Goodin MacBride | Attorneys | Lawyers | Law Firm | San Francisco, California


T 415.392.7900
F 415.398.4321

505 Sansome Street
Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94111

22. United States Steel Corporation,
29 Cal. 3d 603 (1981), 629 P.2d 1381.
In a Commission proceeding considering exemption of private vessel commodities from minimum rate regulations (“MRT”), the Commission concluded that it need not consider the extent to which its decision would affect the ability of domestic steel producers to compete with foreign producers. The Court annulled the decision and held that the Commission should have assessed the economic impact of its action, pursuant to the Commission’s duty to consider all facts that might bear on the exercise of its discretion. The Court held that such a duty was inherent in the requirement of Section 1705 that the Commission decision contain separately stated Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on all material issues. The vitality of any evidentiary requirements governing what would today probably be deemed a rulemaking proceeding (subject to Section 1757.1) will have to be addressed by the Courts at some point.