O R ,. G r ~.¡~ , . - Jd~J~&L
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

)
 In the Matter of
 ) 

)
 McWANE, INC.,
 )


a corporation, and DOCKET NO. 9351
 ) 

) STAR PIPE PRODUCTS, LTD., )

a limited parnership, )


Respondents.
 ) 

) 

ORDER ON NON-PARTIES' MOTIONS FOR IN CAMERA TREATMENT 

I. 

Pursuant to Rule 3.45(b) of 
 the Commission's Rules of 
 Practice and the Scheduling Order entered in this matter, several non-parties filed motions for 
 in camera treatment for 

materials that the parties have listed on their exhibit lists as materials that might be introduced 

at trial in this matter. Neither Complaint Counsel nor Respondent have filed an opposition to 

any of the motions addressed below filed by the non-parties. 

II. 

Under Rule 3.45(b) of the Federal Trade Commission's Rules of 
 Practice, the 

Administrative Law Judge may order that material offered into evidence "be placed in camera 

only after finding that its public disclosure wil 
 likely result in a clearly defined, serious injury 

to the person, parnership or corporation requesting in camera treatment or after finding that 

the material constitutes sensitive personal information." 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b). Applicants for 

in camera treatment must "make a clear showing that the information concerned is ­

sufficiently secret and sufficiently material to their business that disclosure would result in 

serious competitive injury." In re General Foods Corp., 95 F.T.C. 352, 355 (1980). 

"(R)equests for in camera treatment must show 'that the public disclosure of 
 the documentary 

evidence wil result in a clearly defined, serious injury to the person or corporation whose 

records are involved.''' In re Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp., 103F.T.C. 500, 500 (1984), 

quoting In re H P. Hood & Sons, Inc., 58 F.T.C. 1184, 1188 (1961). If 
 the applicants for in 

camera treatment make this showing, the importance of the information in explaining the 

rationale of decisions at the Commission is "the principal countervailng consideration 

weighing in favor of 
 disclosure." In re General Foods Corp., 95 F.T.C. at 355. 
The Federal Trade Commission recognizes the "substantial public interest in holding 

all aspects of adjudicative proceedings, including the evidence adduced therein, open to all 

interested persons." Hood, 58 F.T.C. at 1186. A full and open record ofthe adjudicative 

proceedings promotes public understanding of decisions at the Commission. In re BristolMyers Co., 90 F.T.C. 455,458 (1977). A full and open record also provides guidance to 

persons affected by its actions and helps to deter potential violators of the laws the 

Commission enforces. Hood, 58 F.T.C. at 1186. The burden of showing good cause for 

withholding documents from the public record rests with the party requesting that documents 

be placed in camera. Id. at 1188. Moreover, there is a presumption thatin camera treatment 

wil not be granted for information that is more than three years old. Conference Interpreters, 

1996 FTC LEXIS 298, at *15 (citing General Foods, 95 F.T.C. at 353; Crown Cork, 71 

F.T.C. at 1715). However, a request for in camera treatment by a non-party warrants "special 

solicitude." In re Crown Cork & Seal Co., 71 F.T.C. .1714, 1715 (1967). 

Under Commission Rule 3.45(b)(3), indefinite in camera treatment is warranted only 

"in unusual circumstances," including circumstances in which "the need for confidentiality of 

the material. . . is not likely to decrease over time." 16 C.F.R. § 3.45(b)(3). The Commission 

has nonetheless recognized that "in some unusual cases 'the competitive sensitivity or the 

proprietary value of the information for which in camera treatment is requested wil not 

necessarily diminish, and may actually increase, with the passage of 
 time.''' In re Coca-Cola 

Co., 1990 FTC LEXIS 364, at *7 (Oct. 17, 1990) (quoting Commission comments on 

amendments to the Rule). In determining the length of time for which in camera treatment is 

appropriate, the distinction between trade secrets and ordinary business records is important 

since ordinary business records are granted less protection than trade secrets. See Hood, 58 

F.T.C. at 1189. "Trade secrets" are primarily limited to secret formulas, processes, and other 

secret technical information. Id.; General Foods, 95 F.T.C. at 352. "Ordinary business 

records" includes names of customers, prices to certain customers, and costs of doing business 

and profits. Hood, 58 F.T.C. at 1189. 

