# Division 13. Discipline Codified through Bill No. CB-018-2026, adopted May 12, 2026, effective July 24, 2026. Source: Municode, Supplement 2026 Update 2. Editorial notes and legislative history omitted. ## Division 13. Discipline ### Sec. 16-192. Disciplinary policy Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-192 (2026) It shall be the policy of Prince George's County to insure that all appointing authorities and supervisors discipline employees under their respective jurisdictions in a fair, reasonable, and equitable manner. In that regard, it shall be the general policy of Prince George's County to follow a pattern of progressive discipline which provides employees with notice of deficiencies and an opportunity to improve both performance and conduct problems. All appointing authorities and supervisors shall be encouraged to initiate and/or take authorized disciplinary actions against their employees whenever such disciplinary actions are warranted by virtue of violations of standards of conduct or behavior or failures to maintain satisfactory performance. The job performance and conduct of each employee impacts directly on the public's trust in government and on the County's ability to achieve its mission of service to the public. All employees are, therefore, responsible for adhering to the standards of performance and conduct. ### Sec. 16-193. Conduct related disciplinary actions Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-193 (2026) (a) Grounds. An appointing authority may initiate and take or a supervisor may initiate and, where authorized, take, any of the disciplinary actions set forth in Subsection (b), below, against any employee under their respective jurisdictions where any such employee has committed an act or acts which constitute a violation(s) or failure(s) to comply with any duty, obligation, or requirement imposing a standard of conduct or behavior on such employee by virtue of the provisions of any criminal or civil law or statute or any rule or regulation authorized and promulgated pursuant thereto, provided any such violation(s) or act(s) of noncompliance: (1) Bears a demonstrable relationship to the nature of the duties and responsibilities of the employee's position; and, (2) Constitutes a willful, indifferent, or grossly negligent act or commission by such employee. Such acts for which disciplinary action may be taken include, but are not limited to: theft of County property; knowingly giving or making false statements of a material nature in matters relative to employment; being tardy; being absent without leave; being insubordinate; and violating standards of ethics as established under the County's Code of Ethics. (b) Authorized Actions. Whenever an employee commits an act or acts which constitutes a violation(s) or an act(s) of noncompliance of the nature described in Subsection (a), above, the employee's appointing authority shall be authorized to initiate and take or the employee's supervisor shall be authorized to initiate and, where authorized, take any of the following disciplinary actions against such employee: (1) The appointing authority or supervisor may issue a written reprimand to the employee, provided that any such written reprimand shall state: (A) The specific violation or act of noncompliance causing the issuance of the reprimand; and (B) The fact that any subsequent violations or acts of noncompliance by the employee may warrant the taking of more severe disciplinary action against the employee; (2) The appointing authority may cause the employee to forfeit annual leave days the employee has accrued in an amount not to exceed twenty (20) such accrued leave days for any one (1) violation or act of noncompliance; (3) The appointing authority may fine the employee in an amount not to exceed five percent (5%) of the employee's base annual salary for any one (1) violation or act of noncompliance, provided that such fine, so imposed, may, at the employee's option, so long as the employee is employed by the County, be withheld from the employee's biweekly paychecks, until paid, in increments not to exceed five percent (5%) of the employee's gross biweekly wages; (4) The appointing authority may cause the employee to be suspended; (5) The appointing authority may reduce the employee's salary by an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%). Under no circumstances shall an employee's salary be reduced in this manner to a rate less than the entry rate of the applicable salary range; (6) The appointing authority may cause the employee to be demoted, subject to the provisions of Section 16-148(a)(6); or (7) The appointing authority may cause the employee to be dismissed. (c) General Criteria. Whenever an employee commits an act or acts which constitute grounds for disciplinary action, as provided in Subsection (a), above, the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, shall adhere to the general criteria set forth below in deciding what type of authorized disciplinary action, if any, should be initiated and taken against such employee. (1) Dismissal. The dismissal of an employee shall constitute the most severe type of all authorized disciplinary actions. The dismissal of an employee shall be taken only when the act or acts of the employee which constitute the grounds for disciplinary action are, in the judgment of the employee's appointing authority, serious in nature. In deciding whether any act or acts of the employee are of a sufficiently serious nature to warrant dismissal, the employee's appointing authority shall rely upon any one (1) of the following criteria as justification for the taking of a dismissal action against an employee: (A) Where the employee commits one