CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY
OF NEW YORK, INCORPORATED,
RESPONDENT.
BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR
ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Before me for review is the Recommended Decision and Consent
Order, issued on November 18, 1988, by Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) Paul H. Teitler in the above-captioned case, which arises
under the employee protection provision of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7622 (1982). The ALJ's decision finds that
the settlement agreement entered into by the parties "is a fair
settlement of the claims", and recommends that the complaint in
[Page 2]
this case be dismissed with prejudice.
I have carefully reviewed the settlement agreement filed by
the parties. This document encompasses the settlement of matters
arising not only under the ERA but under other laws, such as the
National Labor Relations Act, or arising at common law. As
stated in Poulos v. Ambassador Fuel Co., Inc., Case No. 86-CAA-1,
Secretary's Order, issued November 2, 1987, slip op. at 2,
[The Secretary's] authority over settlement agreements
is limited to such statutes as are within [the
Secretary's] jurisdiction and is defined by the
applicable statute. See Aurich v. Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, Inc., Case No. CAA-2, Secretary's
Order Approving Settlement, issued July 29, 1987; Chase
v. Buncombe County, N.C., Case No. 85-SWD-4,
Secretary's Decision and Order on Remand, issued
November 3, 1986.
I have, therefore, limited my review of the agreement to
determining whether the terms thereof are a fair, adequate and
reasonable settlement of Complainant's allegations that
Respondents violated the CAA.
I find the terms of the agreement within the scope of my
authority to be fair, adequate and reasonable. I, therefore,
adopt the ALJ's recommendation and approve the settlement entered
into by the parties.
Accordingly, the complaint in this case is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