The Commission has recognized that it may be appropriate to provide in camera 

treatment for certain business records. In re Champion Spark Plug Co., 1982 FTC LEXIS 85, 

at *2 (April 
 5, 1982); see Hood, 58 F.T.C. at 1188-89; Kaiser Aluminum, 103 F.T.C. at 500. 

Where in camera treatment is granted for business records, such as business strategies, 

marketing plans, pricing policies, or sales documents, it is typically provided for two to five 

years. E.g., In re Union Oil Co. of 
 Cal., 2004 FTC LEXIS 223, at *2 (Nov. 22, 2004); In re 

Int 'i Ass 'n of Conference Interpreters, 1996 FTC LEXIS 298, at * 13-14 (June 26, 1996); 

Champion Spark Plug, 1982 FTC LEXIS 85 at *2 and 1982 FTC LEXIS 92, at *2 (March 4, 

1982). 

In order to sustain the burden for withholding documents from the public record, an 

affidavit or declaration is required demonstrating that a document is sufficiently secret and 

sufficiently material to the applicant's business that disclosure would result in serious 

competitive injury. See In re North Texas Specialty Physicians, 2004 FTC LEXIS 109, at *2­

3 (Apr. 23, 2004). To overcome the presumption that in camera treatment wil not be granted 

for information that is more than three years old, applicants seeking in camera treatment for 

2
 
such documents must also demonstrate, by affidavit or declaration, that such material remains 

competitively sensitive. In addition, to properly evaluate requests for in camera treatment, 

applicants for in camera treatment must provide a copy of the documents for which they seek 

in camera treatment to the Administrative Law Judge for review. 

III. 

As set forth below, each of 
 the non-parties filed separate motions for in camera 

treatment. Each motion was supported by an affidavit or declaration of an individual within 

the company who had reviewed the documents. These affidavits and declarations supported 

the applicants' claims that the documents are sufficiently secret and sufficiently material to 

their businesses that disclosure would result in serious competitive injury. That showing was 

then balanced against the importance of the information in explaining the rationale of 

decisions at the Commission. The motions attached the documents or deposition testimony 

for which in camera treatment was sought. Where in camera treatment for deposition 

testimony was sought, non-parties narrowed their requests to specific page and line numbers. 

The specific motions of each ofthe non-parties are analyzed using the standards set forth 

above and are addressed below in alphabetical order. 

A. 

American Cast Iron Pipe Company ("ACIPCO"): 

Non-party ACIPCO seeks in camera treatment for several documents that Complaint 

Counsel intends to introduce into evidence. ACIPCO seeks in camera treatment for 

documents in the following categories: 1) documents showing sales data including types of 

customers, total sales figures, and total tonnage sold; 2) emails and attachments regarding 

business strategies, pricing negotiations, purchase data; and 3) voluminous spreadsheets 

containing information relating to ACIPCO's fittings sales. ACIPCO seeks in camera 

treatment for a period of five years for all but two of these proposed exhibits and indefinite in 

camera treatment for CX2295 and CX2296 because such exhibits contain lists of ACIPCO's 

customers. 

ACIPCO supports its motion with an affidavit from its Vice President of Sales and 

Secretary. The affidavit describes in detail the confidential nature of the documents, which 

contain customer data, pricing and cost information, business strategies, and negotiating 

strategies. The affidavit also describes in detail the measures that ACIPCO has taken to 

protect the confidentiality of the documents for which ACIPCO seeks in camera treatment 

and explains the competitive harm ACIPCO would suffer if such documents were made 

publicly available. Accordingly, ACIPCO has met its burden of demonstrating that the 

materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such protection. However, 

ACIPCO has not met its burden of demonstrating that CX2295 and CX2296, which consist of 

ordinary business records, are entitled to indefinite in camera treatment. 

3 
In camera treatment, for a period of five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is 

GRANTED for the documents identified as: CX1894, CX1895, CX1902, CX1907, CX1924, 

CX2295, and CX2296. 

B. 

Electrosteel USA, LLC ("Electrosteel"): 

Non-party Electrosteel seeks in camera treatment for several documents and
 

deposition excerpts that Complaint Counsel and Respondent have designated for possible
 

introduction into evidence. The materials for which Electrosteel seeks in camera treatment
 

contain detailed customer sales data and emails regarding business plan strategies.
 