of the following acts: (i) Abandonment of the employee's position; (ii) Commission of a crime for which a court sentences an employee to confinement for six (6) months or more so as to prohibit the performance of the employee's normal duties; (iii) Theft of County property; (iv) Falsification of County reports or documents; (v) Participation in an illegal strike; (vi) Intoxication on the job; (vii) Using, possessing or selling narcotic drugs on the job; or (viii) Possessing unauthorized weapons or explosives; (B) Where the employee commits a series of acts which constitute a course of conduct characterized by a continued inability or unwillingness on the part of the employee to conform to the applicable standards of conduct or behavior; (C) Where the employee commits a series of acts which have clearly caused a continuing, disruptive effect on the efficient and/or safe operations of the employee's department, agency, or office and/or the government as a whole; (D) Where the employee commits an act or a series of acts which call into serious question the employee's trustworthiness and/or integrity in the continued performance of the employee's assigned duties and responsibilities; (E) Where the employee commits an act or a series of acts which have had or may be reasonably expected to have, a harmful or injurious effect on the employee, other employees and/or members of the general public; or (F) Where the employee commits an act or a series of acts which have had, or may be reasonably demonstrated to have, an appreciable effect on the general public's confidence and/or trust in the operation of the employee's department, agency, or office and/or the government as a whole. (2) Demotion. The demotion of an employee shall constitute a conduct-related disciplinary action less severe in nature than a dismissal. Where the employee commits an act or acts which constitute justification for the dismissal of the employee under the provisions of paragraph (c)(1), (A) through (E), above, the employee may be demoted rather than dismissed where the employee's appointing authority determines that the employee's past conduct record and/or other extenuating circumstances mitigate against the taking of a dismissal action against the employee. (3) Salary Reduction. The requirement that an employee's salary be reduced by an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) shall constitute the type of conduct-related disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be comparable in severity to demotion where an employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has determined that the employee's conduct constitutes grounds for such disciplinary action as set forth in Subsection (c)(2), above. In deciding whether an employee's salary should be reduced in lieu of demotion, the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, shall make the determination based upon an evaluation that there is no appropriate available vacant position to which the employee could be demoted, or that the employee's conduct will improve under continued close supervision in the same position. After an employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has determined that the employee's conduct constitutes grounds for disciplinary action as set forth in Subsection (c)(2), above, the appointing authority shall be justified in causing the employee's salary by an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%). (4) Suspension. The suspension of an employee shall constitute the type of authorized disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be less severe in nature than a dismissal action, a demotion, or a salary reduction, yet more severe in nature than the issuance of a written reprimand to an employee. In deciding whether the act or acts of the employee which constitute the grounds for disciplinary action are of such a nature as to warrant suspension, the appointing authority shall rely upon any one (1) of the following criteria as justification for the taking of a suspension action against an employee: (A) Where the employee has been charged with the commission of a serious crime such that a subsequent conviction thereof or a finding of wrongful conduct by the employee's appointing authority in connection therewith, would constitute grounds for the dismissal of the employee under the provisions of paragraph (c)(1)(A), (B), (C), (D), or (E), above, provided that: (i) Any such suspension shall be based upon a finding by the employee's appointing authority that there exists reasonably clear evidence of wrongful conduct by the employee in connection with such crime; (ii) Where the finding of clear evidence of wrongful conduct as required under subparagraph (c)(4)(A)(i), above, is predicated on an investigation or inquiry of the alleged crime by the employee's appointing authority, the employee shall be placed on administrative leave, as authorized under Section 16-222, during the period of such investigation or inquiry and prior to the effective date of any subsequent suspension resultant therefrom; and, (iii) Any such suspension shall remain in effect until the employee's guilt or innocence with respect to such alleged crime has been determined by a trial court and, on the basis of such court determination, the employee's appointing authority shall either revoke the suspension and return the employee to a duty and pay status, including restoration of back salary and leave benefits, or proceed to dismiss the employee, whichever is warranted; (B) Where the employee commits an act or acts which constitute justification for the dismissal of the employee under the provisions of paragraph (c)(1), (A) through (E), above, the employee may be suspended rather