DATE:  October 1, 1993
CASE NO. 93-WPC-5


IN THE MATTER OF

MICHAEL G. MITCHELL,

          COMPLAINANT,

     v.

UNITED STATES ARMY,

          RESPONDENT.


BEFORE:  THE SECRETARY OF LABOR


                         FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL

     Before me for review is the [Recommended] Decision and
Order-Dismissing Claim (R.D. and O.) [1]  of the Administrative
Law Judge (ALJ) in this case arising under the employee
protection provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
33 U.S.C. §1367 (1988) (WPCA), and the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6971 (1988) (SWDA).  The ALJ recommended
granting Respondent's motion to dismiss the complaint based on
Complainant's failure to appear at the hearing and failure to
respond to his show cause order, but did not cite the applicable
regulations.  
     The ALJ issued an Order to Show Cause on July 8, 1993, why
the complaint should not be dismissed for abandonement and
failure to appear at the hearing.  Complainant did not respond to
the Show Cause order, which he received via certified mail on
July 12, 1993.  
     Accordingly, I conclude that dismissal of the instant
complaint is appropriate in these circumstances pursuant to  
29 C.F.R. § 24.5(e)(4)(i) and (ii).  See McCrumb
v. Westinghouse Radiological Services, Inc., Case No. 89-ERA-
42, Sec. Fin. Ord. of Dismissal, April 9, 1992, slip op. at 1-2;
Avery v. B & W 
[PAGE 2]
Commercial Nuclear Fuel Plant, Case No. 91-ERA-8, Sec. Fin.
Ord. of Dismissal, Oct. 21, 1991, slip op. at 3-4.
     SO ORDERED.


               ROBERT B. REICH
                Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.



OAA:EGONZALEZ:tm:February 15, 1996 
Room S-4309:FPB:219-4728


[ENDNOTES]
           
[1]  The ALJ's order is not entitled "Recommended Decision and
Order," but under the WPC's implementing regulations, 29 C.F.R.
Part 24 (1992), except in limited circumstances, an ALJ's
decision is a recommended decision and final orders must be
issued by the Secretary.  29 C.F.R. § 24.6.