[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 78 (Friday, April 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-9818]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 22, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 

Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of March 14 Through March 
18, 1994

    During the week of March 14 through March 18, 1994, the decisions 
and orders summarized below were issued with respect to appeals and 
applications for exception or other relief filed with the Office of 
Hearings and Appeals of the Department of Energy. The following summary 
also contains a list of submissions that were dismissed by the Office 
of Hearings and Appeals.

Appeals

Lotepro Corporation, 3/15/94, LFA-0356

    Lotepro Corporation filed an Appeal from a determination issued to 
it on January 14, 1994 by the Superconducting Super Collider Project 
Office (SSCPO) of the Department of Energy (DOE). In that 
determination, SSCPO partially denied Lotepro's request for information 
filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). SSCPO withheld 39 
documents either in their entirety or in part pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
552(b)(5) (Exemption 5) and 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) (Exemption 4). In its 
Appeal, Lotepro challenged SSCPO's application of Exemption 5 to the 
requested documents and requested that the DOE direct SSCPO to release 
the documents. In considering the Appeal, the Office of Hearings and 
Appeals found that SSCPO did not provide an adequate justification for 
withholding documents and did not segregate and release all factual 
material from documents it withheld pursuant to the deliberative 
process privilege of Exemption 5. The Office of Hearings and Appeals 
remanded this Appeal to SSCPO to provide a clearer justification for 
withholding documents and to review the documents for segregable 
factual information. This Appeal was also remanded to consider the 
Department of Justice's new policy which stresses the FOIA's primary 
objective of ``maximum responsible disclosure of government 
information.'' Therefore, the Department of Energy granted in part and 
denied in part Lotepro's Appeal.

Nayar and Company, P.C., 3/17/94, LFA-0352

    Nayar and Company, P.C. (Nayar) filed an Appeal from a 
determination issued to it on December 30, 1993, by the Western Area 
Power Administration (WAPA) in response to a request for information 
Nayar submitted under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In that 
determination, WAPA released the documents Nayar requested, but 
withheld some of the information pursuant to Exemption 4 of the FOIA. 
Nayar argued that some of the withheld information had previously been 
released or it was not information that would cause harm to the 
competitive position of the winning bidder. The DOE determined that 
much of the withheld information was exempt from disclosure but 
concluded that some information was previously released or could not be 
withheld under Exemption 4. Therefore, the Appeal was denied in part 
and granted in part.

Ron Vader, 3/14/94, LFA-0357

    Ron Vader filed a Motion for Reconsideration from a Decision issued 
by the Office of Hearings and Appeals on January 27, 1994. That 
Decision considered his Appeal of a determination issued to him on 
November 19, 1993, by the Richland Operations Office (Richland) in 
response to a request for information he submitted under the Freedom of 
Information Act (FOIA). In that determination, Richland concluded that 
it did not have information responsive to Vader's request. Vader's 
Motion requested that the OHA confirm that a search had been conducted 
for a security guard whose employment had been terminated because he 
allowed two unauthorized people to enter the Hanford Site. The DOE had 
previously determined that the search was adequate and that any 
information Richland may have had would have been destroyed pursuant to 
the Records Inventory and Disposition Schedule. However, in light of 
the additional information, Westinghouse Hanford Company voluntarily 
conducted an additional search and was able to uncover information 
responsive to the request. Therefore, the Motion was granted and the 
matter remanded to Richland for a determination whether or not to 
release the information to Vader.

Request for Exception

Paulson Oil Company, 3/18/94, LEE-0060

    Paulson Oil Company filed an Application for Exception from the 
Energy Information Administration (EIA) requirement that it file Form 
EIA-782B, the ``Resellers'/Retailers' Monthly Petroleum Product Sales 
Report.'' In considering this request, the DOE found that the firm was 
not suffering gross inequity or serious hardship. On January 7, 1994, 
the DOE issued a Proposed Decision and Order determining that the 
exception request should be denied. No Notice of Objections to the 
Proposed Decision and Order was filed at the Office of Hearings and 
Appeals of the DOE within the prescribed time period. Therefore, the 
DOE issued the Proposed Decision and Order in final form, denying 
Paulson's Application for Exception.

