Page images
PDF
EPUB

SUMMARY OF OPERATING, COSTS FISCAL YEAR 1961-COMPARISON WITH PRIOR YEARS BY PERCENT OF COST

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

Investigation and

litigation...

$1,693, 806 $1,711, 218 $1,685, 540 $1,554, 772 $1,753, 778 $2,539, 660

$2,692,270

Economic and financial

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Trade practice confer

ence and small

[blocks in formation]

LETTER TO ROBERT SKITOL, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL, FROM JOHN A. DELANEY, DATED JULY 22, 1969, RE AVERAGE NUMBER OF ATTORNEYS IN BUREAUS OF RESTRAINT OF TRADE, DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND TEXTILES AND FURS, FOR PERIODS JULY 1, 1961, TO JUNE 30, 1962 AND JULY 1, 1962, TO JUNE 30, 1963

ROBERT SKITOL,

Law Review Office, New York University Law School,
New York, N.Y.

JULY 22, 1969.

DEAR MR. SKITOL: On July 14, 1969, you asked me for information as to the average number of attorneys in our Bureaus of Restraint of Trade, Deceptive Practices and Textiles and Furs, for the two periods from July 1, 1961 to June 30, 1962 and July 1, 1962 to June 30, 1963.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Law Review Office, New York University Law School,
New York, N.Y.

DEAR MR. SKITOL: Enclosed is the remainder of the material requested in your letter of June 24, 1969, as amended by Mr. Pitofsky's letter of July 2, 1969.

You may remember that when we discussed Item No. 1 I told you we did not maintain the personnel folders of any of our accountants, economists or statisticians who left us, nor did we have any documents in regard to applicants sent to us by the Civil Service Commission who were not employed. The material submitted in response to Item No. 1 of your letter gives a brief sketch of all our currently employed economists, statisticians, and accountants, who have come with us during the last three years.

Sincerely yours,

JOHN A. DELANEY,

Director, Office of Administration.

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,
Chicago, Ill., June 24, 1969.

JOHN DELANEY, Esq.,

Federal Trade Commission,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. DELANEY: Several members of our Commission have asked me to request that additional information be furnished. The information requested is as follows:

1. In Item 7 of Robert Pitofsky's June 9, 1969 letter to John Buffington,' he requested the following:

1 (See incoming letter dated 7-2-69.) Only a composite of data in each category is requested. Law school affiliation, class standing, and law school apitude score requests withdrawn.

"A compilation of data for the present year and the past two years showing the following information with respect to each applicant to the FTC who accepted an offer of employment on the legal staff, or received and declined an offer:

(a) home state

(b) law school affiliation

(c) rough estimate of class standing

(d) law school aptitude score (when available).

We now request that the same information be made available with respect to economists, accountants, and statisticians who applied to and received or declined an offer of employment at the FTC.

2. With respect to senior staff personnel at the Commission, please indicate as to each the present age, total length of employment with the FTC (if interrupted, furnish total combined years of employment), home address prior to employment with the FTC, law school affiliation, and, if available, a rough estimate of class standing or other available pertinent data indicating law school record.

We hope you will use your good judgment in defining "senior staff" but, in any event, we wanted to include all Bureau and Section Chiefs and Assistant or Associate Bureau and Section Chiefs.

3. With respect to hearing examiners presently associated with the FTC, we would like to know the total number of hearing examiners on active duty.

With respect to each, please advise us of their average case load in the most recent year for which statistics are available and as to that year, the number of hearing and conference days and the general type of case with which each was involved.

4. With respect to hearing examiners presently affiliated, kindly furnish information showing age, length of FTC employment, home address prior to employment with the FTC, and employment record prior to appointment as a hearing examiner.1

I note that you sent us the two most recent "Workload and Manpower Quarterly Reports". I assume, in response to Item 3 of our June 9 letter, that you will be sending us reports for the remaining quarters in each of the past 4 years. Let me emphasize again that we would appreciate it if you would send material to us as soon as it is available.

Sincerely,

ROBERT SKITOL.
MICHELE BEIGEL.

ITEM NO. 1 OF MR. SKITOL'S LETTER OF JUNE 24, 1969

Date of entrance of duty in professional position: April 13, 1969.
Title and grade of position to which appointed: Economist, GS-11.

[blocks in formation]

Other information.-Appointed from Economist Register, CSC rating 83.0; Phi Kappa Phi; NDEA Fellowships; American Economics Association (Committee for Environmental Information).

Date of entrance of duty in professional position: March 9, 1969.

Title and grade of position to which appointed: Economist, GS-5.

College degrees: School, Howard University, degree, B.A.; Date, 1969; grade point average, 2.80.

Date of entrance of duty in professional position: November 22, 1967.

Title and grade of position to which appointed: Economist, GS-7.

« PreviousContinue »