Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Notices 6243

LIST OF CASES RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

[Week of December 23 through December 27, 1996]

Date Name and location of applicant Case No. Type of submission

12/23/96 ..... Harold Bibeau Troutdale, Oregon ...... VFA–0255 Appeal of an Information Request Denial. If Granted: The December 4,

1996 Freedom of Information Request Denial issued by the Argonne

Group would be rescinded, and Harold Bibeau would receive access to

certain DOE information.

12/24/96 ..... Cascade Scientific, Inc. Redmond,

Washington.

VFA–0257 Appeal of an Information Request Denial. If Granted: The November 21,

1996 Freedom of Information Request Denial issued by Richland Operations Office would be rescinded, and Cascade Scientific, Inc. would receive access to certain DOE information.

12/24/96 ..... Crooker & Sons, Inc. Santa Barbara,

California.

RR272–

272

Request for Modification/Rescission in the Crude Oil Refund Proceeding. If

Granted: The November 15, 1996 Dismissal, Case No. RG272–918, issued to Crooker & Sons, Inc. would be modified regarding the firm’s application for refund submitted in the crude oil refund proceeding.

12/24/96 ..... James R. Hutton, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.VFA–0256 Appeal of an Information Request Denial. If Granted: The December 6,

1996 Freedom of Information Request Denial issued by Oak Ridge Operations Office would be rescinded, and James R. Hutton would receive access to certain DOE information.

12/24/96 ..... W. Gordon Smith Co. Eden Prairie,

Minnesota.

VEE–0037 Exception to the Reporting Requirements. If Granted: W. Gordon Smith Co.

would be granted an extension of time in which to file Form EIA–782B

Repeller’s/Retailer’s Monthly Petroleum Product Sales Report.

[FR Doc. 97–3309 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

Notice of Cases Filed; Week of

December 30, 1996 Through January 3,

1997

During the Week of December 30,

1996 through January 3, 1997, the

appeals, applications, petitions or other

requests listed in this Notice were filed

with the Office of Hearings and Appeals

of the Department of Energy.

Any person who will be aggrieved by

the DOE action sought in any of these

cases may file written comments on the

application within ten days of

publication of this Notice or the date of

receipt of actual notice, whichever

occurs first. All such comments shall be

filed with the Office of Hearings and

Appeals, Department of Energy,

Washington, DC. 20585–0107.

Dated: February 3, 1997.

George B. Breznay,

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

LIST OF CASES RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

[Week of December 30, 1996 through January 3, 1997]

Date Name and Location of applicant Case No. Type of submission

1/2/97 ........ Eugene Maples, Alexandria,

Virginia.

VFA–0258 Appeal of an Information Request Denial. If Granted: The November 25, 1996, Freedom of Information Request Denial issued by the Assistant Inspector General for

Investigations would be rescinded, and Eugene Maples would receive access to

certain portions of an investigative report on the fraudulent use of oil overcharge

funds in South Carolina.

[FR Doc. 97–3312 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and

Orders; Week of December 23 Through

December 27, 1996

During the week of December 23

through December 27, 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: February 3, 1997.

George B. Breznay,

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 13

Appeals

Michael A. Grosche, 12/23/96, VFA–

0193

Michael A. Grosche filed an Appeal

from a determination issued by the

Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of

the Department of Energy (DOE) in

response to a Request for Information

submitted under the Freedom of

Information Act. OIG had withheld

names and other information from

memoranda on the outcome of a closed

investigation into alleged misbilling by

sub-contractor employees which

revealed no pecuniary loss to the
6244 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 1997 / Notices

government. In considering the Appeal,

the DOE determined that all of the

documents were generated for a law

enforcement purpose and that under

those conditions, review would be

under Exemption 7(C). In applying

Exemption 7(C), the DOE found that

OIG properly withheld the names of

persons interviewed and investigated.

