Registration and Reregistration Fees for Controlled Substance and List I Chemical Registrants, 44710-44734 [2020-16169]
Download as PDF
44710
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66,
1431, 1433, 1436, 1448, 1459, 1590, 1594,
1623, 1624, 1644, 1644a, 2071 note.
*
*
*
*
*
2. In § 122.15, amend the table in
paragraph (b) by adding entries for
‘‘Boca Raton, Florida’’, ‘‘Lakeland,
Florida’’, ‘‘New Windsor, New York’’,
and ‘‘Ontario, California’’ in
alphabetical order to read as follows.
■
§ 122.15
*
Location
*
*
Name
*
*
*
*
*
Boca Raton, Florida .................................................................................. Boca Raton Airport.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Lakeland, Florida ...................................................................................... Lakeland Linder International Airport.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
New Windsor, New York .......................................................................... New York Stewart International Airport.
Ontario, California ..................................................................................... Ontario International Airport.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: July 14, 2020.
Robert F. Altneu,
Director, Regulations & Disclosure Law
Division, Regulations & Rulings, Office of
Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
*
*
submitted on or after October 1, 2020,
and for all renewal applications
submitted on or after October 1, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Scott A. Brinks, Regulatory Drafting &
Policy Support Section (DPW),
Diversion Control Division, Drug
Enforcement Administration; Mailing
Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive,
Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone:
(571) 362–3261.
Drug Enforcement Administration
I. Executive Summary
[FR Doc. 2020–15475 Filed 7–23–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
The Diversion Control Program
21 CFR Parts 1301 and 1309
[Docket No. DEA–501]
RIN 1117–AB51
Registration and Reregistration Fees
for Controlled Substance and List I
Chemical Registrants
Drug Enforcement
Administration, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) is adjusting the
fee schedule for registration and
reregistration fees necessary to recover
the costs of its Diversion Control
Program relating to the registration and
control of the manufacture, distribution,
dispensing, importation and exportation
of controlled substances and list I
chemicals as mandated by the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This
final rule adopts the notice of proposed
rulemaking published on March 16,
2020, to change the fee schedule and
codify existing practices of the issuance
of refunds by DEA for applicant
registration fees, without change.
DATES: This final rule is effective
October 1, 2020. The new fee schedule
will be in effect for all new applications
SUMMARY:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
User fee airports.
*
*
(b) * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
DEA’s Diversion Control Program
(DCP) is administered by the Diversion
Control Division (DC). DC ensures the
availability of controlled substances and
listed chemicals for legitimate use in the
United States. The DCP is responsible
for maintaining a closed system of
distribution by preventing diversion of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals in the United States and
enforcing the provisions of the CSA for
DEA. The DCP regulates over 1.8
million registrants, ensuring their
compliance with the CSA.
Legal Authority
The DCP is a strategic component of
DEA’s law enforcement mission, which
regulates the registration and control of
the manufacture, distribution,
dispensing, importation, and
exportation of pharmaceutical
controlled substances and listed
chemicals. The DCP implements and
enforces the CSA to help prevent,
detect, and eliminate the diversion of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals into the illicit market while
ensuring a sufficient supply of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals for legitimate medical,
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
scientific, research, and industrial
purposes.1
Under the CSA, DEA is authorized to
charge reasonable fees relating to the
registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
import, and export of controlled
substances and listed chemicals. 21
U.S.C. 821 and 958(f). DEA must set fees
at a level that ensures the recovery of
the full costs of operating the various
aspects of its DCP. 21 U.S.C. 886a. Each
year, DEA is required by statute to
transfer the first $15 million of fee
revenues into the general fund of the
Treasury and the remainder of the fee
revenues is deposited into a separate
fund of the Treasury called the
Diversion Control Fee Account (DCFA).
21 U.S.C. 886a(1). On at least a quarterly
basis, the Secretary of the Treasury is
required to reimburse DEA an amount
from the DCFA ‘‘in accordance with
estimates made in the budget request of
the Attorney General for those fiscal
years’’ for the operation of the DCP.2 21
U.S.C. 886a(1)(B) and (D). The first $15
million of fee revenues that are
transferred to the Treasury do not
support any DCP activities.
The Proposed Rule
DEA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) on March 16, 2020,
in the Federal Register, proposing new
registration and reregistration fees for
registrants, as well as proposing to
codify existing practices of issuing
refunds for these fees in limited
1 The Attorney General’s delegation of authority
to DEA may be found at 28 CFR 0.100.
2 The DCP consists of the pharmaceutical
controlled substance and listed chemical diversion
control activities of DEA. These activities are
related to the registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing, importation,
and exportation of controlled substances and listed
chemicals (21 U.S.C. 886a(2)).
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
circumstances. 85 FR 14810. In the
NPRM, DEA proposed to amend 21 CFR
1301.13, 1309.11, 1309.12, and 1309.21
within the Code of Federal Regulations.
In the NPRM, DEA proposed a new
fee of $3,699 per year for manufacturers
of controlled substances. For
distributors, reverse distributors,
importers, and exporters of controlled
substances, DEA proposed a new fee of
$1,850 per year. For controlled
substance business activities involving
dispensing, a new fee of $888 per three
year cycle was proposed. For all other
business activities of controlled
substances (research, narcotic treatment
programs (NTPs), and chemical
analysis), the proposed new fee was
$296 per year. For manufacturers of list
I chemicals, DEA proposed a new fee of
$3,699 per year. For distributors,
importers, and exporters of list I
chemicals, DEA proposed a new fee of
$1,850 per year.
This final rule adopts the March 16,
2020, NPRM proposal to change the fee
schedule and codify existing practices
of the issuance of refunds by DEA for
applicant registration fees, without
change.
II. Background
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
History of Fees
In October 1992, Congress passed the
Departments of Commerce, Justice, and
State, the Judiciary and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act of 1993
(Pub. L. 102–395), which changed the
source of funding for DEA’s DCP from
being part of DEA’s annual
Congressional appropriation to full
funding by registration and
reregistration fees through the
establishment of the DCFA.3 The
Appropriations Act of 1993 required
that ‘‘[f]ees charged by the Drug
Enforcement Administration under its
diversion control program shall be set at
a level that ensures the recovery of the
full costs of operating the various
aspects of that program.’’ The legislation
did not, however, provide clarification
on what constituted the ‘‘Diversion
Control Program,’’ thus leaving open the
issue as to what fee-setting criteria
should be used to determine which
costs could be reimbursed from the
DCFA.
In response to the Appropriations Act
of 1993, DEA published an NPRM in
December 1992 to adjust the registration
and reregistration fees for controlled
substance registrants (57 FR 60148,
December 18, 1992). In the absence of
guidelines from Congress regarding the
specific criteria to be followed in
3 21
identifying costs and setting the fees,
DEA relied on the plain language of the
Appropriations Act of 1993 and
proposed fees necessary to cover the
costs of the activities that were
identified within the budget decision
unit known as the ‘‘Diversion Control
Program.’’
At the time that the Appropriations
Act of 1993 was passed, 21 U.S.C. 821
did not extend to chemical control
activities; accordingly, there were no
registration or fee requirements for
handlers of list I chemicals. DEA
therefore excluded chemical control
costs from its Final Rule implementing
the requirements of the Appropriations
Act of 1993 (58 FR 15272, March 22,
1993). Congress amended 21 U.S.C. 821
on December 17, 1993, to require
reasonable fees relating to ‘‘the
registration and control of regulated
persons and of regulated transactions’’
(Domestic Chemical Diversion Control
Act of 1993, 3(a), Pub. L. 103–200, 107
Stat. 2333); however, despite this
amendment, DEA continued to
endeavor to maintain separate funding
for its controlled substances diversion
control and its chemical diversion
control activities.
