Authorized Sources of Narcotic Raw Materials, 58569-58571 [E6-16325]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
can then use these estimates for the specified
periods at the beginning and end of the
eligible period to add to the financial
amounts for 2002, 2003, and 2004 to
calculate the total amounts sought in
Appendix A.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
12. Has the applicant or any of its
subsidiaries or affiliates received grants,
subsidies, incentives or similar payments
from local, state, or Federal governmental
entities in support of the security,
maintenance and provision of general
aviation services and facilities furnished in
response to the events of September 11,
2001? (This includes payments under the
Aviation and Transportation Security Act of
2001 (Public Law 107–38) and the Airport
Improvement Program under the Airport
and Airway Improvement Act of 1982
(Public Law 97–248).)
This question requires that you disclose all
grants, subsidies, or incentives that you
received during the eligible reimbursement
period, either directly or indirectly, from
Federal, State, and local entities, to
reimburse you for the cost of operations and
capital improvements associated with
implementing security programs, or
maintaining or providing general aviation
services and facilities.
13. Has the applicant or any of its
subsidiaries or affiliates incurred lobbying
expenses, mitigating expenses, or special
expenses (as described in the section
captioned ‘‘What information must
operators or providers submit in their
applications for reimbursement?’’), or
extraordinary adjustments.
Check ‘‘Yes’’ if you incurred any such
expenses or experienced any such
adjustments. You must briefly describe the
nature of such expenses and adjustments,
including the amounts. Additionally, you
must indicate whether or not such expenses
or adjustments have been included in or
excluded from the totals in the table at item
number 11.
Lobbying includes any amount paid to any
person for influencing or attempting to
influence an officer or employee of any
agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or
employee of Congress, or an employee of a
Member of Congress.
Mitigating expenses include the utilization
of property, the provision of services and the
sale of goods that were undertaken to
mitigate losses arising from the Federal
Government’s closure of airports attendant to
the September 11, 2001 attack. These could
include expenses incurred for the provision
of services and sale of goods moved from
restricted airports to unrestricted airports or
compensation for non-aviation oriented
goods and services provided at restricted
airports. Mitigating expenses may also
include expenses for aviation-related fixed
assets or capital utilized outside of the
restricted airport.
Special expenses include, but are not
limited to, moving expenses, additional
security equipment and facilities, and loss on
sale of assets that arose from the direct
imposition of restrictions during the period
September 11, 2001 through the applicable
eligible date. Any item reported as Special
Expenses shall not also be expensed in other
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Oct 03, 2006
Jkt 211001
expense categories that are reflected in the
calculation of the reimbursement claim.
Details regarding special expenses should be
noted in footnotes.
Extraordinary adjustments are events or
transactions that are material to your
business and unusual in nature and
infrequent in occurrence.
14. Certification
You must certify that all information
contained on the Background and Eligibility
Form and the documents submitted in
support of your application (e.g. profit and
loss statements, actual forecasts, after-the-fact
forecasts, etc.) are accurate. This certification
is made under penalty of law. Falsification
may be grounds for monetary and/or criminal
sanctions. This certification must be made by
a company CEO, COO, or CFO.
[FR Doc. 06–8250 Filed 10–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–C
58569
Register Representative/ODL, 2401
Jefferson-Davis Highway, Alexandria,
VA 22301. Comments may be directly
sent to DEA electronically by sending an
electronic message to
dea.diversion.policy@usdoj.gov.
Comments may also be sent
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov using the
electronic comment form provided on
that site. An electronic copy of this
document is also available at the
https://www.regulations.gov Web site.
DEA will accept attachments to
electronic comments in Microsoft word,
WordPerfect, Adobe PDF, or Excel file
formats only. DEA will not accept any
file formats other than those specifically
listed here.
21 CFR Part 1312
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christine A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief,
Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section,
Office of Diversion Control, Drug
Enforcement Administration,
Washington, DC 20537, Telephone (202)
307–7183.
