DATE:  November 3, 1993

Case No.: 93-CAA-5

In the Matter of:

FRANK WEBB,
     Complainant,

v.

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK,
     Respondent.

BEFORE:  THE SECRETARY OF LABOR

                      FINAL DECISION AND ORDER

     Before me for review is the Order Approving Settlement and
Recommended Order of Dismissal with Prejudice (R.D. and O.) of
the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in this case arising under the
Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7622 (1988).  The ALJ
recommended approval of the settlement agreement and dismissal of
the complaint with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii).[1] 
     I note that the terms of the settlement agreement encompass
the settlement of matters arising under various laws only one of
which is the CAA.   For the reasons set forth in Poulos v.
Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No. 86-CAA-1, Sec. Ord.,
Nov. 2, 1987, slip op. at 2, I have limited my review of the
agreement to determining whether its terms are a fair, adequate
and reasonable settlement of Complaint's allegation that
Respondent violated the CAA.
     Paragraph 10 of the settlement provides that Complainant
shall keep the terms of the settlement confidential.  I construe
this confidentiality provision as not restricting any disclosure
where required by law.  McGlynn v. Pulsair Inc., Case No.
93-CAA-00002, Sec. Fin. Ord. Approving Settlement, June 28, 1993,
slip op. at 3.  Moreover, I note that the settlement agreement
submitted for my review becomes a part of the public record in
these cases and is subject to the provisions of the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, which require federal
agencies to disclose requested records unless they are exempt
from disclosure under the Act.  See Plumlee v. Alyeska
Pipeline Service Co., Case No. 92-TSC-7, Sec. Ord. Approving
Settlements, August 6, 1993, slip op. at 5-6; McTiernan v.
Public Service Co., Case No. 91-ERA-37, Sec. Ord. Approving
Settlement, Feb. 21, 
[PAGE 2]
1992, slip op. at 1-2.
     Additionally, Paragraph 12 provides that the laws of New
York shall govern this settlement agreement.  This provision is
interpreted as not limiting the authority of the Secretary or the
United States district court under the applicable statutes and
regulations.  McGlynn, at 3.
     As construed herein, I approve the settlement agreement and
dismiss the complaint with prejudice.  See Paragraph 6.
     SO ORDERED

     ROBERT B. REICH
     Secretary of Labor  



[ENDNOTES]

[1] It is not necessary to employ Rule 41(a)(1)(ii) to dismiss
this case, as the applicable statutes and case law provide for
dismissal of a case by the Secretary upon approval of the terms
of a fully executed settlement agreement between the parties. 
See Fuchko and Yunker v. Georgia Power Co., Case Nos. 89-
ERA-9, 10, Sec. Ord. to Submit Settlement Agreement, March 23,
1989, slip op. at 1-2.