DATED: October 9, 1998
1998-SDW-00003

In the Matter of:

BRENDA MOHR,
    Complainant,

vs.

EG & G DEFENSE MATERIALS, INC.
    Respondent.

   The above-captioned matter arises under the Safe Drinking Water, 42 U.S.C. § 5851, and pursuant to 29 CFR Part 24. On October 8, 1998, the parties filed a proposed settlement agreement that, if approved, would resolve all issues and allow for the dismissal of this matter with prejudice.

   As required by the relevant statutory provisions, regulations, and case law, I have reviewed the agreement to determine if its terms are fair, adequate, and reasonable. After doing so, I conclude that the terms of the agreement are, in fact, fair, adequate, and reasonable and that the agreement should therefore be approved.

   It is noted that although the agreement contains confidentiality provisions (¶6), it contains no provisions which may prevent or deter the complainant from reporting any wrongdoing by the respondents to federal and state agencies or testifying about the subjects of her past complaints. The agreement contemplates full disclosure of its terms to the Department of Labor and other judicial or administrative bodies as required by law.

   The parties have certified (¶11) that this is the sole agreement between them arising out of the factual circumstances forming the basis of this claim. Finally, it

is noted that the amounts to be paid to the complainant and her attorney as well as her retention by EG&G and promotion to Environmental Technician effective June 1, 1998 appear appropriate, and that, in negotiating of the terms of the agreement, all parties were represented by apparently well-qualified attorneys who appear to be fully aware of all relevant facts and legal principles.

   Accordingly, it is recommended:

1) That the claim of Brenda Mohr against the above- referenced respondent be dismissed with prejudice.

2) That the settlement agreement be given such restricted handling as may be necessary to comply with the provisions of 29 CFR § 70.26 per the parties' request in ¶ 6.

       ALEXANDER KARST
       Administrative Law Judge

Dated:
AK:rs

NOTICE: This Recommended Decision and Order will automatically become the final order of the Secretary unless, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 24.8, a petition for review is timely filed with the Administrative Review Board, United States Department of Labor, Room S-4309, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210. Such a petition for review must be received by the Administrative Review Board within ten (10) business days of the date of this Recommended Decision and Order, and shall be served on all parties and on the Chief Administrative Law Judge. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 24.8 and 24.9, as amended by 63 Fed. Reg. 6614 (1998).