However, the DOE remanded to the OIG

for further consideration the

withholding of names of federal

employees who did not appear to be

persons OIG either investigated or

interviewed, but who only seemed to be

performing their official functions. The

DOE also remanded for further

consideration all other withheld

material such as subcontract numbers

and billing accounts because none of the

material appeared on its face to involve

any privacy interest, but did appear to

address a public interest in whether

certain governmental-funded activities

were well or poorly managed and how

the Federal Acquisition Regulation may

have been violated. Accordingly, the

Appeal was denied in part, granted in

part and remanded to OIG for further

consideration.

Glen Milner, 12/23/96, VFA–0238

Glen Milner (Appellant) filed an

Appeal of two Determinations issued to

him by the Department of Energy (DOE)

in response to a request under the

Freedom of Information Act. In the

request, the Appellant asked for all

documents, generated from 1985 to the

present, concerning the ‘‘White Train’’,

which carried nuclear weapons until the

1980’s. He also requested a fee waiver

for costs associated with processing the

FOIA request. On appeal, the OHA

found that there is no provision in the

DOE FOIA regulations permitting a

conditional fee waiver, such as that

requested by the Appellant. However,

the OHA also found that disclosure of

some of the information requested by

the Appellant would be in the public

interest, because it was likely to

contribute significantly to government

operations and activities. Under these

circumstances the OHA determined that

a fee waiver was appropriate with

respect to the limited number of

documents meeting those conditions.

Accordingly, the DOE granted the

Appeal in part.

Dismissals

The following submissions were dismissed.

Case name Case No.

James H. Stebbings .......................................................................................................................................................................... VFA–0242

James R. Hutton ............................................................................................................................................................................... VFA–0256

L.N. Asphalt Co., Inc ......................................................................................................................................................................... RG272–981

Marlene Flor ...................................................................................................................................................................................... VFA–0253

Merlon Management Corp ................................................................................................................................................................ RG272–997

[FR Doc. 97–3310 Filed 2–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and

Orders; Week of January 13 through

January 17, 1997

During the week of January 13

through January 17, 1997, 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, S.W., 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: February 3, 1997.

George B. Breznay,

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

Decision List No. 16

Appeals

Digital City Communications, Inc., 

1/14/97, VFA–0254

Digital City Communications, Inc.

(Digital) filed an Appeal of a

Determination issued to it by the

Department of Energy (DOE) in response

to a request under the Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA). In the request,

the Appellant asked for Network

Intrusion Detector software and the

accompanying manual. In its

Determination, DOE’s Oakland

Operations Office (Oakland) found that

the requested items should be withheld

under Exemption 4 of the FOIA. On

Appeal, the Office of Hearings and

Appeals (OHA) found that the case

should be remanded because Oakland

had failed to determine whether the

software was a ‘‘record’’ under the

FOIA. OHA further found that

Oakland’s Exemption 4 determination

was inadequate. Therefore, the DOE

granted the Appeal and remanded the

matter to Oakland for further action.

Gretchen Lee Coles, 1/15/97, VFA–0251

Gretchen Lee Coles filed an Appeal

from determinations issued by the Oak

Ridge Operations Office and the

Albuquerque Operations Office

indicating that they had been unable to

locate records that would reflect

whether the federal government had

employed Lee H. Coles and whether Mr.

Coles had been exposed to radiation.

The DOE denied the Appeal because it

found that the searches conducted in

response to the Appellant’s Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) request were

reasonable. The DOE found that the

FOIA Officers contacted people who

would have knowledge of whether

relevant documents exist, and that these

individuals used appropriate

procedures to search for the records

requested.

Harold Bibeau, 1/17/97 VFA–0255

The Department of Energy denied an

Appeal of a determination that no

documents responsive to the appellant’s

request could be located. DOE found

that the search conducted was

reasonably calculated to uncover

material responsive to the request.

I.B.E.W., 1/15/97, VFA–0250

The International Brotherhood of

Electrical Workers (I.B.E.W.) filed an

Appeal from a determination, dated