RSR Corporation

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF RSR CORPORATION Docket 8959. Order, July 28, 1976 Order to show cause and order granting temporary in camera treatment. Appearances For the Commission: K. Keith Thurman, James C. Egan and Annthalia Lingos.

For the respondent: Robert L. Wald, Wald, Harkrader & Ross, Washington, D. C. Merrill L. Hartman, Hewett, Johnson, Swanson & Barbee, Dallas, Tex.

ORDER To SHOW CAUSE AND ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY In Camera TREATMENT On July 22, 1976, respondent filed a document styled “Motion to Strike Pages 19 through 25 of ‘Complaint Counsel’s Reply Brief.” Respondent requested expedited treatment of its motion, alleging that the pages sought to be expunged contained information contained in in camera portions of the record in this proceeding. The Commission has not as yet determined what disposition it will make of respondent’s motion. However, pending a determination as to the alleged in camera status of the information contained in complaint counsel’s brief it will order that this brief be maintained in the in camera portion of the docket of this case. The Commission notes, however, that in camera treatment should be granted sparingly. If respondent’s allegation of 7n camera status is meant seriously as a separate claim from its motion to strike, respondent should specify within 15 days precisely those portions of pp. 19-25 which it believes should be maintained in camera, in the event that the motion to strike is not granted.

In addition, the Commission notes that the in camera findings of the administrative law judge filed in this matter contain information pertaining to market shares of RSR and Quemetco in 1971 and 1972 (I.D. 246-248, 256-258) and pertaining to the distances to which various plants of RSR and Quemetco shipped lead in those same years. (I.D. 217-218, 228) There is an obvious and substantial public interest in having decisions of the Commission contain, for public inspection and review, all information relevant to the Commission’s determination. In light of this public interest, and in light of the fact that the information contained in camera is four to five years old, the Commission will order the parties within 15 days to show cause as to why the information RSR CORPORATION 207 206 Order described below, to the extent that the Commission may determine it to be relevant, should not be made available to the public in the opinion of the Commission rendered in this matter. Therefore, It is ordered, That the parties shall, within 15 days, file memoranda indicating for what reason, if any, the following categories of information may not be included in the opinion of the Commission in this matter and be made available to the public: (1) In camera findings of the administrative law judge Nos. 246-248, 256-258 (whether or not CX 64 is placed on the public record). (2) In camera findings of the administrative law judge 217-218, and 223, as well as other shipping distance figures derivable from CX 69-77, 79, including average plant shipping distance, percentage of plant production shipped to various States, and percentage of plant production shipped various distances.

It is further ordered, That pages 19-25 of complaint counsel’s Reply Brief in this matter shall be maintained in the in camera portion of the record, pending Commission resolution of respondent’s “Motion to Strike.”

Order 88 F.T.C.