Following publication of DEA’s Final
Rule, the American Medical Association
(AMA) and others filed a lawsuit
objecting to the increase in registration
and reregistration fees on the grounds
that DEA had failed to provide adequate
information as to what activities were
covered by the fees and how they were
justified. The district court issued its
final order granting DEA’s motion for
summary judgment and disposing of all
claims on July 5, 1994.4 Upon AMA’s
appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit remanded,
without vacating, the rule to DEA,
requiring the agency to provide an
opportunity for meaningful notice and
comment on the fee-funded components
of the DCP. In doing so, the court
confirmed the boundaries of the DCP
that DEA can fund by registration fees,
finding that the current statutory
scheme (21 U.S.C. 821 and 958)
required DEA to set reasonable
registration fees to recover the full costs
of the DCP. See AMA v. Reno, 57 F.3d
1129, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1995). DEA
responded to the remand requirement
through a notice and comment in the
Federal Register on December 30, 1996,
describing the fee-funded components
and activities of the DCP with an
explanation of how each satisfies the
statutory requirements for fee-funding
(61 FR 68624–32, December 30, 1996).
U.S.C. 886a(1)(C).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
4 AMA
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
v. Reno, 857 F. Supp. 80 (D.D.C. 1994).
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44711
Thus, in the absence of a simple,
objective measure by which DCP costs
could be identified and the appropriate
fees calculated, both DEA and the courts
have looked to 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958
to define the guidelines for determining
what costs should be included in the
calculation of the fees and from whom
the fees might be collected.
The Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act of
2005 was signed into law on December
8, 2004, as Division B of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2005 (Pub. L. 108–447). Title IV, Section
634 of the Appropriations Act of 2005
provided clarification as to the activities
constituting the DCP. The
Appropriations Act of 2005 amended 21
U.S.C. 886a(2)(A) to define the
Diversion Control Program as ‘‘the
controlled substance and chemical
diversion control activities of the Drug
Enforcement Administration,’’ which
are further defined as the ‘‘activities
related to the registration and control of
the manufacture, distribution and
dispensing, importation and exportation
of controlled substances and listed
chemicals.’’ It also amended 21 U.S.C.
886a(1)(B) to provide that
reimbursements from the DCFA ‘‘shall
be made without distinguishing
between expenses related to controlled
substances activities and expenses
related to chemical activities.’’ Finally,
the Appropriations Act of 2005
amended 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958(f) to
make the language of those sections
consistent with the definition of the
DCP (Pub. L. 108–447). The net effect of
the amendments was to allow DEA to
deposit all registration and
reregistration fees (controlled substance
and chemical) into the DFCA and fund
all controlled substance and chemical
diversion control activities from the
account without distinguishing as to the
type of activity (controlled substance or
chemical) being funded.
Independent of the passage of the
Appropriations Act of 2005, DEA
undertook an internal reorganization to
increase operational efficiencies and
overall effectiveness. As discussed in
detail in DEA’s Final Rule published on
August 29, 2006 (71 FR 51105), the
resulting internal reorganization
removed the focus from the single
business decision unit of the DCP to a
focus on diversion control activities
irrespective of the business decision
unit. That is, the diversion control
activities of DEA are no longer
contained in a single business decision
unit identified as the DCP. Thus, in
identifying the activities that constitute
the DCP, DEA looks across the agency
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44712
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
at all functions related to the
registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
importation, and exportation of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals. This approach adheres both
to the language contained in 21 U.S.C.
821 and 958 and to the court’s
requirement that there must be a nexus
between the DCP’s activities funded
through fees, and the registration and
control of the manufacture, distribution,
and dispensing of controlled substances
and listed chemicals of regulated
persons and regulated transactions.
In keeping with this organizational
and functional change, DEA continues
to identify the diversion control
activities to be funded by the DCFA.
Accordingly, this NPRM describes the
activities that constitute the DCP,
irrespective of organizational structure
within the agency and in compliance
with 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958, and 21
U.S.C. 886a, which require that DEA
charge reasonable fees relating to the
registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
importation, and exportation of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals and that DEA collect fees
adequate to fully fund the controlled
substances and listed chemical
diversion control activities that
constitute the DCP, as defined by DEA.
The Department of Justice’s (DOJ)
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
completed a review of DEA’s use of the
DCFA in 2008 and did not find any
misused DCFA funds for non-diversion
control activities between Fiscal Year
(FY) 2004 and FY 2007. To the contrary,
the OIG found that DEA did not fully
fund all diversion control costs with the
DCFA as required by law.5 Therefore, in
2011 DEA published a NPRM to
continue efforts to fully fund the DCP.
The 2011 NPRM included additional
DCP costs which were identified in the
OIG report and resulted in an
approximately 33 percent fee increase
across all registrant groups. The 2011
NPRM was finalized in 2012, and this
was the last time DEA adjusted the fees
prior to the current fee increase.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
III. Diversion Control Program
Scope of the Diversion Control Program
The mission of DEA’s DC is to
prevent, detect and investigate the
diversion of pharmaceutical controlled
substances and listed chemicals from
legitimate channels while ensuring an
adequate and uninterrupted supply of
5 ‘‘Review of the Drug Enforcement
Administration’s Use of the Diversion Control Fee
Account,’’ I–2008–002, February 2008, https://
www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/DEA/e0802/final.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
pharmaceutical controlled substances
and listed chemicals to meet legitimate
medical, commercial, and scientific
needs. This Division administers the
DCP, which is responsible for enforcing
the provisions of the CSA, as they
pertain to ensuring the availability of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals for legitimate uses in the
U.S., while exercising controls to
prevent the diversion of these
substances and chemicals for illegal
uses. This Division maintains an overall
geographic picture of drug and chemical
diversion and abuse problems to
identify new trends or patterns in
diversion and abuse, which enables it to
appropriately direct resources.
The DCP is executed by maintaining
a closed system of distribution by
regulating and managing over 1.8
million DEA registrants and
investigating activity related to the
diversion of pharmaceutical controlled
substances and listed chemicals. To
ensure accountability within the closed
system of distribution, the DCP
administers, maintains, and oversees
DEA’s registration system. This entails
processing, reviewing, and, if necessary,
investigating all applications for
registration and reregistration, collecting
fees, and, when appropriate, proposing
to take administrative action on
registrations or applications for
registration, such as restriction,
revocation, suspension, or denial of an
application.
The DCP’s regulatory function is
accomplished by registering those
entities that handle controlled
substances or listed chemicals,
conducting regulatory inspections,
providing information and guidance to
registrants, and controlling and
monitoring the manufacture,
distribution, dispensing, import, and
export of controlled substances and
listed chemicals. The DCP determines
the appropriate procedures necessary
for ordering and distributing schedule I
and II controlled substances, using DEA
Form 222 or its electronic equivalent.6
This enables the DCP to monitor the
flow of certain controlled substances
from their point of manufacture through
commercial distribution. The DCP also
executes its regulatory functions by
fulfilling its U.S. treaty obligations
pertaining to the CSA, such as the
preparation of periodic reports for
submission to the United Nations (UN)
as mandated by U.S. international drug
control treaty obligations on the
manufacture and distribution of narcotic
and psychotropic substances, as well as
determining the anticipated future
PO 00000
6 21
U.S.C. 828, 21 CFR part 1305.
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
needs for narcotic and psychotropic
substances.
The DCP ensures that registrants are
in compliance with the safeguards of the
CSA. This allows for the identification
and the prevention of diversion of
pharmaceutical controlled substances
and listed chemicals into illicit markets.
