[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 4758]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2394]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Issuance of Decisions and Orders During the Week of November 25
Through November 29, 1996
During the week of November 25 through November 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, 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: January 22, 1997.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
Decision List No. 9
Week of November 25 through November 29, 1996.
Appeals
Ashok K. Kaushal, 11/26/96, VFA-0228
DOE granted in part an Appeal of withholding of documents related
to an investigation of the requester's whistleblower complaint. DOE
found that some of the records sought by the appellant were neither
``agency records'' within the meaning of the FOIA, nor subject to the
release under the DOE regulations. Regarding other records, DOE
remanded the request for processing under the Privacy Act.
Douglas A. Holman, 11/27/96, VFA-0240
DOE denied an Appeal of withholding of documents related to an
investigation of the requester's role as a union steward conducted by
his employer, a DOE contractor. DOE found that the records sought by
the appellant were neither ``agency records'' within the meaning of the
FOIA, nor subject to the FOIA under DOE regulations.
Gary L. Graham, 11/27/96, VFA-0237
Gary L. Graham Appealed a determination issued to him on October 4,
1996, by the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) in response to a
request for information he submitted under the Freedom of Information
Act. WAPA had released some information Mr. Graham requested but stated
that it could not find information responsive to a portion of his
request. We determined that WAPA followed procedures which were
reasonably calculated to uncover the information sought by Mr. Graham.
Therefore, the Appeal was denied.
Research Information Services, Inc., 11/27/96, VFA-0235
The DOE granted a Freedom of Information Act Appeal filed by
Research Information Services, Inc. (RIS). RIS challenged the adequacy
of a search conducted by the DOE's Office of Arms Control and
Nonproliferation (OACN). DOE found that the determination issued by
OACN was inadequate. Accordingly, DOE remanded the matter to OACN with
instructions to correct the determination's deficiencies.
Thomas Stampahar, 11/29/96, VFA-0239
Thomas Stampahar filed an Appeal from a determination issued by the
Nevada Operations Office in response to a Request for Information
submitted under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts. In
considering the Appeal, the DOE noted that as a general matter, a FOIA
search should encompass all documents which would be subject to the
Privacy Act. On review the DOE determined that the search in this case
was adequate. It also found that any responsive records which might be
held by Bechtel Nevada are contractually the property of Bechtel Nevada
and are not subject to the FOIA under 10 C.F.R. Sec. 1004.3(e).
Accordingly, the Appeal was denied.
Refund Application
Good Hope Refineries/Commonwealth Edison Co., 11/29/96, RF339-19
Commonwealth Edison Company filed an Application for Refund in the
Good Hope Refineries II Refund Proceeding. The DOE denied ConEd's
application after finding that it had failed to establish that it was
an indirect purchaser of Good Hope petroleum products.
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.
Averitt Express, Inc..................................... RR272-263 11/27/96
International Mill Service, et al........................ RK272-01849 11/27/96
San Mateo Cnty Superintendent, et al..................... RF272-95418 11/25/96
United Truck Line........................................ RR272-249 11/25/96
Dismissals
The following submissions were dismissed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Case No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph L. Coulon.............................. RF272-92198
Personnel Security Hearing................... VSO-0117
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 97-2394 Filed 1-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