than dismissed where the employee's appointing authority determines that the employee's past conduct record and/or other extenuating circumstances mitigate against the taking of a dismissal action against the employee, provided that no such suspension shall exceed twenty (20) working days in duration; (C) Where the employee's appointing authority or supervisor has issued two (2) or more related, written reprimands to the employee and where the issuance of such reprimands has not resulted in the cessation of the act or acts of the employee which constituted the grounds for the issuance of the written reprimands in the first instance, the employee may be suspended for a period not to exceed ten (10) working days, provided that the foregoing shall not be construed to prevent the employee's appointing authority from suspending the employee following the issuance of one (1) written reprimand to the employee where: (i) The employee commits the same act or acts which resulted in the issuance of the written reprimand within a period of six (6) months following the issuance of the reprimand; and, (ii) The act or acts committed by the employee have clearly caused a disruptive effect on the efficient and/or safe operations of the employee's department, agency, or office and/or the government as a whole; (D) Where the employee is intoxicated or commits a breach of peace during hours of work, the employee may be immediately suspended for a period not to exceed three (3) working days for the commission of any such act, provided that: (i) The facts and circumstances surrounding the commission of the act are not in dispute such that an investigation or inquiry of the act for evidentiary purposes would not be necessary in the judgment of the employee's appointing authority; (ii) Any such suspension is made effective as of the same day that the employee committed the act; and, (iii) Any such suspension shall not require the presentation of an advanced, written statement of charges to the employee by the employee's appointing authority as would otherwise be required under the provisions of Section 16-201(a) governing the procedures for the processing of adverse actions against employees and employee appeals therefrom. (5) Forfeiture of Accrued Annual Leave. The requirement that an employee forfeit accrued annual leave days shall constitute the type of authorized disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be comparable in severity to the suspension of an employee where an employee commits an act or acts which would justify a suspension under the provisions of paragraph (c)(4), above. In deciding whether an employee should be required to forfeit accrued annual leave days in lieu of a suspension as would otherwise be justified under the provisions of paragraph (c)(4), above, the employee's appointing authority shall make such determination based upon an evaluation of the effect the employee's absence from work would have on the operations of the appointing authority's department, agency, or office. Where the employee's appointing authority determines that the absence of an employee from work under a suspension action would cause a detrimental effect on the operations of the department, agency, or office in terms of undue losses in the efficiency of operations or a curtailment in the provisions of services to the general public, the appointing authority shall be justified in causing the employee to forfeit accrued annual leave days in an amount equal to the number of days the employee would have been otherwise suspended under and subject to the conditions set forth in paragraph (c)(4), above; provided, however, that no such forfeiture of accrued annual leave by an employee shall be in an amount in excess of the numbers of annual leave days the employee had accrued as of the effective date of any such action. (6) Fine. The requirement that an employee pay a monetary fine shall constitute the type of authorized disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be comparable in severity to the suspension of an employee where an employee commits an act or acts which would justify a suspension under the provisions of paragraph (c)(4), above, and may be used as an alternative to suspension or forfeiture of accrued annual leave. When a fine is imposed in lieu of suspension or forfeiture of accrued annual leave, the appointing authority shall be justified in requiring the employee to pay such fine in an amount not greater in value than the number of days the employee would have been otherwise suspended under and subject to the conditions set forth in paragraph (c)(4), above, or the amount of accrued annual leave the employee would have otherwise been caused to forfeit under and subject to the conditions set forth in paragraph (c)(5), above; provided, however, that in no case may an employee be required to pay a monetary fine in an amount in excess of five percent (5%) of said employee's base annual salary. (7) Written Reprimand. (A) The issuance of a written reprimand to an employee shall constitute the least severe type of all authorized disciplinary actions. An employee's appointing authority or supervisor shall be justified in issuing a written reprimand to the employee if the act or acts of the employee which constitute the grounds for disciplinary action are minor in nature. (B) Any employee to whom a written reprimand is issued shall be entitled to respond in writing, to any such reprimand within five (5) working days after the date of the issuance thereof by the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be. (C) Whenever an appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, files or causes to be filed a written reprimand or a copy thereof