UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
              OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES


DATE:     June 6, 1996
CASE NO.  94-ERA-25

In the Matter of

B. SCOTT DAVIDSON,
          COMPLAINANT,

     v.

TEMPLE UNIVERSITY,
          RESPONDENT.


BEFORE:   JOHN M. VITTONE
          Chief Administrative Law Judge


                 RECOMMENDED ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
                       AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT

     This case arises under the employee protection provision of
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (ERA), as amended, 42
U.S.C. § 5851 (1988 and Supp. IV 1992).  On May 15, 1996,
the parties submitted a Stipulation of Settlement in this matter.
On May 29, 1996, the parties submitted an Addendum to the
Stipulation of Settlement to clarify certain matters. Settlements
of ERA whistleblower complaints must be reviewed by the Secretary
of Labor to determine whether the terms are a fair, adequate and
reasonable settlement of the complaint.  42 U.S.C. §
5851(b)(2)(A) (1988).  Macktal v. Secretary of Labor, 923
F.2d 1150, 1153-54 (5th Cir. 1991); Thompson v. U.S. Dep't of
Labor, 885 F.2d 551, 556 (9th Cir. 1989); Fuchko and
Yunker v. Georgia Power Co., 89-ERA-9 and 10, slip op. at 1-2 
(Sec'y Mar. 23, 1989).   I have reviewed the settlement
documents, and find that they constitute a fair, adequate and
reasonable settlement of the complaint.

     The parties included a confidentiality provision in their
Stipulation of Settlement.  It is noted that the Stipulation of
Settlement is now part of the record of the case and is subject
to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552. 
FOIA 
[PAGE 2]
requires Federal agencies to disclose requested records unless
they are exempt from disclosure under the Act.    See Debose
v. Carolina Power & Light Co., 92-ERA-14, slip op. at 2-3
(Sec'y Feb. 7, 1994).  The parties have requested that the
Stipulation of Settlement be treated as confidential commercial
information pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 70.26.  Thus, the
Stipulation of Settlement and the Addendum thereto have been
placed in a specially marked folder directing that the provisions
of 29 C.F.R. § 70.26 be followed in the event that a FOIA
request is made seeking disclosure of this settlement agreement.

     The confidentiality provision of the agreement enumerates
certain exceptions permitting disclosure, and provides that the
parties will provide notice prior to disclosure pursuant to one
of the exceptions.  The Administrative Review Board has taken the
position that such a notification requirement does not violate
public policy where it does not restrict or impinge on the
Complainant or his or her counsel from disclosure after
appropriate legal process.  Gillilan v. Tennessee Valley
Authority, 89-ERA-40, 91-ERA-31, 94-ERA-5, 95-ERA-9, 26 and
32 (ARB May 30, 1996).  The notification requirement of this
Stipulation of Settlement, as amended, does not appear to violate
public policy.

     Paragraph 8 of the Stipulation of Settlement provides that
the agreement shall be construed under and governed by the laws
of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.  The Secretary of Labor and
the Administrative Review Board have construed such provisions as
excepting the authority of the Secretary of Labor and any Federal
court which shall be governed in all respects by the laws and
regulations of the United States.  See Carter v. Electrical
Dist. No. 2 of Pinal County, 92-TSC-11 (ARB May 30, 1996),
citing Phillips v. Citizens Assn. for Sound Energy, 91-
ERA-25 (Sec'y Nov. 4, 1991).

     Accordingly, I recommend that the Administrative Review
Board[1]  APPROVE the agreement as construed above, and DISMISS
THE COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE.  See Sections 4, 9.


At Washington, D.C.

                              ______________________________
                              JOHN M. VITTONE
                              Chief Administrative Law Judge

JMV/trs

[PAGE 3]

NOTICE:  This Recommended Order Approving Settlement and
Dismissing Complaint and the administrative file in this matter
will be forwarded for final decision to the Administrative Review
Board, United States Department of Labor, Room S-4309, Frances
Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, DC 
20210.  See 61 Fed. Reg. 19978 and 19982 (1996).


[ENDNOTES]
           
[1]   On April 17, 1996, the Secretary of Labor issued a Secretary's Order 2-96 delegating to
the Administrative Review Board the authority to issue final agency decisions in cases such as
the one sub judice.  See Secretary's Order 2-96, 61 Fed. Reg. 19978 (May 3,
1996); Final Rule; Establishment of the Administrative Review Board, 61 Fed. Reg. 19982
(May 3, 1996).