[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 11, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65206-65207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-31418]


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


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders by the Office of 
Hearings and Appeals; Week of October 21 Through October 25, 1996

    During the week of October 21 through October 25, 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.

    Dated: December 4, 1996.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 4

    Week of October 21 through October 25, 1996

Appeals

Perkins Coie, 10/25/96 VFA-0221

    The law firm of Perkins Coie filed an Appeal from a determination 
issued to it on August 20, 1996 by the Bonneville Power Administration 
(BPA) of the Department of Energy (DOE). In that determination, BPA 
denied in part Perkins Coie's request for information filed under the 
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In its Appeal, Perkins Coie 
challenged BPA's application of Exemption 5 to three requested 
documents in dispute and requested that the DOE direct BPA to release 
the documents. In considering the Appeal, the Office of Hearings and 
Appeals found that BPA properly applied the threshold requirements of 
Exemption 5 to the requested documents at issue, and that there was no 
public interest in its release. However, the Office of Hearings and 
Appeals remanded this Appeal to BPA to issue a new determination, 
either releasing reasonably segregable factual material or explaining 
the reasons for withholding any factual material contained in the 
documents. Therefore, the Department of Energy granted Perkins Coie's 
Appeal.

Radian International, 10/21/96 VFA-0220

    The Department of Energy (DOE) issued a Decision and Order (D&O) 
denying a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal that was filed by 
Radian International. In its Appeal, Radian requested that we review a 
determination issued by the Oak Ridge Operations office that certain 
documents were not ``agency records'' and were therefore not subject to 
release under the FOIA. Radian also expanded the scope of its original 
request to include additional documents. In the Decision, the OHA found 
that the documents in question were not agency records, and that a FOIA 
appeal is not the appropriate venue for the consideration of an initial 
request for documents. The OHA therefore remanded Radian's request for 
additional documents to the Oak Ridge Office for processing under the 
FOIA, and denied Radian's appeal of Oak Ridge's original determination.

Personnel Security Hearing

Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office, 10/24/96, VSO-0103

    A Hearing Officer from the Office of Hearings and Appeals issued an 
Opinion regarding the eligibility of an individual for access 
authorization under the provisions of 10 C.F.R. Part 710. After 
carefully considering the record of the processing in view of the 
standards set forth in Part 710, the Hearing Officer found that: (i) 
the individual has a history of abuse of illegal drugs; (ii) the 
individual provided false information to the DOE; (iii) the acts of the 
individual tend to show that the individual is not honest, reliable, or 
trustworthy; and (iv) the DOE's security concerns regarding these 
behaviors were not overcome by evidence mitigating the derogatory 
information underlying the DOE's charges. Accordingly, the Hearing 
Officer found that the individual's access authorization should not be 
granted.

Requests for Exception

J. Enterprises, Inc., 10/24/96, VEE-0027

    J. Enterprises, Inc. filed an Application for Exception from the 
requirement that it file Form EIA-782B, the ``Reseller/Retailer's 
Monthly Petroleum Product Sales Report.'' The DOE found that the firm 
was not affected by the reporting requirement in a manner different 
from other similar firms, and consequently was not experiencing a 
special hardship, inequity, or unfair distribution of burdens. 
Accordingly, the firm's Application for Exception was denied.

Oil Products, Inc., 10/21/96, VEE-0023

    Oil Products, Inc. filed an Application for Exception from the 
Energy Information Administration requirement that it file Form EIA-
782B, the ``Resellers'/Retailers' Monthly Petroleum Product Sales 
Report.'' In considering Oil Product's request, the DOE found that the 
firm was not experiencing a serious hardship or gross inequity. 
Accordingly, exception relief was denied.

Interlocutory Order

Meta, Inc., 10/23/96, VWZ-0007

    A Hearing Officer from the Office of Hearings and Appeals denied a 
Motion to Dismiss filed by Maria Elena Torano Associates, Inc. (META). 
In its Motion, META sought the dismissal of a complaint filed by C. 
Lawrence Cornett (Cornett) under the DOE's Contractor Employee 
Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Part 708. META alleged that Cornett's 
complaint failed to state an actionable claim. Specifically, META 
asserted that Cornett failed to make a protected

[[Page 65207]]

disclosure under Part 708 since the information contained in his 
alleged disclosures was already known by DOE or META and that 
information disclosed did not involve any substantial and specific 
threats to health and safety. The Hearing Officer held that, under Part 
708, a disclosure need not consist of unique information that is 
unknown to the recipient. Further, the Hearing Officer found that a 
disclosure, to be protected under Part 708, need not in fact involve a 
substantial and specific danger to employees or public health and 
safety as long as individual making the disclosure in good faith 
believes that the disclosure concerns a substantial and specific 
danger. The Hearing Officer also found that the question regarding 
Cornett's beliefs was a factual matter. Consequently, the Hearing 
Officer denied the Motion.

Refund Application

Steuben CO. Farm Bureau, 10/21/96, RF272-97912

    The DOE issued a Decision and Order concerning one Application for 
Refund filed by Steuben Co. Farm Bureau in the Subpart V crude oil 
overcharge refund proceeding. The DOE determined that Steuben Co. Farm 
Bureau was not entitled to a refund since it had filed a Retailer's 
Escrow Settlement Claim Form and Waiver. In this filing, Steuben Co. 
Farm Bureau requested a Stripper Well refund from the Retailers' 
escrow, thereby waiving its right to a Subpart V crude oil refund. 
Accordingly, the DOE denied the Application for Refund.

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.

Aline Manire, et al......................................  RF272-94540                                  10/23/96
Atlantic Richfield Co./Jerair Panosian...................  RF304-15505                                  10/24/96
Atlantic Richfield Co./Ron's ARCO........................  RF304-15506                                  10/24/96
Beaver Valley Builders Supply, Inc., et al...............  RF272-95100                                  10/24/96
Crude Oil Supple Ref Dist................................  RB272-00092                                  10/23/96
Holstein Coop Elevator, et al............................  RG272-6                                      10/23/96
Ruth A. Martinek.........................................  RJ272-24                                     10/24/96
W.E. Bartholw & Son Const., et al........................  RK272-01406                                  10/21/96
                                                                                                                

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Name                               Case No.        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig W. Anderson............................  VFA-0207                 
Craid W. Anderson............................  VFA-0212                 
Loyd Jones Well Service......................  RF272-96591              
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 96-31418 Filed 12-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P