DATE:  April 10, 1996
CASE NO. 93-ERA-24


IN THE MATTER OF

CALVIN CREEKMORE,

          COMPLAINANT,

     v.

ABB POWER SYSTEMS ENERGY 
SERVICES, INC.,

          RESPONDENT.


BEFORE:   THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF LABOR[1] 


                   SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER CONCERNING REMAND

     In a February 14, 1996 Decision and Remand Order (D. R. O.),
I found that Respondent[2]  violated the employee protection
provision of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (ERA), 
42 U.S.C. § 5851 (1988), when it laid off Complainant Calvin
Creekmore.  I remanded to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for
a recommended supplemental decision on the amount of certain
remedies to which Creekmore is entitled.  
     Although the decision was in favor of Creekmore, he has
filed a petition for reconsideration of the R. D. O., seeking
additional remedies.  Respondent opposed the motion on the ground
that it is not ripe for consideration because there is no final
decision.  In the alternative, Respondent seeks a briefing
schedule to permit it to address the merits of the petition for
reconsideration.
     I formally deny the request for reconsideration, but note
and clarify below certain inconsistencies raised.  Creekmore has
pointed out two ministerial errors in the D. R. O. that are 
[PAGE 2]
corrected.  Also, there is an issue concerning moving expenses
that may be addressed on remand.  In view of the fact that the
parties will have the opportunity to address the moving expenses
issue before the ALJ, I deny Respondent's request for a briefing
schedule at this time.
Reinstatement
     I ordered Respondent to reinstate Creekmore to the same or a
substantially similar position with the same pay and benefits. 
D. R. O. at 27.  I will not reconsider my decision to order
reinstatement and to deny front pay.  That Respondent
discriminated against Creekmore in firing him does not establish
a higher level of hostility toward Creekmore than toward other
whistleblowers, for whom reinstatement is the normal remedy.  The
evidence does not show the impossibility of a normal working
relationship between the parties, nor does it demonstrate that
Creekmore will be at medical risk if reinstated.
     Creekmore has raised the issue of the appropriate corporate
entity that should offer him reinstatement.  Petition at 24-25. 
At the time of Creekmore's employ, PSESI was a subsidiary of ABB-
Combustion Engineering (ABB-CE).  In 1994, ABB-CE sold its stock
in PSESI to Octagon, Inc.  D. R. O. at 1 n.1.  Respondent has
explained that after the sale, ABB-CE retained liability arising
from this complaint.  ABB-PSESI Rebuttal Brief, March 31, 1995,
at n.1.
     In the D. R. O., I referred to Respondent as "PSESI" since
that company was the named respondent.  D. R. O. at 1 n.1.  In
ordering PSESI to reinstate Creekmore, however, I did not mean to
obligate a corporation that did not retain liability in this
cause of action.  Rather, it is appropriate that ABB-CE has the
obligation to reinstate Creekmore to a substantially similar
position. 
Reimbursement of Travel Expenses
     Creekmore points out an inconsistency in the amount of
travel expenses that Respondent was ordered to pay.  Whereas I
stated the correct amount of $2,240 in the discussion section of
the decision, D. R. O. at 27, I misstated the amount as $2,040 in
the ordering paragraph.  D. R. O. at 28 ¶3.  The correct
amount of travel expenses that Respondent is ordered to pay is
$2,240. 
Reimbursement of Job Search Expenses
     The ordering paragraphs in the D. R. O. should have included
an order that Respondent pay Creekmore $2,000 in job search
expenses, as reflected in the discussion section.  See D. R. O.
at 27.
Cost of Acquiring New Home
     I denied Creekmore's request for payment of $7,500 to secure
a mortgage on his new home in Virginia on the ground that he is
not entitled to a payment that would place him in a better 
[PAGE 3]
position than if he had not been laid off unlawfully.  D. R. O.
at 17.  Creekmore has submitted an affidavit that past and
present PSESI employees received relocation expenses when they
moved to Florida after the company was sold.  On remand the ALJ
may take evidence concerning whether Creekmore sustained expenses
for relocating to Virginia that were not reimbursed by his new
employer and that would have been reimbursed by Respondent if he
had made the move to Florida when PSESI was sold.  The ALJ shall
recommend the amount of relocation expenses to which Creekmore is
entitled, if any.
     SO ORDERED.


                              THOMAS P. GLYNN
                              Deputy Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.




[ENDNOTES]
           
[1]  The Secretary has recused himself in this case.

[2]  Asea Brown Boveri (ABB) acquired Combustion Engineering,
Inc. in 1989.  Power Systems Energy Services, Inc. (PSESI), which
employed Creekmore, was a wholly owned subsidiary of Combustion
Engineering.  PSESI's stock was sold to Octagon, Inc. in 1984 and 
PSESI moved from Connecticut to Florida after the sale.  In this
complaint, ABB has defended its former subsidiary's actions.