[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7783-7784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-3849]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Hearings and Appeals
Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of November 10
Through November 14, 1997
During the week of November 10 through November 14, 1997, 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: February 6, 1998.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
Decision List No. 59: Week of November 10 Through November 14, 1997
Appeals
F.A.C.T.S., 11/10/97, VFA-0339, VFA-0343
For A Clean Tonawanda Site (F.A.C.T.S.), the Appellant, filed
Appeals from determinations issued to him by the Oak Ridge Operations
Office (OR) and the Office of the Executive Secretariat (ES) of the
Department of Energy (DOE). In its Appeal, the Appellant asserted that
OR and ES had improperly withheld documents pertaining to a DOE FUSRAP
site in Tonawanda, New York, pursuant to Exemption 5 of the FOIA and
that OR and ES had conducted an inadequate search for documents
responsive to three categories of requested documents. Additionally,
the Appellant appealed OR's denial of a fee waiver in connection with
its request. Upon review, the DOE determined that OR and ES had
conducted an adequate search for responsive documents. With regard to
the OR's fee waiver determination, the DOE determined that the
Appellant had not supplied sufficient information upon which OR could
grant a fee waiver. However, because OR and ES had failed to adequately
describe each of the withheld documents, the DOE remanded the matter to
OR for the issuance of another determination. Since each of the
documents withheld by ES was included in the documents withheld by OR,
ES was not required to issue another determination. Consequently, the
Appeal pertaining to the ES determination (Case No. VFA-0339) was
denied but the Appeal pertaining to the OR determination (Case No. VFA-
0343) was granted in part.
James R. Hutton, 11/13/97, VFA-0341
The DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) issued a decision
granting in part a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal filed by
James R. Hutton. Hutton sought the release of information withheld by
the Oak Ridge Operations Office (Oak Ridge). In its decision, OHA found
that Oak Ridge improperly withheld a retention register in its
entirety, when instead it should have released this document with only
that information which would reveal specific employees' identities
removed. OHA also found that Oak Ridge had improperly used a Glomar
declaration in response to the Appellant's request for another
document. (A ``Glomar'' declaration neither confirms nor denies the
existence of a document). Accordingly, the Appeal was remanded to Oak
Ridge and denied in all other aspects.
Refund Applications
Belle Pass Towing Corp., 11/13/97, RF272-57009
The DOE issued a Decision and Order granting sixteen Applications
for Refund in the crude oil refund proceeding. Eight of the cases
involved a corporation that dissolved after it submitted its timely and
accurate refund application. Because the DOE did not act on the
application prior to the corporation's dissolution, the DOE allowed
shareholders at the time of dissolution to file refund claims after the
June 30, 1995 crude oil proceeding deadline.
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 11/14/97, RR272-304
The Office of Hearings and Appeals granted a supplemental crude oil
refund in the amount of $425,580 to the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
in accordance with the Opinion issued by the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 30, 1997. The supplemental
refund pertained to Goodyear's butadiene and propylene purchases from
two of its suppliers.
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.
CAVE CREEK UNIF. DIST. #93 ET AL......................... RF272-95415 11/13/97
COLONY TRANSPORT ET AL. RF272-76468 11/13/97
CRUDE OIL SUPPLE REF DIST RB272-00125 11/13/97
GEORGE L. GEAR RK272-04053 11/12/97
LYDA STOWE ET AL. RK272-04598 11/12/97
THE ROBERT JURY TRUST ET AL. RK272-01611 11/12/97
[[Page 7784]]
[FR Doc. 98-3849 Filed 2-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
