Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts, 41927-41929 [2010-17515]

Download as PDF jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices Percentage Helicopter Runway/Helipad Utilization. The FAA has determined that these Noise Exposure Maps and accompanying documentation are in compliance with applicable requirements. This determination is effective on July 8, 2010. FAA’s determination on the airport operator’s Noise Exposure Maps is limited to a finding that the maps were developed in accordance with the procedures contained in Appendix A of 14 CFR Part 150. Such determination does not constitute approval of the airport operator’s data, information or plans, or a commitment to approve a Noise Compatibility Program or to fund the implementation of that Program. If questions arise concerning the precise relationship of specific properties to noise exposure contours depicted on a Noise Exposure Map submitted under Section 47503 of the Act, it should be noted that the FAA is not involved in any way in determining the relative locations of specific properties with regard to the depicted noise exposure contours, or in interpreting the Noise Exposure Maps to resolve questions concerning, for example, which properties should be covered by the provisions of Section 47506 of the Act. These functions are inseparable from the ultimate land use control and planning responsibilities of local government. These local responsibilities are not changed in any way under 14 CFR Part 150 or through FAA’s review of Noise Exposure Maps. Therefore, the responsibility for the detailed overlaying of noise exposure contours onto the map depicting properties on the surface rests exclusively with the airport operator that submitted those maps, or with those public agencies and planning agencies with which consultation is required under Section 47503 of the Act. The FAA has relied on the certification by the airport operator, under Section 150.21 of 14 CFR Part 150, that the statutorily required consultation has been accomplished. Copies of the full Noise Exposure Maps documentation and of the FAA’s evaluation of the maps are available for examination at the following location: Federal Aviation Administration, Orlando Airports District Office, 5950 Hazeltine National Drive, Suite 400, Orlando, FL 32822, 407–812–6331. Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Issued in Orlando, Florida, on July 8, 2010. W. Dean Stringer, Manager, Orlando Airports District Office. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY [FR Doc. 2010–17512 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] Ideal Federal Savings Bank, Baltimore, Maryland; Notice of Appointment of Receiver BILLING CODE 4910–13–P TREASURY DEPARTMENT Senior Executive Service; Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program; Performance Review Board AGENCY: Treasury Department. ACTION: Notice of members of the SIGTARP Performance Review Board. SUMMARY: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), this notice announces the appointment of members of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program Performance Review Board (PRB). The purpose of this Board is to review and make recommendations concerning proposed performance appraisals, ratings, bonuses and other appropriate personnel actions for incumbents of SES positions in SIGTARP. The board will perform PRB functions for other bureau positions if requested. Compostion of SIGTARP PRB: The Board shall consist of at least three members. In the case of an appraisal of a career appointee, more than half the members shall consist of career appointees. The names and titles of the Board members are as follows: Kevin Puvalowski, Regional Director. Christy Romero, Chief of Staff. Timothy Lee, Senior Policy Analyst. Dr. Eileen Ennis, Deputy Special Inspector General, Operations. Kurt Hyde, Deputy Special Inspector General, Audit. Christopher Sharply, Deputy Special Inspector General, Investigations. Brian Saddler, Chief Counsel to the Special Inspector General. DATES: Effective Date: Membership is effective on the date of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally Ruble, Human Resources Specialist, 1801 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. Telephone: 202 927–9457. Dated: June 24, 2010. Deborah Mason, Director, Human Resources, Operations Division. [FR Doc. 2010–17584 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Jul 16, 2010 Jkt 220001 41927 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Office of Thrift Supervision Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the authority contained in section 5(d)(2) of the Home Owners’ Loan Act, the Office of Thrift Supervision has duly appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as sole Receiver for Ideal Federal Savings Bank, Baltimore, Maryland, (OTS No. 08283), on July 9, 2010. Dated: July 12, 2010. By the Office of Thrift Supervision. Sandra E. Evans, Federal Register Liaison. [FR Doc. 2010–17333 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6720–01–M UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts AGENCY: United States Sentencing Commission. ACTION: Notice of proposed priorities. Request for public comment. 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 United States Sentencing Commission is seeking comment on possible priority policy issues for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2011. DATES: Public comment should be received on or before August 18, 2010. ADDRESSES: Send comments to: United States Sentencing Commission, One Columbus Circle, NE., Suite 2–500, South Lobby, Washington, DC 20002– 8002, Attention: Public Affairs— Priorities Comment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Courlander, Public Affairs Officer, Telephone: (202) 502–4597. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch of the United States Government. The Commission promulgates sentencing guidelines and policy statements for Federal sentencing courts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(a). The Commission also periodically reviews and revises previously promulgated guidelines pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(o) E:\FR\FM\19JYN1.SGM 19JYN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 41928 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices and submits guideline amendments to the Congress not later than the first day of May each year pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(p). The Commission provides this notice to identify tentative priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2011. The Commission recognizes, however, that other factors, such as the enactment of any legislation requiring Commission action, may affect the Commission’s ability to complete work on any or all of its identified priorities by the statutory deadline of May 1, 2011. Accordingly, it may be necessary to continue work on any or all of these issues beyond the amendment cycle ending on May 1, 2011. As so prefaced, the Commission has identified the following tentative priorities: (1) Continuation of its work with the congressional, executive, and judicial branches of government, and other interested parties, to study the manner in which United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), and subsequent Supreme Court decisions have affected Federal sentencing practices, the appellate review of those practices, and the role of the Federal sentencing guidelines. The Commission anticipates