DATE:   January 17, 1995


CASE NO.:  94-ERA-13

                            
IN THE MATTER OF            
                             
DANNY  M.  CARTER,               
          Complainant,      
  
     V.

B&W  NUCLEAR  TECHNOLOGIES,  INC.,

     and

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY,
          Respondents.



Appearances:   ROBERT C. MANN, Esq.
               For the Complainant

               DONN C. MEINDERTSMA, Esq.
               For B&W Nuclear Technologies, Inc.

               THOMAS F. FINE, Esq.
               For Tennessee Valley Authority


Before:        DANIEL A. SARNO, JR.
               Administrative Law Judge


                    RECOMMENDED  ORDER  APPROVING
                 SETTLEMENT  AND  DISMISSING  CASE

[PAGE 2]


     This case arises under the employee protection provisions of
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section
5851.  The case was scheduled to be heard in Huntsville, Alabama
commencing on October 25, 1994.


     Prior to the scheduled hearing, counsel advised the Presiding
Judge that the parties had reached agreement to dispose of the
matter by settlement.  Under cover letter dated January 6, 1995,
the parties submitted a "Joint Motion to Dismiss Complaint With
Prejudice and Approve Settlement" and the "Confidential Settlement
Agreement and Release."


     My review of the settlement agreement is limited to a
determination of whether its terms are fair, adequate and
reasonable.  Fuchkco and Yunker v. Georgia Power Co., 89-
ERA-9 and 10 (Sec'y, March 23, 1984).  The settlement must
adequately protect the whistleblower.  Virginia Electric and
Power Co., 19 FERCS 61, 333 (Federal/Energy/Regulatory
Commission, 1982).  Furthermore, the settlement must not be
contrary to public interest.  Heffley v. NCK Metals Corp.,
89 SDW 2 (Sec'y, March 6, 1990).


     First, I note that the parties are represented by counsel.  In
reaching an agreement, Respondents do not admit that they have
broken any law or regulation.  Nor is the agreement to be construed
as a admission of liability or wrong doing by Respondents. 
Moreover, Complainant waives his right to sue in the future on
claims or causes of action arising out of facts occurring prior to
the date of the execution of the agreement.  Also, Complainant
agrees that he is not entitled to reinstatement under the
agreement.


     The agreement designates specific information as confidential
commercial information to be handled as provided at 29 C.F.R.
§ 70.26(b) (1991).  Thus, Respondents request that the
Secretary of Labor retain the Settlement Agreement in confidence to
the full extent permitted by law.  Debose v. Carolina Power +
Light Co., Case No. 92-ERA-14 (Sec'y Feb. 7, 1994).[1] 


     After consideration of the settlement agreement, I find that 
[PAGE 3]
none of the terms or conditions are unacceptable.  Moreover, I find
the agreement to be fair, adequate and reasonable, and I believe it
is in the public interest to adopt the agreement as a basis for the


administrative disposition of this case.  Therefore, I recommend
dismissal of this proceeding with prejudice based upon authority
conferred by 29 C.F.R. Section 19.39(b).






                                                               

                                   DANIEL A. SARNO, JR.
                                   Administrative Law Judge

DAS/ccb




NOTICE:  This Recommended Decision and Order and the
administrative file in this matter will be forwarded for review by
the Secretary of Labor to the Office of Administrative Appeals, U.
S. Department of Labor, Room S-4309, Frances Perkins Building, 200
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC  20210.  The Office of
Administrative Appeals has the responsibility to advise and assist
the Secretary in the preparation and issuance of final decisions in
employee protection cases adjudicated under the regulations at 29
C.F.R. Parts 24 and 1978.  See 55 Fed. Reg. 13250
(1990).


[ENDNOTES]
              
[1]   It is not necessary that the settlement agreement be part of the final order. Macktal
v. Brown + Root, Inc., Case No. 86-ERA-23, Order to Submit Settlement Agreement
issued May 11, 1957, Slip Op. at 2.  Decisions to disclose information specifically designated as
confidential commercial information are made pursuant to the Department of Labor regulations
implementing the Freedom of Information Act.  Debose v. Carolina Power, supra; 29
C.F.R.
§§ 70.26(b), (c), (e), (f); 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1988).