[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 11, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47923-47924]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-23182]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Issuance of Decisions and Orders During the Week of
April 8 through April 12, 1996
Office of Hearings and Appeals
During the week of April 8 through April 12, 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, 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: August 30, 1996.
Richard W. Dugan,
Acting Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.
Decision List No. 967
Week of April 8 through April 12, 1996
Appeals
A. Victorian, 4/11/96, VFA-0142
Dr. A. Victorian filed an Appeal from a denial by the Office of
Defense Programs of a request for information that he filed under the
Freedom of Information Act. Defense Programs responded by stating that
it could neither confirm nor deny the existence of records responsive
to Dr. Victorian's request. Based on its review of the nature of the
request, and after considering the arguments that Dr. Victorian raised
on appeal, the DOE determined that Defense Programs' Glomar response
was appropriate. Accordingly, the Appeal was denied.
Petrucelli & Nadler, 4/11/96, VFA-0143
Petrucelli & Nadler (Petrucelli) filed an Appeal from a denial by
the Oak Ridge Operations Office (DOE/OR) of the Department of Energy of
a Request for Information which the firm had submitted under the
Freedom of Information Act. In considering the Appeal, the DOE found
that the documents requested by Petrucelli, information on all persons
involved in radiation experiments performed on students at the Fernald
State School in Massachusetts, could possibly have been located in a
search of either another relevant DOE office or the DOE Archives. Thus,
the Appeal was granted.
Personnel Security Hearing
Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office, 4/12/96, VSA-0048
The Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals issued an
Opinion regarding a Request for Review of a Hearing Officer Opinion
which recommended against restoring the level ``L'' access
authorization of the Respondent seeking review of the matter. The
Respondent had requested that the Director examine two issues: (1)
Whether the Respondent's failure to file state and federal income taxes
and pay miscellaneous local taxes raises a legitimate security concern;
and (2) whether promises to repay loans to the Respondent and the
Respondent's opportunity to satisfy his mortgage mitigate some of the
DOE's security concerns. With regard to the first issued, after
reviewing the record regarding the Respondent's tax situation and
considering the Respondent's purported efforts to take corrective
action with respect to some of his tax liabilities, the Director found
no reason to disturb the Hearing Officer's Opinion. As for the second
issue raised on review, the Director first opined that the new evidence
suggesting that some of the Respondent's relatives might repay the
Respondent some time in the future is not sufficient to overcome the
security concern raised by the DOE regarding the Respondent's financial
problems. Moreover, the Director observed that the Respondent has not
demonstrated that he will be able to satisfy his entire mortgage debt
within the time frame prescribed by the Respondent's lending
institution. In sum, the Director refused to conclude that the new
evidence tendered by the Respondent regarding his attempt to redress
his mortgage problems mitigates the DOE's security concerns regarding
the Respondent's judgement in managing his financial affairs.
After carefully considering the record, the Director opined that
the Respondent's access authorization should not be restored.
Refund Applications
Charter Co./Mississippi--RQ23-601
Standard Oil Co. (Indiana)/Mississippi--RQ251-602
OKC Corp./Mississippi, 4/11/96, RQ13-603
The DOE issued a Decision and Order granting a second-stage refund
application filed by the State of Mississippi. Mississippi requested
that all remaining funds allocated to it in the Charter Company,
Standard Oil Co. (Indiana), and OKC Corp. Special refund proceedings be
used to fund the state's Energy-Efficient, Affordable Housing and
Energy in Agriculture Programs. As
[[Page 47924]]
of March 31, 1996, the allocation totaled $856,829 ($372,150 in
principal and $484,679 in interest), but the allocation will be
slightly higher at the time of disbursement due to interest earned
between March 31, 1996 and the date of disbursement. The DOE found that
Mississippi's proposal would provide timely restitutionary benefits to
injured consumers of refined petroleum products. Accordingly,
Mississippi's second-stage refund application was granted.
Gulf Oil Corp./Victoria Guernsey, Inc., 4/11/96, RF300-18821
The DOE issued a Decision and Order granting a refund application
filed by Victoria Guernsey, Inc. in the Gulf Oil Corporation special
refund proceeding. The DOE found that Victoria Guernsey made a
reasonable demonstration that it purchased the claimed amount of Gulf
product through two suppliers, Parton Oil Co. and Armour Oil Co.
Because there was no affirmative evidence that either supplier absorbed
the alleged Gulf overcharges, the DOE determined that Victoria Guernsey
should be considered for a refund under the standards applicable to
direct purchasers. Accordingly, the DOE granted Victoria Guernsey a
$23,981 refund based on the medium range presumption of injury.
Valley Line Co., 4/12/96, RC272-337
The DOE issued a Decision and Order rescinding a refund granted to
The Valley Line Co. in the Subpart V crude oil refund proceeding. The
DOE was informed by The Valley Line that Chromalloy American
Corporation, the former parent company of The Valley Line, had received
a refund from the Rail & Water Transporters Escrow, one of the eight
escrows established by the final Settlement Agreement in the Stripper
Well Exemption Litigation. In order to receive a refund from a Stripper
Well escrow, a claimant was required to waive its right and the rights
of its affiliates to participate in any future refund proceeding based
on crude oil overcharges. Therefore, The Valley Line was ineligible to
receive a refund in the crude oil proceeding.
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/Ed & Ray's Gulf et al............... RF300-13549 04/08/96
Heartland Co-op et al.................................... RK272-03205 04/11/96
Hereford Independent School District et al............... RF272-86302 04/09/96
Mueller Industries, Inc.................................. RC272-00336 04/08/96
Rick Rush................................................ RJ272-9 04/11/96
Ricky Timmons Estate et al............................... RK272-01106 04/08/96
Woods Research & Development Corp. et al................. RK272-03328 04/11/96
Dismissals
The following submissions were dismissed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name Case No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Ontario Limited.......................... RF272-98755
Arundel Asphalt Products..................... RD272-74858
Arundel Asphalt Products, Inc................ RF272-74858
Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc............. RF272-74311
Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc............. RD272-74311
Dianna McNew................................. VFA-0146
Dispatch Distribution Line, Inc.............. RF272-77995
Leotal, Inc. for Northeast Tool and RG272-00102
Engineering.
Liberty Express.............................. RF272-98705
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 96-23182 Filed 9-10-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
