6434 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 9, 2000 / Notices

11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

3Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41711

(August 5, 1999), 64 FR 44073.

4See Letter from John Dayton, Counsel, Phlx, to

Nancy Sanow, Senior Special Counsel, Division of

Market Regulation, SEC, dated December 23, 1999.

5 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

and, in general, to protect investors and

the public interest.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Burden on Competition

The Exchange does not believe that

the proposed rule change will impose

any burden on competition that is not

necessary or appropriate in furtherance

of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s

Statement on Comments on the

Proposed Rule Change Received from

Members, Participants or Others

No written comments were solicited

or received with respect to the proposed

rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the

Proposed rule Change and Timing for

Commission Action

Within 35 days of the date of

publication of this notice in the Federal

Register or within such longer period (i)

as the Commission may designate up to

90 days of such date if it finds such

longer period to be appropriate and

publishes its reasons for so finding or

(ii) as to which the Exchange consents,

the Commission will:

(a) By order approve the proposed

rule change, or

(b) Institute proceedings to determine

whether the proposed rule change

should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

Interested persons are invited to

submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the proposed rule

change, as amended, is consistent with

the Act. Persons making written

submissions should file six copies

thereof with the Secretary, Securities

and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549–

0609. Copies of the submission, all

subsequent amendments, all written

statements with respect to the proposed

rule change that are filed with the

Commission, and all written

communications relating to the

proposed rule change between the

Commission and any person, other than

those that may be withheld from the

public in accordance with the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be

available for inspection and copying at

the Commission’s Public Reference

Room. Copies of such filing will also be

available for inspection and copying at

the principal office of the Exchange. All

submissions should refer to File No.

SR–NYSE–99–14 and should be

submitted by March 1, 2000.

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.11

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–2881 Filed 2–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION

[Release No. 34–42377; File No. SR–Phlx–

99–24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice

of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule

Change by the Philadelphia Stock

Exchange, Inc. Relating to the

Establishment of a Fee to Members for

Receiving On-Line Options Information

February 2, 2000.

On June 29, 1999, the Philadelphia

Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’ or

‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities

and Exchange Commission

(‘‘Commission’’) a proposed rule

change, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 to

adopt a fee for the transmission to

members of option trade information on

a real-time trade basis. Notice of the

proposed rule change was published on

August 12, 1999, in the Federal

Register, to solicit comments from

interested persons.3 On December 28,

1999, the Exchange withdrew the

proposed rule change.4

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority.5

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–2966 Filed 2–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

UNITED STATES SENTENCING

COMMISSION

Sentencing Guidelines for United

States Courts

AGENCY: United States Sentencing

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of finalized policy

development agenda.

SUMMARY: As part of its statutory

authority and responsibility to analyze

sentencing issues, including operation

of the federal sentencing guidelines, and

in accordance with Rule 5.2 of its Rules

of Practice and Procedure, the

Commission proposed, in December

1999, certain priorities as the focus of its

policy development work, including

amendments to guidelines, policy

statements, and commentary, for the

amendment cycle ending May 1, 2000.

The Commission was reconstituted in

November 1999, in the middle of that

amendment cycle. Due to the resulting

constraints of an abbreviated

amendment cycle, the Commission has

proposed as its priorities for the

amendment cycle ending May 1, 2000

only those items the Commission might

be able to conclude by its statutory

deadline of May 1.

The Commission published a notice

of these proposed priorities in the

Federal Register on December 8, 1999.

See 64 FR 68,715, Dec. 8 ,1999. After

reviewing public comment received

pursuant to this notice, the Commission

has decided to limit its current policy

development priorities principally to

the following areas: (i) Implementation

of legislative directives and other high

priority crime legislation enacted by the

105th Congress for which guideline

amendments were not developed or

finalized by the previous Commission;

and (ii) resolution of a limited number

of high priority circuit conflicts in

guideline interpretation, with the goal of

enhancing the consistency with which

the guidelines are applied.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Courlander, Public Affairs

Officer, Telephone: (202) 502–4590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Priorities.’’The specific policy

development issues that comprise the

Commission’s finalized agenda are as

follows—

I. Legislative Directives

The Commission has identified the

implementation of the following

directives as a priority for this

amendment cycle:

(A) The No Electronic Theft (NET) Act

of 1997—Congress directed the

Commission, under emergency

amendment authority, to ensure that: (1)

The guideline penalties for intellectual

property offenses are sufficiently

stringent to deter those crimes; and (2)

the guidelines pertaining to intellectual

property offenses provide for

consideration of the retail value and

quantity of infringed items.

(B) The Telemarketing Fraud

Prevention Act of 1998—Congress