[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7252-7253]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4403]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders During the Week of
June 19 Through June 23, 1995
During the week of June 19 through June 23, 1995, the decisions and
orders summarized below were issued with respect to appeals and
applications for other relief 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.
Appeals
A. Victorian, 6/22/95, VFA-0043
Dr. A. Victorian filed an Appeal from a determination issued by the
Oakland Operations Office (Oakland) of the Department of Energy in
response to a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Dr.
Victorian sought documents concerning ``Project Woodpecker'' at
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The Oakland determination
denied Dr. Victorian's request on the grounds that the DOE had no
responsive documents. In considering this Appeal, the DOE found that
Oakland followed procedures that were reasonably calculated to uncover
responsive documents. Accordingly, the DOE denied Dr. Victorian's
Appeal.
Ferenc M. Szasz, 6/22/95, LFA-0254
Ferenc M. Szasz filed an Appeal from a denial by the National
Archives and Records Administration of a request for information that
he filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Professor Szasz
sought specified reports contained in Manhattan Project files. In
considering the information that was withheld as classified material
under Exemptions 1 and 3 of the FOIA, the DOE determined that all of
the previously withheld material must continue to be withheld.
Accordingly, the Appeal was denied.
Petition for Special Redress
State of Louisiana, 6/20/95, VEG-0001
The DOE issued a Decision and Order granting a Petition for Special
Redress filed by the State of Louisiana. Louisiana sought approval to
use Stripper Well funds for a project which the DOE's Assistant
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy held to be
inconsistent with the terms of the Stripper Well Settlement Agreement.
The DOE approved the State's proposal to use $11,650,915 to establish a
Louisiana Petroleum Information Center (PIC). The PIC will be a central
archive for Louisiana geological data, including stratigraphic data
collected by the major oil companies and the oil and gas archives of
the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. The DOE found that the
PIC would bring energy-related restitutionary benefits to the citizens
of Louisiana and could be approved as an energy research program under
the terms of the Stripper Well Settlement Agreement. Accordingly,
Louisiana's Petition for Special Redress was approved.
Refund Applications
Gulf Oil Corp./FASCO, Inc., 6/22/95, T3RF300-8238
The DOE issued a Decision and Order concerning a refund application
filed by FASGO, Inc. in the Gulf Oil Corporation refund proceeding.
FASGO calculated the volume of its refined product purchased by
referring to its own company records. The DOE found that the records
were reasonable, and used them to calculate a refund of $60,014,
including interest, for the firm. The DOE further noted that FASGO, a
bankrupt firm, was no longer in existence. The record in the case
included an Order from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania stipulating that upon payment of
administrative expenses and of a certain claim by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, two former owners of FASGO would be entitled to all
liquidated assets of the firm. These former owners submitted evidence
showing that the payments had been made. Accordingly, the DOE directed
that these two individuals should receive the FASGO refund.
Gulf Oil Corporation/the Circle K Corporation, Fairmont Foods, Inc., 6/
22/95, RF300-19969, RF300-19994
The DOE issued a Decision and Order concerning Applications for
Refund submitted in the Gulf Oil Corporation special refund proceeding
by The Circle K Corporation and Fairmont Foods, Inc. The Circle K
Corporation requested that the OHA grant it a refund based on separate
presumptions of injury for each of three subsidiaries which purchased
Gulf products. The OHA found that while the three subsidiaries were
operated as separate entities during the
[[Page 7253]]
refund period, they are no longer operationally distinct. Accordingly,
the OHA determined that they do not qualify for consideration under
separate presumptions of injury. The OHA also found that The Circle K
Corporation could not receive a full volumetric refund for purchases
made by a subsidiary for end-use, in addition to benefitting from the
small claims presumption of injury for its two subsidiaries that were
retailers of Gulf products. Instead, the OHA ordered that the applicant
be granted a full volumetric refund for end-use purchases, and refunds
under the mid-range presumption of injury for purchases made by its
retailer subsidiaries. Accordingly, the Circle K Corporation was
granted a total refund of $15,046. In addition, the OHA denied a
competing Application for Refund filed by Fairmont Foods, Inc.
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.
Gulf Oil Corporation/Bracknell Oil Co., Inc............... RF300-19716 06/22/95
Quality Gulf.............................................. RF300-19987
Valley View Gulf.......................................... RF300-19991
Gulf Oil Corporation/Denison Oil Co., Inc................. RF300-20066 06/22/95
H.R. Higgins Excavating et al............................. RF272-97036 06/23/95
Old Colony Transportation et al........................... RF272-90436 06/23/95
Roane County et al........................................ RF272-97600 06/23/95
Sequim School District et al.............................. RF272-97701 06/23/95
Texaco Inc./Look Oil Co................................... RF321-20305 06/23/95
Dismissals
The following submissions were dismissed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Case No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acme Resin Corporation....................... RF272-58053
Brattlebono Memorial Hospital................ RF272-99147
Butler Landmark Inc.......................... RG272-194
Dallas County Schools........................ RF272-55467
Digital Equipment Corporation................ RF272-53469
DSM Copolymer................................ RF272-58418
Farmers Elevator & Cooperative Association... RG272-279
International Flavors & Fragrance............ RF272-14036
Jamaica Bay Oil Co........................... RF321-20562
MacArthur Petroleum & Solvent Co............. RF321-20576
McLaurin's Texaco............................ RF321-19757
Nash Equity Exchange......................... RG272-25
National Standard Company.................... RF272-17314
Pollard Delivery Service..................... RF272-89521
Windsor Village Texaco....................... RF321-20166
Wyatt's Service.............................. RF315-10163
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, 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.
Dated: February 14, 1996.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
[FR Doc. 96-4403 Filed 2-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
