[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 144 (Tuesday, July 28, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 40270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20125]



[[Page 40270]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Hearings and Appeals


Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders During the Week of 
June 1 Through June 5, 1998

    During the week of June 1 through June 5, 1998, 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, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza, SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0107, Monday through Friday, 
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.

    Date: July 20, 1998.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 88

Appeals
David E. Ridenour, 6/4/98, VFA-0411

    David E. Ridenour (Ridenour) filed an Appeal from a determination 
issued to him by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the 
Department of Energy (DOE). The determination concerned Ridenour's 
request for information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA). In his Appeal, Ridenour asserted that OIG failed to conduct an 
adequate search for documents pertaining to a 1997 complaint he had 
filed with OIG. Additionally, Ridenour asserted that OIG had improperly 
withheld information pursuant to Exemptions 5, 6 and 7(C) and that OIG 
had failed to provide him with copies of 18 responsive documents 
(authored by Ridenour himself) which OIG identified. After reviewing 
the search that was conducted for responsive documents, the DOE 
determined that OIG had performed an adequate search. The DOE also held 
that while OIG properly invoked Exemptions 6 and 7(C), OIG had 
improperly withheld information pursuant to Exemption 5. Additionally, 
DOE held that OIG should issue a determination regarding the 18 
responsive documents it did not provide to Ridenour. Consequently, 
Ridenour's Appeal was granted in part.

Gary S. Foster, 6/1/98, VFA-0413, VFA-0414, VFA-0415, VFA-0416, VFA-
0417

    Gary S. Foster (Foster) filed five Appeals from five determinations 
issued to him by the Oak Ridge Operations Office (Oak Ridge) of the 
Department of Energy (DOE) in response to requests filed pursuant to 
the Freedom of Information (FOIA). In his Appeals, Foster asserted that 
Oak Ridge failed to conduct an adequate search for certain documents 
pertaining to beryllium transactions between Oak Ridge and five 
companies that supplied Oak Ridge with beryllium in the past. After 
reviewing the search that was conducted for responsive documents, the 
DOE determined that Oak Ridge had performed an adequate search. 
Consequently, Foster's Appeals were denied.

Personnel Security Hearing

Personnel Security Hearing, 6/2/98, VSO-0186

    An OHA Hearing Officer issued an opinion recommending against 
restoration of the security clearance of an individual, which had been 
suspended because the DOE had obtained derogatory information that fell 
within 10 CFR Sec. 710.8 (f), (j), and (l). In reaching his conclusion, 
the Hearing Officer found that the individual suffered from alcohol 
abuse and had a pattern of lying about whether he drank. The Hearing 
Officer concluded that the individual is not sufficiently honest, 
reliable and trustworthy within the meaning of 10 CFR Sec. 710.8(l) to 
hold an access authorization.

Whistleblower Hearing

Carlos M. Castillo, 6/1/98, VWA-0021

    Carlos M. Castillo (Castillo) filed a complaint under the DOE's 
Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 CFR Part 708, contending 
that reprisals were taken against him after he raised concerns relating 
to health and safety to Kiewit Construction Company (Kiewit). These 
alleged reprisals included the complainant's wrongful termination from 
employment and, after he had been rehired, being improperly selected 
for a company layoff. After a preliminary investigation of this matter 
by the DOE Office of Inspector General, Castillo and Kiewit exercised 
their option for an expedited hearing under 10 CFR Sec. 708.9. In 
considering the transcript of testimony taken at the hearing and the 
submissions of the parties, the Hearing Officer determined that 
although Castillo had made a protected disclosure relating to health or 
safety, he failed to carry his burden to show by a preponderance of the 
evidence that such disclosure was a contributing factor in the 
personnel actions taken against him by Kiewit. 10 CFR Sec. 708.9(d). 
Accordingly, in the DOE's Initial Agency Decision, Castillo's request 
for relief under Part 708 was denied.

Dismissals

    The following submissions were dismissed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Name                               Case No.        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farmers Union Oil Company....................  RF272-94241              
Karen Coleman Wiltshire......................  VFA-0410                 
Stand of Amarillo, Inc.......................  VFA-0409                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 98-20125 Filed 7-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P