BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR
FINAL ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Before me for review is the Recommended Decision and Order
Accepting the Parties' Settlement Agreement and Dismissal of the
Complaint with Prejudice, issued January 8, 1991, by
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Michael P. Lesniak in the above-
captioned case, which arises under the employee protection
provision of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended
(ERA), 42 U.S.C. § 5851 (1988). The ALJ reviewed the Settlement
Agreement in Full and Final Release of All Claims (the
agreement), as well as the parties' offer of proof presented at
the hearing, and concluded that the agreement was fair, adequate
and reasonable. See Fuchko and Yunker v. Georgia Power Co. , Case
Nos. 89-ERA-9, 89-ERA-10, Sec. Order, March 23, 1989, slip op. at
1-2. The ALJ accordingly recommended that the agreement be
accepted and the case dismissed with prejudice.
Review of the agreement reveals that it appears to encompass
the settlement of matters under various laws, only one of which
is the ERA. See, e.g. , Settlement Agreement ¶¶. 4, 7. As stated
in Poulos v. Ambassador Fuel Oil Co.. Inc ., Case No. 86-CAA-1,
Sec. Order, November 2, 1987, slip op. at 2:
[The Secretary's] authority over settlement agreements
is limited to such statutes as are within [the
Secretary's] jurisdiction and is defined by the
applicable statute. See Aurich v. Consolidated Edison
Company of New York. Inc ., Case No. [86-]CAA-2,
Secretary's Order Approving Settlement, issued July 29,
1987; Chase v. Buncombe County, N.C. , Case No.
85-SWD-4, Secretary's Decision and Order on Remand,
issued November 3, 1986.
I have, therefore, limited my review of the agreement to
determining whether the terms thereof are a fair, adequate and
reasonable settlement of Complainant's allegation that
Respondents violated the ERA.
Regarding Paragraph 6 of the agreement, in which the parties
agree to maintain the strictest confidentiality of the terms of
the agreement, the parties at the hearing asked the ALJ to keep
the agreement under seal if possible, but that if it were not
possible, the parties stated that it would not cause the
agreement to fail. T. 4-8. In view of the parties' agreement
that the settlement will not fail if not kept under seal, the
agreement has been unsealed and incorporated into the
administrative record of the case.2
Upon review of the terms of the agreement signed by the
parties, and based on the record of this case, I find that the
agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable. I therefore accept
the ALJ's recommendation that the agreement be accepted.
Accordingly this case is DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
LYNN MARTIN
Washington, D.C.
[ENDNOTES]
1 See Hearing Transcript (T.), 4; Settlement Agreement in Full and
Final Release of All Claims, p.1.
2
