Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 1998 / Notices 30739

Ruth Towle Murphy completed the

filing of a Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA) Appeal requesting that the Office

of Hearings and Appeals of the

Department of Energy (DOE) order the

release of ‘‘estimated costs, fixed fees,

and the names of key personnel to

implement a contract,’’ information

withheld pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

§ 552(b)(4). In considering the Appeal,

the DOE determined that all of the

information withheld was commercial

information within the meaning of that

Exemption. Thus, the DOE dismissed

Ms. Murphy’s Appeal.

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.

CITY OF PROVO .................................................................................................................................................. RG272–738 1/20/98

CITY OF QUINCY ................................................................................................................................................ RF272–95482 1/20/98

ELSA COOP GIN ASSN ....................................................................................................................................... RF272–95719 ........................

J & H ASSOCIATES ET AL ................................................................................................................................. RK272–01580 1/21/98

QUANTUM CHEMICAL CORP./RICE OIL CO ................................................................................................... RF330–67 ........................

RICE-LINDQUIST, INC ........................................................................................................................................ RF300–21841 ........................

WINN-DIXIE MIDWEST, INC. ET AL ................................................................................................................. RK272–04683 1/23/98

Dismissals

The following submissions were dismissed.

Name Case No.

ARTHUR F. MURFIN ........................................................................................................................................................................ VWA–0016

BROOKLYN-GERNSEY-MALCOLM COMM. SCHOOLS ................................................................................................................ RF272–79520

GENERAL DELIVERY AND SERVICE ............................................................................................................................................ RF272–94642

JONES, WALKER, WAECHTER, POITEVENT, CA ........................................................................................................................ VFA–0363

[FR Doc. 98–14972 Filed 6–4–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Hearings and Appeals

Notice of Issuance of Decisions and

Orders During the Week of March 2

Through March 6, 1998

During the week of March 2 through

March 6, 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 20585–

0107, 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: May 20, 1998.

Thomas O. Mann,

Acting Director, Office of Hearings and

Appeals.

Decision List No. 75; Week of March 2

Through March 6, 1998

Appeal

GLEN MILNER, 3/3/98, VFA–0170

Glen Milner filed an Appeal from a

denial by the Albuquerque Operations

Office of a Request for Information that

he filed under the Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA). Because the

withheld information was identified as

classified under Executive Order 12958

and the Atomic Energy Act, the DOE

withheld it under Exemptions 1 and 3

of the FOIA. In considering the

information that was withheld, the DOE

determined on appeal that a small

portion of the document must continue

to be withheld under Exemption 3, but

the remainder could be released.

Accordingly, the Appeal was granted in

part and a newly redaction version of

the requested information was ordered

to be released.

Personnel Security Hearing

PERSONNEL SECURITY HEARING, 3/

5/98 VSO–0183

A Hearing Officer Opinion

recommended against the grant of

access authorization. The Opinion

found that the individual had not

resolved the security concern arising

from a pattern of dishonest conduct.

Refund Applications

ENRON CORP./FERRELLGAS, INC.,

3/3/98, RF340–60

The DOE granted an Application for

Refund submitted by Ferrellgas, Inc.

(Ferrellgas) in the Enron Corporation

(Enron) special refund proceeding. The

DOE found that Ferrellgas was a reseller

and retailer that purchased large

quantities of propane and butane from

Enron. The DOE also found that

Ferrellgas’ propane and butane

purchases from Enron were not

discretionary in nature, and were

necessary for Ferrellgas to meet the

supply requirements of its regular

customers. The DOE found that

Ferrellgas had demonstrated that the

prices it paid to Enron for butane

resulted in an economic injury to

Ferrellgas, and granted Ferrellgas a full

volumetric refund for its butane

purchases. However, with respect to

propane, the DOE found that Ferrellgas

had not established a level of injury

sufficient to qualify for a full volumetric

refund. The DOE therefore limited this

refund to the volume of propane that

Ferrellgas purchased from Enron at

above market prices. Accordingly, the

DOE granted Ferrellgas a refund,

including interest, of $347,549.
30740 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 108 / Friday, June 5, 1998 / Notices

LAWRENCE PAPERBOARD

CORPORATION, 3/3/98, RK272–

04120, RK272–04178, RC272–00377

The DOE issued a Decision and Order

concerning competing claims to the

right to a refund based on the purchases

of Lawrence Paperboard Corporation.

The DOE had originally granted the

refund to Atlantic Coast Paperboard. In

the instant case, the DOE learned that

Atlantic merely purchased the assets of

Lawrence Paperboard and that the assets

did not include the right to the refund.