Registrant compliance is determined
primarily through pre-registration,
scheduled, and complaint
investigations. DCP regulatory activities
have an inherent deterrent function, and
they are designed to ensure that those
businesses and individuals registered
with DEA to handle controlled
substances or listed chemicals have
sufficient measures in place to prevent
the diversion of these substances. These
investigations also help registrants
understand and comply with the CSA,
identify those registrants who violate
the CSA, and implement regulations.
Pre-registration investigations reduce
the possibility of registering
unauthorized entities, ensure that the
means to prevent diversion are in place,
and determine whether registration is
consistent with the public interest.
Not only does the DCP exercise
authority and control over the registrant
population, the DCP exercises authority
over the classification of substances.7
This is accomplished by evaluating
drugs and chemicals to determine
whether these substances are being
abused or potentially involved in illicit
traffic, and to evaluate whether any
substances should be scheduled as a
controlled substance or regulated as a
listed chemical. This requires the
collection and analysis of a large
amount of data from various sources.
These evaluations are used by DEA as
a basis for developing appropriate drug
control policies; determining the status
of controlled, excluded, or exempted
drugs and drug products; and
supporting U.S. initiatives in
international forums.
The DCP’s authority over controlled
substances and listed chemicals requires
its support of domestic and foreign
investigations of these substances. As
such, the DCP serves as the competent
national authority for the U.S. regarding
listed chemicals and international
treaties. The DCP works with the
international community to identify and
seize international shipments of listed
chemicals destined for the U.S. The DCP
also works on a bilateral basis to urge
international partners to take effective
action, in cooperation with chemical
companies, to establish controls and
prevent the diversion of listed
chemicals from legitimate trade. In
7 21
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
U.S.C. 811–814.
24JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
addition to its other oversight and
regulatory responsibilities in this area,
the DCP reviews the importation and
exportation notifications of listed
chemicals.
The DCP also controls the
manufacture of controlled substances by
setting the aggregate production quotas,
individual manufacturing quotas, and
procurement quotas for basic classes of
schedule I and II controlled substances.
Similarly, the DCP controls the
manufacture of list I chemicals
ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and
phenylpropanolamine by setting the
assessment of annual needs, individual
manufacturing quotas, procurement
quotas and import quotas for these three
list I chemicals. As such, the DCP
maintains and monitors the Year-End
Reporting System/Quota Management
System (YERS/QMS), which provides
information on entities manufacturing
schedule I and II controlled substances
and list I chemicals ephedrine,
pseudoephedrine, and
phenylpropanolamine. Furthermore, the
DCP issues import and export
registrations and permits, and monitors
declared imports, exports, and
transshipments of these substances. The
DCP must ensure that all imports and
exports of controlled substances and
listed chemicals meet the requirements
of the CSA. As such, the DCP maintains
and monitors many electronic reporting
systems, such as the Chemical Handlers
Enforcement Management System,
which provides information on entities
manufacturing, distributing, and
exporting and importing regulated
chemicals, and encapsulating and
tableting machines.8
To effectively execute its regulatory
functions, the DCP reviews legislation
pertinent to the availability of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals for legitimate uses in the U.S.
and controls to prevent the diversion of
these substances and chemicals. The
DCP drafts and implements regulations
to keep DEA in compliance with
legislation enacted by Congress. The
DCP constantly reviews its own
regulations and develops and
implements regulations designed to
enhance DEA’s diversion control efforts.
The DCP’s regulatory activities also
require education and outreach to
ensure understanding of and
compliance with the CSA and
applicable regulations, and to ensure
registrants have sufficient measures in
place to prevent diversion. The DCP’s
outreach efforts include establishing
and maintaining liaison and working
relationships with other Federal
8 See
21 U.S.C. 830, 957–58.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
agencies, the regulated community, and
foreign, state, and local governments.
Other efforts include developing and
maintaining manuals and other
publications; organizing and conducting
national conferences on current issues,
policies, and initiatives; and providing
scientific support for policy guidance,
expert witness testimony, and
conference presentations.
The DCP continues to address the
growing threat of synthetic substances
through the collection and evaluation of
pharmacological, medical,
epidemiological and other scientific
data for new drugs of abuse and when
appropriate, initiate the necessary
administrative procedures to place these
substances under regulatory control.
Since the last fee increase in 2012, the
nature of the diversion control problem
has increased in size and complexity.
The increased diversion threats and
changing diversion schemes such as the
opioid epidemic, as well as
amendments to the CSA, have
necessitated the need to increase DEA
registration fees in order to fully fund
all aspects of the DCP.
Although DEA has been fiscally
responsible and has not increased
registration fees since 2012, a
registration fee increase is needed. This
increase will fund personnel and
operations supporting the DCP’s
mission to prevent and detect diversion,
protect the closed system of distribution
in the U.S., and combat the nation’s
opioid crisis. Without an increase in
registration fees, DEA will be unable to
continue current operations and will be
in violation of the statutory mandate
that fees charged ‘‘shall be set at a level
that ensures the recovery of the full
costs of operating the various aspects of
[the diversion control program].’’ 21
U.S.C. 886a(1)(C).
IV. Discussion of Comments
Following publication of the NPRM
on March 16, 2020, 85 FR 14810–14837,
DEA received twelve comments in
response to the rule. Of these comments,
five comments are out of scope in their
entirety, and did not address the fee
calculation or the issuance of refunds by
DEA for applicant registration fees. Two
comments supported the proposed rule
in part. The remainder of the comments
expressed concern about the fee
increase, as further described below.
Support for the Fee Increase and
Proposal To Grant Registration Refunds
Issue: An association agreed with
DEA’s proposed methodology for the
new fee calculation and the proposal to
grant registration fee refunds under
certain circumstances. The commenter
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44713
expressed its appreciation for DEA’s
acknowledgement that there will be a
certain amount of honest errors either
on the part of the registrant or on DEA’s
part. This commenter wrote that the
proposed rule provides a useful
explanation of the three alternative
methodologies to calculate the new
registration fees and agreed with DEA’s
selection of the weighted-ratio method.
The commenter wrote that because all
supply chain trading partners share a
responsibility for helping to avoid the
misuse/abuse of the controlled
substances and other products that DEA
regulates, adopting a method that
applies an equivalent increase to all
registrants is reasonable.
Another association also supported
the proposal to allow the Administrator
to refund registration fees under certain
circumstances. They requested that
information regarding the refund
process be easily accessible, and that an
efficient process be established to issue
the refunds.
DEA Response: DEA appreciates the
support for the selected fee calculation
methodology, and the codification of
DEA policy regarding refunding of
registration fees in certain
circumstances. In developing the fee
schedule, DEA conducted a thorough
analysis of the identified fee calculation
options—including the anticipated
economic impact on registrants—and
determined that the weighted-ratio
option represents the most reasonable
approach to calculate registrant fees
sufficient to fully fund the DCP.
Based on the Administrator’s
discretionary authority, the refunds for
fees will be issued under limited
circumstances, to include applicant
error, DEA error, and death of a
registrant within the first year of the
three-year registration cycle. The
process for obtaining a refund will be
made available on DEA Diversion
Control’s website
(www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov).
Objection to the Fee Increase
Auditing Mechanisms
Issue: Two commenters, one of whom
is a physician, the other of whom is
anonymous, raised concern about
tracking DEA’s accountability with
respect to the DCFA. These commenters
wrote that an audit should be done on
the DCFA to avoid waste and to ensure
that the DCFA does not become a blank
check for DEA to do whatever they want
with it. In particular, the commenters
were concerned with how the fees are
being spent. The physician commenter
objected to the fee increase and
proposed that an independent, non-
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44714
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
governmental audit be performed on an
annual basis to ensure that there is no
fraud or waste of the fees.
