[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 24, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50017-50018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-24395]


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


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders From the Week of March 
25 Through March 29, 1996

    During the week of March 25 through March 29, 1996, the decisions 
and orders summarized below were issued with respect to appeals, 
applications, petitions, or other requests 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.
    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, D.C. 20585-0107, 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. Some decisions and 
orders are available on the Office of Hearings and Appeals World Wide 
Web site at http://www.oha.doe.gov.

    Dated: September 16, 1996.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 965

Week of March 25 Through March 29, 1996

Appeals

Keith E. Loomis, 3/25/96, VFA-0104

    Keith E. Loomis filed an Appeal from a denial by the DOE's Office 
of Naval Reactors of a request for information that he filed under the 
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In considering the information that 
was withheld, pursuant to a review by the Director of Naval Reactors, 
as classified and Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information under Exemptions 
1 and 3 of the FOIA, the DOE determined that all of previously withheld 
material must continue to be withheld. Accordingly, the Appeal was 
denied.

Phoenix Rising Communications, 3/26/96, VFA-0116

    Phoenix Rising Communications (Phoenix) filed an Appeal from a 
determination issued by the DOE's Oakland Operations Office (Oakland) 
in response to a request from Phoenix under the Freedom of Information 
Act (FOIA). Phoenix sought documents related to Lawrence Livermore 
National Laboratory's Site 300. In considering the Appeal, the DOE 
found that Oakland performed an adequate search and followed procedures 
which were reasonably calculated to uncover the material sought by 
Phoenix. Accordingly, the Appeal was denied.

William H. Payne, 3/26/96, VFA-0128, VFA-0137, VFA-0138, VFA-0139, VFA-
0140, VFA-0141

    William H. Payne filed Appeals from three determinations and two 
letters, and a Motion for Reconsideration of Decision and Order, all of 
which concerned requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 
In appealing three DOE Albuquerque Operations Office (DOE/AL) 
determinations, Mr. Payne challenged (1) the adequacy of the search for 
documents containing the names of retired military personnel currently 
employed at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL); (2) the adequacy of the 
search for husband-wife pairs employed at either SNL or DOE-AL; and (3) 
the denial of a requested fee waiver for law firm invoices. Mr. Payne 
also sought review of DOE's handling of three requests for information 
and a letter issued by the University of California for records 
containing the names of husband-wife pairs employed at the Los Alamos 
National Laboratory (LANL). Lastly, Mr. Payne sought review of a 
Decision and Order concerning retired military personnel currently 
employed at LANL. In considering the Appeals, the DOE found that 
records which might contain responsive information on husband-wife 
pairs and retired military personnel at SNL were not agency records 
subject to the FOIA. Moreover, the DOE found that DOE-AL performed an 
adequate search of its documents for husband-wife pairs employed at 
DOE-AL. Accordingly, these two appeals were denied. With respect to the 
fee waiver, the DOE found that Mr. Payne had not demonstrated at least 
some capability to disseminate the information received from the law 
firm billing invoices to the public. Therefore, Mr. Payne's fee waiver 
request was denied. In considering the two letters, the DOE found that 
they were not

[[Page 50018]]

determinations with respect to either the three requests for 
information or the request for husband-wife pairs employed at LANL. 
Thus, the DOE dismissed the Appeals concerning the letters. Lastly, the 
DOE found that in his Motion for Reconsideration, Mr. Payne had not 
provided any additional information or shown changed circumstances that 
would lead the DOE to alter its prior Decision. Accordingly, the Motion 
for Reconsideration was denied.

Remedial Order

Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 3/25/96, LRO-0004

    Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (Chevron) filed a Statement of Objections to a 
Proposed Remedial Order (PRO) issued to Chevron by the Economic 
Regulatory Administration (ERA) on March 26, 1992. In the PRO, the ERA 
alleged that as a result of its participation in the DOE Tertiary 
Incentive Program (TIP), Chevron received excess tertiary incentive 
revenue attributable to its first sales of domestically produced crude 
oil during the period January 1980 through January 27, 1981, in 
violation of 10 C.F.R. Secs. 212.78, 212.73, 212.74 and 205.202. The 
PRO required that Chevron make restitution for this alleged violation 
in the amount of $124,989,588 (later amended to $167,268,897), plus 
interest. In considering the substantial record developed in the 
proceeding, the DOE found that although Chevron's TIP reports reflected 
the firm's receipt of excess ``tertiary incentive revenue'' by 
regulatory definition, the firm had not in fact received any excess 
amount of actual revenue as a result of its participation in the TIP. 
Accordingly, the PRO was dismissed with prejudice.

Personnel Security Hearing

Albuquerque Operations Office, 3/26/96, VSO-0066

    An Office of Hearings and Appeals Hearing Officer issued an opinion 
against restoring the security clearance of an individual whose 
clearance had been suspended because the Department had obtained 
derogatory information that fell within 10 C.F.R. Sec. 710.8 (j) and 
(l). In reaching his conclusion, the Hearing Officer found that the 
individual had been diagnosed as dependent on alcohol and did not make 
an adequate showing of rehabilitation. In addition, the Hearing Officer 
found that an incident of domestic violence where the individual left 
the scene before law enforcement officers arrived shows a lack of 
judgment and reliability within the meaning of 10 C.F.R. Sec. 710.8(l).

Refund Applications

Good Hope Refineries/Marathon Oil Company, 3/25/96, RF339-11

    Marathon Oil Company filed an application for refund in the Good 
Hope Refineries II Refund Proceeding. The DOE denied Marathon's 
application after finding that Marathon was a spot purchaser and failed 
to rebut the presumption that spot purchasers were not injured.

Gulf Oil Corp./Hilltop Gulf, 3/27/96, RR300-00268

    The DOE dismissed a Motion for Reconsideration filed in the Gulf 
Oil Corporation special refund proceeding on behalf of Hilltop Gulf. In 
this Motion for Reconsideration, Wilson, Keller & Associates, Inc. 
(WKA), a refund filing service, asserted that several facts contained 
in the original Application were incorrect. On the basis of the new 
information, WKA requested that the Applicant's name be changed and 
that gallons purchased under a second Gulf Customer Number be added to 
the total gallonage claim. The DOE determined that the Motion for 
Reconsideration was fundamentally different from the original 
Application and constituted a new application which was barred by the 
Gulf deadline. Accordingly, the DOE dismissed the Motion.

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.

Clara B. Hale, et al.............  RK272-2249                   03/27/96
Gulf Oil Corporation/Newark        RR300-0259                   03/25/96
 Lumber Co./American Home &                                             
 Hardware.                                                              
Margaret H. Nordquist, et al.....  RK272-01526                  03/27/96
                                                                        

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Name                               Case No.        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airtrails, Inc................................  RF272-98018             
American Trans Air, Inc.......................  RF272-98744             
Bay de Noc Oil Co., Inc.......................  RF300-14753             
Buffalo Airways, Inc..........................  RF272-98720             
Decatur Aviation..............................  RF272-98723             
Gulf Air Taxi, Inc............................  RF272-98725             
Pem-Air Limited...............................  RF272-98727             
Ron's Arco....................................  RF304-15343             
S&B Go., Inc..................................  RF300-16372             
Soneco/Northeastern...........................  RG272-00303             
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 96-24395 Filed 9-23-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P