Electrosteel seeks in camera treatment for a period of 
 five years. 

Electrosteel supports its motion with a declaration from its Business Development 

Manager. The declaration describes in detail the confidential nature of the documents, which 

contain customer data, pricing and cost information, business and negotiating strategies, and 

proprietary information relating to Electrosteel' s financial status. The declaration also 

describes in detail the measures that Electrosteel has taken to protect the confidentiality of the 

documents for which Electrosteel seeks in camera treatment and explains the competitive 

harm Electrosteel would suffer if such documents were made publicly available. With respect 

to the deposition testimony for which Electrosteel seeks in camera treatment, Electrosteel has 

narrowed its request to selected excerpts. Accordingly, Electrosteel has met its burden of 

demonstrating that the materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such 

protection. 

In camera treatment, for a period of five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is
 

GRANTED for the documents identified as: CX1546, CX1549, CX1553, and RX0384
 

(ESMCW0000002). In addition, in camera treatment for a period of 
 five years is granted to the following excerpts from the deposition of 
 Danny Swalley (CX2SOO): 252: 13-252:22; 

74:24-78:19; 185:19-23; 221:25-232:15; 71:6-19; 183:19-185:19.
 

c. 

Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. ("Ferguson"): 

Non-party Ferguson seeks in camera treatment for several business documents and 

emails that Complaint Counsel and Respondent have designated for possible introduction into 

evidence. The materials for which Ferguson seeks in camera treatment contain information 

on pricing and negotiation strategies. Ferguson seeks in camera treatment for a period of 
 five 

years. 

Ferguson supports its motion with an affidavit from its Vice President of 
 Waterworks 

Division. The affidavit describes in detail the confidential nature of the documents, which 

contain rebate terms with its suppliers and the share of each supplier's product sold by 

Ferguson. The affidavit also describes in detail the measures that Ferguson has taken to 

4
 
protect the confidentiality of 
 the documents for which Ferguson seeks in camera treatment 

and explains the competitive harm Ferguson would suffer if such documents were made 

publicly available. Accordingly, Ferguson has met its burden of demonstrating that the
 

materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such protection.
 

In camera treatment, for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is 

GRANTED for the documents identified as: CX0500, CX0502, CX0504, CX0509, CX0510, 

CX2276, and CX2277. 

D. 

Griffin Pipe Products ("GPP") 

Non-party GPP seeks in camera treatment for two documents and a deposition
 

transcript that Complaint Counsel and Respondent intend to introduce into evidence. The
 

materials for which GPP seeks in camera treatment contain competitively sensitive
 

information. GPP is seeking in camera treatment for an indefinite period for all documents
 

listed in its motion.
 

GPP supports its motion with a declaration from its Controller. The declaration
 

describes in detail the confidential nature of the documents which contain detailed
 

information regarding GPP's purchases and sales, including names and locations of GPP's
 

customers and the nature and specifics of 
 payments made by GPP's customers to GPP. The
 

declaration also describes in detail the measures that GPP has taken to protect the
 

confidentiality of 
 the documents for which GPP seeks in camera treatment and explains the 

competitive harm GPP would suffer if such documents were made publicly available. 

Accordingly, with respect to the two documents, GPP has met its burden of demonstrating 

that the materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such protection. 

With respect to the transcript of 
 the deposition testimony of 
 Douglas Kuhrts, designated as 

CX2508, although GPP requested in camera treatment for the entire transcript, in the 

alternative, GPP requested in camera treatment for selected excerpts of 
 the deposition 

transcript. GPP has met its burden of demonstrating that the materials for which it seeks in 

camera treatment should be given such protection. 

However, GPP has not met its burden of demonstrating that its materials, which 

consist of ordinary business records, are entitled to indefinite in camera treatment. 

