[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 113 (Friday, June 12, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32202-32203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15722]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Hearings and Appeals
Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of March 30
Through April 3, 1998
During the week of March 30 through April 3, 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,
Room 7117, Comsat Building, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC
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: June 2, 1998.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
Decision List No. 79; Week of March 30 through April 3, 1998
Appeals
David R. Berg, 4/2/98, VFA-0376
The Department of Energy denied a Privacy and Freedom of
Information Acts (FOIA) Appeal filed by David R. Berg from a
determination issued by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human
Resources that certain documents relating to Mr. Berg and several co-
workers were exempt from mandatory disclosure. The DOE found that the
withheld material was exempt from mandatory disclosure under subsection
(d)(5) of the Privacy Act and Exemption 6 of the FOIA, but that
Exemptions 7(C) and 7(F) of the FOIA were inapplicable because the
documents were not compiled for law enforcement purposes.
Dr. Nicolas Dominquez, 4/2/98, VFA-0368, VFA-0387, VFA-0388, VFA-0389
Dr. Nicolas Dominguez appealed four Determinations issued to him in
response to a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The
Appellant sought information concerning his termination by Lockheed
Martin Energy Research Corporation (LMERC), including two memos, his
job description and identifying information concerning a ``group of
peers'' which heard testimony regarding the termination. In its
Determination, the Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) found that all
responsive documents were owned by LMERC. On appeal, the DOE rejected
the argument that all records funded by the taxpayers were subject to
release under the FOIA. The DOE, however, found that ORO did possess
responsive agency records regarding the ``group of peers,'' and that
some of the requested documents were subject to release because they
were owned by DOE. Accordingly, two of the Appeals were granted and two
were denied.
Eugene Maples, 3/30/98, VFA-0382
Eugene Maples (Maples) appealed determinations issued to him by the
Offices of the Inspector General (OIG) and the General Counsel (OGC).
In his Appeal, Maples asserted that OIG improperly withheld, pursuant
to FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(C), names from documents relating to
recoupment of Petroleum Violation Escrow (PVE) funds from the State of
South Carolina. Maples also argued that OIG and OGC conducted
inadequate searches for responsive documents. The DOE determined that
OIG and OGC conducted adequate searches for responsive documents, but
that OIG may have improperly applied Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to the
withheld names. Consequently, Maples's Appeal was granted in part.
Personnel Security Hearing
Personnel Security Hearing, 4/3/98, VSO-0172
A Hearing Officer recommended that the access authorization of an
individual employed by a DOE contractor not be reinstated. The
individual was charged with deliberately omitting information relevant
to his eligibility for access authorization from two written security
questionnaire forms, making false statements during a DOE personnel
security interview, and with ``unusual conduct'' that tended to show he
was not honest, reliable or trustworthy, including violation of a DOE
Drug Certification and a pattern of repeated arrests. The Hearing
Officer found that the individual had mitigated some of the charges,
including a number of minor inconsistencies in his statements to the
local DOE security office, and his violation of the Drug Certification
five years before the hearing, but had failed to mitigate the charges
that he had deliberately omitted or falsified
[[Page 32203]]
information relevant to his eligibility for access authorization. He
thus recommended against reinstating the individual's access
authorization.
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.
American Aggregates Corp. et al.......................... RF272-76986 4/1/98
John R. Olivares, Inc. et al............................. RK272-04778 4/1/98
Dismissals
The following submissions were dismissed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Case No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cass County, North Dakota.................... RF272-86469
Ikard & Newsom............................... RF340-00134
Patricia McCracken........................... VFA-0392
Personnel Security Hearing................... VSO-0196
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 98-15722 Filed 6-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
