This court has considered the appeal in light of the briefs, argument of counsel, and pertinent authorities and portions of the record. Having done so, we DENY the petition for review. The Benefits Review Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and involves no error of law. The employer did not satisfy its burden of showing, on the facts of this case, that suitable employment for Necaise was “reasonably available” because Necaise was able to perform short-term light duty work. See Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. v. Hord, 193 F.3d 797 (4th Cir. 1999).

PETITION DENIED.