[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 2, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21515-21516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10757]



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



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders During the Week of 
February 20 Through February 24, 1995

    During the week of February 20 through February 24, 1995, 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

David K. Hackett, 2/24/95, VFA-0021

    David K. Hackett filed an Appeal from a determination issued by the 
Oak Ridge Operations Office (Oak Ridge) of the Department of Energy in 
response to a request from Mr. Hackett under the Freedom of Information 
Act (FOIA). Mr. Hackett sought a copy of the transcript of the 
deposition taken of him in the case of Hackett v. Martin Marietta. In 
denying Hackett's request, Oak Ridge stated that it did not possess the 
requested document. In considering the Appeal, the Office of Hearings 
and Appeals found that although Oak Ridge did not possess the requested 
transcript, it did own that document. The OHA found that since Oak 
Ridge owned the deposition transcript, it should have considered 
whether the document should have been released. Accordingly, the matter 
was remanded to Oak Ridge.

J/R/A Associates, 2/23/95, VFA-0022

    J/R/A Associates filed an Appeal from a determination issued to it 
by the Associate Deputy Secretary for Field Management of the 
Department of Energy (DOE) in response to a Request for Information 
submitted under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In considering 
the Appeal, the DOE found that the Office of Contractor Employee 
Protection (OCEP) had improperly withheld the name of corporate 
contractors and subcontractors named in ongoing ``whistleblower'' 
investigations. OCEP had withheld this information under Exemptions 6 
and 7(C), which protect personal privacy. The DOE found that 
corporations do not have protectable privacy interests for the purposes 
of these FOIA exemptions. Accordingly, the Appeal was granted in part, 
denied in part and remanded with instructions to either release the 
requested information or to issue a new determination fully explaining 
its reasons for continuing to withhold the information.

Refund Applications

Atlantic Richfield Co./Coast Gas, Inc., 2/23/95 RR304-63

    Coast Gas, Inc. filed a Motion for Reconsideration from the 
dismissal of an Application for Refund that it had filed the Atlantic 
Richfield Company special refund proceeding. Since Coast Gas was 
seeking a refund in excess of $5,000, it was required to demonstrate 
that it was injured by ARCO's alleged overcharges on its sales of 
natural gas liquids. The firm submitted evidence that it maintained 
banks of unrecovered product costs in excess of its refund claim and 
that the firm's ARCO purchases placed it at a competitive disadvantage 
vis-a-vis other resellers of propane and butane in its marketing area. 
The firm was not however, at a competitive disadvantage with respect to 
its purchases of ARCO natural gasoline. Accordingly, the firm was 
granted a refund of its full allocable share with respect to its 
propane and butane purchases, and a refund equal to its above-market 
volumetric share with respect to its purchases of natural gasoline. The 
total refund issued to the firm was $88,339 ($49,699 in principal and 
$38,640 in interest).

Texaco Inc./ Cadoret Oil Company, 2/22/95 RF321-14165

    The DOE issued a Decision and Order granting an Application for 
Refund in the Texaco Inc. special refund proceeding. Francis Cadoret 
filed an Application for Refund on behalf of Cadoret Oil Co., a firm he 
owned with his partner, Joseph Cadoret, for its purchases of Texaco 
petroleum products. Francis Cadoret claimed that he alone was entitled 
to the entire refund since he had purchased his partners share of the 
business. After examining the language of the relevant partnership 
dissolution agreement, the DOE found that the agreement had transferred 
Joseph Cadorets right to a refund to Francis Cadoret. Consequently, the 
DOE determined that Francis Cadoret was eligible to receive a refund 
equal to Cadoret Oil's full allocable share. Accordingly, Francis 
Cadoret was granted a refund of $1,166 ($805 principal plus $361 
interest).

Texaco Inc./27 W. Landis Texaco, Langhorne Texaco Service Station, 
D'ippolito Oil Company R.A. Reiff Fuels, Inc., 2/23/95 RF321-16943, 
RF321-16944, RF321-16950, RF321-16951

    The DOE issued a Decision and Order concerning four Applications 
for Refund submitted by indirect purchases of Texaco products. The DOE 
determined that the four applicants were affiliated through varying 
degrees of common ownership and considered the claims together in order 
to determine one combined allocable share for the four firms. Further, 
one of the owners of R.A. Reiff Fuels, Inc. also owns 75 percent of the 
shares of the corporation that supplied Texaco products to R.A. Reiff 
Fuels, Inc. Since that supplier has [[Page 21516]] received a refund 
for its direct purchases of Texaco products, R.A. Reiff Fuels, Inc.'s 
refund attributable to the common owner was reduced by 75 percent so 
that he would not receive two refunds for the same gallons of product. 
The total of the refunds granted to the applicants was $12,005 ($8,288 
principal and $3,717 interest).

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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Name                                           Case No.                   Date     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic Richfield Company/R.D.P. Corporation et al..........  RF304-14596......................        02/23/95
City of Columbus et al.......................................  RF272-83003......................        02/22/95
Deer Trail Truckline.........................................  RC272-277........................        02/23/95
Deer Trail Truckline.........................................  RR272-187........................                
Muckleroy Cattle Co. et al...................................  RF272-91900......................        02/21/95
Prins Rental et al...........................................  RF272-90188......................        02/22/95
Texaco Inc./Air Comfort, Inc.................................  RF321-21058......................        02/21/95
Texaco Inc./Allen Texaco et al...............................  RF321-9086.......................        02/22/95
Texaco Inc./Pritchard's Texaco et al.........................  RF321-17144......................        02/21/95
Texaco Inc./Silva's Texaco et al.............................  RF321-20818......................        02/22/95
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Name                               Case No.      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona Chemical..................................  RF321-20821         
Schadow Texaco....................................  RF321-12996         
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: April 21, 1995.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
[FR Doc. 95-10757 Filed 5-1-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P