DECISION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Appellant, Stanley E. Wooten (appellant or Mr. Wooten), appeals from the Hearing Officer’s decision finding against his claims of employment discrimination based on race and retaliatory discharge in alleged violation of sections 201(a)(l) and 207(a) of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (the CAA or the Act), 2 U.S.C. §§ 131 l(a)(l), 1317(a). For the reasons set forth below, the Board affirms the Hearing Officer’s decision.
I.
The facts found by the Hearing Officer are as follows: Appellant is an African-American. Decision and Judgment, (Decision) No.98-AC-29 (CV, RP) (May 20, 1999) at 1. He was hired on May 19, 1997 for a one-year probationary period as an Engineering Technician (Mechanical) GS-802-10. Id.
The Engineering Technician job was a new, skilled position in the field of computer-assisted design (CAD) in the Technical Support Section of the Office of the Architect of the Capitol (AOC or respondent). Id. at 1, 4 (Finding of Fact (FOF) No. l ). The position required “extensive knowledge of computer programs, broad in-depth knowledge of mechanical engineering design standards,” and “the ability to work independently at a journeyman-level expertise.” Id. at 4 (FOF No. l .a., b.) (internal quotations omitted).
Appellant worked in a unit of seven professionals. Appellant’s supervisor, Mr. Weber, a Caucasian, hired both appellant and the other African-American professional employed in the unit at the time of appellant’s employment there. Id.; see also id. at 7-8 (FOF No. 5. a.).
Like all members of his unit, appellant was expected to work independently. Id. at 4 (FOF No. 2). Like other employees, appellant did not receive formal written evaluations. Id. at 5 (FOF No.3.c.). Rather, he received verbal feedback. Id.
