DOL Home > OALJ > Whistleblower > Roberts v. Battelle Memorial Institute, 96-ERA-24 (ALJ Jan. 15, 1997) |
Date: JAN 15 1997
Case No.: 96-ERA-24
In the Matter of:
LINDA ROBERTS,
Complainant,
v.
BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE; ROBERT W. SMITH, JR.;
ROBERT E. LINCOLN; KATHY OLSON;
K.C. BROG; AND V.E. CASTLEBERRY,
Respondents.
On December 18, 1996, the undersigned issued a Recommended Order of Dismissal in the above-captioned matter. I denied Complainant's request for reconsideration on January 6, 1997. On January 10, 1997, this Office received a second motion from Complainant again requesting that the recommendation for dismissal be reconsidered.
The implementing regulations at 29 C.F.R. Part 24 do not expressly authorize the reconsideration of a recommended decision by an administrative law judge, but there is some existing case law suggesting that such reconsideration is permissible. See Smith v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 89-ERA-12 (Sec'y June 2, 1994). Additional authority, however, indicates that an administrative law judge does not have jurisdiction over a matter after a recommended decision and order has been issued, as jurisdiction then passes to the Secretary of Labor. See Tankersley v. Triple Crown Services, Inc., 92-STa-8 (Sec'y Feb. 18, 1993); Rex v. Ebasco Services, Inc., 87-ERA-6 and 40 (ALJ Mem., Apr. 13, 1994). Because the regulatory scheme provides for automatic review of recommended decision and orders, requests for reconsideration are unnecessary. Thus, I again decline to reconsider this matter. Any argument Complainant wishes to proffer at this time should be presented to the Administrative Review Board.
Accordingly, Complainant's second request for reconsideration is DENIED.
JOHN M. VITTONE
Chief Administrative Law Judge
JMV/cy