With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (5th Cir.1967); Winona Indus., 257 N.L.R.B. 695, 697 n. 9 (1981); San Isabel Elec. Servs., 225 N.L.R.B. 1073, 1078 n. 6 (1976). 35 . Nothing in this opinion should be read to suggest that the presence of each of the factors identified herein is essential to the establishment of relevance in cases presenting similar issues. 36 . See Fawcett Printing Corp., 201 N.L.R.B. at 975. 37 . We express no view concerning how the balance between the parties’ interests should be struck in the event that no satisfactory conditions can be developed. 38 . 29 U.S.C. § 160(c) (1976); see International Union, UAAAIW v. NLRB, 427 F.2d 1330, 1331-32 (6th Cir.1970). 39 . See Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 252 N.L.R.B. 368, 368 (1980); cf. Detroit Edison Co. v. NLRB, 440 U.S. at 318-19, 99 S.Ct. at 1132-33 (<HOLDING>); United States v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.,

A: recognizing minnesotas interest in protecting the interests of the child
B: recognizing records material to selfdefense claim outweigh victims interest in confidentiality
C: recognizing employers interest in protecting confidentiality of data bearing on employees basic competence
D: recognizing strong public interest in maintaining confidentiality of official records concerning child abuse
C.