in an employee's official personnel file and/or in a departmental personnel file, any such written reprimand or copy thereof: (i) Shall have appended thereto, a copy of the employee's written comments in response thereto if such comments are provided in accordance with subparagraph (B), above; or, in the alternative, (ii) Shall be signed by the employee so as to indicate that the employee received and reviewed the reprimand, provided that such signature by the employee shall not be construed as an indication that the employee concurs with the contents of the reprimand; or, in the alternative, (iii) Shall be accompanied by a signed certification by the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, to the effect that the appointing authority or supervisor issued the written reprimand to the employee and that the employee did not elect to respond in writing to the reprimand or to sign the reprimand. ### Sec. 16-194. Performance-related disciplinary actions Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-194 (2026) (a) Grounds. An appointing authority may initiate and take, or a supervisor may initiate, any of the disciplinary actions set forth in Subsection (b), below, against any employee under their respective jurisdictions where the appointing authority makes a determination that any such employee's performance has become "less than satisfactory" with respect to the execution of any or all of the duties, tasks, and/or responsibilities set forth in the employee's position description. In determining whether an employee's performance has become "less than satisfactory" to a degree which warrants disciplinary action, the employee's appointing authority shall rely upon any one (1) of the following criteria as justification for the taking of any of the disciplinary actions set forth in Subsection (b), below: (1) Where the employee's actions, inactions, and/or attitudes constitute a representative course of conduct characterized by a general inability, incapability, and/or unwillingness on the part of the employee to maintain a minimum standard of performance with respect to the quality and/or quantity of any or all of the duties, tasks, and/or responsibilities properly assigned to the employee; (2) Where the employee unjustifiably fails to carry out a particular work assignment which was within the scope of the duties, tasks, and/or responsibilities properly assigned to the employee; or (3) Where the employee loses or fails to maintain any of the requirements or standards set forth in the qualification requirements statement, as defined in Section 16-102(a)(39), applicable to the employee's position. (b) Authorized Actions. Whenever an appointing authority or supervisor makes a determination in accordance with grounds set forth in Subsection (a), above, that an employee's performance has become "less than satisfactory," the employee's appointing authority shall be authorized to initiate and take, or an employee's supervisor shall be authorized to initiate, any of the following disciplinary actions against the employee: (1) The appointing authority or supervisor may issue a written reprimand to the employee, provided that any such written reprimand shall state: (A) The specific violation or act of nonperformance causing the issuance of the reprimand; and (B) The fact that any subsequent violations or acts of nonperformance by the employee may warrant the taking of more severe disciplinary action against the employee; (2) The appointing authority may cause the employee to forfeit annual leave days the employee has accrued in an amount not to exceed twenty (20) such accrued leave days; (3) The appointing authority may fine the employee in an amount not to exceed five percent (5%) of the employee's base annual salary, provided that such fine, so imposed, may, at the employee's option, so long as the employee is employed by the County, be withheld from the employee's biweekly paychecks, until paid, in increments not to exceed five percent (5%) of the employee's gross biweekly wages; (4) The appointing authority may cause the employee to be suspended; (5) The appointing authority may reduce the employee's salary by an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%). Under no circumstances shall an employee's salary be reduced in this manner to a rate less than the entry rate of the applicable salary range; (6) The appointing authority may cause the employee to be demoted, subject to the provisions of Section 16-148(a)(6); (7) The appointing authority may cause the employee to be dismissed. (c) General Criteria. Whenever any appointing authority or supervisor makes a determination, in accordance with the grounds set forth in Subsection (a), above, that an employee's performance has become "less than satisfactory," the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, shall adhere to the general criteria set forth below in deciding what type of authorized disciplinary action, if any, should be initiated and taken against such employee. (1) Dismissal. The dismissal of an employee shall constitute the most severe of the three (3) types of performance-related, disciplinary actions authorized under Subsection (b), above. After an employee's appointing authority or supervisor has determined that the employee's performance constitutes grounds for disciplinary action, as set forth in Subsection (a), above, the employee's appointing authority shall be justified in causing the employee to be dismissed, provided that: (A) The employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has made a reasonable effort to counsel the employee with respect to the employee's performance and has afforded the employee a reasonable opportunity to take remedial