[Docket No. DEA–282P]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
RIN 1117–AB03
Legal Authority
Authorized Sources of Narcotic Raw
Materials
Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA), Department of
Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: DEA proposes to amend its
regulations to update the list of nontraditional countries authorized to
export narcotic raw materials (NRM) to
the United States. This change would
replace Yugoslavia with Spain. This
proposed rule seeks to maintain a
consistent and reliable supply of
narcotic raw materials from a limited
number of countries consistent with
United States obligations under
international treaties and resolutions.
DATES: Written comments must be
postmarked, and electronic comments
must be sent, on or before December 4,
2006.
ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling
of comments, please reference ‘‘Docket
No. DEA–282P’’ on all written and
electronic correspondence. Written
comments being sent via regular mail
should be sent to the Deputy Assistant
Administrator, Office of Diversion
Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration, Washington, DC 20537,
Attention: DEA Federal Register
Representative/Liaison and Policy
Section (ODL). Written comments sent
via express mail should be sent to DEA
Headquarters, Attention: DEA Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEA enforces the Controlled
Substances Act (CSA) (21 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.), as amended. DEA regulations
implementing this statute are published
in Title 21 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), parts 1300 to 1399.
These regulations are designed to
establish a framework for the legal
distribution of controlled substances to
deter their diversion for illegal purposes
and to ensure an adequate and
uninterrupted supply of these drugs for
legitimate medical purposes. The CSA
and its implementing regulations are
consistent with United States treaty
obligations that, among other things,
address the production, import, and
export of controlled substances.
Controlled Substances
Controlled substances are drugs that
have a potential for abuse and
addiction; these include substances
classified as opiates, stimulants,
depressants, hallucinogens, anabolic
steroids, and drugs that are immediate
precursors of these classes of
substances. DEA lists controlled
substances in 21 CFR part 1308. The
substances are divided into five
schedules: Schedule I substances have a
high potential for abuse and have no
accepted medical use. These substances
may only be used for research, chemical
analysis, or manufacture of other drugs.
Schedule II–V substances have an
accepted medical use and also have a
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
58570
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
potential for abuse and addiction.
Narcotic raw materials (opium, poppy
straw, and concentrate of poppy straw
(CPS)) are in Schedule II and are the
materials from which morphine,
codeine, and thebaine are extracted for
purposes of manufacturing a number of
Schedule II controlled substances.
Sources of Narcotic Raw Materials
In May 1979, the United Nations’
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
adopted Resolution 471, which called
on importing countries such as the
United States to support traditional
suppliers of narcotic raw materials
(NRM) and to limit imports from nontraditional supplying countries. The
resolution, which was reaffirmed by
ECOSOC in 1981, was adopted to limit
overproduction of NRM, to restore a
balance between supply and demand,
and to prevent diversion to illicit
channels. The United States, based on
long-standing policy, does not cultivate
or produce NRM, but relies solely on
opium, poppy straw, and CPS produced
in other countries for the NRM
necessary to meet the legitimate medical
needs of the United States. In response
to Resolution 471, on August 18, 1981,
DEA published a final rule specifying
certain source countries of NRM (46 FR
41775); the rule is frequently referred to
as the 80/20 rule. Under the final rule,
currently codified as 21 CFR 1312.13(f)
and (g), NRM can be imported from one
of only seven countries. Traditional
suppliers India and Turkey must be the
source of at least 80 percent of the
United States’ requirement for NRM.
Five countries—France, Poland,
Hungary, Australia, and Yugoslavia—
may be the source of not more than 20
percent. The United States continues to
reaffirm its support of the original
resolution by supporting similar
resolutions each year at the CND.
Recently, DEA registered importers of
NRM have imported approximately 90
percent of NRM from traditional
suppliers India and Turkey. India is the
only country that cultivates poppies for
production of opium. All other
exporting countries use the CPS method
of NRM production, a method that
allows the plant to go to seed; portions
of the plant are then processed into a
concentrate. It is generally believed that
CPS is less divertible than opium. CPS
may be rich in morphine (CPS–M) or
rich in thebaine (CPS–T). The United
States imports the majority of its CPS–
M from Turkey, with Australia
supplying much of the balance.
