Case No. RR300-00247

December 12, 1997

DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Motions for Reconsideration

Name of Movants: Gulf Oil Corp. / Interstate Gulf

Gulf Oil Corp. / Columbus Gulf #1

Date of Filing: March 24, 1993

Case Numbers: RR300-00247

RR300-00248

The Office of Hearings and Appeals issued a Decision and Order regarding twelve Applications for Refund submitted by Harold L. Burrell in the Gulf Oil Corporation overcharge refund proceeding. Gulf Oil Corporation / Burrell’s Fuel Co., et al., Case No. RF300- 14881, et al (Burrell’s Fuel Co.). (March 15, 1993). In Burrell’s Fuel Co., we granted an Application for Refund filed by Mr. Burrell for Burrell’s Fuels, a Gulf distributorship. We also denied eleven Applications filed by Mr. Burrell, representing Gulf products purchased by various gas stations. Mr. Burrell submitted this Motion to request that we reconsider our previous decision and grant Burrell’s Fuels a refund for two of the original Applicants, Interstate Gulf (Case No. RF300-14882) and Columbus Gulf #1 (Case No. RF300-14883). As explained below, we will reaffirm our previous decision and deny the Motion for Reconsideration.

In our initial decision, we found that Mr. Burrell was authorized to file an Application for Refund for Burrell’s Fuel Company (Case No. RF300-14858). Our finding was based on documentary materials submitted by Mr. Burrell that indicated his affiliation with the distributorship.

For the other eleven applications, Mr. Burrell claimed that he was the "owner of several gas stations in the North Carolina area." The gas stations he claimed were listed in the Gulf customer listing under the names of various individuals, but not Mr. Burrell. Mr. Burrell claimed that the accounts for each station were kept under the name of "employee/managers" who were hired by Mr. Burrell’s company to operate the stations. According to Mr. Burrell, these employee/managers were paid by Mr. Burrell on a commission basis.Burrell’s Fuel Co. at 3.

Mr. Burrell, however, did not submit any materials to support his claims. We therefore concluded that:

Mr. Burrell … has not submitted any documentation which would show that Burrell’s Fuels owned or leased any Gulf service stations. Furthermore, Mr. Burrell has not shown that Burrell’s Fuels purchased Gulf petroleum products for any of these service stations for which he is applying. Without any demonstration that Burrell’s Fuels is the proper party to receive the refund for these service stations, we cannot grant the 11 Applications for Refund.

The goal of the Gulf refund proceeding is to provide restitution to claimants who are able to demonstrate that they were injured as a result of Gulf’s alleged overcharges. Gulf at 88,736. Since we have no reasonable evidence in the present record that Burrell’s Fuels actually purchased Gulf products for any of these service stations during the refund period, we cannot conclude that granting these refunds would constitute restitution for Gulf’s alleged overcharges. Accordingly, the other 11 Applications for Refund filed by Mr. Harold Burrell on behalf of Burrell’s Fuels will be denied.

Burrell’s Fuel Co. at 4.

With his Motion for Reconsideration, Mr. Burrell has submitted five documents that he believes will support his claim for the eleven gas stations. The documents are:

  1. A deed dated February 24, 1966, from Perry Earle Christopher to Butler’s Fuels, Inc., conveying a tract of land near Landrum, South Carolina. The deed conveys a tract of land, according to Mr. Burrell, where the gas station known as Interstate Gulf was located.
  2. The articles of incorporation of Burrell’s Fuels, Inc., dated March 25, 1970. The articles list Theodore L. Burrell, Harold L. Burrell, and Elizabeth R. Burrell as incorporators.
  3. A sales agreement, dated April 10, 1970, between Faye E. Butler, Jack Butler, William E. Butler, Nora S. Butler, and Susan Butler Cucchiaro, sellers, and Theodore Butler of Tryon, North Carolina, buyer. The agreement conveys all of the assets and capital stock of Butler’s Fuels, Inc. to the buyer. According to Mr. Burrell, the assets include the tract of land described in Item 1, above.
  4. A deed, dated July 8, 1975, from Gulf Oil Corporation to Burrell’s Fuels, Inc., conveying a tract of land at 100 New Market Road, Tryon, North Carolina. The tract of land was the site of the gas station known variously as Steve Foster Gulf and Sitton’s Gulf was located.
  5. A deed, dated June 20, 1977, from Gulf Oil Corporation to Harold L. Burrell and Elizabeth R. Burrell, conveying a tract of land located at the intersection of North Carolina Highway 108 and Interstate Highway 26, Columbus, North Carolina. The tract of land was the site of the gas station known as Columbus Gulf was located.

The documentation submitted by Mr. Burrell indicates that Burrell’s Fuels owned several parcels of real estate on which gas stations were located. The documentation does not show, however, that Burrell’s Fuels purchased Gulf products for the gas stations, or incurred injury from overcharges in the sales of Gulf products by those stations. Consequently, we cannot find that Burrell’s Fuels is the proper recipient of a refund for overcharges incurred by the gas stations in question. We will therefore deny these Motions.

It Is Therefore Ordered That:

(1) The Motions for Reconsideration filed by Harold L. Burrell for Interstate Gulf (Case No. RR300-00247) and Columbus Gulf #1 (Case NO. RR300-00248) are hereby denied.

(2) This is a final Order of the Department of Energy.

George B. Breznay

Director

Office of Hearings and Appeals

Date: December 12, 1997