Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Notices 18397

rendered a decision in the matter of

Jimmy Little v. Arkansas Department of

Human Services, Division for the Blind

(Docket No. R–S/92–1). This panel was

convened by the Secretary of the

Department of Education pursuant to 20

U.S.C. 107d–2, upon receipt of a

complaint filed by petitioner Jimmy

Little.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A

copy of the full text of the arbitration

panel decision may be obtained from

George F. Arsnow, U.S. Department of

Education, 600 Independence Avenue,

SW., Room 3230, Switzer Building,

Washington, DC. 20202–2738.

Telephone: (202) 205–9317. Individuals

who use a telecommunications device

for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD

number at (202) 205–8298.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to the Randolph-Sheppard Act (20

U.S.C. 107d–2(c)), the Secretary

publishes a synopsis of arbitration panel

decisions affecting the administration of

vending facilities on Federal property.

Background

Jimmy Little, complainant, is a blind

vendor licensed by the Department of

Human Services, Division of Services

for the Blind, State of Arkansas. Mr.

Little operated the vending facility at

Newport Vo-Tech in Arkansas.

The Arkansas State licensing agency

expressed concern and had evidence

that Mr. Little was not following

established Vending Facility Program

(VFP) procedures for notifying program

officials regarding his opening and

closing hours during the summer.

In a telephone conversation on

August 6, 1990, Mr. Little and the

Administrator for the VFP discussed his

procedural failures, and it was indicated

then that the agency might revoke his

vendor’s license. On August 7, 1990, the

Administrator and a specialist in the

VFP visited Mr. Little’s facility with

questions concerning his summer

opening and closing schedule. The VFP

representatives reviewed Mr. Little’s

business records and counted his

inventory. Complainant felt that the

Administrator’s conduct was

inappropriate and cast doubts on his

honesty and integrity. As the lunch hour

approached, business increased and the

two VFP officials waited outside before

continuing their discussion with Mr.

Little.

Mr. Little believed that the

Administrator made him look like a

thief in front of his customers, and,

upon the officials’ return to the facility,

complainant informed them he would

no longer manage the facility and turned

in his keys. Subsequently, Mr. Little’s

license to operate the vending facility at

Newport Vo-Tech was revoked for

abandonment of his facility.

Mr. Little’s position is that his

abandonment was not by choice but that

he was forced to leave by the behavior

of the VFP officials. Mr. Little has

sought the return of his license to

operate the facility at Newport Vo-Tech

as well as monetary damages for lost

earnings. Mr. Little requested and was

granted a State fair hearing on the

matter on March 1, 1991. The hearing

officer ruled that there was not

sufficient evidence presented at the

State fair hearing to warrant a finding

that the actions of the VFP personnel

were responsible for the complainant’s

abandonment of the Newport Vo-Tech

facility.

Arbitration Panel Decision

The panel stated that there are sound

business reasons to visit a vendor at his

facility, especially if there are questions

about his records, inventory, and hours

of business during the summer. Based

on both men’s testimony at the hearing,

the panel found there was no evidence

that the Administrator ever called Mr.

Little a thief and by Mr. Little’s own

admission he did not believe any of his

patrons overheard any of the

Administrator’s inquiry. The

complainant believed that his integrity

was questioned because of the

Administrator’s request to count his

inventory and examine his receipts, but

the panel found that this was part of the

Administrator’s job. It also found Mr.

Little had not been harassed and was

not justified in abandoning his facility.

On November 13, 1992, the arbitration

panel issued its opinion. The panel

found that Mr. Little voluntarily

abandoned the facility at Newport VoTech, and the panel upheld the

revocation of complainant’s vending

facility license by the Arkansas

Department of Human Services,

Division for the Blind.

Dated: April 5, 1995.

Judith E. Heumann,

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and

Rehabilitative Services.

[FR Doc. 95–8896 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. ER94–1147–000, et al.]

Madison Gas & Electric Company, et

al.; Electric Rate and Corporate

Regulation Filings

April 4, 1995.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Madison Gas & Electric Company

[Docket No. ER94–1147–000]

Take notice that on March 23, 1995,

Madison Gas & Electric Company

tendered for filing an amendment in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: April 18, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

2. Public Service Company of New

Mexico

[Docket No. ER94–1367–000]

Take notice that on March 21, 1995,

Public Service Company of New Mexico

(PNM) submitted for filing a letter of

clarification to supplement its June 16,

1994 filing of a Capacity and Energy

Services Agreement between PNM and

Enron Power Marketing, Inc. (EPMI).

Copies of the supplement have been

served upon EPMI and the New Mexico

Public Utility Commission.

Comment date: April 18, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

3. Ohio Edison Company

[Docket No. ER94–1661–000]

Take notice that on March 28, 1995,

Ohio Edison Company tendered for

filing an amendment in the abovereferenced docket.

Comment date: April 18, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

4. New England Power Service

Company

[Docket No. ER95–539–000]

Take notice that on March 17, 1995,

New England Power Service Company

tendered for filing an amendment in the

above-referenced docket.

Comment date: April 18, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph E

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

E. Any person desiring to be heard or

to protest said filing should file a

motion to intervene or protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

825 North Capitol Street, NE.,
18398 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Notices

1See 29 FERC ¶ 61,034, 61,311 (1984).

