DATE: November 1, 1995
CASE NO. 94-TSC-12
IN THE MATTER OF
DAVID J. POPE,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
ANCHOR DRILLING FLUIDS USA, INC.,
RESPONDENT.
BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR
FINAL ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT
This case arises under the employee protection provision of
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. § 2622
(1988). The parties submitted a Release of All Claims seeking
approval of the settlement and dismissal of the complaint.
The request for approval is based on an agreement entered
into by the parties, therefore, I must review it to determine
whether the terms are a fair, adequate and reasonable settlement
of the complaint. 24 C.F.R. § 24.6. 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-ERA-9, 89-ERA-10, Sec. Order,
Mar. 23, 1989, slip op. at 1-2.
The agreement appears to encompass the settlement of matters
arising under various laws, beyond the TSCA. See
Paragraphs 1 and 6. For the reasons set forth in Poulos v.
Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No. 86-CAA-1,
Sec. Order, 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 the Complainant's allegations the Respondent
[PAGE 2]
violated the TSCA.
Paragraph 10 contains
language which provides that the Complainant shall keep the
terms of the agreement confidential. I interpret this language
as not preventing Complainant, either voluntarily or pursuant to
an order or subpoena, from communicating with, or providing
information to, State and Federal government agencies about
suspected violations of law involving the Respondent. See
Corder v. Bechtel Energy Corp., Sec. Order, Feb. 9, 1994,
slip op. at 6-8 (finding void as contrary to public policy a
settlement agreement provision prohibiting the complainant from
communicating with federal or state agencies concerning possible
violations of law).
The parties' submissions, including the agreement become
part of the record of the case and are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1988). FOIA
requires Federal agencies to disclose requested records unless
they are exempt from disclosure under the Act.[1] See Debose
v. Carolina Power and Light Co., Case No. 92-
ERA-14, Order Disapproving Settlement and Remanding Case, Feb. 7,
1994, slip op. at 2-3 and cases there cited.
I find that the agreement, as here construed, is a fair,
adequate and reasonable settlement of the complaint.
Accordingly, I APPROVE the agreement and DISMISS THE COMPLAINT
WITH PREJUDICE. Paragraph 7.
SO ORDERED.
ROBERT B. REICH
Secretary of Labor
Washington, D.C.
[ENDNOTES]
[1] Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 70.26(b), submitters may
designate specific information as confidential commercial
information to be handled as provided in the regulations. When
FOIA requests are received for such information, the Department
of Labor will notify the submitter promptly, 29 C.F.R. §
70.26(c); the submitter will be given a reasonable amount of time
to state its objections to disclosure, 29 C.F.R. § 70.26(e);
and the submitter will be notified if a decision is made to
disclose the information, 29 C.F.R. § 70.26(f). If the
information is withheld and a suit is filed by the requester to
compel disclosure, the submitter will be notified, 29 C.F.R.
§70.26(h).