The 80/20 rule was established based
on traditional import amounts and on
the U.N. resolution calling on member
nations to support traditional sources
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 03, 2006
Jkt 211001
that have been reliable suppliers and
that take measures to curtail diversion.
The United States allowed a limited
number of non-traditional suppliers to
have access to the United States market
based on past commercial relationships
and on the desirability of preserving
alternative sources. This approach was
consistent with the U.N. Resolution
because it supported India and Turkey,
and ensured an adequate and
uninterrupted supply of NRM, while
limiting the number of supplying
countries. DEA continues to support the
80/20 rule.
On June 6, 2005, the Government of
Spain petitioned DEA seeking to be
added to the list of non-traditional
suppliers. Spain stated four reasons that
granting its petition would be consistent
with United States interests:
• The change would be consistent
with the 80/20 rule because it maintains
India and Turkey as the two traditional
supplier countries, that is, Spain does
not seek to be added to the list of
traditional suppliers.
• The change would ensure adequate
supplies of NRM.
• The change would not result in
diversion because Spain maintains strict
control and oversight over the
cultivation and distribution of NRM.
• The change would allow DEA to
monitor diversion and maintain costeffective supplies.
In its petition, Spain explained that in
the early 1970s, Spanish pharmaceutical
firms sought authorization to cultivate
opium poppies to produce NRM. In
1973, Spain authorized a single firm,
Alcaliber, to cultivate, harvest, store,
and prepare extracts from the opium
poppy. Spain is now the fifth largest
cultivator of opium poppies; Spain is
the fourth largest producer of CPS and
the third largest exporter of CPS–M.1
Spain has ratified international
agreements to control production and
commerce in opium products. In
accordance with these international
agreements, Spain has implemented a
comprehensive regulatory regime for
controlling the cultivation, production,
and export of NRM. The petition stated
that this control ensures that NRM
produced in Spain are not diverted to
illicit uses.
DEA has reviewed the petition and is
proposing to change the list of nontraditional suppliers to remove
Yugoslavia and replace it with Spain.
DEA has determined that the successor
states to the former Yugoslavia no
1 ‘‘Narcotic Drugs: Estimated World Requirements
for 2005—Statistics for 2003’’, Tables II and XIII;
International Narcotics Control Board (E/INCB/
2004/2).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
longer produce NRM for export.
Therefore, replacing Yugoslavia with
Spain will continue to limit the number
of non-traditional suppliers to the
United States while ensuring that an
adequate number of sources of NRM are
available. The change does not
otherwise affect how the 80/20 rule is
implemented.
Regulatory Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Deputy Assistant Administrator,
Office of Diversion Control, hereby
certifies that this rulemaking has been
drafted in accordance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), that he has reviewed this
regulation, and by approving it certifies
that this regulation will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small business
entities. The proposed rule imposes no
new costs or burden on small entities.
Executive Order 12866
The Deputy Assistant Administrator,
Office of Diversion Control, further
certifies that this rulemaking has been
drafted in accordance with the
principles in Executive Order 12866
Section 1(b). It has been determined that
this is a significant regulatory action.
Therefore, this action has been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards set forth in
Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988.
Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule does not preempt
or modify any provision of State law;
nor does it impose enforcement
responsibilities on any State; nor does it
diminish the power of any State to
enforce its own laws. Accordingly, this
rulemaking does not have federalism
implications warranting the application
of Executive Order 13132.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule will not result in
the expenditure by State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of $117,000,000 or
more (adjusted for inflation) in any one
year, and will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 192 / Wednesday, October 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed rule is not a major rule
as defined by Section 804 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will not
result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100,000,000 or more; a
major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and
export markets.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1312
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drug traffic control, Exports,
Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR
part 1312 is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 1312—IMPORTATION AND
EXPORTATION OF CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCES
1. The authority citation for Part 1312
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 952, 953, 954, 957,
958.