actions with respect thereto; and, (B) The employee's appointing authority has made a reasonable determination that the employee will be unable, incapable and/or unwilling to perform satisfactorily in another position in a class with a lower grade; provided, however, that where the appointing authority has made a reasonable determination that the employee will be capable and able to perform satisfactorily in another position in a class with a lower grade, nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to prevent the appointing authority from causing the employee to be dismissed notwithstanding such a determination if the appointing authority has made a reasonable effort to demote the employee and such demotion cannot be effectuated due to the unavailability of an appropriate vacant position, or due to the fact that the proposed demotion does not meet the conditions stipulated in Section 16-148(a)(6)(B). Notwithstanding any other provision in this subsection, an employee of the County Council shall be eligible for immediate dismissal if the employee: (i) receives an annual performance rating of "Does Not Meet Expectations" or equivalent rating or (ii) commits an act or a series of acts which call into serious question the employee's trustworthiness, competence and/or integrity in the continued performance of the employee's assigned duties and responsibilities. (2) Demotion. The demotion of an employee shall constitute a performance-related disciplinary action less severe in nature than a dismissal. After an employee's appointing authority or supervisor has determined that the employee's performance constitutes grounds for disciplinary action, as set forth in Subsection (a), above, the employee's appointing authority shall be justified in causing the employee to be demoted, provided that: (A) The employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has made a reasonable effort to counsel the employee with respect to the employee's performance and has afforded the employee a reasonable opportunity to take remedial actions with respect thereto; and, (B) The employee's appointing authority has made a reasonable determination that the employee will be capable and able to perform satisfactorily in the position to which the employee is to be demoted. (3) Salary Reduction. The requirement that an employee's salary be reduced by an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) shall constitute the type of performance-related disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be comparable in severity to demotion where an employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has determined that the employee's performance constitutes grounds for such disciplinary action. In deciding whether an employee's salary should be reduced by an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) in lieu of demotion, the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, shall make the determination based upon an evaluation that there is no appropriate available vacant position to which the employee could be demoted, or that the employee's performance will improve under continued close supervision in the same position. After an employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has determined that the employee's performance constitutes grounds for disciplinary action as set forth in Subsection (a), above, the appointing authority shall be justified in causing the employee's salary to be reduced the equivalent of one (1) step rate, provided that: (A) The employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, has made a reasonable effort to counsel the employee with respect to the employee's performance and has afforded the employee a reasonable opportunity to take remedial actions with respect thereto; and (B) The employee's appointing authority has made a reasonable determination that the employee's performance will improve to a satisfactory level in the same position. (4) Suspension. The suspension of an employee shall constitute the type of authorized disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be less severe in nature than a dismissal action, a demotion, or a salary reduction, yet more severe in nature than the issuance of a written reprimand to an employee. In deciding whether the act or acts of the employee which constitute the grounds for disciplinary action are of such a nature as to warrant suspension, the appointing authority shall rely upon any one (1) of the following criteria as justification for the taking of a suspension action against an employee: (A) Where the employee commits an act or acts which constitute justification for the dismissal of the employee under the provisions of paragraph (c)(1), (A) and (B), above, the employee may be suspended rather than dismissed where the employee's appointing authority determines that the employee's past conduct and/or performance record and/or other extenuating circumstances mitigate against the taking of a dismissal action against the employee, provided that no such suspension shall exceed twenty (20) working days in duration; (B) Where the employee's appointing authority or supervisor has issued two (2) or more related, written reprimands to the employee and where the issuance of such reprimands has not resulted in the cessation of the act or acts of the employee which constituted the grounds for the issuance of the written reprimands in the first instance, the employee may be suspended for a period not to exceed ten (10) working days, provided that the foregoing shall not be construed to prevent the employee's appointing authority from suspending the employee following the issuance of one (1) written reprimand to the employee where: (i) The employee commits