UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

   SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
   Release No. 41765 / August 19, 1999

   ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
   File No. 3-9982

   The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced
   today that it instituted public administrative proceedings pursuant to
   Section 15(b)(6) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange
   Act") against Ronnie R. Neihart ("Neihart") of Weldon, North Carolina
   to determine whether Neihart should be barred from participating in
   penny stock offerings.

   The Order Instituting Public Administrative Proceedings Pursuant to
   Section 15(b)(6) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Order") is
   based upon a permanent injunction which the Commission obtained
   against Neihart on January 20, 1999 in United States District Court
   for the Northern District of Georgia, , Civil Action No. 1
   98-cv-3341-WBH. The injunction permanently enjoined Neihart from
   further violations of the registration, antifraud and reporting
   provisions of the federal securities laws, barred Neihart from acting
   as an officer or director of any company that has a class of
   securities registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12 of
   the Exchange Act or that is required to file periodic reports with the
   Commission pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, ordered
   Neihart to disgorge $961,000 in ill-gotten gains, and ordered Neihart
   to pay civil penalties. The Court subsequently set the amount of civil
   penalties at $110,000.

   The Order alleges that the complaint in the injunctive action alleged
   that Neihart, while acting as Synvion Corporation's president and CEO,
   made material misrepresentations and omissions in connection with the
   purchase or sale, and in the offer or sale of unregistered Synvion
   stock. The complaint further alleged that Neihart misrepresented,
   among other things, (1) that Synvion would be quoted on NASDAQ at a
   price of up to $64 per share, when, in fact, Synvion had never even
   filed an application to be quoted on NASDAQ with the National
   Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., (2) the commercial viability
   of ETA10 supercomputers worth $20 million which Synvion allegedly
   owned, when, in fact, the supercomputers were worthless, (3) the
   existence of contracts with several large, publicly-traded
   corporations, including NCR Corporation, AT&T Corp. and Lucent
   Technologies, Inc., when, in fact, these contracts did not exist, (4)
   the existence of a lucrative stock lease agreement with Prudential
   Securities, Inc., when, in fact, there was no such stock lease
   agreement; and (5) that a cease-and-desist order issued against