UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

DATE: November 4, 1991
CASE NO. 91-ERA-25

IN THE MATTER OF

H. SHANNON PHILLIPS,
    COMPLAINANT,

    v.

    CITIZENS ASSOCIATION FOR
SOUND ENERGY,
    RESPONDENT.

BEFORE: THE SECRETARY OF LABOR

   In response to the Secretary's order of April 18, 1991, counsel for Respondent has submitted a copy of the General Release and Settlement Agreement entered into between the parties in this case, which arises under the employee protection provision of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended (ERA), 42 U.S.C. § 5851 (1988).

   The terms of the parties' agreement have been carefully reviewed. I note that the agreement encompasses the settlement of matters arising under various laws, only one of which is the ERA. See, e.g., General Release and Settlement Agreement at 1. For the reasons set forth in Poulos v. Ambassador Fuel Oil Co.,

Case No. 86-CAA-1, Sec. Order, November 2, 1987, slip op. at 2, I have limited my review of the agreement to determining whether its terms are a fair, adequate, and reasonable settlement of complainant's allegations that Respondent violated the ERA.

   I also note that certain language in the agreement could be construed as a waiver by Complainant of causes of action he may have which arise in the future. See, e.g., General Release and Settlement Agreement at 4. Because a waiver of Complainant's rights based on future employer actions would be contrary to public policy, I interpret these provisions as limited to a waiver of the right to sue in the future on claims or causes of action arising out of facts or any set of facts occurring before the date of the agreement. See Polizzi v. Gibbs and Hill, Case No. 87-ERA-38, Sec. Order Rejecting in Part and Approving in Part Settlement Submitted by the Parties and Dismissing Case, July 18, 1989, slip op. at 9, and cases cited therein.

   Additionally, the agreement states that any dispute arising under the agreement "will be construed and resolved" pursuant to the laws of Texas. General Release and Settlement Agreement at 5. I interpret this statement as not limiting the authority of the Secretary or the United States district court under the statute and the regulations. 42 U.S.C. § 5851(d); see also 29 C.F.R. § 24.8(a).(1991). See Milewski v. Kansas Gas and Electric Co., Case No. 85-ERA-0021, Sec. Order Approving Settlement Agreement and Dismissing Complaint, June 23, 1990, slip op. at 2.

   As so construed, I find the terms of the agreement to be fair, adequate, and reasonable, and, therefore, approve the General Release and Settlement Agreement. Accordingly, the complaint in this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. See General Release and Settlement Agreement at 4 para. 2; Complainant's letter to the Chief Administrative Law Judge dated February 25, 1991.

   SO ORDERED.

       LYNN MARTIN
       Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.