[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 17, 1996)] [Notices] [Pages 48946-48948] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 96-23735] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of January 29 Through February 2, 1996 During the week of January 29 through February 2, 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 www.oha.doe.gov. Dated: September 4, 1996. George B. Breznay, Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals. Appeal PSI Energy, Inc., 1/30/96, VEA-0001 PSI Energy, Inc. (PSI) filed an Appeal from a determination issued by the DOE's Office of Environmental Management (OEM). PSI claimed that: (i) the OEM erroneously determined its liability for payment into the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund (D&D Fund) established under the Energy Policy Act of 1992; (ii) Indiana state law would prohibit PSI from passing through its assessment to its ratepayers; and (iii) the assessment of utilities for payment into the D&D Fund was an unconstitutional taking of property. The DOE found that: (i) the firm was properly assessed for uranium enrichment services that it purchased from the DOE and did not sell in the secondary market; (ii) Indiana state law would be preempted by the federal Energy Policy Act; and (iii) while the DOE will ultimately defer to the rulings of the federal courts, the collection of assessments will continue while the courts are considering the constitutionality of the relevant provisions of the Energy Policy Act. Accordingly, PSI's Appeal was denied. Personnel Security Hearings Albuquerque Operations Office, 1/31/96, VSA-0020 The Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals issued an Opinion concerning a Request for Review that was filed by the DOE's Office of Security Affairs (OSA). In its submission, the OSA requested that a security clearance matter be remanded to the Hearing Officer so that the Hearing Officer could render an opinion concerning an individual's eligibility for access authorization. In the Hearing Officer's initial Opinion, she stated that because the individual attended, but did [[Page 48947]] not participate in, his security clearance hearing, she would not address the merits of the individual's eligibility for a clearance, but would instead transfer the proceeding to the Manager of DOE/Albuquerque for a final determination as to the individual's eligibility. In the Director's Opinion, he stated that the regulations governing these proceedings do not contemplate the transferral of a security clearance matter to a DOE Manager under the circumstances in this case. He added that because a hearing was held and additional testimony was received, an evaluation by the Hearing Officer of the individual's eligibility for access authorization was required. Accordingly, the Director remanded the matter to the Hearing Officer for the issuance of such an evaluation. Rocky Flats Field Office, 1/30/96, VSO-0046 An Office of Hearings and Appeals Hearing Officer issued an opinion against restoring the security clearance of an individual whose clearance had been suspended because the Department had obtained derogatory information that fell within 10 C.F.R. Sec. 710.8(f). In reaching his conclusion, the Hearing Officer found that the individual deliberately misrepresented, falsified, or omitted significant information during the Personnel Security Interview. Rocky Flats Field Office, 2/7/96, VSO-0060 An OHA Hearing Officer issued an opinion on a request for review from an individual employed by a Rocky Flats contractor whose DOE security clearance had been suspended. The individual's ``Q'' access authorization was suspended after Rocky Flats security officials had received information from Personnel Security Interviews (PSIs) with two confidential sources about the individual's extensive marijuana use in the five or six years immediately after he had signed a DOE Drug Certification in 1980. At the hearing which was held in this case, neither of the two sources would testify about the instances of marijuana use or distribution by the individual that they had reported in their PSIs. However, the individual himself refused to testify in his own behalf at the hearing, and submitted no direct evidence to contravene the derogatory information in the statements by the two sources in their PSIs. Instead, the individual relied upon statements made in his own PSIs with Rocky Flats security personnel, in which he categorically denied any post-1980 marijuana use. After considering the record in this case, the Hearing Officer concluded that the individual had failed to meet his burden of coming forward with evidence to show that restoring his access authorization would not endanger the common defense and security and would be clearly consistent with the national interest. Accordingly, the Hearing Officer recommended that the individual's access authorization not be restored. Implementation of Special Refund Procedures OXY USA, Inc., 01/31/96, VEF-0030 The DOE issued a Decision and Order setting forth procedures for the distribution of $275 million (plus interest) in alleged overcharges remitted or to be remitted to the DOE by Occidental Petroleum Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiary OXY USA, Inc. (OXY). The DOE determined that these funds should be distributed in accordance with the DOE's Modified Statement of Restitutionary Policy in Crude Oil Cases, 51 Fed. Reg. 27899 (August 4, 1986). Accordingly, the DOE determined that 20 percent should be reserved for Subpart V Claimants and the remaining 80 percent should be divided equally between the federal government and the states. Refund Applications Citronelle/Texas Cities Refining, Inc., et. al., 1/30/96, RF345-1, et. al. The DOE issued a Supplemental Order disbursing $144,204,002 from an escrow account in connection with the 341 Tract Unit of the Citronelle Field. The disbursements were made pursuant to a Settlement Agreement that was approved by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on December 6, 1995. 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. Alaska Gold Company et al...... RC272-327 01/30/96 Atlantic Richfield Company/ RF304-13239 01/30/96 Oscar B. Chao et al. Metromedia Co et al............ RF272-95102 01/30/96 Dismissals The following submissions were dismissed: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Name Case No. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Airline Snack Bar............................ RF300-19839 Albuquerque Operations Office................ VSO-0064 Anderson Super Gulf-Parkway.................. RF300-18803 Bayer & Mingolla Industries, Inc............. RF300-21419 Brink's, Inc................................. RF300-15179 Buffalo Aeronautical......................... RF300-16947 Central Telephone Co. of Florida............. RF300-14816 Charles F. Morris............................ RF300-21659 Continental Baking Co........................ RF300-21479 D.L. Stowe Trucking.......................... RF300-18841 Daniels Gulf................................. RF300-19586 Dans Rental.................................. RF300-19585 Dix Gulf..................................... RF300-19588 Ellex Transportation......................... RF300-13113 Garden Street Gulf........................... RF300-15086 Garvie Marks Gulf............................ RF300-21406 Hilltop Gulf................................. RF300-18730 Honeywell Inc................................ RF272-67216 J.D.'s Gulf.................................. RF300-13159 Jackson & Michael Gulf Service............... RF300-19659 [[Page 48948]] John L. Sutton, Jr........................... RF300-21420 Lake & Sam Williams Gulf Dist................ RF300-13245 Lee-Hy Paving Corporation.................... RR272-137 Mart Gulf.................................... RF300-16505 Minden City Oil & Gas Co..................... RF300-19560 Murphey's Gulf & U-Haul...................... RF300-19528 Richland Operations Office................... VSO-0056 Sam's Auto Service........................... RF300-10924 Sanders Gulf................................. RF300-18795 Wade's Rent-a-Car............................ RF300-18092 Waite, Schneider, Bayless & Chesley.......... VFA-0118 Wiley Fuel Oil............................... RF300-19541 Williams Gulf................................ RF300-18405 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [FR Doc. 96-23735 Filed 9-16-96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
Document
Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of January 29 Through February 2, 1996
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 17, 1996)] [Notices] [Pages 48946-48948] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [ www....
Legal Citation
Federal Register Citation
Use this for formal legal and research references to the published document.
61 FR 48946
Web Citation
Suggested Web Citation
Use this when citing the archival web version of the document.
“Issuance of Decisions and Orders; Week of January 29 Through February 2, 1996,” thefederalregister.org (September 17, 1996), https://thefederalregister.org/documents/96-23735/issuance-of-decisions-and-orders-week-of-january-29-through-february-2-1996.