[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 23, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-20697]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: August 23, 1994]


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


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 

Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of June 27 Through July 1, 
1994

    During the week of June 27 through July 1, 1994, the decisions and 
orders summarized below were issued with respect to appeals and 
applications for 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

John Gilmore, 6/29/94, LFA-0388


    Mr. John Gilmore filed an Appeal from a denial by the Albuquerque 
Operations Office of a Request for Information which his attorney Lee 
Tien had submitted under the Freedom of Information Act (the FOIA). In 
considering the Appeal, the DOE found that the material requested 
computer source code of conferencing software developed by Sandia 
National Laboratories, was not considered agency records subject to 
disclosure under the FOIA. The DOE also concluded that even if the 
software could be considered records, the programs would likely be 
withheld under Exemption 4 because they are commercially valuable to 
Sandia Corporation, which sold two software licenses and expects to 
sell more. The Appeal was therefore denied. The important issue that 
was considered in the Decision and Order was whether computer programs 
could be considered agency records subject to disclosure under the 
FOIA.

Teresa Longstreet, 6/27/94, LFA-0389

    Teresa Longstreet filed an Appeal from a denial by the Oak Ridge 
Operations Office (Oak Ridge) of a request for Information she had 
submitted under the Freedom of Information Act (the FOIA). In 
considering the Appeal, the DOE found that the search for responsive 
documents conducted by Oak Ridge was adequate. Accordingly, the DOE 
denied Ms. Longstreet's Appeal. An important issue considered in the 
Decision and Order was the adequacy of the search.

Requests for Exception

Fitch Oil Company, Inc., 6/30/94, LEE-0101

    Fitch Oil Company, Inc. (Fitch), filed an Application for Exception 
from the provisions of the Energy Information Administration (EIA) 
reporting requirements in which the firm sought relief from filing Form 
EIA-782B, entitled ``Resellers'/Retailers' Monthly Petroleum Sales 
Report.'' In considering the request, the DOE found that the firm was 
suffering a gross inequity due to the firm's personnel shortage. 
Accordingly, the DOE determined that the exception request be granted 
in part and that Fitch be relieved of the reporting requirement from 
April 1994 through December 1994.

Saupe' Enterprises, Inc., 6/30/94, LEE-0105

    Saupe' Enterprises, Inc. (Saupe') filed an Application for 
Exception from the provisions of the Energy Information Administration 
(EIA) reporting requirements in which the firm sought relief from 
filing Form EIA-782B, entitled ``Resellers'/Retailers' Monthly 
Petroleum Product Sales Report.'' In considering the request, the DOE 
found that the firm was not experiencing a serious hardship or gross 
inequity as a result of the reporting requirements. Accordingly, 
exception relief was denied.

Swan Oil Company, 6/29/94, LEE-0076

    Swan 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 a gross inequity or serious hardship. On March 29, 1994, 
the DOE issued a Proposed Decision and Order determining that the 
exception request should be denied. No Notice of Objections was filed. 
Consequently, the DOE issued the Proposed Decision and Order in final 
form, denying Swan Oil Company's Application for Exception.

Wells Oil Co., 6/30/94, LEE-108

    Wells Oil Co. filed an Application for Exception from the 
provisions of the EIA reporting requirements in which the firm sought 
an exception from filing Form EIA-782B. In considering the request, the 
DOE found that the firm was not suffering a serious hardship or gross 
inequity as a result of the reporting requirements. Accordingly, 
exception relief was denied.

Refund Applications

Texaco Inc./Energy Sales, Inc., 6/29/94, RF321-20015; RF321-20074; 
RF321-21006

    The DOE issued a Decision and Order in the Texaco Inc. refund 
proceeding concerning three Applications for Refund filed with respect 
to Texaco purchases made by Energy Sales, Inc. (ESI), a dissolved 
corporation. The DOE noted that generally where the corporation has 
been dissolved, the owners at the time of dissolution are usually 
entitled to the refund. There was no dispute that John Grisham owned 
24.33 percent of ESI, and he was granted a refund equal to 24.33 
percent of the refund due ESI. The other two applicants, David 
Montgomery and Clarence Stapp, both claimed the remaining 75.67 percent 
of ESI's refund. Montgomery claimed to have purchased ESI's corporate 
shares from Stapp in 1986, and he submitted a copy of the purchase 
contract to support his claim. Stapp claimed that the conditions of the 
contract were never fulfilled and that he retains the stock 
certificates. The DOE found the stock certificates were issued in 
Montgomery's name. Stapp retained custody of the certificates only to 
protect a security interest, and, he had never exercised a stock power 
that would have transferred them to his name. The DOE also noted that 
the loan for which the stock certificates constituted a security 
interest had been paid off. Under these circumstances, the DOE found 
that Montgomery was the owner of the stock. Accordingly, the refund 
application filed by Montgomery was granted and the application filed 
by Stapp was denied.