the same act or acts which resulted in the issuance of the written reprimand within a period of six (6) months following the issuance of the reprimand; and (ii) The act or acts committed by the employee have clearly caused a disruptive effect on the efficient and/or safe operations of the employee's department, agency, or office and/or the government as a whole. (5) Forfeiture of Accrued Annual Leave. The requirement that an employee forfeit accrued annual leave days shall constitute the type of authorized disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be comparable in severity to the suspension of an employee where an employee commits an act or acts which would justify a suspension under the provisions of paragraph (c)(4), above. In deciding whether an employee should be required to forfeit accrued annual leave days in lieu of a suspension as would otherwise be justified under the provisions of paragraph (c)(4), above, the employee's appointing authority shall make such determination based upon an evaluation of the effect the employee's absence from work would have on the operations of the appointing authority's department, agency, or office. Where the employee's appointing authority determines that the absence of an employee from work under a suspension action would cause a detrimental effect on the operations of the department, agency, or office in terms of undue losses in the efficiency of operations or a curtailment in the provisions of services to the general public, the appointing authority shall be justified in causing the employee to forfeit accrued annual leave days in an amount equal to the number of days the employee would have been otherwise suspended under, and subject to, the conditions set forth in paragraph (c)(4), above; provided, however, that no such forfeiture of accrued annual leave by an employee shall be in an amount in excess of the number of annual leave days the employee had accrued as of the effective date of any such action. (6) Fine. The requirement that an employee pay a monetary fine shall constitute the type of authorized disciplinary action which shall generally be considered to be comparable in severity to the suspension of an employee where an employee commits an act or acts which would justify a suspension under the provisions of paragraph (c)(4), above, and may be used as an alternative to suspension or forfeiture of accrued annual leave. When a fine is imposed in lieu of suspension or forfeiture of accrued annual leave, the appointing authority shall be justified in requiring the employee to pay such fine in an amount not greater in value than the number of days the employee would have been otherwise suspended under, and subject to, the conditions set forth in paragraph (c)(4), above, or the amount of accrued annual leave the employee would have otherwise been caused to forfeit under, and subject to, the conditions set forth in paragraph (c)(3), above; provided, however, that in no case may an employee be required to pay a monetary fine in an amount in excess of five percent (5%) of said employee's base annual salary. (7) Written Reprimand. (A) The issuance of a written reprimand to an employee shall constitute the least severe type of all authorized disciplinary actions. An employee's appointing authority or supervisor shall be justified in issuing a written reprimand to the employee if the act or acts of the employee which constitute the grounds for disciplinary action are minor in nature. (B) Any employee to whom a written reprimand is issued shall be entitled to respond in writing to any such reprimand within five (5) working days after the date of the issuance thereof by the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be. (C) Whenever an appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, files or causes to be filed a written reprimand or a copy thereof in an employee's official personnel file and/or in a departmental personnel file, any such written reprimand or copy thereof: (i) Shall have appended thereto a copy of the employee's written comments in response thereto if such comments are provided in accordance with subparagraph (B), above; or, in the alternative, (ii) Shall be signed by the employee so as to indicate that the employee received and reviewed the reprimand, provided that such signature by the employee shall not be construed as an indication that the employee concurs with the contents of the reprimand; or, in the alternative, (iii) Shall be accompanied by a signed certification by the employee's appointing authority or supervisor, as the case may be, to the effect that the appointing authority or supervisor issued the written reprimand to the employee and that the employee did not elect to respond in writing to the reprimand or to sign the reprimand. ### Sec. 16-195. Conduct and performance-related disciplinary actions Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-195 (2026) (a) The following provisions shall apply to both conduct and performance-related disciplinary actions. (1) Evaluative Factors. Prior to finally taking any of the conduct- or performance-related disciplinary actions authorized under the provisions of Sections 16-193, except under Subsection (c)(1)(A), thereof, and 16-194, respectively, an appointing authority or, where applicable, a supervisor shall insure that the following factors have been evaluated and taken into consideration: (A) The severity of the particular disciplinary action in relation to the nature of the particular act or acts of the employee constituting the grounds for disciplinary action; (B) Any extenuating circumstances concerning an employee which may mitigate against the taking of the particular disciplinary action against