Accordingly, the DOE rescinded the

refund granted Atlantic. As between the

two remaining claimants to the refund,

the bankruptcy trustee on one hand, and

the sole owner of the corporation at the

time of its dissolution on the other, the

DOE determined that the refund should

be sent to the bankruptcy trustee for

distribution to unpaid creditors.

Accordingly, the request of the

bankruptcy trustee was granted and the

claim of the owner at the time of

dissolution was denied.

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.

CITY OF RENSSELAER ELEC. DEPT. ET AL .................................................................................................... RF272–79197 3/3/98

JOHN RAY TRUCKING CO. ET AL .................................................................................................................... RF272–76565 3/3/98

Dismissals

The following submissions were dismissed.

Name Case No.

VERNON J. BRECHIN ..................................................................................................................................................................... VFA–0383

[FR Doc. 98–14973 Filed 6–4–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6108–2]

New Jersey State Prohibition on

Marine Discharges of Vessel Sewage;

Final Affirmative Determination

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notification is hereby given

that the Regional Administrator,

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Region II has affirmatively determined,

pursuant to section 312(f) of Public Law

92–500, as amended by Public Law 95–

217 and Public Law 100–4 (the Clean

Water Act), that adequate facilities for

the safe and sanitary removal and

treatment of sewage from all vessels are

reasonably available for the waters of

the Manasquan River, Counties of

Monmouth and Ocean, State of New

Jersey.

This petition was made by the New

Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection (NJDEP) in cooperation with

the Monmouth-Ocean Alliance to

Enhance the Manasquan River. Upon

receipt of this affirmative determination,

NJDEP will completely prohibit the

discharge of sewage, whether treated or

not, from any vessel in the Manasquan

River in accordance with section

312(f)(3) of the Clean Water Act and 40

CFR 140.4(a). Notice of the Receipt of

Petition and Tentative Determination

was published in the Federal Register

on March 12, 1998. Comments on the

tentative determination were accepted

during the comment period which

closed on April 13, 1998. Written

statements were received from the

following:

1. James F. Lacey, Freeholder Director,

Ocean County Board of Chosen

Freeholders, P.O. Box 2191, Toms

River, New Jersey 08754–2191

2. Mr. Lester W. Jargowsky, M.P.H.,

Public Health Coordinator,

Monmouth County Board of Health,

3435 Highway 9, Freehold, New

Jersey 07728

3. Ms. Cindy Zipf, Executive Director,

Clean Ocean Action, P.O. Box 505,

Highlands, New Jersey 07732

4. Mr. Arthur J. Bretnall, Jr., President,

Raritan Engineering, P.O. Box 1157,

Millville, New Jersey 08332

5. Mr. Philip G. Conner, President,

Crockett Brothers Boatyard, Inc.,

P.O. Box 369, Oxford, Maryland

21654

The comments are summarized and

responded to below:

Three individuals expressed their

support of the Manasquan River

determination. One individual stated

that the notice failed to mention that the

proposed No Discharge Area (NDA)

included the southern shore of the

Manasquan River which lies within

Ocean County. Another individual

stated that many organizations and

individuals have worked hard to ensure

that there are an adequate and

convenient supply of sewerage pumpout

facilities in the subject coastal

watershed. He further commented that

his organization will continue to

educate and motivate boaters to adhere

to the designation.

EPA acknowledges the support. While

the document clearly indicates the

boundaries of the area including the

southern shoreline, EPA has added

Monmouth County and Ocean County to

the listed communities for clarification.

The description now reads, ‘‘The lower

6.5 miles of the river forms the estuary

that is bordered by Wall Township,

Brielle Borough and Manasquan

Borough to the north in Monmouth

County and Brick Township, Point

Pleasant Borough and Point Pleasant

Beach Borough to the south in Ocean

County.’’ EPA also agrees that education

is a key component of the compliance

and enforcement effort.

One individual stated that there is

evidence that there is a need for better

management of marine sewage. He

commented that shellfish beds in the

river continue to be closed to harvesting

due to elevated fecal coliform counts.

Through the establishment of an NDA,

the local Boards of Health will have a

new management tool for vessel sewage

which can reduce the fecal coliform

loading and which may assist in the

reopening of the shellfish beds for

harvest. No revision to the

determination is warranted based on

this comment.

Another individual stated that there is

no credible reason to disallow the

continued use of the Type I and Type

II Marine Sanitation Devices (MSDs). He

further stated that according to the

National Shellfish Register the five

principal sources of pollution are

upstream sources, wildlife, individual

waste management systems, septic tanks

and waste treatment plants.

In response, EPA notes that the

National Shellfish Register stated in the