that it will issue a report with respect to its findings, possibly including (A) an evaluation of the impact of those decisions on the Federal sentencing guideline system; (B) development of recommendations for legislation regarding Federal sentencing policy; (C) an evaluation of the appellate standard of review applicable to post-Booker Federal sentencing decisions; and (D) possible consideration of amendments to the Federal sentencing guidelines. Such findings will be informed by the testimony received at seven regional public hearings the Commission held in 2009–2010, feedback received from the judiciary contained in the Results of Survey of United States District Judges January 2010 through March 2010 issued in June 2010, and other information and input. (2) Continuation of its study of and, pursuant to the directive in section 4713 of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, Public Law 111–84, report to Congress on statutory mandatory minimum penalties, including a review of the operation of the ‘‘safety valve’’ provision at 18 U.S.C. 3553(e). The findings of the report will be informed by the testimony received at the hearing on statutory mandatory minimum penalties the Commission held on May 27, 2010, the regional public hearings and survey of United States District VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Jul 16, 2010 Jkt 220001 Judges referred to in paragraph (1), and other information and input. (3) Study of and, pursuant to the directive in section 107(b) of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, Public Law 111–195, report to Congress regarding violations of section 5(a) of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22 U.S.C. 287c(a)), sections 38, 39, and 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2278, 2279, and 2780), and the Trading with the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. App. 1 et seq.), including consideration of amendments to § 2M5.2 (Exportation of Arms, Munitions, or Military Equipment or Services Without Required Validated Export License) or other guidelines in Part K or Part M of Chapter Two of the Guidelines Manual that might be appropriate in light of the information obtained from such study. (4) Implementation of the directive in section 10606(a)(2)(A) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111–148, regarding health care fraud offenses and any other crime legislation enacted during the 111th Congress warranting a Commission response. (5) Continuation of its work with Congress and other interested parties on cocaine sentencing policy to implement the recommendations set forth in the Commission’s 2002 and 2007 reports to Congress, both entitled Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy; possible consideration of amending the Drug Quantity Table in §2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) across drug types; and development of appropriate guideline amendments in response to any related legislation enacted during the 111th Congress. (6) Continuation of its review of child pornography offenses and possible report to Congress as a result of such review. It is anticipated that any such report would include (A) a review of the incidence of, and reasons for, departures and variances from the guideline sentence; (B) a compilation of studies on, and analysis of, recidivism by child pornography offenders; and (C) possible recommendations to Congress on any statutory changes that may be appropriate. (7) Continuation of its review of departures within the guidelines, including provisions in Parts H and K of Chapter Five of the Guidelines Manual, and the extent to which pertinent statutory provisions prohibit, discourage, or encourage certain factors as forming the basis for departure from the guideline sentence. PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (8) Continuation of its multi-year study of the statutory and guideline definitions of ‘‘crime of violence’’, ‘‘aggravated felony’’, ‘‘violent felony’’, and ‘‘drug trafficking offense’’, including (A) an examination of relevant circuit conflicts regarding whether any offense is categorically a ‘‘crime of violence’’, ‘‘aggravated felony’’, ‘‘violent felony’’, or ‘‘drug trafficking offense’’ for purposes of triggering an enhanced sentence under certain Federal statutes and guidelines; (B) possible consideration of an amendment to provide an alternative approach to the ‘‘categorical approach’’, see Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990); Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005), for determining the applicability of guideline enhancements; and (C) possible consideration of an amendment to provide that the time period limitations in subsection (e) of §4A1.2 (Definitions and Instructions for Computing Criminal History) apply for purposes of determining the applicability of enhancements in §2L1.2 (Unlawfully Entering or Remaining in the United States). (9) Consideration of a possible amendment to provide a reduction in the offense level for certain deportable aliens who agree to a stipulated order of deportation. (10) Examination of, and possible amendments to, the guidelines and policy statements in Part D of Chapter Five of the Guidelines Manual pertaining to supervised release. (11) Continued study of alternatives to incarceration, including possible consideration of any changes to the Guidelines Manual that might be appropriate in light of the information obtained from that study. (12) Resolution of circuit conflicts, pursuant to the Commission’s continuing authority and responsibility, under 28 U.S.C. 991(b)(1)(B) and Braxton v. United States, 500 U.S. 344 (1991), to resolve conflicting interpretations of the guidelines by the Federal courts. (13) Multi-year review of the guidelines pertaining to environmental crimes, with particular consideration of whether the fine provisions in Part C of Chapter Eight of the Guidelines Manual should apply to such offenses. (14) Consideration of miscellaneous guideline application issues coming to the Commission’s attention from case law and other sources. The Commission hereby gives notice that it is seeking comment on these tentative priorities and on any other issues that interested persons believe the Commission should address during the amendment cycle ending May 1, E:\FR\FM\19JYN1.SGM 19JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 137 / Monday, July 19, 2010 / Notices jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 2011. To the extent practicable, public comment should include the following: (1) A statement of the issue, including, where appropriate, the scope and manner of study, particular problem areas and possible solutions, and any other matters relevant to a proposed VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Jul 16, 2010 Jkt 220001 priority; (2) citations to applicable sentencing guidelines, statutes, case law, and constitutional provisions; and (3) a direct and concise statement of why the Commission should make the issue a priority. PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 41929 Authority: 28 U.S.C. 994(a), (o); USSC Rules of Practice and Procedure 5.2. William K Sessions III, Chair. [FR Doc. 2010–17515 Filed 7–16–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 2210–40–P E:\FR\FM\19JYN1.SGM 19JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 137 (Monday, July 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41927-41929]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17515]