the employee; (C) An employee's past record of conduct or performance, as the case may be; provided, however, that where an employee's performance is marginal, the employee's past conduct record may be taken into account in making a final determination to take a performance-related disciplinary action against the employee; and (D) The consistency and uniformity of the particular disciplinary action in relation to the general disciplinary practices and policies as applied to other employees within the particular department, agency, or office under facts and circumstances which are substantially the same. (2) Procedural Requirements. Except for an immediate suspension as authorized under Section 16-193(c)(4)(D), any disciplinary action authorized under the provisions of Sections 16-193 and 16-194 which constitutes an adverse action, as defined in Section 16-102(a)(1), shall be initiated and taken in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 16-201 which govern the processing of adverse actions against employees and the taking of employee appeals therefrom. (3) Disciplinary Actions by Appointing Authorities. Any disciplinary action authorized under Sections 16-193 and 16-194 which constitutes an adverse action shall only be finally taken against an employee by the employee's appointing authority; provided, however, that the foregoing part of this sentence shall not be construed to prevent any supervisor from effectively initiating or recommending any such action. ### Sec. 16-196. Reserved Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-196 (2026) ### Sec. 16-197. Statute of limitations on certain disciplinary records Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-197 (2026) (a) Temporary Records. For purposes of Section 16-216, the following records or documents relating to authorized disciplinary actions which may have been taken against an employee shall be considered to be temporary records or documents, and shall be maintained in the employee's official personnel file and/or in any departmental personnel file only for a period of three (3) calendar years and then removed therefrom and disposed of consistent with the applicable provisions of State law: (1) Any written reprimand and any written employee response in relation thereto; (2) Any record of an employee's suspension for any period not in excess of ten (10) working days; (3) Any record of an employee's forfeiture of accrued annual leave as a disciplinary action in any amount not in excess of ten (10) accrued leave days; and, (4) Any record of fines imposed as a disciplinary action. (b) Permanent Records. For purposes of Section 16-216, the following records or documents relating to authorized disciplinary actions which may have been taken against an employee shall be considered to be permanent records and shall be retained in the employee's official personnel file and/or in any departmental personnel file in accordance with the provisions of Sections 16-216 and 16-217: (1) Any record of an employee's suspension for any period in excess of ten (10) working days; (2) Any record of any employee's forfeiture of accrued annual leave as a disciplinary action in any amount in excess of ten (10) working days; (3) Any record of an employee's demotion or reduction in step rate; and, (4) Any record of an employee's dismissal. ### Sec. 16-198. Hearing boards for public safety employees Prince George's County, Md., Code § 16-198 (2026) (a) The appointing authorities of the Police, Fire, Sheriff's, and Corrections Departments shall be authorized to appoint hearing boards to hear and review conduct- or performance-related disciplinary charges against any uniformed employee occupying a public safety class of work within their respective departments, and to render recommendations to the appointing authorities as to the type of authorized disciplinary action, if any, which should be taken against any such employee. The disciplinary recommendations rendered by any such hearing board so appointed, shall be advisory in nature and the final determination as to the taking of any authorized disciplinary action in relation thereto shall rest exclusively with the appointing authorities of such departments. (b) In any case where the rights of uniformed employees occupying public safety classes of work within the Police and Sheriff's Departments with respect to disciplinary actions and appeals therefrom are governed by the provisions of Article 27, Sections 727 through 734A of the Annotated Code of Maryland, titled "Law-Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights," the provisions of said statute shall apply, in lieu of the provisions of this Division, in the taking of authorized disciplinary actions against such employees, and there shall be no appeals to the Personnel Board as a result of the taking of any such disciplinary actions against any such employees as would otherwise be provided under the applicable provisions of Article XIV. However, in any case where the appointing authorities of the Police and Sheriff's Departments determine that an investigation and/or an interrogation is not necessary in order to determine whether any uniformed employee occupying a public safety class of work within their respective departments has committed an act or acts which constitute grounds for disciplinary action under the provisions of Sections 16-193 and 16-194, then, and in such event, said appointing authorities may take any of the disciplinary actions authorized under Sections 16-193 and 16-194 without appointing a hearing board in advance thereof, and any employee's appeal from any such disciplinary action shall be taken in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article XIV.