[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 10, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 46474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-15806]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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: [email protected]. 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: [email protected]. 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 
[email protected]. 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