DATE:   August 31, 1992
CASE NO. 90-ERA-44

FREDERICK E. McCUISTION,

          COMPLAINANT,

     v.

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY,

          RESPONDENT.


BEFORE:  THE SECRETARY OF LABOR


                      ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND
                    DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE

     This case arises under the employee protection provision 
of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended (ERA), 42
U.S.C. § 5851 (1988).  Complainant waived the statutory
deadline for a final order by the Secretary.    
     The parties submitted a Memorandum of Understanding and
Agreement, dated July 28, 1992, indicating that Complainant
agreed to a settlement of his complaint against the TVA and
sought dismissal of the complaint with prejudice.  Because this
request for dismissal is based on an agreement entered into by
the parties, I must review it to determine whether the terms are
a fair, adequate, and reasonable settlement of the complaint.  42
U.S.C. § 5851(b)(2)(A); Macktal v. Secretary of
Labor, 923 F.2d 1150, 1153-54 (5th Cir. 1991); Thompson v.
United States Department of Labor, 885 F.2d 551, 556 (9th
Cir. 1989); Fuchko and Yunker v. Georgia Power Co., Case
Nos. 89-ERA-9, 89-ERA-10, Sec. Order, Mar. 23, 1989, slip op. at
1-2.
     This settlement agreement may encompass matters arising
under various laws only one of which is the ERA.  As my authority
over settlement agreements is limited to such statutes as are
within my jurisdiction and is defined by the applicable statute,
see Goese v. Ebasco Services, Inc., Case No. 88-
ERA-25, Sec. Order Approving Settlement and Dismissing Case, Dec.
8, 1988; Poulos v. Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No.
86-CAA-1, Sec. 
[PAGE 2]
Order, Nov. 2, 1987, and cases cited therein, I have limited my
review to determining whether the terms of the agreement are
fair, adequate, and reasonable to settle Complainant's allegation
that Respondent violated the ERA.
     Upon review of the terms of the agreement and the record 
in this case, I find that the agreement is fair, adequate and
reasonable, and therefore, I approve the agreement. [1] 
Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice, as requested.
     SO ORDERED.



                              LYNN MARTIN
                              Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.

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


[ENDNOTES]
           
[1]   Paragraph 5 provides for confidentiality of the terms of
Complainant's awards, except with family and attorney, and as
required by legal process.  I note that the parties' submissions
become part of the record in the case and that the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1988), requires federal
agencies to disclose requested records unless they are exempt
from disclosure under the Act.  See Hamka v. The
Detroit Edison Co., Case No. 88-ERA-26, Sec. Order to Submit
Attachments, Dec. 9, 1991, slip op. at 2, n.1.