DATE:  March 17, 1995
CASE NO. 91-ERA-4


IN THE MATTER OF

LINDA PORTER,

          COMPLAINANT,

     v.

BROWN & ROOT, INC.,

     and

TEXAS UTILITIES,

          RESPONDENTS.


BEFORE:  THE SECRETARY OF LABOR

                     FINAL ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
                            AND DISMISSING CASE

     This case arises under the employee protection provisions 
of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (ERA), as amended, 
42 U.S.C. § 5851 (1988) and the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), 15 U.S.C. § 2622.  
     On February 25, 1994, I disapproved of a settlement
agreement that required the terms to be kept confidential.  I
found such a requirement to be inconsistent with my obligations
under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552
(1988).  Respondents appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit and the court dismissed the petition for
review.  Brown & Root, Inc. and TU Electric v. U.S. Dep't of
Labor, No 94-40337 (5th Cir. Jan. 11, 1995) (unpublished).  
     The parties have now submitted a modified settlement
agreement and release which deletes the offending confidentiality
provisions.  The parties have requested notification under 

[PAGE 2]
29 C.F.R. § 70.26 of the FOIA regulations regarding any
requests for the inspection or copying of the settlement
agreement and release.
     A review of the agreement reveals that it encompasses matter
arising under laws other than the ERA and TSCA.  See
Settlement Agreement, Section 3.  As stated in Poulos v.
Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No. 86-CAA-1, Sec. Order
Nov. 2, 1987, slip op. at 2:
     [The Secretary's] authority over settlement agreements
     is limited to such statutes as are within [the
     Secretary's] jurisdiction and is defined by the
     applicable statute.  See Aurich v. Consolidated
     Edision Company of New York, Inc., Case No. [86-
     ]CAA-2, Secretary's Order Approving Settlement, issued
     July 29, 1987; Chase v. Buncombe County, N.C.,
     Case No. 85-SWD-4, Secretary's Order on Remand, issued
     November 3, 1986.  
I have therefore, limited my review of the agreement to
determining whether the terms thereof are a fair, adequate and
reasonable settlement of Complainant's allegation that
Respondents violated the ERA or TSCA.  
     Finally, with respect to Respondents' request for
notification under 29 C.F.R. § 70.26 of any requests under
the FOIA for inspection or copying of the settlement agreement
and release, the Office of Administrative Law Judges, as
custodian of the documents, is directed to place a notice
prominently displayed in the record of this case referring to
Respondent's request and directing that the procedures in 29
C.F.R. § 70.26 be followed if a FOIA request is received for
the settlement and release in this case.
     Upon review, I find the terms of the Settlement Agreement
and Release within the scope of my authority and as interpreted
herein, to be fair, adequate and reasonable and I approve them. 
Accordingly, the complaint in this case is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.  
     SO ORDERED.


                               ROBERT B. REICH
                               Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.