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

UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION


Sentencing Guidelines for United States Courts

AGENCY: United States Sentencing Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed priorities. Request for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 United States Sentencing Commission is 
seeking comment on possible priority policy issues for the amendment 
cycle ending May 1, 2011.

DATES: Public comment should be received on or before August 18, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to: United States Sentencing Commission, One 
Columbus Circle, NE., Suite 2-500, South Lobby, Washington, DC 20002-
8002, Attention: Public Affairs--Priorities Comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Courlander, Public Affairs 
Officer, Telephone: (202) 502-4597.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Sentencing Commission is 
an independent agency in the judicial branch of the United States 
Government. The Commission promulgates sentencing guidelines and policy 
statements for Federal sentencing courts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(a). 
The Commission also periodically reviews and revises previously 
promulgated guidelines pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(o)

[[Page 41928]]

and submits guideline amendments to the Congress not later than the 
first day of May each year pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(p).
    The Commission provides this notice to identify tentative 
priorities for the amendment cycle ending May 1, 2011. The Commission 
recognizes, however, that other factors, such as the enactment of any 
legislation requiring Commission action, may affect the Commission's 
ability to complete work on any or all of its identified priorities by 
the statutory deadline of May 1, 2011. Accordingly, it may be necessary 
to continue work on any or all of these issues beyond the amendment 
cycle ending on May 1, 2011.
    As so prefaced, the Commission has identified the following 
tentative priorities:
    (1) Continuation of its work with the congressional, executive, and 
judicial branches of government, and other interested parties, to study 
the manner in which United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), and 
subsequent Supreme Court decisions have affected Federal sentencing 
practices, the appellate review of those practices, and the role of the 
Federal sentencing guidelines. The Commission anticipates that it will 
issue a report with respect to its findings, possibly including (A) an 
evaluation of the impact of those decisions on the Federal sentencing 
guideline system; (B) development of recommendations for legislation 
regarding Federal sentencing policy; (C) an evaluation of the appellate 
standard of review applicable to post-Booker Federal sentencing 
decisions; and (D) possible consideration of amendments to the Federal 
sentencing guidelines. Such findings will be informed by the testimony 
received at seven regional public hearings the Commission held in 2009-
2010, feedback received from the judiciary contained in the Results of 
Survey of United States District Judges January 2010 through March 2010 
issued in June 2010, and other information and input.
    (2) Continuation of its study of and, pursuant to the directive in 
section 4713 of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes 
Prevention Act of 2009, Public Law 111-84, report to Congress on 
statutory mandatory minimum penalties, including a review of the 
operation of the ``safety valve'' provision at 18 U.S.C. 3553(e). The 
findings of the report will be informed by the testimony received at 
the hearing on statutory mandatory minimum penalties the Commission 
held on May 27, 2010, the regional public hearings and survey of United 
States District Judges referred to in paragraph (1), and other 
information and input.
    (3) Study of and, pursuant to the directive in section 107(b) of 
the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 
2010, Public Law 111-195, report to Congress regarding violations of 
section 5(a) of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945 (22 U.S.C. 
287c(a)), sections 38, 39, and 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 
U.S.C. 2278, 2279, and 2780), and the Trading with the Enemy Act (50 
U.S.C. App. 1 et seq.), including consideration of amendments to Sec.  
2M5.2 (Exportation of Arms, Munitions, or Military Equipment or 
Services Without Required Validated Export License) or other guidelines 
in Part K or Part M of Chapter Two of the Guidelines Manual that might 
be appropriate in light of the information obtained from such study.
    (4) Implementation of the directive in section 10606(a)(2)(A) of 
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148, 