Whistleblower Proceedings

David Ramirez, 3/17/94, LWA-0002

    David Ramirez (Ramirez), an employee of a DOE subcontractor, filed 
a request for hearing under the DOE's Contractor Employee Protection 
Program, 10 CFR part 708. Ramirez claimed that he was laid off from his 
job by a DOE contractor, Brookhaven National Laboratories/Associated 
Universities, Inc. (BNL), in reprisal for his having raised safety 
issues with his BNL supervisor. A hearing was held in which witnesses 
for Ramirez and BNL testified before an Office of Hearings and Appeals 
Hearing Officer. On the basis of the testimony and other evidence in 
the record, the Hearing Officer concluded that Ramirez proved by a 
preponderance of the evidence that he engaged in activities protected 
under part 708 and that these activities were a contributing factor in 
the decision of BNL to lay him off. In his Decision, the Hearing 
Officer further concluded that BNL failed to prove by clear and 
convincing evidence that it would have taken this action were it not 
for Ramirez' safety-related disclosures. The Hearing Officer therefore 
determined that BNL's action violated the whistleblower regulations in 
10 CFR part 708. Ramirez was awarded back pay, attorney's fees and 
costs, the amount of which will be determined in a supplemental 
decision. BNL has the right to appeal the Hearing Officer's Decision to 
the Secretary of Energy or her designee.

Universities Research Association, Inc., 3/17/94, LWA-0003

    The DOE issued an Initial Agency Decision finding that Universities 
Research Association, Inc. (URA) had violated provisions of the 
Department's Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 CFR part 708, 
in dismissing Dr. Naresh Mehta. The DOE found that Dr. Mehta had made 
protected disclosures concerning alleged mismanagement of the hypercube 
computer at the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory, which is 
operated by URA. The DOE further found that URA had dismissed Dr. Mehta 
in reprisal for his disclosures. Accordingly, the DOE ordered that URA 
reinstate Dr. Mehta to his former position, and provide him with 
appropriate restitution including back pay and costs and expenses 
incurred by him in the proceeding.

Refund Applications

Sears Roebuck & Company, 3/16/94, RF272-90794

    An Application for Refund was filed by Sears Roebuck and Company in 
the Crude Oil Refund Proceeding. However, Sears had previously filed a 
claim from the Retailers Escrow in the Department of Energy Stripper 
Well Exemption Litigation, No. MDL-378 (D. Kan.) and that claim was 
granted in October 1987. Since Sears signed a waiver in the Stripper 
Well proceeding, it is ineligible to receive a second crude oil refund 
from the Office of Hearings and Appeals. Accordingly, Sears' 
Application was denied.

St. Benedict's Hearth Corp., RC272-232, Dan Branch Mining Co., Inc., 3/
18/94, RC272-233

    The Department of Energy (DOE) issued a Decision and Order 
rescinding refunds that were granted to St. Benedict's Hearth Corp. 
(St. Benedict's) and Dan Branch Mining Co., Inc. and its owner, Harold 
Asbury, in the crude oil refund proceeding. The refund was rescinded 
after the refund check was returned by the U.S. Postal Service because 
it could not be delivered to the firm at the address provided in its 
application, and the OHA was unable to locate this applicant.

Wheaton Industries, Inc., 3/18/94, RF272-18882, RD272-18882

    The DOE issued a Decision and Order granting an Application for 
Refund filed by Wheaton Industries, Inc. in the crude oil refund 
proceeding. In considering the Application, the DOE determined that the 
company could estimate petroleum purchased using current total kilowatt 
hour use. The DOE determined that evidence which had been offered by 
the States was insufficient to rebut the presumption of end-user 
injury. The DOE also denied the States' Motion for Discovery. The 
refund granted was $39,373.