Accordingly, in camera treatment, for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1,2017, 

is GRANTED for the documents identified as: CX2258 and CX2259. With respect to the 

deposition testimony, GPP's alternative request is GRANTED and the following excerpts 

from CX2508 wil be given in camera treatment for a period of five years, to expire on 

September 1,2017: 19:17-21 :17; 22:5-27:7; 30:15-31 :16; 31 :20; 32:2-10; 40:16-41 :17; 42:13­

45:5; 48:23-50:3; 50:5-21; 54:5-10; 54:12-55:15; 73:21-74:7; 83:13-85:17; 21:18-22; 27:8­

30:13; 33:2-36:14; 38:12-16; 38:23-39:11; 45:6-48:22; 51 :17-53:22; 55:16-65:5; 72:5-73:20;
 

74:12-81:11; and 85:18-86:22.
 

5 
E. 

Illnois Meter, Inc. ("Illnois Meter") 

Non-party Ilinois Meter seeks in camera treatment for excerpts from the transcripts of 

the deposition of 
 Dennis Sheley, taken on January 11, 2012 and Apri124, 2012, which 

Complaint Counsel and Respondent have designated for possible introduction into evidence. 

Ilinois Meter is seeking in camera treatment for a period of ten years. 

Ilinois Meter supports its motion with a declaration from its President and Chief 

Operating Officer. The information Ilinois Meter seeks to protect from disclosure is 

proprietary information regarding gross sales, percentage of mark-up or profit, inventory 

levels, volume of sales of paricular inventory items, and other financial and sales information 

that would be of benefit to competitors of Ilinois Meter. The declaration states that the 

material sought to be withheld from the public record reveals current operating data and that 

the data is only known to a select few and trusted employees. 

The information for which Ilinois Meter seeks in camera treatment consists of
 

ordinary business records, which are typically given in camera protection for a period oftwo
 

to five years. Ilinois Meter has met its burden of demonstrating that the materials for which
 

it seeks in camera treatment should be given in camera protection, but has not demonstrated a 

sufficient basis for extending such protection for a period often years. Accordingly, in 

camera treatment, for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1,2017, is GRANTED 

for these selected excerpts of 
 the deposition transcripts of 
 Dennis Sheley: CX2515 (10:9-15; 

11:8-15; 25:5-17,18-25; 26:1-25; 27:1-10; 33:4-7,13-14; 34:23; 35:3; 41:20-22; 52:1-4; 

53:10; 69:8-9,13,16,19-23; 70:1-4,14-16,23; 73:1-11; 74:4; 101:1-7; 102:17; 129:24-25;
 

130:1-9); and CX2516 (9:7-9; 12:19-24; 13:1-12; 14:9-12, 17; 16:1; 18:19-20; 26:22; 27:6-7, 

10-11, 13; 33:2-16; 37:7; 39:7-8; 43:13; 58:12; 62:11-13; 72:7-8, 13; 73:4,8; 85:19-21; 86:11­

13,21; 87:13-14, 18-20; 89:4-9, 14, 16; 90:15; 121:12-13; 122:9-11; 124:21-23; 126:20; 

154:23; 158:17-19; 163:7, 12,20; 164:13,18,23-24; 165:1).
 

F. 

Metalfit, Inc. ("Metalfit") 

Non-party Metalfit seeks in camera treatment for two documents that have been 

designated by Complaint Counsel for possible introduction into evidence. The documents for 

which Metalfit seeks in camera treatment contain competitively sensitive information. 

Metalfit is seeking in camera treatment for an indefinite period for both documents. 

Metalfit supports its motion with a declaration from its Vice President and Co-Owner. 

The documents for which it seeks in camera treatment contain information regarding gross 

sales, pricing practices, and sales to specific customers. The declaration describes the 

measures that Metalfit has taken to protect the confidentiality of the documents for which 

Metalfit seeks in camera treatment and explains the competitive harm Metalfit would suffer if 

6
 
such documents were made publicly available. Metalfit has met its burden of demonstrating 

that the materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such protection. 

However, Metalfit has not met its burden of demonstrating that its materials, which
 

consist of ordinary business records, are entitled to indefinite in camera treatment.
 

Accordingly, in camera treatment, for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, 

is GRANTED for the documents identified as: CX1776 and CX1777. 

G. 

Serrampore Industries Private ("SIP Industries") 

Non-pary SIP Industries seeks in camera treatment for several documents and
 

deposition excerpts that Complaint Counsel and Respondent have designated for possible
 

introduction into evidence. SIP Industres seeks in camera treatment for documents that
 

contain sales data, negotiations on business dealings, business costs, meetings with potential
 

customers, and pricing procedures. SIP Industries seeks in camera treatment for periods of
 

three to five years.
 

