### 47503 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 151 / Friday, August 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing formats. Documents created electronically using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing.

21. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an original and 14 copies of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

22. All comments will be placed in the Commission’s public files and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments on other
commenters. VI. Document Availability

23. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register , the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the Internet through FERC’s Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov ) and in FERC’s Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.

24. From FERC’s Home Page on the Internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field.

25. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC’s website during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202) 502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676) or e-mail at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502– 8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 35

Electric power rates, Electric utilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

By direction of the Commission. Commissioner Moeller is concurring, in part and dissenting, in part with a separate statement attached. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. MOELLER, Commissioner, concurring,

in part and dissenting, in part: While I support the decision to supplement the record and convene a technical conference, for the reasons set forth in my concurring and dissenting statement on the NOPR that initiated this proceeding on March 18, I continue to concur and dissent, in part.
Philip D. Moeller, Commissioner. [FR Doc. 2010–19376 Filed 8–5–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6717–01–P**

**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 :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking: correction.

**SUMMARY :**  The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is correcting a notice of proposed rulemaking that appeared in the Federal Register of September 8, 2003. The proposed rulepertained to the scheduling of NBenzylpiperazine (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 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that scheduled the substance n-Benzylpiperazine (BZP) as a schedule I controlled substance. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published on September 8, 2003 (68 FR 52872), proposed the control of BZP in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The 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 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Under separate rulemaking, DEA is publishing a correction to the Final Rule, published March 18, 2004 (68 FR 12794).

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 documents prepared by both HHS and DEA.

Although the potency difference between BZP and amphetamine was discussed in the rules proposing and


### 47504 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 151 / Friday, August 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules

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 Monday, September 8, 2003, of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [Docket No. DEA–247P], at 68 FR 52872 [FR Doc. 03–22684], is corrected in the preamble as follows:

On page 52873, in the third column, paragraph 2 is corrected to read as follows: ‘‘ Consistent with the abovementioned animal studies, it has been shown that BZP is about 20 times less potent than amphetamine in producing stimulant-like subjective and cardiovascular effects in humans (Bye C, et al., Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 6: 163– 169, 1973). Similarly, Campbell and colleagues (Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 6: 170–176, 1973), using a double-blind clinical study involving 18 subjects with a history of amphetamine dependence, reported that the nature and the timecourse of behavioral, autonomic and subjective effects following BZP administration are similar to those of amphetamine. BZP was found to be about 10 times less potent than amphetamine in this study. ’’ Dated: July 9, 2010. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–19345 Filed 8–5–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4410–09–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Office of the Secretary**

**32 CFR Part 68**

**[Docket No. DoD–2009–OS–0034]**

**RIN 0790–AI50**

**Voluntary Education Programs**

**AGENCY :**  Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of Defense (DoD) proposes to implement policy, assign responsibilities, and prescribe procedures for the operation of voluntary education programs within DoD. Included are: Procedures for Service members participating in education programs; guidelines for establishing, maintaining, and operating voluntary education programsincluding, but not limited to, instructorled courses offered on-installation and off-installation, as well as via distancelearning; procedures for obtaining onbase voluntary education programs and services; minimum criteria for selecting institutions to deliver higher education programs and services on military installations; the establishment of a DoD Voluntary Education Partnership Memorandum of Understanding between DoD and educational institutions receiving tuition assistance payments; and procedures for other education programs for Service members and their adult family members.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received by October 5, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by docket number and or RIN number and title, by any of the following methods:

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–1160.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Kerrie Tucker at 703–602–4949, extension 117.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Regulatory Procedures

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review ’’
It has been certified that 32 CFR part 68 is a significant regulatory action. The rule has an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.

The rule does not: (1) Adversely affect in a material way the economy; a section of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another Agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order.

Funding for Voluntary Education Programs is authorized by law and is subject to the availability of funds from each Service. Voluntary education programs include tuition assistance (per section 2007 of title 10, United States Code), which is administered uniformly across the Services. Each Service pays no more than $250.00 per semester-unit for tuition and fees combined. EachService member participating in offduty, voluntary education is authorized up to $4,500.00, in aggregate, for each fiscal year. As per NDAA FY08, each of the Services may also provide TA to activated Service members of the Selected Reserves and Individual Ready Reserve. For Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09), the Services executed approximately $800 million for Off-Duty and Voluntary Education Programs. For Fiscal Year 2010 (FY10), the President’s Budget for Off-Duty and Voluntary Education is approximately $790 million, with $208 million programmed for operational costs and $582 million programmed for tuition assistance costs.