[Federal Register: August 10, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 153)]
[Notices]
[Page 46474]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10au05-29]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ANTITRUST MODERNIZATION COMMISSION
Request for Public Comment
AGENCY: Antitrust Modernization Commission.
ACTION: Request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Antitrust Modernization Commission requests comments from
the public regarding specific questions relating to the issues selected
for Commission study.
DATES: Comments are due by September 30, 2005.
ADDRESSES: By electronic mail: comments@amc.gov. By mail: Antitrust
Modernization Commission, Attn: Public Comments, 1120 G Street, NW.,
Suite 810, Washington, DC 20005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew J. Heimert, Executive Director
& General Counsel, Antitrust Modernization Commission. Telephone: (202)
233-0701; e-mail: info@amc.gov. Internet: http://www.amc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Antitrust Modernization Commission was
established to ``examine whether the need exists to modernize the
antitrust laws and to identify and study related issues.'' Antitrust
Modernization Commission Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-273, Sec. 11053, 116
Stat. 1856. In conducting its review of the antitrust laws, the
Commission is required to ``solicit the views of all parties concerned
with the operation of the antitrust laws.'' Id. By this request for
comments, the Commission seeks to provide a full opportunity for
interested members of the public to provide input regarding certain
issues selected for Commission study. From time to time, the Commission
may issue additional requests for comment on issues selected for study.
Comments should be submitted in written form. Comments should
identify the topic to which it relates. Comments need not address every
question within the topic. Comments exceeding 1500 words should include
a brief (less than 250 word) summary. Commenters may submit additional
background materials (such as articles, data, or other information)
relating to the topic by separate attachment.
Comments should identify the person or organization submitting the
comments. If comments are submitted by an organization, the submission
should identify a contact person within the organization. Comments
should include the following contact information for the submitter: an
address, telephone number, and e-mail address (if available). Comments
submitted to the Commission will be made available to the public in
accordance with federal laws.
Comments may be submitted either in hard copy or electronic form.
Electronic submissions may be sent by electronic mail to
comments@amc.gov. Comments submitted in hard copy should be delivered
to the address specified above, and should enclose, if possible, a CD-
ROM or a 3\1/2\-inch computer diskette containing an electronic copy of
the comment. The Commission prefers to receive electronic documents
(whether by e-mail or on CD-ROM/diskette) in portable document format
(.pdf), but also will accept comments in Microsoft Word format.
The AMC has issued this request for comments pursuant to its
authorizing statute and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Antitrust
Modernization Commission Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-273, Sec. 11053, 116
Stat. 1758, 1856; Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., Sec.
10(a)(3).
Topic for Comment
The Commission requests comment on the following topic.
Criminal Remedies
1. In setting corporate fines for criminal Sherman Act violations,
should there be a means for differentiation based on differences in the
severity or culpability of the behavior?
A. Do the Sentencing Guidelines provide an adequate method of
distinguishing between violations with differing degrees of
culpability? For example, should the Sentencing Guidelines provide
distinctions between different types of antitrust crimes (e.g., price
fixing versus monopolization)?
B. The Sentencing Guidelines use 20% of the volume of commerce
affected as the starting point for computation of corporate antitrust
fines. See United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual Sec.
2R1.1 (2004). Does the volume of commerce provide an adequate measure
for setting fines? If not, what other measure(s) or methods would
provide a more appropriate way for the Guidelines to establish fine
levels?
2. The Sherman Act provides for a maximum fine of $100 million (or,
previously, $10 million). The government may seek criminal fines in
excess of that maximum pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3571(d).
A. Should ``twice the gross gain or twice the gross loss'' as
provided in Section 3571(d) be calculated based on the gain or loss
from all coconspirator sales or on only the defendant's sales?
B. Should fines above the statutory maximum, and thus limited by
Section 3571(d), be based on 20% of gross sales as provided for in the
Sentencing Guidelines, as they are for fines below the statutory
maximum, or should they be calculated differently? If differently, how
should they be calculated?
Dated: August 4, 2005.
By direction of the Antitrust Modernization Commission.
Andrew J. Heimert,
Executive Director & General Counsel, Antitrust Modernization
Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-15806 Filed 8-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-YM-P