[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 208 (Friday, October 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55289-55291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-27419]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Hearings and Appeals


Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders During the Week of 
September 9 Through September 13, 1996

    During the week of September 9 through September 13, 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, S.W., 
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.


[[Page 55290]]


    Dated: October 17, 1996.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 989

Appeals

Cindy David, 9/12/96, VFA-0204

    Cindy David filed an Appeal from a partial denial by the Western 
Area Power Administration (WAPA) of a Request for Information which Ms. 
David had submitted under the Freedom of Information Act. In 
considering the Appeal, the DOE found that material which WAPA withheld 
by claiming the protection of Exemption 4, overhead expense and general 
and administrative expense data, was indeed exempt from disclosure as 
proprietary commercial information. The DOE concluded that release of 
the withheld material would cause competitive harm to the submitter, 
Salazar Associates International. Accordingly, the Appeal was denied.

Dennis J. McQuade, 9/9/96, VFA-0200

    Dennis J. McQuade filed an Appeal from a determination by the DOE's 
Oak Ridge Operations Office (OR), which denied a request for 
information he had filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 
OR stated that it conducted a search of its files which included the 
Office of Assistant Manager for Defense Programs, the Quality and 
Reliability Division, the Safeguards and Security Division, and the 
Office of Chief Counsel. OR stated that the only record which could be 
located was a record which responded to item 2 of Mr. McQuade's 
request. OR provided that record to Mr. McQuade, but stated that no 
documents could be located in response to item 1 and item 3 of his 
request. The Appeal challenged the adequacy of the search conducted by 
OR. In considering the Appeal, the DOE found that OR conducted an 
adequate search which was reasonably calculated to discover documents 
responsive to Mr. McQuade's Request. Accordingly, the Appeal was 
denied.

Diane C. Larson, 9/9/96, VFA-0199

    Diane C. Larson filed an Appeal of a determination issued to her in 
response to a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and 
the Privacy Act. In the determination, the DOE's Richland Operations 
Office (DOE/RL) stated that most of the requested documents were the 
property of Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) and were not agency 
records, not subject to the FOIA under 10 C.F.R. Sec. 1004.3(e), and 
not subject to the Privacy Act. DOE/RL also released some documents 
which were under the control of the DOE, but redacted the names and 
lengths of service of WHC employees, under Exemption 6 of the FOIA. In 
considering the Appeal, the DOE first determined that WHC was not an 
agency and therefore not subject to the Privacy Act. The DOE also found 
that the requested documents were not agency records, and that those 
documents belonged under contract to WHC. The DOE then concluded that 
Exemption 6 did not protect the material withheld by DOE/RL. Neither 
length of service nor general age are the type of personal information 
usually protected by Exemption 6. Accordingly, the DOE granted the 
Appeal in part and remanded the matter to DOE/RL for further action.

Mary Towles Taylor, 9/9/96, VFA-0201

    Mary Towles Taylor filed an Appeal from a determination by the 
DOE's Freedom of Information Office that no records exist which would 
indicate whether her father had been exposed to radiation during his 
employment at the Oak Ridge Operations Office. After considering the 
Appeal, the DOE remanded the matter so that an additional search for 
responsive documents could be conducted. Accordingly, the Appeal was 
granted in part.

National Security Archive, 9/13/96, VFA-0033

    The National Security Archive filed an Appeal from a denial by the 
DOE's Oakland Operations Office of a request for information that it 
filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In considering the 
information that was withheld, pursuant to a review by the Director of 
Security Affairs, as National Security Information and Restricted Data 
under Exemptions 1 and 3 of the FOIA, the DOE determined that all of 
the material previously identified as withholdable must continue to be 
withheld. However, more precise deletions now permit additional 
portions of the requested information to be released. Accordingly, the 
Appeal was granted in part.

US Solar Roof, 9/12/96, VFA-0203

    US Solar Roof (USSR) filed an Appeal from a determination by the 
DOE's Golden Field Office GFO (Manager). In that determination, the GFO 
denied a request for information filed by USSR under the Freedom of 
Information Act (FOIA). In considering the Appeal, the DOE confirmed 
that the GFO followed procedures reasonably calculated to uncover the 
requested information. Accordingly, the Appeal was denied.

William Donnelly, 9/11/96, VFA-0202

    The DOE issued a Decision and Order denying a Freedom of 
Information Act Appeal that was filed by William Donnelly. In his 
Appeal, Mr. Donnelly contested the adequacy of the search for 
responsive documents performed by the DOE's Pittsburgh Energy 
Technology Center. In the Decision, the DOE found that the search for 
responsive documents was adequate.

Personnel Security Hearing

Oak Ridge Operations Office, 9/11/96, VSO-0096

    An Office of Hearings and Appeals Hearing Officer issued an opinion 
under 10 C.F.R. Part 710 concerning the eligibility of an individual 
for access authorization. After considering the testimony at the 
hearing convened at the request of the individual and all other 
information in the record, the Hearing Officer found that the 
individual (i) deliberately omitted significant information from his 
Questionnaire for Sensitive Positions, which is derogatory information 
under 10 C.F.R. Sec. 710.8(f), (ii) been diagnosed by a board-certified 
psychiatrist as suffering from alcohol abuse, which is derogatory 
information under 10 C.F.R. Sec. 710.8(j), and (iii) been arrested on a 
variety of charges, including three recent arrests for driving while 
under the influence of alcohol, and had a number of longstanding 
delinquent financial obligations, all of which tend to show that the 
individual is not reliable, and thus constitute derogatory information 
under 10 C.F.R. Sec. 710.8(l). The Hearing Officer further found that 
the individual failed to present sufficient evidence to mitigate the 
derogatory information. Accordingly, the Hearing Officer recommended 
that the individual not receive access authorization.

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.

BUCKEYE COOP ELEVATOR CO., ET AL.........................  RG272-4                                      09/12/96
CITY OF ST. PAUL.........................................  RJ272-00021                                  09/09/96
CLIFFORD COHEN, ET AL....................................  RF272-85021                                  09/11/96

[[Page 55291]]

                                                                                                                
CRUDE OIL SUPPLE REF DIST................................  RB272-00086                                  09/12/96
GENERAL MOTOR LINES, INC.................................  RF272-97362                                  09/12/96
GULF OIL CORPORATION/LEO & GLEN COMBS, INC...............  RF300-21834                                  09/09/96
S.T. WOOTEN CONSTRUCTION CO..............................  RR272-238                                    09/11/96
SPIVEY, INC..............................................  RC272-350                                    09/09/96
SPIVEY, INC..............................................  RC272-351                                            
                                                                                                                

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Name                               Case No.        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLUE RIDGE TRUSS & SUPPLY, INC...............  RG272-736                
E.D. FEE TRANSFER, INC.......................  RF272-95260              
KEWAUNEE COOPERATIVE.........................  RG272-695                
MIKE HILL FARMS, INC.........................  RK272-820                
NATIONAL ENTERPRISES.........................  RK272-854                
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 96-27419 Filed 10-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P