skip navigational links United States Department of Labor
May 9, 2009        
DOL Home > OALJ Home > Whistleblower Collection
DOL Home USDOL/OALJ Reporter

Parker v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 1999-ERA-13 (ALJ Sept. 17, 1999)


U.S. Department of LaborOffice of Administrative Law Judges
Heritage Plaza Bldg. - Suite 530
111 Veterans Memorial Blvd
Metairie, LA 70005

(504) 589-6201
(504) 589-6268 (FAX)

DOL Seal

DATE ISSUED: September 17, 1999
CASE NO.: 1999-ERA-13

IN THE MATTER OF

JAMES P. PARKER
   Complainant

    v.

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
   Respondent

ORDER OF REFERRAL AND MEMORANDUM

   Came on this date to be considered Complainant's Motion for Reconsideration filed August 16, 1999.

   In Rex v. Ebasco Services, Inc., 87-ERA-6 and 40 (ALJ Apr. 13, 1994) the administrative law judge found that under Tankersley v. Triple Crown Services, Inc., 92-STA-8 (Sec'y Feb. 18, 1993), jurisdiction passes from the presiding judge to the Secretary of Labor after a decision is issued in this type of case. Consequently, an Administrative Law Judge does not have authority to rule on a motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, because Parker was not remanded to this Court, this Court herein enters an ORDER OF REFERRAL to the Secretary.

   Although the motion is not properly before this Office as a procedural matter, this Court will address the issue of protected activity under the ERA. Complainant argues that the facts of this case are analogous to those in Stone & Webster Engineering Corp. v. Herman, 115 F.3d 1568 (11th Cir. 1997), wherein the Court held that a worker's communications to co-workers regarding fire safety in the drywell of the Browns-Ferry nuclear reactor were protected activity. However, the instant case can be distinguished from Stone as the complaints herein do not concern fire safety in the Browns-Ferry nuclear plant, but rather address fire safety issues in the switchyard outside the plant. Therefore, Complainant's safety related activity does not relate to nuclear safety protected under 42 U.S.C. § 5851. Because Complainant's safety-related activity is not related to nuclear safety it is unprotected under the Act and the Court would deny the motion for reconsideration if it had jurisdiction.

    It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that this case is REFERRED to the Secretary for further action.

   ENTERED this 17th day of September, 1999 at Metairie, Louisiana.

       JAMES W. KERR
       Administrative Law Judge

JWK/cmh



Phone Numbers