U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
                            SECRETARY OF LABOR
                             WASHINGTON, D.C.


DATE:     May 19, 1994
CASE NOS. 92-ERA-30
          93-ERA-26
          93-ERA-45

IN THE MATTERS OF

THOMAS J. SAPORITO, JR.
     COMPLAINANT,

v.

ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY,
ARIZONA NUCLEAR POWER PROJECT,
THE ATLANTIC GROUP, INC.
     RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE:   THE SECRETARY OF LABOR

                                   ORDER

     I issued a Final Decision and Order Approving Settlement and
Dismissing Cases on March 21, 1994 in these cases, dismissing the
cases with prejudice based on a combined settlement entered into
by the parties, a joint motion by the parties in 92-ERA-30, a
Recommended Order of Dismissal by the Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) in 92-ERA-30, and a Recommended Decision and Order
Approving Settlement Dismissing Claim in 93-ERA-26.
     However, on April 21, 1994, Complainant moved for
establishment of a briefing schedule on what he characterizes as
his remaining claims against Respondent The Atlantic Group (TAG),
or in the alternative, for reconsideration of my March 21, 1994
Order.  Complainant asserts that the settlement, upon which the
ALJ's recommended orders and my Order was based, was limited to
Complainant's claims relating to Complainant's employment or
attempts to obtain employment with TAG at the Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station (PVGNS) and did not settle "other claims (of
Complainant] against TAG, unrelated to (Complainant's] employment
or attempts to obtain employment at PVGNS."  Complainant's Motion
at 2. Attached to Complainant's motion is a copy of an order
issued by Administrative Law Judge Clement J. Kichuk on Jan. 10, 
[PAGE 2]
1994 in Case Nos. 93-ERA-00026 and 93-ERA-00045, which was not
submitted with the Joint Motion, the combined Settlement or the
ALJ's recommended orders.  Judge Kichuk's order states, among
other things, that the ALJ "retains jurisdiction in cases Number
93-ERA-00026 and 93-ERA-00045."  Attorneys for Respondent The
Atlantic Group wrote a letter to the Acting Director of the
office of Administrative Appeals on April 28, 1994, stating that
"it is our position that there are no remaining claims against
The Atlantic Group."  Counsel's letter, however, only refers to
Case No. 92-ERA-30 when it asserts that "there is no active claim
that needs reconsideration at this time."
     It is apparent that there is considerable confusion over the
scope of the settlement agreement entered into by the parties on
Dec. 15, 1993.  Accordingly, my Order of March 21, 1994 is
RESCINDED.  These matters are REMANDED to the respective ALJs for
reconsideration and clarification of their recommended orders
approving the settlement.  After holding such proceedings as the
ALJs deem appropriate, the ALJs shall submit new recommended
orders clarifying specifically the scope of the settlement
agreement and the extent to which any claims by Complainant
against any of the Respondents remain unresolved by that
agreement.

SO ORDERED.

     ROBERT B. REICH
     Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.