Texaco Inc./Lacey-Elliott Texaco, Elliott Bell, Inc., 6/29/94, RF321-
19844

    On June 18, 1991, the DOE issued a Decision and Order in the Texaco 
Inc. refund proceeding concerning an Application for Refund filed by 
Mrs. Earl Elliott on behalf of Elliott Bell, Inc., a Texaco jobber. 
That refund was based upon the applicant's claim that her husband 
operated the business. Subsequently, the children of Trammel Lacey 
filed an application for refund for the same business under the name 
Lacey-Elliott Texaco. They stated that Mr. Lacey and Mr. Elliott were 
partners for part of the refund period. In response, Mrs. Elliott 
claimed that her husband acquired all rights to the business, including 
the right to the Texaco refund, when he bought out Mr. Lacey's share.
    The DOE noted that, generally, the owners of the firm at the time 
of the Texaco purchases are entitled to the refund. This right is not 
normally transferred to the purchaser of a partner's interest unless 
the interest was transferred under a contract that either specifies 
refunds as one of the assets being transferred or leaves no doubt that 
the parties intended the contract to transfer rights to refunds. The 
DOE found that Mr. Lacey had owned 40 percent of the business and that 
nothing in the contract indicated an intent to transfer rights to 
refunds. Accordingly, the DOE found that the children of Mr. Lacey 
should receive a refund based upon 40 percent of the firm's purchases 
for the portion of the refund period prior to Mr. Lacey's sale of the 
business to Mr. Elliott, and Mrs. Elliott should repay, with interest, 
that portion of the refund she had previously received that was 
attributable to Mr. Lacey's share of the business.

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. 

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Conrad Coop et al......................  RF272-93754            06/29/94
Dahlman Truck Lines, Inc. et al........  RF272-82513            06/30/94
Enron Corp./Fuel Products, Inc.........  RF340-69               06/30/94
Taylor-Harbin L.P. Gas.................  RF340-133                      
Domex, Inc.............................  RF340-191                      
Gulf Oil Corporation/Braniff Airways,    RF300-20801            07/01/94
 Inc..                                                                  
Gulf Oil Corporation/Dothan Aviation     RF300-15434            06/29/94
 Corp., Inc. et al.                                                     
Gulf Oil Corporation/Enserch             RF300-20585            06/29/94
 Corporation.                                                           
Gulf Oil Corporation/Hammond Country     RR300-186              06/29/94
 Store.                                                                 
McClure's Gulf.........................  RR300-208                      
Gulf Oil Corporation/Trenton Lehigh      RR300-78               06/29/94
 Coal & Oil Co. et al.                                                  
Iuka Cooperative Exchange et al........  RF272-88266            06/29/94
Setton Company, Inc....................  RF272-94484            06/29/94
Town of Billerica Fire Dept............  RF272-94490                    
Texaco Inc./Bellis Texaco et al........  RF321-19332            06/27/94
Texaco Inc./Bobis Texaco et al.........  RF321-19742            06/30/94
Texaco Inc./Gold Medal Farms Inc. et al  RF321-6587             07/01/94
Texaco Inc./James River Corporation et   RF321-19655            06/30/94
 al.                                                                    
Texaco Inc./Joe's Texaco #1............  RF321-20230            07/01/94
Joe's Texaco #2........................  RF321-20231                    
Texaco Inc./Linwood Texaco et al.......  RF321-16861            06/30/94
Texaco Inc./Nora Texaco et al..........  RF321-415              06/29/94
Union County School District et al.....  RF272-82427            06/29/94
Warrden County, New York et al.........  RF272-85209           06/29/94 
                                                                        

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed: 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Name                               Case No.    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Vista Texaco......................................  RF321-11304     
Amax Copper, Inc......................................  RF321-19926     
Auburn Texaco.........................................  RF321-13877     
Bagwell Service Station...............................  RF272-95736     
Bill Alsbury Texaco...................................  RF321-20870     
Bill's Texaco.........................................  RF321-19582     
Dan's Texaco..........................................  RF321-16249     
Holmes Oil Corporation................................  RF315-10186     
Howard Bush's Texaco #2...............................  RF321-10624     
John Diramarian Texaco................................  RF321-20438     
John Paul's Texaco....................................  RF321-20684     
Kennedy Realty Co.....................................  RF272-78323     
Kinzeler Marine, Inc..................................  RF321-19911     
Mac's Triangle Service................................  RF321-12101     
Middlesex Builders, Inc...............................  RF272-77675     
Miss Valley C U Dist 166..............................  RF272-87093     
Oakland C U School Dist 5.............................  RF272-87140     
Pats Fuel Oil.........................................  RF300-20050     
Regency Texaco........................................  RF321-20764     
Salt Meadow Shell.....................................  RF315-8857      
Strickland Texaco.....................................  LFA-7049        
Styles Arco...........................................  RF272-95735     
The Armrel-Byrnes Co..................................  RF321-19922     
Vic's Monterey........................................  RF272-95747     
Warrick Eastside Texaco...............................  RF321-11214     
Woodbridge Gardens Association........................  RF272-78346     
Woodbridge Village Association........................  RF272-78354     
Wyomissing Area School District.......................  RF272-81933     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20585, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 
1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., except federal holidays. They are also 
available in Energy Management: Federal Energy Guidelines, a 
commercially published loose leaf reporter system.

    Dated: August 16, 1994.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
[FR Doc. 94-20697 Filed 8-22-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P