DEA Response: As required by the
Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act, DOJ
OIG annually audits DEA’s financial
statements, using a third party auditor
(currently KPMG). These audits cover
all of DEA’s funding sources and lines
of business, including the DCFA. DEA
has received an unqualified audit
opinion for approximately twenty years.
Additionally, DEA has established a
robust system of internal controls to
ensure that DEA recovers the full cost of
the DCP, and that the DCFA is used only
for all of that program’s costs, as
directed by law. These internal controls
over non-personnel expenses are
managed by the Cost Diversion
Validation Unit. This unit is
independent of the DCP and resides
within the Financial Management
Division, which is responsible for all of
DEA’s financial management, including
that of the DCFA. The unit reviews
every DCFA expenditure over $500 for
a justification for how it relates to the
DCP and ensures that DCFA funding is
in compliance with established
methodologies. The Cost Diversion
Validation Unit recommends
methodologies for the appropriate and
consistent use of DCFA funding across
commodities and cost areas, to ensure
the funding is used to pay for only costs
attributable to the DCP.
Along with the oversight of the Cost
Diversion Validation Unit over nonpersonnel expenses, DEA’s Office of
Resource Management reviews the
investigative work performed by DEA’s
workforce, including Special Agents, on
a quarterly basis. These reviews enable
DEA to ensure that the DCFA pays for
all payroll costs associated with DCP
casework and does not pay for the
payroll or employees working on nonDCP casework. In instances where
DCFA funded employees work on nonDCP cases, DEA’s salaries and expenses
(non-DCFA) account reimburses the
DCFA for those payroll expenses. These
internal controls ensure that DCFA
funding is used only for the
requirements of the DCP and not made
available for non-diversion related
expenses within DEA.
DC, as part of DEA, must adhere to
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular A–123, Management’s
Responsibility for Enterprise Risk
Management,9 and Internal Control and
Federal Managers’ and Financial
9 Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular No. A–123, Management’s Responsibility
for Internal Control.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
Integrity Act 10 which have been at the
center of Federal requirements to
improve accountability in Federal
programs and operations since 1981.
Under OMB Circular A–123, DEA must
maintain internal controls that reduce
the risk of fraud, waste, and error. DEA
is also responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal controls to achieve
specific internal control objectives
related to operations, reporting, and
compliance.
In addition to DEA’s internal
inspection and evaluation practices,
DEA’s programs are subject to external
audits and reviews, as part of
maintaining the public’s trust in DEA’s
ability to manage resources in
fulfillment of its mission. DOJ, OIG, and
the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) are the primary auditing agencies
that review DEA’s programs on an ad
hoc basis. The outcome of external
audits, whether positive or negative, has
a significant impact on DEA’s programs.
Moreover, all budget submissions for
the DCP are subject to multiple levels of
scrutiny and review within DEA, the
DOJ, and OMB. Each of DEA’s annual
budget requests to Congress, which
includes the DCP, is available for public
view. Each budget request is examined
and approved by both DOJ and OMB.
The DCP’s implementation of internal
inspection and evaluation practices
coupled with federal mandates
established by OMB, OIG, and GAO are
sufficient to maintain DC’s program
integrity, efficiency, and transparency.
All aspects of the DCP are inspected to
detect any waste, fraud, or abuse. An
external, non-governmental audit, as
suggested by the physician commenter,
would require a large expenditure of
registrant fees, and would be excessive,
given the other safeguards that are
already in effect.
Hiring of Additional Personnel To
Address DCP’s Mission; Finalizing
Rules and Updates to DEA Publications
Issue: The anonymous commenter
raised concern about the increase in fees
as it relates to the hiring of additional
personnel, and the physician questioned
what is being funded by registrant fees.
The anonymous commenter stated that
hiring personnel did not seem to be the
answer because enforcement was not
working on the opioid epidemic. The
anonymous commenter further
suggested that hiring additional people
would not solve the problems of the
opioid epidemic, and opined that DEA
believes that additional people will
magically solve the opioid epidemic.
Both commenters stated that DEA has
PO 00000
10 31
U.S.C. 3512.
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
failed to meet many Congressional
deadlines that were imposed by the
enactment of various legislation. The
physician also added that DEA has been
slow to draft implementing regulations
for statutory amendments to the CSA,
and to draft other rules, schedule
substances, or update manuals and
publications that help registrants.
DEA Response: As a part of executing
the DCP’s mission, DEA is focused on
combatting the opioid epidemic, as well
as addressing the diversion of other
controlled substances and listed
chemicals. While DEA knows that the
hiring of additional people will not
automatically solve the epidemic, hiring
more people will improve DEA’s ability
to successfully investigate diversion. By
increasing personnel and devoting more
resources towards prioritizing and
drafting rules, DEA will be able to more
efficiently and effectively meet
deadlines and address diversion.
While DEA aims to meet every
deadline Congress puts in place when
creating new legislation, DEA’s
rulemaking process involves many
steps. Where Congress has enacted
statutory amendments to the CSA, such
as the SUPPORT Act, DEA complies
with these laws while finalizing
implementing regulations for these
amendments. Moreover, finalizing and
implementing rules require the
publication of proposed rules or interim
final rules and final rules. These
documents require significant drafting
and analysis, as well as a lengthy review
process to ensure that the rule is legal,
fair, and will be effective in meeting the
goal of the particular rule.
In the proposed rule to increase fees,
DEA chose not to discuss any other
proposed rules or their status, due to the
sensitive nature of rule drafting, as well
as the fact that proposed rules can
change prior to finalization. However,
DEA received comments questioning the
necessity of the fee increase due to the
fact that implementing regulations for
statutory amendments to the CSA, as
well as a regulation related to marijuana
growers, have yet to be published. As
stated above, the rulemaking process is
lengthy and involves multiple phases.
In 2019, DEA published two NPRMs,
three Final Rules, and two Notices
(regarding the setting of the aggregate
production quota and assessment of
annual needs). So far, in 2020, DEA has
published three NPRMs and one Notice
(to adjust the established aggregate
production quotas and assessment of
annual needs).
The physician commenter also noted
that DEA’s Diversion Control website
Manuals and Publications section
contains older manuals. However, this
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
is not indicative of DEA’s continuous
efforts to keep policies and procedures
current with regulations, technology,
and industry best practices. DEA is in
the process of updating the entire
Manuals and Publications section on its
website and several manuals are being
drafted. DCFA funds will be used to
provide the DCP with additional
resources to update the manuals and
outdated documents. The physician also
contended that DEA publishes an
average of only three scheduling actions
per year. This is inaccurate. Since FY
2019 alone, DEA has published in the
Federal Register over twenty final rules
placing dangerous substances in
schedules I and II of the CSA.
Quotas
Issue: The physician commenter
raised a concern about DEA’s process
for setting quotas. In particular, the
commenter did not understand how
proposing new use-specific quotas
would expedite the process or provide
clarity. The commenter wrote that it is
unsettling to pay for leadership that is
unsure about how certain processes
under their purview work.
DEA Response: DC’s leadership fully
understands the quota setting process
and plays an active role in the rulemaking process.
