|
|
|
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||
 |
| October 4, 2008 DOL Home > OALJ Home > USDOL/OALJ Reporter |
|
USDOL/OALJ Reporter Ass't Sec'y & Shave v. Brisco Bailing Corp., 2002-STA-37 (ALJ July 31, 2003)
Issue Date: 31 July 2003 CASE NO.: 2002-STA-00037 In the Matter of
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF LABOR
and
PRESCOTT B. SHAVE v.
BRISCO BAILING CORPORATION d/b/a
In this proceeding which arises under the provisions of section 405 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, 49 U.S.C. § 31105 (the "STAA"), the parties have filed a joint motion to approve the attached settlement agreement. The STAA and its implementing regulations provide that a proceeding under the STAA may be ended prior to entry of a final order by a settlement agreement between the parties. 49 U.S.C. § 31105(b)(2)(C); 29 C.F.R. § 1978.111(d)(2) (2001). The Administrative Law Judge's role in reviewing the parties's settlement agreement is limited to ascertaining whether the terms of the agreement fairly, adequately and reasonably settle the Complainant's allegations that the Respondent violated the STAA. Ass't Sec'y & Zurenda v. Corporate Express Delivery Systems, Inc., ARB No. 00-041, ALJ No. 1999-STA-30 (ARB March 31, 2000). Pursuant to the requirements of the STAA and implementing regulations, I have carefully reviewed the terms of the parties' Settlement Agreement, and I have determined that it constitutes a fair, adequate and reasonable settlement of the complaint. Accordingly, the following order is entered: [Page 2] (1) the parties' Settlement Agreement is hereby approved; and (2) the matter is referred to the Administrative Review Board for issuance of a final decision and order pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1978.109(c). See Howick v. Experience Hendrix, LLC, ARB No. 02-049, ALJ No. 2000-STA-32 (ARB Sept. 26, 2002). SO ORDERED.
DANIEL F. SUTTON
Boston, Massachusetts
Attachment: Settlement Agreement
|
||||||||
| ||||||||
