[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 113 (Friday, June 12, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32203-32204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15723]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Hearings and Appeals
Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of April 27
Through May 1, 1998
During the week of April 27 through May 1, 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, DC, 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.
Dated: June 2, 1998.
George B. Breznay,
Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
Decision List No. 83; Week of April 27 through May 1, 1998
Appeals
Diane C. Larson, 4/30/98, VFA-0405
The DOE denied a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal filed by
Diane C. Larson. Larson sought the release of names withheld from
investigative files released to her by the DOE's Office of the
Inspector General. In its decision, the DOE found that the withholding
of the names was appropriate under FOIA Exemptions 6 and 7(C).
Eva Glow Brownlow, 4/30/98, VFA-0397
Eva Glow Brownlow appealed a determination issued to her by the
Albuquerque Operations Office (AL) that denied a request for
information she filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In
her Appeal, Ms. Brownlow contended that AL improperly withheld the
requested information from disclosure under Exemption 5, of the FOIA.
The DOE found that AL properly applied Exemption 5, and concluded that
the release of the document would not be in the public interest.
Consequently, the Appeal filed by Ms. Brownlow was denied.
McGraw-Hill Companies, 4/28/98, VFA-0398
The DOE denied a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Appeal that was
filed by McGraw-Hill Companies (McGraw-Hill). In its Appeal, McGraw-
Hill contested the adequacy of the search for responsive documents
carried out by the DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management. The DOE found that the search was adequate.
Tamara L. Mix, 4/27/98, VFA-0394
Tamara L. Mix (Mix) appealed a determination issued to her by the
Oak Ridge Operations Office (OR). In her Appeal, Mix asserted that OR
failed to conduct an adequate search for various Oak Ridge community
relations documents she sought pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act
Request. The DOE determined that OR had conducted an adequate search
for documents responsive to Mix's Request. Consequently, Mix's Appeal
was denied.
Whistleblower Proceeding
Daniel Holsinger, VWC-0001; K-Ray Security, Inc., 4/27/98, VWC-0002
Upon remand by the Deputy Secretary, the Director of the OHA
considered whether K-Ray Security, Inc., a subsequent contractor,
should be required to reinstate Daniel Holsinger, who was terminated by
a prior DOE contractor after making a disclosure protected under 10
CFR, Part 708 (Contractor Employee Protection Program). After
considering all the equities involved, and in particular the important
goals of Part 708, the Director found that K-Ray had not shown that it
would experience any undue burden if it were required to reinstate
Holsinger for one eight-hour shift per week.
Refund Application
Gulf Oil Corp./Amerigas Propane, Inc., RR300-00292; Gulf Oil Corp./
Utility Propane Co., 4/28/98, RF300-21843
The DOE granted a Motion for Reconsideration filed by Amerigas
Propane, Inc. (Amerigas) in the Gulf refund proceeding. The DOE had
previously determined that Utility Propane Co., rather than Amerigas
was entitled to a refund based on the purchases of Utility Propane.
Upon reconsideration, the DOE determined that the sale and purchase
agreement between Utility Propane and Amerigas contained sufficiently
broad language to transfer the right to the refund to Amerigas.
Accordingly, the refund granted to Utility Propane was
[[Page 32204]]
rescinded, and a refund was granted to Amerigas.
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.
Advance Publications, Inc................................ RR272-00305 4/28/98
McCann-Shields Paint Co.................................. RF272-94052 5/1/98
N. Central Local Schl Dist. et al........................ RF272-95741 5/1/98
Pritchard & Van Zandt et al.............................. RK272-04794 4/30/98
Dismissals
The following submissions were dismissed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Case No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Payne............................. VFA-0408
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 98-15723 Filed 6-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
