Before me for review is the [recommended]
Decision and Order (R.D. and O.) of Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ) Alfred Lindeman issued on November 28, 1990, in this case
which arises under Section 405, the employee protection
provision, of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982
(the Act). 49 U.S.C. app. § 2305 (1988). The ALJ recommended
that Mr. Freeman's complaint be dismissed.
Complainant, a truck driver, alleges that his
June 1990 discharge by the Respondent, was in violation of the
protections provided him under Section 405. Respondent denies
Complainant's allegations. The ALJ found that the Complainant had
not established a primafacie case that he had
engaged in any protected activity and that, in any event, the
record as a whole established that, "he was terminated
solely because of [an] episode of damaging company property"
in Dallas, Texas. (R.D. and O. at 2). Neither party has filed any
brief in support of or in opposition to the ALJ's R.D. and O. as
permitted in the applicable regulations. 29 C.F.R. §
1978.109(c)(2)(1990).
Based on a thorough review of the record, I
concur in the ALJ's factual findings which are supported by
substantial evidence on the record as a whole and are conclusive.
29 C.F.R. § 1978.109(c)(3). Accordingly, I adopt the ALJ's
R.D. and O., appended hereto, and this case is DISMISSED.
