```

[Federal Register: August 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 151)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 47451-47452]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06au10-3]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

21 CFR Part 1308

[Docket No. DEA-247C]

 
Schedules of Controlled Substances; Placement of 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-
(n)-propylthiophenethylamine and N-Benzylpiperazine Into Schedule I of 
the Controlled Substances Act; Correction

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Justice.

ACTION: Final rule: correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is correcting a 
final rule that appeared in the Federal Register of March 18, 2004. The 
final rule pertained to the scheduling of N-Benzylpiperazine (BZP), and 
contained an error regarding the potency of BZP relative to 
amphetamine. Although DEA used the correct figures in arriving at its 
scheduling determination, the agency is publishing this correction to 
provide an official statement of the actual figures. This correction 
does not address the scheduling of 2,5-dimethoxy-4-(n)-
propylthiophenethylamine (2C-T-7) which was also placed into schedule I 
as a result of the above cited rulemaking.

DATES: This correction is effective August 6, 2010 without further 
action.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, PhD, Chief, 
Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, VA 
22152, Telephone (202) 307-7183.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    DEA is correcting an inadvertent error that occurred in a Final 
Rule that scheduled the substance n-Benzylpiperazine (BZP) as a 
schedule I controlled substance. In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 
published on September 8, 2003 (68 FR 52872), DEA proposed the control 
of BZP in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). A Final 
Rule, published on March 18, 2004 (69 FR 12794), finalized the 
placement of BZP in schedule I of the CSA.
    Each of these rules contained a misstatement in the ``Supplementary 
Information'' section, with regard to the potency differences between 
BZP and amphetamine. In each rule, it was erroneously stated that BZP 
is 10 to 20 times more potent than amphetamine. In actuality, the 
converse is true (i.e., BZP is 10 to 20 times less potent than 
amphetamine.) Therefore this Rulemaking corrects this misstatement in 
the Final Rule. Under separate rulemaking, DEA is publishing a 
correction to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published September 8, 
2003 (68 FR 52872).
    DEA emphasizes that these errors were made solely in the rules as 
published in the Federal Register. Both DEA and the U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS) considered the correct BZP potencies 
during their scheduling deliberations. The correct potencies were 
included in both the HHS scientific and medical evaluation document, 
and in DEA's scheduling document, which were used to make the 
determination for control. The public docket for BZP contains both of 
these review documents. In addition, DEA has already published on the 
agency's Web site the correct figures regarding relative potency.
    The determination of control of BZP was made after consideration of 
all the available data and all eight factors and the criteria for 
schedule I as specified in 21 U.S.C. 811 and 812. The amphetamine-like 
property of BZP was determined following the collective review and 
consideration of all the available evidence including drug 
discrimination and self-administration and other information. These 
studies were briefly mentioned in the rules controlling BZP as a 
schedule I controlled substance and were discussed in detail in the 
scientific and medical evaluation and scheduling

[[Page 47452]]

documents prepared by both HHS and DEA.
    Although the potency difference between BZP and amphetamine was 
discussed in the rules proposing and finalizing control of BZP as a 
part of the scientific background information, comparisons of potency 
differences are only one piece of background scientific data used to 
evaluate the abuse potential of drugs or other substances. In addition, 
potency itself is not one of the factors determinative of control. In 
fact, there are many examples of substances of varying potencies in 
each schedule, including stimulants and opiates previously scheduled 
under the CSA.
    Even though the scheduling of BZP was finalized more than six years 
ago, DEA has been advised that in criminal proceedings, for sentencing 
purposes, courts have sought to ascertain: (1) The controlled 
substance, for which a sentencing guideline equivalency exists, that is 
the most closely analogous to BZP (which is d-amphetamine) and (2) the 
relative potency of BZP to that of the most analogous controlled 
substance. As indicated above, DEA has already published on the 
agency's Web site the correct figures regarding relative potency. This 
correction is being issued to provide such an official statement in the 
Federal Register for ease of reference by courts, litigants, and others 
who need the information for sentencing purposes.
    This correction does not address the scheduling of 2,5-dimethoxy-4-
(n)-propylthiophenethylamine (2C-T-7) which was also placed into 
schedule I as a result of the above cited rulemakings.

Correction

    Accordingly, the publication on Thursday, March 18, 2004, of the 
Final Rule [Docket No. DEA-247F], at 69 FR 12794 [FR Doc. 04-6110], is 
corrected in the preamble as follows:
    On page 12795, in the first column, paragraph 4, sentences 4 and 5 
are corrected to read as follows: ``BZP is about 20 times less potent 
than amphetamine in producing these effects. However, in subjects with 
a history of amphetamine dependence, BZP was found to be about 10 times 
less potent than amphetamine.''

    Dated: July 26, 2010.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-19348 Filed 8-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
```