SIP Industries supports its motion with a declaration from its Vice President-Business 

Development. The declaration describes the documents for which SIP Industres seeks in 

camera treatment as containing proprietary business information regarding SIP Industries' 

business, which if disclosed could be misused by SIP Industries' competitors and customers. 

The declaration also describes in detail the measures that SIP Industries has taken to protect 

the confidentiality of the documents for which SIP Industries seeks in camera treatment and 

explains the competitive harm SIP Industres would suffer if such documents were made 

publicly available. Accordingly, SIP Industries has met its burden of demonstrating that the 

materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such protection. 

Although SIP Industries requests in camera treatment for a period of three to five 

years, in order to make the expiration date of in camera treatment consistent across exhibits 

provided by non-parties, which establishes consistency and furthers administrative 1 in camera treatment for a period of five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is efficiency, 

GRANTED for the documents identified as: CX0003, CX0004, CX0005, CX0007, and 

RX0369 (SIP Industries Fitting Sales 2008-2011). In addition, in camera treatment for a 

period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is GRANTED for the following excerpts. 

of deposition testimony in CX2521 (61 :14-62:15; 62:16-18; 62:19-63:5; 63:17-64:1; 122:22­

123:14; 123:15-124:21; 215:25-216:8; 167:8-169:15; 182:3-183:19; 192:23-193:4; 193:5-18;
 

206:25-207:24; 207:25-208:5; 208:6-25; 209:1-209:13; 210:3-211:20; 11:21-14:3; 18:10­

21 :23; 23:12-24:18; 24:25-25:25; 27:5-23; 30:5-31 :5; 31 :11-18; 32:20-33:12; 34:20-22; 37:9­

14; 65:25-66: 18; 74:25-75:16; 75:17-75:23; 75:24-80:3; 80:4-80:6; 80:7-82:4; 84:19-85:17; 

97:15-99:4; 99:5-99:10; 106:15-107:3; 126:10-128:7; 129:2-130:23; 131:7-9; 132:2-135:5;
 

136:7:-138:22; 138:23-139:17; 141 :19-143:4; 143:11-21; 144:1-9; 144: 10-145:3; 145:4­

146:17; 146:18-147:3;148:2-150:5; 150:6-8; 150:9-151:2; 151:3-152:19; 152:20-153:16;
 

154:23-157:7; 158:9-162:23; 162:24-163:12; 163:13-165:10; 165:11-166:20; 166:24-167:7;
 

i See In re ProMediea Health Sys., 2011 FTC LEXIS 101, *20 n.1 (May 25,2011). 

7
 
169:16-170:8; 170:19:-176:16; 176:17-22; 176:23-177:6; 177:7-178:8; 178:9-180:25; 181 :1­

16; 183:20-185:3; 185:4-186:22; 186:23-187:4; 187:5-12;188:2-6; 188:7-189:10; 189:16­

190:4; 190:5-11; 190:15-191:2; 194:24-197:18; 199:21-201:12; 201:16-203:11; 212:2-15; 

212:16-213:12; 213:13-20; 213:21-214:4) and in CX2522 (12:6-13:13; 43:16-18; 43:19­

44:21; 45:8-46:6; 49:24-50:7; 81:14-82:19; 89:1-6; 14:23-15:16; 7:1-18:6; 23:24-24:7; 38:15­

23; 39:24-40:23; 73:17-25; 111:15-23; 112:6-20; 20:10-21:2; 21:3-15; 21:16-22:16; 29:8­

30:2; 30:4-31:6; 55:23-56:5; 56:17-21; 57:12-58:6; 58:19-59:19; 59:22-61:15; 62:22-64:20; 

66:21-68:10; 68:11-69:5; 75:18-77:2; 77:3-78:5; 78:13-22; 80:7-81:3; 82:24- 83:6; 85:5-10; 

89:13-25; 90:1-12; 90:15-91:18; 92:9-93:11; 93:15-24; 93:25-94:17; 95:5-96:25; 97:1-22; 

97:23-98:18; 98:19-23; 100:17-104:16; 104:25-105:1; 106:25-107:22; 108:3-109:14; 109:15­

110:5; 110:11-111:3; 111:6-111:14; 114:5-115:8; 115:9-117:6).
 