Washington, DC 20426, in accordance

with Rules 211 and 214 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR

385.214). All such motions or protests

should be filed on or before the

comment date. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve to make

protestants parties to the proceeding.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–8864 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

[Docket No. CP95–284–000, et al.]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation,

et al. Natural Gas Certificate Filings

April 4, 1995.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. National Fuel Gas Supply

Corporation

[Docket No. CP95–284–000]

Take notice that on March 24, 1995,

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation

(National), 10 Lafayette Square, Buffalo,

New York 14203, filed in Docket No.

CP95–284–000 an application pursuant

to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act for

permission and approval to abandon a

natural gas transportation service,

authorized in Docket No. CP76–492–031

and –032,1 all as more fully set forth in

the application on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

National proposes to abandon a

transportation service which it provides

to UGI Utilities, Inc. (UGI), pursuant to

a transportation agreement dated

October 3, 1984. National states that the

transportation agreement is on file as

Rate Schedule X–30 of its FERC Gas

Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 2.

National further states that the proposed

termination is requested due to a

written termination notice by UPI dated

March 24, 1994, which cites April 1,

1995, as the contractual date of

termination.

National states that the service to be

abandoned involves the transportation

for injection of up to 19,019 Mcf per day

on a firm basis and the withdrawal of up

to 25,358 Mcf per day on an

interruptible basis through National

Fuel’s Ellisburg-First Fork pipeline. It is

indicated that the service involves gas

stored with Penn-York Energy

Corporation in the East Independence,

West Independence and Beech Hill

storage pools in Allegany County, New

York.

Comment date: April 25, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

2. Mississippi River Transmission

Corporation

[Docket No. CP95–290–000]

Take notice that on March 30, 1995,

Mississippi River Transmission

Corporation (MRT), 9900 Clayton Road,

St. Louis, Missouri 63214, filed in

Docket No. CP95–290–000 a request

pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas

Act, as amended, and Sections 157.205

and 157.216(b) for authorization to

abandon certain lateral lines, sales taps

and related facilities and equipment

which have been used to serve Illinois

Terminal Railroad Company (Terminal

Railroad) and Missouri Portland Cement

Company (Missouri Portland), pursuant

to MRT’s blanket authorization issued

in Docket No. CP82–489–000, all as

more fully described in the request

which is on file with the Commission

and open for public inspection. MRT

also proposes to abandon service to

these two customers.

MRT proposes to abandon

approximately 60 feet of Line A–108

pipeline in Madison County, Illinois

used to serve Terminal Railroad and

approximately 2,337 feet of Line A–123

pipeline in St. Louis City, Missouri,

used to serve Missouri Portland.

MRT proposes to blind off at the tap

valve the metering and regulating

stations of Terminal Railroad and

Missouri Portland and remove all the

above ground facilities. It is further

stated that MRT proposes to abandon in

place all the underground pipe.

Comment date: May 19, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph G

at the end of this notice.

3. Colorado Interstate Gas Company

[Docket No. CP95–293–000]

Take notice that on March 31, 1995,

Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG),

P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs,

Colorado 80944, filed in Docket No.

CP95–293–000 an application pursuant

to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act for

permission and approval to abandon a

firm gas transportation service for

Coastal Chem, Inc. (Coastal Chem),

which was authorized in Docket No.

CP82–483 et. al., all as more fully set

forth in the application on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

CIG states that it proposes to abandon

a certificated agreement related to the

transportation of natural gas by CIG for

Coastal Chem. CIG states that the

agreement, dated March 16, 1982, as

amended, constitutes CIG’s Rate

Schedule X–44 of its FERC Gas Tariff,

Original Volume No. 2.

CIG states that Coastal Chem has

agreed for CIG to terminate the March

16, 1982 transportation agreement. CIG

states that it will continue to provide

transportation service for Coastal Chem

pursuant to its open access certificate.

CIG further states that it does not

propose to abandon any facilities as a

result of the authorization requested

herein and that CIG will continue to use

these facilities for open access

transportation service.

Comment date: April 25, 1995, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

F. Any person desiring to be heard or

to make any protest with reference to

said application should on or before the

comment date, file with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC. 20426, a motion to

intervene or a protest in accordance

with the requirements of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211)

and the Regulations under the Natural

Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). All protests

filed with the Commission will be

considered by it in determining the

appropriate action to be taken but will

not serve to make the protestants parties

to the proceeding. Any person wishing

to become a party to a proceeding or to

participate as a party in any hearing

therein must file a motion to intervene

in accordance with the Commission’s

Rules.

Take further notice that, pursuant to

the authority contained in and subject to

the jurisdiction conferred upon the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas

Act and the Commission’s Rules of

Practice and Procedure, a hearing will

be held without further notice before the

Commission or its designee on this

application if no motion to intervene is

filed within the time required herein, if

the Commission on its own review of

the matter finds that a grant of the

certificate and/or permission and

approval for the proposed abandonment

are required by the public convenience

and necessity. If a motion for leave to

intervene is timely filed, or if the

Commission on its own motion believes

that a formal hearing is required, further

notice of such hearing will be duly

given.