2. Section 1312.13 is proposed to be
amended by revising paragraphs (f) and
(g) to read as follows:
§ 1312.13
Issuance of import permit.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(1)
and (a)(2) of this section, the
Administrator shall permit, pursuant to
21 U.S.C. 952(a)(1) or (a)(2)(A), the
importation of approved narcotic raw
material (opium, poppy straw and
concentrate of poppy straw) having as
its source:
(1) Turkey,
(2) India,
(3) Spain,
(4) France,
(5) Poland,
(6) Hungary, and
(7) Australia.
(g) At least eighty (80) percent of the
narcotic raw material imported into the
United States shall have as its original
source Turkey and India. Except under
conditions of insufficient supplies of
narcotic raw materials, not more than
twenty (20) percent of the narcotic raw
material imported into the United States
annually shall have as its source Spain,
France, Poland, Hungary and Australia.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:41 Oct 03, 2006
Jkt 211001
Dated: September 26, 2006.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control.
[FR Doc. E6–16325 Filed 10–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 281
[EPA–RO1–UST–2006–0622; FRL–8226–6]
New Hampshire: Final Approval of
Underground Storage Tank Program
Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The State of New Hampshire
has applied to EPA for approval of the
changes to its underground storage tank
program under Subtitle I of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
EPA has determined that these
amendments satisfy all requirements
needed for program approval and
proposes to approve the State’s changes.
In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section
of this Federal Register, EPA is
approving the changes by an immediate
final rule. EPA did not make a proposal
prior to the immediate final rule
because we believe this action is not
controversial and do not expect
comments that oppose it. We have
explained the reasons for this approval
in the preamble to the immediate final
rule. Unless we get written comments
which oppose this approval during the
comment period, the immediate final
rule will become effective on the date it
establishes, and we will not take further
action on this proposal. If we receive
comments that oppose this action, we
will withdraw the immediate final rule
and it will not take effect. We will then
respond to public comments in a later
final rule based on this proposal. You
may not have another opportunity for
comment. If you want to comment on
this action, you must do so at this time.
DATES: Send your written comments by
November 3, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
UST–2006–0622, by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: hanamoto.susan@epa.gov.
• Mail: Susan Hanamoto, Office of
Underground Storage Tanks, EPA
Region I, One Congress Street, Suite
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58571
1100 (Mail Code: HBO), Boston, MA
02114–2023.
• Hand Delivery: Susan Hanamoto,
Office of Underground Storage Tanks,
EPA Region I, One Congress Street,
Suite 1100 (Mail Code: HBO), Boston,
MA 02114–2023. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the EPA’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R01–UST–2006–
0622. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: EPA has established a docket
for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA–R01–UST–2006–0622. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information may not be publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Region I Library, One Congress
Street, 11th Floor, Boston, MA 02114–
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 4, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58569-58571]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16325]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
21 CFR Part 1312
[Docket No. DEA-282P]
RIN 1117-AB03
Authorized Sources of Narcotic Raw Materials
AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DEA proposes to amend its regulations to update the list of
non-traditional countries authorized to export narcotic raw materials
(NRM) to the United States. This change would replace Yugoslavia with
Spain. This proposed rule seeks to maintain a consistent and reliable
supply of narcotic raw materials from a limited number of countries
consistent with United States obligations under international treaties
and resolutions.
DATES: Written comments must be postmarked, and electronic comments
must be sent, on or before December 4, 2006.
ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling of comments, please reference
``Docket No. DEA-282P'' on all written and electronic correspondence.
Written comments being sent via regular mail should be sent to the
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug
Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA
Federal Register Representative/Liaison and Policy Section (ODL).
