DATE:  June 28, 1993
CASE NOS. 92-ERA-38
          92-ERA-45


IN THE MATTER OF

THOMAS J. SAPORITO, JR.,

               COMPLAINANT,

     v.

HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER CO.,
GEORGIA POWER CO., AND NUCLEAR
SUPPORT SERVICES, INC.,

               RESPONDENTS.


BEFORE:  THE SECRETARY OF LABOR


                         FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL

     Before me for review is the Recommended Order of Dismissal
issued by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on November 24,
1992, in the above-captioned matter which arises under Section
210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended (ERA),
42 U.S.C. § 5851 (1988). [1]   The ALJ recommended that the
claim against Respondent Georgia Power Company be dismissed
pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure based on Complainant's October 19, 1992, Notice of
Dismissal of Respondent Georgia Power Company.  Respondent has
not filed any response.  Upon review, I accept the ALJ's
recommendation.  Since Respondent did not file the functional
equivalent of either an answer to the complaint or a motion for
summary judgment, and raises no objection to Complainant's motion
for dismissal of this action, the case against Respondent Georgia
Power Company is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule
41(a)(1)(i).  See Cable v. Arizona Public Service
Co., Case No. 90-ERA-15, Sec. 
[PAGE 2]
Fin. Dec. and Ord., Nov. 13, 1992, slip op. at 3-5; Mosbaugh
v. Georgia Power Co., Case No. 90-ERA-58, Sec. Fin. Dec. and
Ord., Sept. 23, 1992, slip op. at 3-6.
     SO ORDERED.


                              ROBERT B. REICH 
                              Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.


OAA:JJOYCE:kg:02/20/96
Room S-4309:FPB:523-9728



[ENDNOTES]
           
[1]   By order dated August 28, 1992, the ALJ consolidated the
case of Thomas J. Saporito, Jr. v. Houston Lighting and Power
Co., Georgia Power Co., and Nuclear Support Services, Inc.,
Case No. 92-ERA-38, with the case of Thomas J. Saporito, Jr.
v. Houston Lighting and Power Co., Case No. 92-ERA-45.