Before me for review is the Recommended Decision and Order
Approving Settlement Agreement issued by the Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ) on June 12, 1991, in this case under the employee
protection provision of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), 42
U.S.C. § 6971 (1988). Finding that the Settlement Agreement and
Release is in Complainant's best interests and effectuates the
purposes and policies of the SWDA, the ALJ recommends that the
agreement be approved and the case dismissed with prejudice.
Review of the agreement reveals that it appears to encompass
the settlement of matters arising under various laws, only one of
which is ERA. See Settlement Agreement and Release, is ¶¶ 5,6,7.
As stated in Poulos v. Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No.
86-CAA-1, Sec. Order, Nov. 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. [86-]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 its terms are a fair, adequate and reasonable
settlement of Complainant's allegation that Respondent violated
the SWDA. See Fuchko and Yunker v. Georgia Power Co., Case Nos.
89-ERA-9, 89-ERA-10, Sec. Order, Mar. 23, 1989, slip op. at 2.
Upon the review of the terms of the agreement signed by the
parties, I find that it is fair, adequate and reasonable. I,
therefore, accept the ALJ's recommendation that the settlement be
approved and the case be, and it hereby is, DISMISSED with
prejudice.