Written comments sent via express mail should be sent to DEA
Headquarters, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODL, 2401
Jefferson-Davis Highway, Alexandria, VA 22301. Comments may be directly
sent to DEA electronically by sending an electronic message to
dea.diversion.policy@usdoj.gov. Comments may also be sent
electronically through https://www.regulations.gov using the electronic
comment form provided on that site. An electronic copy of this document
is also available at the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. DEA will
accept attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft word,
WordPerfect, Adobe PDF, or Excel file formats only. DEA will not accept
any file formats other than those specifically listed here.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Sannerud, Ph.D., Chief,
Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of Diversion Control, Drug
Enforcement Administration, Washington, DC 20537, Telephone (202) 307-
7183.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Legal Authority
DEA enforces the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) (21 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.), as amended. DEA regulations implementing this statute are
published in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), parts
1300 to 1399. These regulations are designed to establish a framework
for the legal distribution of controlled substances to deter their
diversion for illegal purposes and to ensure an adequate and
uninterrupted supply of these drugs for legitimate medical purposes.
The CSA and its implementing regulations are consistent with United
States treaty obligations that, among other things, address the
production, import, and export of controlled substances.
Controlled Substances
Controlled substances are drugs that have a potential for abuse and
addiction; these include substances classified as opiates, stimulants,
depressants, hallucinogens, anabolic steroids, and drugs that are
immediate precursors of these classes of substances. DEA lists
controlled substances in 21 CFR part 1308. The substances are divided
into five schedules: Schedule I substances have a high potential for
abuse and have no accepted medical use. These substances may only be
used for research, chemical analysis, or manufacture of other drugs.
Schedule II-V substances have an accepted medical use and also have a
[[Page 58570]]
potential for abuse and addiction. Narcotic raw materials (opium, poppy
straw, and concentrate of poppy straw (CPS)) are in Schedule II and are
the materials from which morphine, codeine, and thebaine are extracted
for purposes of manufacturing a number of Schedule II controlled
substances.
Sources of Narcotic Raw Materials
In May 1979, the United Nations' Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC) adopted Resolution 471, which called on importing countries
such as the United States to support traditional suppliers of narcotic
raw materials (NRM) and to limit imports from non-traditional supplying
countries. The resolution, which was reaffirmed by ECOSOC in 1981, was
adopted to limit overproduction of NRM, to restore a balance between
supply and demand, and to prevent diversion to illicit channels. The
United States, based on long-standing policy, does not cultivate or
produce NRM, but relies solely on opium, poppy straw, and CPS produced
in other countries for the NRM necessary to meet the legitimate medical
needs of the United States. In response to Resolution 471, on August
18, 1981, DEA published a final rule specifying certain source
countries of NRM (46 FR 41775); the rule is frequently referred to as
the 80/20 rule. Under the final rule, currently codified as 21 CFR
1312.13(f) and (g), NRM can be imported from one of only seven
countries. Traditional suppliers India and Turkey must be the source of
at least 80 percent of the United States' requirement for NRM. Five
countries--France, Poland, Hungary, Australia, and Yugoslavia--may be
the source of not more than 20 percent. The United States continues to
reaffirm its support of the original resolution by supporting similar
resolutions each year at the CND.
Recently, DEA registered importers of NRM have imported
approximately 90 percent of NRM from traditional suppliers India and
Turkey. India is the only country that cultivates poppies for
production of opium. All other exporting countries use the CPS method
of NRM production, a method that allows the plant to go to seed;
portions of the plant are then processed into a concentrate. It is
generally believed that CPS is less divertible than opium. CPS may be
rich in morphine (CPS-M) or rich in thebaine (CPS-T). The United States
imports the majority of its CPS-M from Turkey, with Australia supplying
much of the balance.
The 80/20 rule was established based on traditional import amounts
and on the U.N. resolution calling on member nations to support
traditional sources that have been reliable suppliers and that take
measures to curtail diversion. The United States allowed a limited
number of non-traditional suppliers to have access to the United States
market based on past commercial relationships and on the desirability
of preserving alternative sources. This approach was consistent with
the U.N. Resolution because it supported India and Turkey, and ensured
an adequate and uninterrupted supply of NRM, while limiting the number
of supplying countries. DEA continues to support the 80/20 rule.
