Trueblood v. Von Roll America, Inc., 2003-WPC-7 (ALJ Sept. 17, 2003)

U.S. Department of Labor

Office of Administrative Law Judges 800 K Street, NW, Suite 400-N Washington, DC 20001-8002

Issue Date: 17 September 2003

CASE NO: 2003-WPC-7

In the Matter of:

DONNA L. TRUEBLOOD,
    Complainant,

    v.

VON ROLL AMERICA, INC., d/b/a WTI or WASTE TECHNOLOGY, INC.
and HERITAGE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.,
    Respondents.

   This proceeding involves a complaint filed May 30, 2003, alleging violations of the employee protection provisions of the laws enforced pursuant to 29 CFR Part 24 including the Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. §1367 (WPC); Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300j-9(i) (SDW); Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §2622 (TSC); Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. §6971 (SWD); Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §7622 (CAA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. §9610 (CERCLA); and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §5851 (ERA).

   The complaint in this case alleges that the Respondents discriminated and retaliated against Complainant by refusing to reinstate her and by refusing to comply with the Preliminary Order on Remand issued by Administrative Law Judge Richard A. Morgan on May 6, 2003, pursuant to 29 CFR §24.7(c)(2) as mandated in cases brought under the ERA. The Preliminary Order on Remand included an order of immediate reinstatement among other relief. The Complainant alleges that the refusal of Respondents to obey and implement the Preliminary Order on Remand issued by Judge Morgan constitutes an additional act of retaliation by Respondents related to protected activity under the ERA and other statutes which was the subject of Judge Morgan's Decision and Order dated March 26, 2003, in Case Nos. 2002-WPC-3; 2002-WPC-3; 2002-WPC-4; 2002-WPC-5; 2002-WPC-6, 2003-WPC-1.

   The parties have agreed to settle the case and have filed a Joint Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice on September 17, 2003, requesting that the actions and all claims asserted therein before this tribunal be dismissed with prejudice. The parties have submitted a Settlement Agreement, Mutual Release, and Covenants Not To Sue dated and effective September 9, 2003, (the "Settlement Agreement"), providing for certain affirmative actions by the parties and providing for comprehensive releases of all claims in any way related to this and all other claims between and among the parties which are pending before specified judicial and administrative tribunals or which otherwise exist or might exist between or among them. Having reviewed the Settlement Agreement and concluded that the settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable, and, upon implicit and explicit representation of the parties, that it adequately documents all claims arising from the same factual circumstances forming the basis of the federal claim before this tribunal, and provides for the comprehensive resolution thereof, it is

   ORDERED that the Settlement Agreement be approved; that the Joint Motion For Dismissal With Prejudice filed in the case before this tribunal be granted; that, to the extent that this tribunal has jurisdiction so to order, the parties execute the Settlement Agreement in accordance with its terms; that the actions and all claims asserted therein before this tribunal be dismissed with prejudice as settled.

      EDWARD TERHUNE MILLER
      Administrative Law Judge