Refund Applications

    The Office of Hearings and Appeals issued the following Decisions 
and Orders concerning refund applications, which are not summarized. 
Copies of the full texts of the Decisions and Orders are available in 
the Public Reference Room of the Office of Hearings and Appeals. 

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Atlantic Richfield Company/Jackson's       RF304-13699          03/18/94
 Service et al.                                                         
Atlantic Richfield Company/Jess Taylor     RF304-14130          03/18/94
 Management, Inc. et al.                                                
Central Virginia Electric Coop et al.....  RF272-90655          03/15/94
City of Baraboo et al....................  RF272-85456          03/16/94
Clark Oil & Refining Corp./Paul's Clark    RF342-324            03/14/94
 Service.                                                               
Eau Claire Transit.......................  RC272-228            03/18/94
Elkhorn Valley Cooperative et al.........  RF272-90109          03/14/94
Enron Corp./Black Thunder Marketings, Inc  RF340-73             03/18/94
Marathon Butane Company..................  RF340-129         ...........
Anco Manufacturing & Supply Co...........  RF340-153         ...........
Greenville R II et al....................  RF272-80263          03/16/94
Nostrand Gardens Co-Op et al.............  RF272-82008          03/16/94
Sysco Food Systems.......................  RC272-217            03/15/94
Texaco Inc./Coan, Inc. et al.............  RF321-5747           03/14/94
Texaco Inc./Fred H. Slate Company........  RF321-20952          03/14/94
Texaco Inc./Suttle Texaco................  RF321-10888          03/14/94
Tri-County Co-Op Oil Association et al...  RF272-88713         03/16/94 
                                                                        

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed: 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Name                               Case no.    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill's Beacon Service.................................  RF238-132       
Borough of Fort Lee...................................  RF272-88592     
BTL Specialty Resins..................................  RD272-58631     
Charles Texaco........................................  RF321-17984     
City of Cherryvale....................................  RF272-88544     
City of Chowchilla....................................  RF272-88588     
City of Galt..........................................  RF272-88595     
City of Macedonia.....................................  RF272-88507     
City of Reedley.......................................  RF272-88564     
City of Shinnston.....................................  RF272-88578     
City of Soledad.......................................  RF272-88573     
Cobre School District.................................  RF272-87238     
Davis Gas Company, Inc................................  RF304-13583     
Elfrida Texaco........................................  RF321-19257     
Farrell Area School District..........................  RF272-87526     
French's Texaco.......................................  RF321-19399     
Jose Lobo Texaco......................................  RF321-18462     
Les' Beacon...........................................  RF238-147       
Meridian Public Schools...............................  RF272-88525     
Morgan County School District.........................  RF272-87103     
Orange Unified School District........................  RF272-88510     
Polar Transport.......................................  RF272-91383     
Ray White's Texaco #1.................................  RF321-16675     
Ray White's Texaco #2.................................  RF321-16676     
Rinks Oil Company.....................................  RF304-14339     
Rio Bravo-Greeley Union Elementary....................  RF272-88532     
Roosevelt Park........................................  RF272-88547     
Salisbury R-IV School District........................  RF272-88535     
San Jose C U School District 122......................  RF272-88536     
Santa Cruz City Elementary............................  RF272-87435     
Simmons Meadowbrook Gulf, Inc.                          RF300-19646     
Sun Company...........................................  RF304-15235     
Tinley Park C.C.S.D. #146.............................  RF272-87361     
Town of Strasburg.....................................  RF272-88567     
Village of Mackinaw City..............................  RF272-88506     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Copies of the full text of these decisions and orders are available 
in the Public Reference Room of the Office of Hearings and Appeals, 
room 1E-234, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 1 
p.m. and 5 p.m., except federal holidays. They are also available in 
Energy Management: Federal Energy Guidelines, a commercially published 
loose leaf reporter system.

    Dated: April 18, 1994.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
[FR Doc. 94-9818 Filed 4-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P