In addition, DEA is committed to
ensuring that quotas are set in such a
way as to grant manufacturers the
ability to provide controlled substances
to meet the demand of the legitimate
medical, scientific, industrial, and
research needs of the U.S. DEA is
required to understand what is available
for legitimate patient need versus what
is available for product development to
properly calculate the Aggregate
Production Quota (APQ) and individual
quotas. Additionally, as the number of
manufacturers continues to increase and
industry practices and specializations
change, the ability to methodically track
movements of material between
registrants at all stages of manufacturing
becomes more critical. Use-specific
subcategories improve the efficiency of
the application and reporting process
for DEA-registered manufacturers. The
specification of quota subcategories
reflects the manufacturing activity of the
applying DEA registrant, has facilitated
the issuance of manufacturing and
procurement quotas, and has provided a
more accurate calculation of the APQs
for the U.S. by preventing double
counting of quotas. Use-specific quotas
have been informally in place for well
over a decade with no complaints from
the registrants who have found the
system beneficial in separating their
product development and packaging
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
efforts from their commercial
manufacturing efforts when requesting
adjustments to their quotas.
Education and Outreach Programs
Issue: The physician commenter
suggested that DEA could save money
and manpower by eliminating programs
such as DEA 360 Strategy, National
Take-Back Initiative (NTBI), and
Tactical Diversion Squads (TDS). This
commenter believes that DEA has not
been proactive enough in its mission to
address or prevent the opioid problem.
DEA Response: DEA works diligently
to achieve operational efficiencies in all
of its programs, including the DCP,
while keeping costs as low as possible.
Due to increased diversion and
prescription drug abuse, as well as an
increase in the production and use of
chemicals that contribute to the health
emergency, DEA’s 360 Strategy, NTBI,
and TDS groups are necessary tools to
aid ending the deadly cycle of
prescription opioid misuse.
Through DEA’s 360 program,
prescription opioid misuse is targeted
using a holistic approach while
leveraging enforcement resources. Given
the number of opioid-related deaths, the
coordinated and targeted enforcement
efforts of federal, state, and local law
enforcement are needed resources to
help fight the epidemic. This epidemic
is too massive for state and local
governments to handle alone. The
opioid epidemic is a national matter,
which requires coordinated law
enforcement, diversion control, and
community outreach efforts, and which
is aided by DEA’s 360 Strategy
initiative.
Before DEA began NTBI, most U.S.
communities did not routinely offer
opportunities to properly dispose of
expired, unused, or unwanted
pharmaceutical controlled substances.
As a result, many people kept these
drugs because they did not know how
to dispose of them. In many cases,
dispensed controlled pharmaceutical
drugs remain in household medicine
cabinets well after medication therapy
has been completed, thus providing
easy access to non-medical users for
abuse or accidental ingestion. NTBI
events have been overwhelmingly
successful for over a decade, and have
resulted in the collection and disposal
of over 6,349 tons of pharmaceuticals.
The huge volume of drugs must be
transported for proper disposal. The
assistance from local points of contact is
necessary to pick up collected drugs for
disposal in accordance with Federal and
State environmental standards. The
NTBI program is an example of the
DCP’s commitment to community
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44715
outreach efforts and the need to
properly dispose of unused and
unwanted controlled substances. This
collaborative effort between DEA and
State and local law enforcement
agencies is focused on removing
potentially dangerous controlled
pharmaceutical substances from our
nation’s medicine cabinets to reduce
opportunities for diversion.
The TDS program has been a
successful tool employed by the DCP to
combat the illegal diversion of
controlled substances. Combining the
criminal drug investigative experience
of DEA Special Agents, the subject
matter expertise of Diversion
Investigators (DIs), and the local
knowledge and capabilities of deputized
Task Force Officers, the TDSs can
effectively confront the diversion
problem on multiple levels. Since the
initial deployment, TDSs have initiated
an average of more than 1,500 cases and
made more than 2,100 arrests per year.
The opioid epidemic is a national
matter, which requires consistent
coordinated law enforcement, diversion
control, and community outreach efforts
through DEA’s 360, NTBI, and TDSs to
represent the interests of the nation as
a whole. Elimination of these programs
would reduce the awareness of the
opioid crisis, increase opportunities for
diversion, and possibly result in a rise
in opioid-related deaths.
Fee Calculation Methodology
Issue: The physician commenter
believes that the methods described by
the Agency that were used to come up
with the fee increase seem arbitrary.
DEA Response: In developing this
rule, DEA considered three
methodologies to calculate registration
and reregistration fees. DEA selected the
current weighted-ratio option to
calculate the new fees. This approach
has been used since Congress
established registrant fees and continues
to be a reasonable reflection of differing
costs. The registration fees under the
weighted-ratio option result in
differentiated fees among registrant
groups, where registrants with generally
larger revenues and costs pay higher
fees than registrants with lower
revenues and costs. Furthermore, the
weighted-ratio does not create a
disparity in the relative increase in fees
from the current to the new fees. The
weighted-ratios used by DEA to
calculate the current fee have proven
effective and reasonable over time, and
generally reflect the differences in
activity level, notably in inspections,
scheduled investigations, and other
control and monitoring, by registrant
category (i.e., these costs are higher for
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44716
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
manufacturers). DEA selected this
option because it is the only option that
resulted in ‘‘reasonable’’ fees for all
registrant groups.
Fees for Registrant Categories
Issue: The pharmaceutical company
objected to the increased registration
fees, especially for small businesses.
This commenter proposed two
alternatives for assessing registration
fees: Assessing fees based on the size of
the business, or having registrants with
a significant history of CSA violations
pay higher registration fees. The
commenter stated that in the first
proposal, registration fees would be
assessed based on the size of the
business (e.g., the number of employees,
annual earnings, etc.). The commenter’s
second proposal requires registrants
with a significant history of CSA
violations to pay dramatically increased
registration fees. The commenter
believes that specific manufacturers and
wholesale distributors contributed to
the opioid epidemic by turning a blind
eye to CSA laws and implementing
regulations, and were lured by sales of
opioid medications and profits over
their responsibilities as DEA registrants.
DEA also received a comment from an
association agreeing with the concern
for imposing disproportionately higher
fees on NTPs, but objecting because they
believe distributors will not be paying
their fair share under the proposed
‘‘weighted ratio option.’’ The comment
states that the ‘‘past-based option’’
would lead to a 117 percent increase for
distributors, as opposed to the lower 21
percent that is being proposed. In their
view, practitioners under the current
and proposed ‘‘weighted ration option’’
would be paying too much as compared
to manufacturers and distributors. The
association also included a suggestion to
lower fees for physicians who comply
with DEA regulations that impose an
extra cost upon the registrants, such as
the electronic prescribing of controlled
substances (EPCS) or a waiver to
prescribe buprenorphine. The
association takes the position that if
EPCS is supposed to reduce diversion,
then DCP must be incurring lower costs
for those who adopt EPCS. Similarly,
they state that physicians trained to
prescribe buprenorphine to treat opioid
use disorder are lowering DCP costs by
lowering the costs associated with drug
addiction.
A company in support of the fee
increase suggested that DEA eliminate
the duplicative registration requirement.
This company previously sent a letter to
the Office of Legal Policy, U.S.
Department of Justice, dated August 14,
2017, requesting that DEA amend the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
regulations to waive the chemical
registration requirement for wholesale
distributors who are also registered as
controlled substance handlers. The
company further stated that it is
redundant, unnecessary, and unfair to
make a single facility pay two
registration fees. The company was
specifically concerned that wholesale
distributors that possess and distribute
both controlled substances and certain
iodine products must apply and pay
registration fees for two separate
registrations, even though they are
storing and distributing these products
at a single warehouse.
DEA Response: It is important to
emphasize that the focus of DEA’s fee
calculation methodology is to account
for DCP program costs among the
registrant categories and not to set fees
according to business size or quantities
of controlled substances handled. DEA
provided economic impact analysis
demonstrating the relatively minor
proportion of registrant’s total income
needed to pay a registration fee.
