October 3, 2008 DOL Home > OALJ Home > Whistleblower Collection |
USDOL/OALJ Reporter
SECRETARY OF LABOR
DATE: June 6, 1990 IN THE MATTER OF
E. DEAN CASSINELLI, v.
THE CITY OF DUVALL, BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR
AND DISMISSING CASE Before me for review is the Recommended Decision and Order of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Steven E. Halpern issued on January 25, 1990, in the captioned case which arises under the employee protection provision of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), 42 U.S.C. § 6971 (1982). Having reviewed the Release and Settlement AGreement and Notice of Settlement of Claim, the ALJ found the settlement to be fair, adequate and reasonable and recommended that the case be dismissed with prejudice. On March 28, 1990, after reviewing the Release and Settlement Agreement, I found the settlement to be fair, adequate and reasonable with certain exceptions and limitations. As stated in the March 28 order:
[Page 2]
Slip op. at 2-3. Accordingly, the March 28 show cause order, for reasons set forth fully therein, permitted Complainant and Respondent to show cause why the remainder of the settlement agreement should not be approved if the provisions of Paragraph 13 found to be void were severed. Additionally, the March 28 Order stated that:
[Page 3]
Slip op. at 4-5. The time allotted for responding to the show cause order has expired and no submissions have been received. As stated in the March 28 order, "[i]f no cause is shown by the parties . . . as indicated, a final order will be issued approving the settlement as severed and interpreted in this order, and this case will be dismissed with prejudice." See Release and Settlement Agreement, ¶ 6. Wherefore, Paragraph 13 of the Release and Settlement Agreement, to the extent that it would restrict Complainant and Respondent from communicating information to federal or state enforcement authorities as described above, is severed. Paragraph 15 is interpreted as not restricting the authority of the Secretary under the SWDA and regulations promulgated thereto. The settlement as severed and interpreted is fair, adequate and reasonable and is approved. Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. SO ORDERED.
ELIZABETH DOLE Washington, D.C. |
||||||||
|