ARB CASE NO. 07-103
ALJ CASE NO. 2007-STA-015
DATE: August 31, 2007
In the Matter of:
C. D. BENNETT,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
YELLOW TRANSPORTATION, INC.,
RESPONDENT.
BEFORE: THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE
This case arises
under Section 405, the employee protection provision, of the Surface
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA)[1]
and its implementing regulations.[2]
The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) below issued a Recommended Decision and
Order Approving Settlement Agreement and Dismissing Complaint (R. D. & O.)
on July 30, 2007.
Under the
regulations implementing the STAA, the parties may settle a case at any time
after filing objections to the Assistant Secretary’s preliminary findings, and
before those findings become final, “if the participating parties agree to a
settlement and such settlement is approved
[Page 2]
by the Administrative Review Board
[Board] . . . or the ALJ.”[3]
The regulations direct the parties to file a copy of the settlement with the
ALJ, the Board, or United States Department of Labor.[4]
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R.
§ 1978.109(c)(1), the Board “shall issue a final decision and order based on
the record and the decision and order of the administrative law judge.” In
reviewing the ALJ’s legal conclusions, the Board, as the Secretary’s designee,
acts with “all the powers [the Secretary] would have in making the initial
decision . . . .”[5]
Therefore, the Board reviews the ALJ’s legal conclusions de novo.[6]
The Board
received the R. D. & O. and issued a Notice of Review and Briefing Schedule
apprising the parties of their right to submit briefs supporting or opposing
the ALJ’s recommended decision on August 10, 2007. Neither party responded to
the Board’s Notice.
The ARB concurs
with the ALJ’s determination that the parties’ settlement agreement is fair,
adequate and reasonable. But, we note that the Agreement encompasses the
settlement of matters under laws other than the STAA.[7]
The Board’s authority over settlement agreements is limited to the statutes
that are within the Board’s jurisdiction as defined by the applicable statute.
Our approval is limited to this case, and we understand the settlement terms
relating to release of STAA claims as pertaining only to the facts and
circumstances giving rise to this case. Therefore, we approve only the terms
of the Agreement pertaining to Bennett’s STAA claim ARB No. 07-103, 2007-STA-00015.[8]
The Agreement
provides that the parties shall keep the terms of the settlement confidential,
with certain specified exceptions.[9]
The Board notes that the parties’ submissions, including the Agreement,
become part of the record of the case and are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA).[10]
FOIA requires Federal agencies to disclose requested records unless
[Page 3]
they are
exempt from disclosure under the Act.[11]
Department of Labor regulations provide specific procedures for responding to FOIA requests, for appeals by requestors from denials of such requests,
and for protecting the interests of submitters of confidential commercial
information.[12]
The parties have
agreed to settle Bennett’s STAA claim. Accordingly, with the reservations
noted above, we APPROVE the agreement and DISMISS the complaint
with prejudice.
SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
DAVID G. DYE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[1] 49 U.S.C.A. § 31105 (West 2007).
[2] 29 C.F.R. Part 1978 (2006).
[3] 29 C.F.R. §
1978.111(d)(2).
[4] See id.
[5] 5 U.S.C.A. § 557(b) (West 2007).
[6] See Roadway Express, Inc. v. Dole,
929 F.2d 1060, 1066 (5th Cir. 1991).
[7] See, e.g., paras. 3, 5, and 6
of the Settlement Agreement and General Release.
[8] Fish v. H & R Transfer, ARB No.
01-071, ALJ No. 00-STA-56, slip op. at 2 (ARB Apr. 30, 2003).
[9] Settlement Agreement and General Release,
para. 9.
[10] 5 U.S.C.A. § 552 (West 2006).
[11] Coffman v. Alyeska Pipeline Serv. Co. &
Arctic Slope Inspection Serv., ARB No. 96-141, ALJ Nos. 96-TSC-005, 6, slip
op. at 2 (ARB June 24, 1996).
[12] 29 C.F.R. § 70 et seq. (2006).