H. 

SIGMA Corporation ("SIGMA") 

Non-pary SIGMA seeks in camera treatment for numerous documents that Complaint 

Counsel and Respondent have identified for possible introduction into evidence. SIGMA 

seeks in camera treatment for documents in the following categories: 1) documents that 

contain strategic planning and market share information; and 2) documents that contain 

sensitive financial information of SIGMA. SIGMA seeks in camera treatment for a period of 

two years. 

SIGMA supports its motion with a declaration from its Chairman and Chief 
 Executive 

Officer. The declaration describes in detail the highly sensitive nature of the information 

related to SIGMA's financial information and SIGMA's strategic planning initiatives for the 

future of the company. The declaration also describes in detail the measures that SIGMA has 

taken to protect the confidentiality of the documents for which SIGMA seeks in camera 

treatment and explains the competitive har SIGMA would suffer if such documents were 

made publicly available. SIGMA narowed its request for in camera treatment from the 

almost 500 documents provided by SIGMA and designated for use as potential hearng 

txhibits, to a select group of just over 30 documents. Accordingly, SIGMA has met its 

burden of demonstrating that the materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be 

given such protection. 

Although SIGMA requests in camera treatment for a period of only two years, in 

order to make the expiration date of in camera treatment consistent across exhibits provided 

by non-parties, which establishes consistency and furthers administrative efficiency, in 

camera treatment for a period of five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is GRANTED 

for the documents identified as: CX0938, CX1748, CX1749, CX1750, CX2026, CX2407, 

CX2408, CX2409, CX241O, CX2411, CX2412, CX2413, CX2414, CX2420, CX2421, 

CX2422, CX2423, CX2424, CX2425, CX2426, CX2427, CX2460, CX2461, CX2462, 

CX2463, CX2464, CX2465, CX2466, CX2467, RX0126, RX0163, RX0242, and RX0383. In
 

addition, in camera treatment, for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1,2017, is 

8 
GRANTED for parts of 
 the following documents: CX0086; CXI022; CX1651; and
 

CX1997.2
 

I. 

Star Pipe Products, Ltd. ("Star") 

Non-pary Star3 seeks in camera treatment for numerous documents and deposition 

excerpts that have been designated by Complaint Counsel and Respondent for possible 

introduction into evidence. Star seeks in camera treatment for documents in the following 

categories: 1) internal communications, analyses, and other sensitive internal financial 

profitability and sales information, including specific customer information and rebating 

practices; 2) internal correspondence and analyses, agreement and costing documents, and 

marketing strategies; and 3) excerpts from deposition testimony that reveal internal business 

strategies and principles and policies for dealing with customers and competing in the 

marketplace. For each of 
 the documents in these categories, Star seeks in camera treatment 

for a period of five years. 

Star supports its motion with a declaration from its Vice President of 
 Finance. The 

declaration describes in detail the highly sensitive nature of 
 the information relating to Star's 

margins and other profitabilty information and information relating to Star's plans and 

business strategies for entering the market as a supplier of domestic ductile iron pipe fittings. 

The declaration also demonstrates that the documents and testimony for which Star seeks in 

camera treatment contain secret, competitively sensitive information, the disclosure of 
 which 

could cause serious competitive injury to Star, and describes in detail the measures that Star 

has taken to protect the confidentiality of such documents. Star narowed its request for in 

camera treatment from the almost 500 documents provided by Star and designated for use as 

potential hearing exhibits, to a more limited group of 86 documents. Accordingly, Star has 

met its burden of demonstrating that the materials for which it seeks in camera treatment 

should be given such protection. 

In camera treatment, for a period of five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is 

GRANTED for the documents identified in Star's motion. Because the number of exhibits to 

which in camera treatment has been granted is somewhat lengthy and because it is not clear 

from Star's motion the RX numbers that have been assigned to the documents listed in Star's 

motion, Complaint Counsel is hereby instructed to prepare a proposed order, with a signature 

line for the Administrative Law Judge, that lists by exhibit numbers the documents and 

deposition excerpts that, by this Order, have been granted in camera treatment. A subsequent 

order wil issue to identify Star's documents by exhibit number that have been granted in 

camera treatment by this Order. 

