On appeal, Mr. Vaughan argues that he did not voluntarily execute the settlement agreement because of his disability, and because he was informed by the administrative judge via telephone that a video recording of the incident giving rise to the removal “spoke a thousand words.”

Mr. Vaughan failed to present sufficient evidence to establish that any disability he may have had impaired his decision-making capability at the time he executed the settlement agreement. The plain language of the settlement agreement establishes that Mr. Vaughan “acknowledges that he is . . . mentally competent to execute” the agreement, and “that he has entered into this Settlement Agreement freely, knowingly, voluntarily, and without coercion, threat or duress.” J.A. 17 at ¶10. Moreover, Mr. Vaughan accepted the benefits provided to him under the settlement agreement, including a modest lump-sum payment, and submitted a signed resignation form. The administrative judge’s finding that such behavior is indicative of his voluntary acceptance, J.A. 5, is supported by substantial evidence. Thus, the Board properly dismissed the appeal.