Additionally, the analysis showed that
the percentage fee increase is
comparable to inflation.
DEA continues to review possible
methodologies for differentiating fees
between various registrant groups.
However, at this time, DEA has
determined that it is both practicable
and reasonable to continue to apply the
weighted-ratio methodology without
distinction between small and large
businesses.
Regarding using CSA violations as a
factor in setting registration fees, DEA’s
statutory authority is to charge
reasonable registration fees set at a level
that ensures the recovery of the full
costs of operating the various aspects of
the DCP. As a practical matter, the vast
majority of DEA registrants are in
compliance with the CSA, and DEA
works with any registrant who is not in
full compliance with the CSA to bring
that registrant into compliance. The
CSA provides for mechanisms
independent of the registration fee by
which to exact financial penalties from
registrants who violate the law.
Registrants who violate the CSA may be
subject to civil and criminal penalties,
as well as forfeitures. 21 U.S.C. 841,
842, 843, 881. Additionally, DEA would
move to suspend the registration of a
person whose registration is
inconsistent with the public interest.
As discussed in the NPRM and in the
final rule, DEA examined three
alternative methodologies to calculate
registration and reregistration fees. DEA
did not select the past-based option for
two key reasons. First, the fee increase
is disproportionately burdensome to a
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
small number of registrants. Narcotic
treatment program fees would increase
by 856 percent, while the change for the
remaining registrant groups would range
from a decrease of 44 percent to an
increase of 131 percent. DEA deemed
this option unreasonable. Second, the
past-based option is backward looking
and implicitly assumes that the future
will be similar to the past. DEA cannot
assume that future workload will reflect
past DEA work hour data. For example,
DEA plans to conduct more scheduled
investigations in accordance with the
new scheduled investigation work plan.
As a result, DEA has concluded that
past data is not the best basis for the
calculation of new fees. The selected
methodology must be applied to all
registrants. For example, DEA cannot
only apply the past-based option to
distributors.
DEA does not have access to
practitioners’ rates of EPCS use or
buprenorphine prescribing rates. In fact,
many states with prescription drug
monitoring programs prohibit law
enforcement entities from using
prescribing data without specific,
independent legal authority to do so
(e.g., a subpoena or warrant). Even so,
DEA does not have the resources to
calculate the rate of prescribing for each
registrant or to personalize each
registrant’s registration fee.
Additionally, allowing individualized
calculations based on EPCS use,
prescribing rates, business size, or type
of patients served would introduce
uncertainty and unpredictable
fluctuations in the collection cycle,
thereby jeopardizing the statutory
mandate to recover the full costs of
operating the DCP.
Purchasers and suppliers of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals are regulated under the CSA
and are therefore subject to the
registration and reregistration
requirement and fees.11 The CSA is
Federal law and cannot be changed by
DEA. DEA carries out the mandates of
the CSA by preventing the diversion of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals into the illicit market, but
does not have the authority to change
Federal provisions. The commenter
suggested that DEA eliminate the
duplicative registration requirement for
certain chemicals (e.g., iodine). The
CSA requires a separate registration for
certain chemicals to prevent its
diversion into the illicit market. Iodine
is not identified as a listed chemical that
is contained in a drug marketed or
distributed lawfully in the U.S. under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
11 21
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
U.S.C. 822(a)(1); 21 U.S.C. 833(b).
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Act.12 Furthermore, iodine may be used
for non-research, illegitimate purposes,
and is also used in the illicit
manufacture of methamphetamine. DEA
requires a separate registration for this
chemical due to the high probability
that it may be diverted to the
clandestine manufacture of
methamphetamine.
Extension of Implementation Due to
Coronavirus Disease 2019 Public Health
Emergency
Issue: Three commenters
recommended deferring the proposed
fee increase and one objected to its
implementation due to the Coronavirus
Disease (COVID–19) pandemic and the
economic uncertainty that it has
engendered. A pharmaceutical company
suggested that DEA postpone the fee
increases and the comment period at
least until January 2021, and noted that
publishing a proposed fee increase
during a worldwide health pandemic
with looming economic uncertainties
was poorly timed, as the nation’s
current priority is to focus public health
and safety measures on the COVID–19
pandemic. An association
recommended that the fee increases be
postponed until the conclusion of the
public health emergency, stating that
implementing the proposed 21 percent
increase would be a heavy burden to
pharmacists who are already struggling
during this time, as the pandemic has
led to a decrease in patient services and
revenues. A third commenter, also an
association, urged that DEA defer the
registration fee increases for at least 12
months due to the COVID–19 pandemic
and resulting economic recession, or
until the business community has
recovered.
A fourth commenter objected to the
increase in practitioners’ registration
fees because physicians cannot afford to
pay higher DEA registration and
reregistration fees. It stated that
Medicare payment rates are in the midst
of a six-year freeze, and COVID–19 has
led to steep declines in patient services
and associated revenues, even for
frontline physicians caring for patients
with COVID–19, who may face a
reduction in revenues from elective
procedures and increased expenses due
to new infection control processes and
supplies.
DEA Response: DEA recognizes that
industry is experiencing unique
challenges, including financial
challenges, during the current
coronavirus pandemic. Protecting the
health and safety of our communities is
DEA’s top priority, and that
12 21
commitment has continued during the
unprecedented public health emergency
caused by the ongoing COVID–19
pandemic. During this emergency, DC is
responding quickly and appropriately to
ensure continued access to necessary
controlled substances. DC’s efforts
include supporting prescribing practices
that limit exposure, enabling
uninterrupted access to practitioners,
and safeguarding a consistent and
reliable drug supply. Some of the ways
DC continues to fulfill its mission and
serve the American people during this
challenging time include:
• Working with registrants to facilitate
satellite hospitals and clinic locations;
• Temporarily lifting restrictions on DEA’s
‘‘five percent rule’’;
• Temporarily raising aggregate
production quotas for certain medications;
• Providing clear guidance on electronic
prescribing of controlled substances;
• Allowing Narcotic Treatment Programs
to sign invoices post delivery;
• Ensuring Narcotic Treatment Programs
can get medication to their patients; and
• Supporting responsible use of
telemedicine while providing medication
assisted treatment.
These additional COVID–19-related
responsibilities have put additional
pressure on the DCP and its resource
needs.
Moreover, DEA’s scope of
responsibilities has expanded due to
Congressional mandates since the last
fee schedule revision in 2012. DEA
outlined the legal authority, the history
of the fees, the need for an increase in
fees, the methodology, and the proposed
fee calculation in the NPRM to explain
why there is a fee, why there is a
periodic recalculation, and how the
proposed new fee schedule was
calculated. The registration fee is a
statutory requirement for those seeking
to participate in the closed system of
distribution by handling, or having
access to, controlled substances or List
I chemicals. These fees fund the DCP,
which includes providing and
maintaining services to DEA registrants.
DEA is sensitive to the challenges
facing many registrants and has
endeavored to set the fee as low as
possible, consistent with its statutory
mandates, and has provided a 60-day
comment period to solicit input from
interested parties. DEA continuously
strives to be fiscally responsible. The
last fee increase was set in FY 2012, and
was intended to encompass only FYs
2012–2014. Through various efforts and
cost-saving measures, the DCP has been
able to operate under that fee structure
through FY 2020. While DEA is
publishing this final rule at this current
time, the increase will not immediately
go into effect on the date of publication
of this rule. The new fee schedule will
be implemented for all new applications
submitted on or after October 1, 2020,
and for all renewal applications
submitted on or after October 1, 2020.
