[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 1995)] [Notices] [Pages 18396-18397] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 95-8896] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act AGENCY: Department of Education. ACTION: Notice of arbitration panel decision under the Randolph- Sheppard Act. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that on November 13, 1992, an arbitration panel [[Page 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 Vo-Tech, 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