2 With respect to CX0086, CX1022, and CX1997, only the highlighted portions should be excluded from in 

camera treatment. With respect to CX1651, pages CX1651-010, 1651-020, and 1651-053, should be excluded 

from in camera treatment. 

3 Although Star is named as a Respondent in the caption in this matter, by Order dated February 23,2012, the 

Commission withdrew all claims against Star. 

9
 
J. 

The Distribution Group ("TDG") 

Non-party TDG seeks in camera treatment for several documents and deposition
 

excerpts Complaint Counsel and Respondent intend to introduce into evidence. The
 

documents contain quarerly reports, rebate information, payment terms, vendor and potential 

vendor identities and information, as well as other secret and material information. With 

respect to one document,TDG seeks in camera treatment for a period of 
 five years. With 

respect to the remaining documents listed in its motion, TDG seek indefinite in camera 

treatment. 

TDG supports its motion with a declaration from its President. The declaration 

. describes the highly confidential nature of the documents for which TDG seeks in camera 

treatment, which, among other things, reveal TDG's vendor program and rebate amounts and 

percentages. The declaration also describes in detail the measures that TDG has taken to 

protect the confidentiality of the documents for which TDG seeks in camera treatment and 

explains the competitive harm TDG would suffer if such documents were made publicly 

available. Accordingly, TDG has met its burden of demonstrating that the materials for which 

it seeks in camera treatment should be given such protection. 

However, TDG has not met its burden of demonstrating that its materials, which
 

consist of ordinary business records, are entitled to indefinite in camera treatment.
 

Accordingly, in camera treatment, for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, 

is GRANTED for: CX1361, RX0132 (TDGOOOI43-145), RX0220 (TDG000230-233), 

RX0288 (TDGOOO 151-153), and to the following excerpts of deposition testimony in CX2493 

(6:11-21; 7:9-17; 8:20-9:12; 10:13-17) and in CX2494 (8-24; 20:4; 21:7-16; 27:5-8; 29:19­

30:9; 31:8-23; 31:24-32:25; 33:8-9; 37:9-25; 38:2-22; 46:15-25; 70:13-14; 73:15-22; 107:22­

24; 110:20-112:15; 113:4-8; 115:21-24; 128:9-129:1; 129:19-24).
 

K. 

United States Pipe and Foundry Company, LLC ("U.S. Pipe") 

Non-pary U.S. Pipe seeks in camera treatment for two exhibits that have been 

designated by Complaint Counsel for possible introduction into evidence. The documents are 

spreadsheets that contain highly confidential and competitively sensitive purchase and sales 

data. For each of these documents, U.S. Pipe seeks in camera treatment for a period of two 

years. 

U.S. Pipe supports its motion with a declaration from its Vice President of 
 Purchasing. 

The declaration describes the documents as containing recent, detailed purchase and sales data 

that is competitively sensitive. The declaration also describes the measures U.S. Pipe takes to 

hold this information in strict confidence and the competitive injury U.S. Pipe would suffer if 

these documents were publicly disclosed, Accordingly, U.S. Pipe has met its burden of 

10
 
demonstrating that the materials for which it seeks in camera treatment should be given such 

protection. 

Although U.S. Pipe requests in camera treatment for a period of only two years, in
 

order to make the expiration date of in camera treatment consistent across exhibits provided
 

by non-parties, which establishes consistency and furthers administrative efficiency, in
 

camera treatment for a period of 
 five years, to expire on September 1, 2017, is GRANTED
 

for the documents identified as CX1944 and CX1945.
 

iv. 

Each non-party that has documents or information that has been granted in camera 

treatment by this Order shall inform its testifyng current or former employees that in camera 

treatment has been provided for the material described in this Order. At the time that any 

documents that have been granted in camera treatment are offered into evidence or before any 

of the information contained therein is referred to in court, the parties shall identify such 

documents and the subject matter therein as in camera, inform the court reporter of 
 the trial exhibit number(s) of 
 such documents, and request that the hearing go into an in camera 

session. 

ORDERED: :DM ~fl,l 

D. Michael Chappell 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Date: August 17,2012 

11