       implications  for the question at bar.  First and foremost, given

          the labyrinthine way in  which repeat offenders' actual sentences

          are constructed,  heightened deference to the  Commission's slant

          on  the "at  or near"  language  is very  desirable.   After all,

          respect for  agency interpretations is  "particularly appropriate

          in complex and highly specialized areas  where the regulatory net

             the motions for resentencing.

                    The principles governing motions to resentence based on

          newly emergent guideline amendments can be compactly  catalogued.

          When the Commission amends  the guidelines (or its interpretation

          of the guidelines)  in a  manner that favors  defendants, it  may

          invite retrospective  application  of the  new  interpretation.13

         