Date: December 7, 1989
Case No: 89-SDW-3

In the Matter of

ALVIN L. BUSH,
    Complainant,

    v.

OLYMPUS TERRACE SEWER DISTRICT,
    Respondent.

Robert I. Goodstein, Esq.
Short, Cressman & Burgess
3000 First Interstate Center
999 Third Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104-4008
    For the Complainant

Quenton D. Christensen, Esq.
Christensen, Hawes & Hulbert
3102 Rockefeller Avenue
Everett, Washington 98201
    For the Respondent

Before: HENRY B. LASKY
    Administrative Law Judge

   Complainant Alvin L. Bush commenced this proceeding in the above-entitled matter on March 28, 1989, with the filing of a complaint with the Department of Labor. Ultimately, the matter was scheduled for trial on August 29, 1989, in Seattle, Washington, but continued at the request of the parties and rescheduled for trial on October 3, 1989. At that time, the matter proceeded to trial and was submitted for decision subject to the parties filing proposed

findings of fact and conclusions of law as well as appropriate briefing of certain legal issues requiring resolution. On October 31, 1989, while the matter was pending subject to the aforesaid submissions, the parties advised the undersigned that they had entered into a negotiated proposed settlement. The parties waived any time requirements and were given until December 1, 1989, for submission of the terms of the proposed settlement.

   On December 1, 1989, counsel for Claimant filed a motion and affidavit for order approving settlement as well as a memorandum in support of the motion to approve the settlement, all of which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this recommended decision as if set forth in its entirety.

   In view of Thompson v. U.S. Department of Labor, 885 F.2d 551 (9th Cir. 1989), and based on the motion, affidavit and memorandum in support of the motion to approve the settlement, it is abundantly clear that the proposed settlement is in the best interest of all parties herein, that it is reasonable and fair under the precise circumstances and disputed issues involved in this proceeding, including but not limited to the issues of whether the claim herein is time barred by the applicable statute of limitations, whether the facts in this case warrant the application of the doctrine of equitable tolling of the statute of limitations and whether the Safe Drinking Water Act is, in fact, applicable to this proceeding.

   The parties have negotiated in good faith and have agreed to resolve the outstanding and difficult issues in this matter by entering into a proposed settlement, thereby bringing the proceeding to a fair and equitable disposition. I am particularly cognizant of the skill and capabilities of counsel for Claimant, as demonstrated at the formal trial of the matter, and his recommendation and motion for approval of the settlement is afforded special consideration.

   The terms of the settlement are as follows:

1. The Olympus Terrace Sewer District shall pay $15,000.00 to Complainant Alvin L. Bush as compensation for back wages and lost benefits;

2. The Olympus Terrace Sewer District shall provide an accurate and positive letter of recommendation to the Complainant, Alvin L. Bush, for his use in seeking other employment;

3. In returns Complainant Alvin L. Bush shall execute a release to the benefit of Olympus Terrace Sewer District.

   The parties have fully complied with the terms of the settlement, and the settlement of the case before decision will vastly reduce litigation costs due to the potential for appeal, regardless of the outcome. In view of the vigorously contested issues at trial on October 3, 1989, and the complex issues of law involved in this matter, there is substantial likelihood that an appeal would be pursued by whichever party did not prevail. Such appeal would greatly increase litigation costs, thus the equitable settlement is in the best interest of both parties and is consistent with public policy.

   It is hereby recommended that the settlement agreement between Complainant Alvin L. Bush and Respondent Olympus Terrace Sewer District be approved and that the matter be dismissed with prejudice.

       HENRY B. LASKY
       Administrative Law Judge