DATE: March 20, 1992

CASE NO 87-ERA-17


IN THE MATTER OF

PATTY S. MIRIELLO,

            COMPLAINANT,
       
v.        
          
CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY,
            RESPONDENT,
AND CHARLESTON NAVAL SHIPYARD, RESPONDENT .


BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR


                         FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
                                     
      On January 23, 1992, I issued a Decision and Order to
Show Cause in this case which arises under the employee
protection provision of the Energy Reorganization Act of
1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. sec. 5851 (1988).
      After reviewing the record and the Administrative Law
Judge's recommended decisions, I agreed with his recommendation
to dismiss Complainant's entire complaint, as it related to both
Respondents.  It appeared from the record, however, that
Complainant may not have been properly notified of the ALJ's
recommended decisions, as required by applicable law.  See
29 C.F.R. sec. 24.6(a), 18.3(c) (1991).  Accordingly, in order to
ensure a fair opportunity for response, I issued the January 23,
1992, Decision and Order to Show Cause, with the ALJ's
recommended decisions attached, providing the parties ten
days from receipt within which to show cause why I should
not enter a final order.
    The record contains return receipts from Respondent Carolina 
[PAGE 2]
Power and Light Company, dated January 28, 1992.  The receipt
from Respondent Charleston Naval Shipyard has not been returned, and
the mailings to Complainant have been returned by the post office as unclaimed and
unforwardable.  Both of these parties, however, are charged with constructive receipt
of the Decision and Order to Show Cause, with attachments,
because the order was served by certified mail to the last known address
of each party.[1] See 29 C.F.R.  24.6(b), 18.4; Fed. R.
Civ. P. 5(b) as made applicable by 29 C.F.R.  18.1; see
also Miriello v. Carolina Power and Light
Co., Case No. 87-ERA-17, Sec. Dec. and Order to Show Cause,
Jan. 23, 1992, slip op. at 8-9.
    No party having responded to date, and the prescribed period
within which to respond having expired, see 29 C.F.R.
 18.4(c)(3), for the reasons set forth in my January 23, 1992,
Decision and Order to Show Cause, this case is DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.

                           LYNN MARTIN
                           Secretary of Labor           
                


Washington, D.C.


[ENDNOTES]

[1]  Additionally, the order with attachments was sent by certified mail
to Complainant's previous address.