DATE: February 1, 1995
CASE NO. 94-WPC-5
IN THE MATTER OF
BRIAN L. HOCKETT,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND
MANAGEMENT,
RESPONDENT.
BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR
FINAL ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT
This case arises under the employee protection provisions of
the Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA), 33 U.S.C. § 1367
(1988), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. §
300j-9(i) (1988) and the regulations at 29 C.F.R. Part 24 (1993).
The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a recommended order for
dismissal of the complaint on December 13, 1994.
The parties have submitted a Settlement Agreement and
Release (Agreement) and seek approval of the Agreement and
dismissal of complaint. Because the request for approval is
based on an agreement entered into by the parties, I must review
it to determine whether the terms are a fair, adequate and
reasonable settlement of the complaint. 29 C.F.R. §
24.6(b); Macktal v. Secretary of Labor, 923 F.2d 1150,
1153-54 (5th Cir. 1991); Thompson v. U.S. Dep't of Labor,
885 F.2d 551, 556 (9th Cir. 1989); Fuchko and Yunker v.
Georgia Power Co., Case Nos. 89-
[PAGE 2]
ERA-9, 89-ERA-10, Sec. Ord., Mar. 23, 1989, slip op. at 2.
The Agreement appears to encompass the settlement of matters
arising under various laws, beyond those encompassed by the WPCA
and the SDWA. See Agreement ¶ 6. 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
Complainant's allegations that Respondent violated the WPCA and
the SDWA.
I find that the Agreement, as here construed, is a fair,
adequate and reasonable settlement of the complaint.
Accordingly, I APPROVE the settlement and DISMISS the complaint
with prejudice. Agreement ¶ 1.
SO ORDERED.
ROBERT B. REICH
Secretary of Labor
Washington, D.C.
