The parties have agreed to settle White's STAA claim. Accordingly, with the reservations noted above limiting our approval to the settlement of White's STAA claim, we APPROVE the agreement and DISMISS the complaint with prejudice.
SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
DAVID G. DYE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 49 U.S.C.A. § 31105 (West 2006).
2 29 C.F.R. Part 1978 (West 2006).
3 The parties' settlement is composed of two settlement agreements, one between White and Maricopa Ready Mix (Settlement Agreement and Full Release) and the second between White, Maricopa Ready Mix, and the Assistant Secretary (Settlement Agreement). White also filed an Unopposed Motion to Approve Settlement and Dismiss Proceeding with Prejudice on October 30, 2006, in which he averred that neither the Assistant Secretary nor Maricopa Ready Mix opposed the motion.
4 29 C.F.R. § 1978.111(d)(2).
5 See id.
6 See, e.g., para. B of the Settlement Agreement and Full Release.
7 Fish v. H & R Transfer, ARB No. 01-071, ALJ No. 00-STA-56, slip op. at 2 (ARB Apr. 30, 2003).
8 Phillips v. Citizens' Ass'n for Sound Energy, 1991-ERA-25, slip op. at 2 (Sec'y Nov. 4, 1991).