Thus, not all registrants will be paying
registration and reregistration fees on
October 1, 2020. Those whose
reregistration fees are due between now
and September 30, 2020, will continue
to pay the current fees until their next
date of renewal. As such, only a small
subset of registrants will be affected
when the rule is first implemented.
Without an adjustment in the annual
registration fees, the DCP will be unable
to continue current operations and will
be in violation of the statutory mandate
that fees ‘‘shall be set at a level that
ensures the recovery of the full costs of
operating the various aspects of [the
diversion control program.]’’ 21 U.S.C.
886a(1)(C). Continued collections under
the current fee schedule would require
the DCP to significantly cut existing and
planned DCP operations vital to its
mission. DEA relies on the DCP to
maintain the integrity of the closed
system of distribution as outlined in the
proposed rule, particularly at this time
of increased abuse and diversion.
V. Provisions of the Final Rule
After careful consideration of all the
comments, DEA is finalizing, without
change, the fee schedule, and codifying
existing practices of the issuance of
refunds by DEA for applicant
registration fees as proposed in the
NPRM published on March 16, 2020. 85
FR 14810–14837.
Revised Fees
Based on thorough analysis of the
identified fee calculation options—
including the anticipated economic
impact on registrants—DEA has
determined that the weighed-ratio
option represents the most reasonable
approach to calculate registrant fees
sufficient to fully fund the DCP.
The fee schedule replaces the current
fee schedule for controlled substance
and chemical registrants to recover the
full costs of the DCP so it can continue
to meet the programmatic
responsibilities set forth by statute,
Congress, and the President. As
discussed, without an adjustment to
fees, the DCP will be unable to continue
current operations, necessitating
dramatic program reductions, and
possibly weakening the closed system of
distribution. Accordingly, DEA finalizes
CFR 1300.02(1)(iv).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44717
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44718
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
the following new fees for the FY 2021
to FY 2023 period.
TABLE 1—REGISTRATION AND REREGISTRATION FEES BY BUSINESS ACTIVITY
Current fees
($)
Business activity
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle *
Pharmacy ..............................................................................................................................
Hospital/Clinic .......................................................................................................................
Practitioner ............................................................................................................................
Teaching Institution ..............................................................................................................
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP) .................................................................................................
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer .........................................................................................................................
Distributor .............................................................................................................................
Researcher/Canine Handler .................................................................................................
Analytical Lab .......................................................................................................................
Importer ................................................................................................................................
Exporter ................................................................................................................................
Reverse Distributor ...............................................................................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ................................................................................................
Chemical Manufacturer ........................................................................................................
Chemical Importer ................................................................................................................
Chemical Distributor .............................................................................................................
Chemical Exporter ................................................................................................................
New fees
($)
Difference
($)
731
731
731
731
731
888
888
888
888
888
157
157
157
157
157
3,047
1,523
244
244
1,523
1,523
1,523
244
3,047
1,523
1,523
1,523
3,699
1,850
296
296
1,850
1,850
1,850
296
3,699
1,850
1,850
1,850
652
327
52
52
327
327
327
52
652
327
327
327
* Pharmacy, hospital/clinic, practitioner, teaching institution, and mid-level practitioner registration fees are for a three-year period. This current
three-year fee is $731. The revised fee for the three-year registration period is $888. The three-year difference is $157 or an annual difference of
$52.
The fees are estimated to fund the full
cost of the DCP—to include the
increased programmatic and personnel
requirements currently, or expected to
be in place from FY 2021 to FY 2023,
and have a FY 2023 end-of-year balance
of at least $50 million.
TABLE 2—OVERVIEW OF DIVERSION CONTROL FEE ACCOUNT
FY 2021
($M)
FY 2023
($M)
3-Years
combined
($M)
DCFA Balance Carried Forward From Prior Year ...........................................
Total Collections ..............................................................................................
Treasury Amount .............................................................................................
Other Collections (OGV, CMEA) .....................................................................
69
576
(15)
1
96
596
(15)
1
86
625
(15)
1
69
1,797
(45)
3
Net Collections .........................................................................................
Total Obligations ..............................................................................................
Recoveries from Deobligations ........................................................................
562
555
(20)
582
613
(22)
611
670
(24)
1,755
1,838
(65)
Net Obligations .........................................................................................
End of Year DCFA Balance ..............................................................
535
96
591
86
647
50
1,773
50
Refund of Registration Fees
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
FY 2022
($M)
DEA is amending 21 CFR 1301.13(e)
and 1309.12(b) to codify existing
practices of the issuance of refunds by
DEA for applicant registration fees.
Generally, registration fees are not
refundable. This regulation was
implemented when registration fees
were nominal. With increased
registration fees, DEA recognizes the
need to issue refunds in limited
circumstances. These provisions of the
rule will give the DEA Administrator
discretionary authority to refund
registration fees in limited
circumstances, such as: Applicant error,
DEA error, and death of a registrant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
within the first year of the three-year
registration cycle. Refunds will be
issued for applicant error when there
has been a duplicate payment for the
same renewal, incorrect billing or
incorrect transposing of credit card
digits, payment for incorrect business
activity, or when an applicant is feeexempt. Refunds will be issued based
on DEA error when DEA caused the
error; for example, when DEA
incorrectly advised that a new
application was needed, or advised a
registrant to submit payment for a
wrong business activity. While these
provisions will have no economic costs
PO 00000
or benefits, DEA believes it is important
to accurately codify existing practices.
VI. Need for a New Fee Calculation
As discussed in the NPRM, DEA last
adjusted the fee schedule in March
2012, with collections beginning in
April 2012.13 This fee schedule was
intended to cover the ‘‘full costs’’ of the
DCP for FY 2012 through FY 2014, or
October 1, 2011 through September 30,
2014. The DCP has continued to operate
under this fee schedule by being fiscally
responsible, optimizing its
organizational structure, maximizing the
use of technological enhancements, as
13 77
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
FR 15234, March 15, 2012.
24JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
well as unforeseen delays in hiring. As
indicated by the above-referenced 2008
OIG report, the DCP has assumed a
number of costs since the last fee
increase, including indirect pay and
rightsizing, additional salary, and other
costs attributable to diversion control
activities. In addition, Congress has
expanded DCP’s responsibility to
address the opioid epidemic public
health emergency. DEA’s 360 Strategy
was launched with the purpose of
ending the deadly cycle of prescription
opioid misuse through coordinated law
enforcement, diversion control, and
community outreach efforts.
Due to increased diversion and
prescription drug abuse, as well as an
increase in the production and use of
chemicals that contribute to the opioid
epidemic, the DCP has increased its use
of TDS groups to meet its enforcement
mission, and hired more DIs working in
Diversion Groups (DG) and Diversion
Staff (DS) across the nation to support
its increased regulatory mission. In
April 2012, DEA had 48 TDSs, 65 DGs
and 17 DSs. At the end of FY 2019, DEA
had 86 TDSs, 87, DG, 15 DSs, and 16
TDS-Extensions.14
The DCP continues to draw technical
expertise from DIs, and the DCP has
incorporated greater numbers of Special
Agents, Chemists, Information
Technology Specialists, Attorneys,
Intelligence Research Specialists, and
state and local personnel to meet its
increased responsibilities. In April
2012, DEA had 1,167 employees in
DCFA funded positions; at the end of
FY 2019, DEA had 1,681. To continue
to meet diversion control challenges and
to staff and support the increased
number of regulatory and enforcement
groups, DEA must expand the DCP’s
enforcement and regulatory capacity, as
well as its support functions. DEA plans
to increase its full-time-equivalent (FTE)
staffing level of 1,782 in FY 2020, DEA
plans to increase FTEs by 90, 147, and
134, in FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023,
respectively, for a total of 2,153 FTEs in
FY 2023. The estimated increase for the
three year period is 371 FTEs.