On June 6, 2005, the Government of Spain petitioned DEA seeking to
be added to the list of non-traditional suppliers. Spain stated four
reasons that granting its petition would be consistent with United
States interests:
The change would be consistent with the 80/20 rule because
it maintains India and Turkey as the two traditional supplier
countries, that is, Spain does not seek to be added to the list of
traditional suppliers.
The change would ensure adequate supplies of NRM.
The change would not result in diversion because Spain
maintains strict control and oversight over the cultivation and
distribution of NRM.
The change would allow DEA to monitor diversion and
maintain cost-effective supplies.
In its petition, Spain explained that in the early 1970s, Spanish
pharmaceutical firms sought authorization to cultivate opium poppies to
produce NRM. In 1973, Spain authorized a single firm, Alcaliber, to
cultivate, harvest, store, and prepare extracts from the opium poppy.
Spain is now the fifth largest cultivator of opium poppies; Spain is
the fourth largest producer of CPS and the third largest exporter of
CPS-M.\1\ Spain has ratified international agreements to control
production and commerce in opium products. In accordance with these
international agreements, Spain has implemented a comprehensive
regulatory regime for controlling the cultivation, production, and
export of NRM. The petition stated that this control ensures that NRM
produced in Spain are not diverted to illicit uses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Narcotic Drugs: Estimated World Requirements for 2005--
Statistics for 2003'', Tables II and XIII; International Narcotics
Control Board (E/INCB/2004/2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEA has reviewed the petition and is proposing to change the list
of non-traditional suppliers to remove Yugoslavia and replace it with
Spain. DEA has determined that the successor states to the former
Yugoslavia no longer produce NRM for export. Therefore, replacing
Yugoslavia with Spain will continue to limit the number of non-
traditional suppliers to the United States while ensuring that an
adequate number of sources of NRM are available. The change does not
otherwise affect how the 80/20 rule is implemented.
Regulatory Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control,
hereby certifies that this rulemaking has been drafted in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), that he has
reviewed this regulation, and by approving it certifies that this
regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small business entities. The proposed rule imposes no new
costs or burden on small entities.
Executive Order 12866
The Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control,
further certifies that this rulemaking has been drafted in accordance
with the principles in Executive Order 12866 Section 1(b). It has been
determined that this is a significant regulatory action. Therefore,
this action has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule meets the applicable standards set forth in
Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule does not preempt or modify any provision of
State law; nor does it impose enforcement responsibilities on any
State; nor does it diminish the power of any State to enforce its own
laws. Accordingly, this rulemaking does not have federalism
implications warranting the application of Executive Order 13132.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule will not result in the expenditure by State,
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $117,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation) in any one
year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
[[Page 58571]]
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed rule is not a major rule as defined by Section 804 of
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This
rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000
or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to
compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1312
Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR part 1312 is proposed to be
amended as follows:
PART 1312--IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
1. The authority citation for Part 1312 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 952, 953, 954, 957, 958.
2. Section 1312.13 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraphs
(f) and (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 1312.13 Issuance of import permit.
* * * * *
(f) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section,
the Administrator shall permit, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(1) or
(a)(2)(A), the importation of approved narcotic raw material (opium,
poppy straw and concentrate of poppy straw) having as its source:
(1) Turkey,
(2) India,
(3) Spain,
(4) France,
(5) Poland,
(6) Hungary, and
(7) Australia.
(g) At least eighty (80) percent of the narcotic raw material
imported into the United States shall have as its original source
Turkey and India. Except under conditions of insufficient supplies of
narcotic raw materials, not more than twenty (20) percent of the
narcotic raw material imported into the United States annually shall
have as its source Spain, France, Poland, Hungary and Australia.
Dated: September 26, 2006.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control.
[FR Doc. E6-16325 Filed 10-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P