regarding health care fraud offenses and any other crime legislation 
enacted during the 111th Congress warranting a Commission response.
    (5) Continuation of its work with Congress and other interested 
parties on cocaine sentencing policy to implement the recommendations 
set forth in the Commission's 2002 and 2007 reports to Congress, both 
entitled Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy; possible consideration 
of amending the Drug Quantity Table in Sec. 2D1.1 (Unlawful 
Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including 
Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or 
Conspiracy) across drug types; and development of appropriate guideline 
amendments in response to any related legislation enacted during the 
111th Congress.
    (6) Continuation of its review of child pornography offenses and 
possible report to Congress as a result of such review. It is 
anticipated that any such report would include (A) a review of the 
incidence of, and reasons for, departures and variances from the 
guideline sentence; (B) a compilation of studies on, and analysis of, 
recidivism by child pornography offenders; and (C) possible 
recommendations to Congress on any statutory changes that may be 
appropriate.
    (7) Continuation of its review of departures within the guidelines, 
including provisions in Parts H and K of Chapter Five of the Guidelines 
Manual, and the extent to which pertinent statutory provisions 
prohibit, discourage, or encourage certain factors as forming the basis 
for departure from the guideline sentence.
    (8) Continuation of its multi-year study of the statutory and 
guideline definitions of ``crime of violence'', ``aggravated felony'', 
``violent felony'', and ``drug trafficking offense'', including (A) an 
examination of relevant circuit conflicts regarding whether any offense 
is categorically a ``crime of violence'', ``aggravated felony'', 
``violent felony'', or ``drug trafficking offense'' for purposes of 
triggering an enhanced sentence under certain Federal statutes and 
guidelines; (B) possible consideration of an amendment to provide an 
alternative approach to the ``categorical approach'', see Taylor v. 
United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990); Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 
13 (2005), for determining the applicability of guideline enhancements; 
and (C) possible consideration of an amendment to provide that the time 
period limitations in subsection (e) of Sec. 4A1.2 (Definitions and 
Instructions for Computing Criminal History) apply for purposes of 
determining the applicability of enhancements in Sec. 2L1.2 (Unlawfully 
Entering or Remaining in the United States).
    (9) Consideration of a possible amendment to provide a reduction in 
the offense level for certain deportable aliens who agree to a 
stipulated order of deportation.
    (10) Examination of, and possible amendments to, the guidelines and 
policy statements in Part D of Chapter Five of the Guidelines Manual 
pertaining to supervised release.
    (11) Continued study of alternatives to incarceration, including 
possible consideration of any changes to the Guidelines Manual that 
might be appropriate in light of the information obtained from that 
study.
    (12) Resolution of circuit conflicts, pursuant to the Commission's 
continuing authority and responsibility, under 28 U.S.C. 991(b)(1)(B) 
and Braxton v. United States, 500 U.S. 344 (1991), to resolve 
conflicting interpretations of the guidelines by the Federal courts.
    (13) Multi-year review of the guidelines pertaining to 
environmental crimes, with particular consideration of whether the fine 
provisions in Part C of Chapter Eight of the Guidelines Manual should 
apply to such offenses.
    (14) Consideration of miscellaneous guideline application issues 
coming to the Commission's attention from case law and other sources.
    The Commission hereby gives notice that it is seeking comment on 
these tentative priorities and on any other issues that interested 
persons believe the Commission should address during the amendment 
cycle ending May 1,

[[Page 41929]]

2011. To the extent practicable, public comment should include the 
following: (1) A statement of the issue, including, where appropriate, 
the scope and manner of study, particular problem areas and possible 
solutions, and any other matters relevant to a proposed priority; (2) 
citations to applicable sentencing guidelines, statutes, case law, and 
constitutional provisions; and (3) a direct and concise statement of 
why the Commission should make the issue a priority.

    Authority: 28 U.S.C. 994(a), (o); USSC Rules of Practice and 
Procedure 5.2.

William K Sessions III,
Chair.
[FR Doc. 2010-17515 Filed 7-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-40-P