DEA has been, and will continue to be
fiscally responsible and seek to improve
efficiencies and identify other cost
saving measures. As discussed above,
however, a new fee calculation is
needed. Without an adjustment in the
registration fees, DEA will be unable to
continue current operations and will be
in violation of the statutory mandate
that fees charged ‘‘shall be set at a level
14 A TDS-Extension is an extension of a TDS into
a location, usually staffed by two Special Agents to
provided law enforcement coverage while not
incurring the full cost of a TDS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
that ensures the recovery of the full
costs of operating the various aspects of
[the diversion control program].’’ 21
U.S.C. 886a(1)(C). For example,
collections under the current fee
schedule will require the DCP to
significantly cut existing and planned
DCP operations vital to its mission. DEA
relies on the DCP to maintain the
integrity of the closed system for
pharmaceutical controlled substances
and listed chemicals, particularly at this
time of dramatic increases in drug abuse
and diversion.
Fee Calculation
As described above, DEA is delegated
the task of determining the details of
how to fulfill the statutory requirement
to recover the full costs of operating the
DCP and charging registrants reasonable
fees relating to the registration and
control ‘‘of the manufacture,
distribution, dispensing’’ 15 and
‘‘importers and exporters’’ 16 of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals. In advance of actual
expenditures, DEA must determine
reasonable fees to be charged. To project
the annual costs of the DCP, DEA uses
historical data and projections, together
with actual and current costs.
Additionally, a reasonable fee must be
calculated that will fully recover the
costs of the DCP based on a variable
number of registrants in the different
categories of registration (e.g.,
manufacturers, distributors, importers,
exporters, reverse distributors,
practitioners, and individual
researchers). Because the fees collected
must be available to fully fund the
DCFA and to reimburse DEA for
expenses incurred in the operation of
the DCP (21 U.S.C. 886a), DEA must
collect more than is actually spent to
avoid running a deficit and being in
violation of federal fiscal law.17 In
operating the DCP, DEA must be
prepared for changes in investigative
priorities, diversion trends, and
emerging drugs or chemicals posing
new threats to the public health and
safety. By definition, it is an inexact
effort. Consequently, the agency must
select and follow a single methodology
throughout any given fee cycle.
Since the inception of the fee, the
agency has selected a weighted-ratio
method to determine a reasonable fee
for each category of registrants. Under
this method, registrants are assigned to
U.S.C. 821.
U.S.C. 958(f).
17 In general, no officer or employee of the United
States Government may make or authorize an
expenditure or obligation in excess of an amount
available in an appropriation or fund. 31 U.S.C.
1341.
PO 00000
15 21
16 21
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44719
a business activity or category (e.g.,
researcher, practitioner, distributor,
manufacturer, etc.) based on the
statutory fee categories, and the
projected population is calculated for
each category or business activity. Then,
DEA estimates the full cost of the DCP
for the analysis period, which is
generally three years. The
corresponding registration fees required
to pay the full cost of the DCP for the
analysis period are then calculated by
employing a ratio of 1.0 for researchers,
3.0 for practitioners (for administrative
convenience, the fee is collected every
three years for practitioners), 6.25 for
distributors, and 12.5 for manufacturers.
These are long-established ratios,
utilized in previous fee increases, and
repeatedly determined to be
reasonable.18 By utilizing these different
ratios, DEA recognizes the statutory
need to charge reasonable fees relating
to the registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
importation, and exportation of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals.
The current fees, some of which are
paid annually, and some of which are
paid every three years, range from $244
for ratio 1 to $3,047 for ratio 12.5,
depending upon the particular registrant
category. Practitioners, mid-level
practitioners, dispensers, researchers,
and narcotic treatment programs pay an
annual registration fee of $244. For
administrative convenience, both the
collection and the payment,
practitioners pay a combined
registration fee of $731 every three
years. Distributors, importers, and
exporters pay an annual fee of $1,523,
while manufacturers pay an annual fee
of $3,047. 21 CFR 1301.13 and 1309.11.
Since the last fee schedule adjustment
in March 2012,19 DEA continued to
review possible alternative
methodologies to differentiate
registration fees between various
registration business activities. In
developing this rule, DEA examined
three alternative methodologies to
calculate the registration and
registration fees: Flat Fee Option, PastBased Option, and Weighted-Ratio
Option (current and selected method).
In examining each alternative
methodology, DEA considered whether
the fee calculation (1) was reasonable,
and (2) could fully fund the costs of
operating the various aspects of the
DCP. DEA has determined that the
current ‘‘weighted-ratio’’ fee structure is
the most reasonable. Therefore, DEA
18 77 FR 15234 (March 15, 2012); 71 FR 51105
(August 29, 2006).
19 77 FR 15234, March 15, 2012.
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44720
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
selected the current weighted-ratio
method to calculate and differentiate
fees between registrant groups. A
detailed discussion of the alternatives is
provided below. Additionally, the
selected fee calculation method is
summarized below and detailed in
‘‘Proposed Registration Fee Schedule
Calculation’’ in the rulemaking docket
at https://www.regulations.gov.
Projected Costs for the Diversion Control
Program
In calculating fees to recover the
mandated full costs of operating the
DCP, DEA estimated the cost of
operating the DCP for the next three
fiscal years. To develop the DCFA
budget request estimates for FY 2021 to
FY 2023, DEA compiled: (1) The DCFA
Budget for FY 2020, which forms a base
spending level for the current level of
service, (2) the estimated additional
required funds for FY 2021 to FY 2023,
and (3) the required annual $15 million
transfer to the United States Treasury as
mandated by the CSA (21 U.S.C. 886a).
The following paragraphs explain the
annual revenue calculations and how
the total amount to be collected for the
FY 2021 to FY 2023 period was
calculated. In developing this figure,
DEA began with annual projected DCP
obligations, including payroll,
operational expenses, and necessary
equipment. The DCP budget has
increased due to inflationary
adjustments for rent and payroll, and
adding staffing resources that support
the regulatory and law enforcement
activities of the program. The basis of
current fees was to fund the DCP for the
time period of FY 2012 to FY 2014, and
the fees need to be adjusted to reflect
these factors. Specific details on the
DCP budget are available in the annual
President’s Budget Submission and
supplemental budget justification
documents provided to Congress. 20
DEA must set fees to recover the full
cost of the DCP. Therefore, the
estimated budget for FY 2021 to FY
2023 forms the basis for required
collections (target collections) from
registration fees. The process for
estimating the budget for each year is
the same. Generally, the budget for a
particular year is set by starting from the
previous year (base year), adjusting for
inflation, and then adding
enhancements (growth) to the budget.
DCP personnel growth is the key factor
in formulating the budget.
The estimated budget is based on two
estimated components: (1) Payroll
obligations based on estimated FTEs,
and (2) non-payroll obligations based on
changes to payroll obligations. The
estimated payroll obligations are based
on the payroll cost of the FTEs
described earlier. The estimates also
account for the difference in payroll cost
between personnel leaving the program,
usually at a higher grade level, and
personnel entering the program.
Additionally, the payroll obligations
include a yearly inflation factor of two
percent to cover Within-Grade
Increases, Career Ladders,21 Cost of
Living Adjustment, and increased
benefits costs. Non-payroll obligations
generally follow payroll obligations. As
FTE and payroll obligations increase,
non-payroll obligations increase
accordingly. Non-payroll obligations
include items such as rent,
communications, utilities, services,
equipment, travel, etc. 22 DEA believes
its methodology supports the estimated
budget for the three-year period, FY
2021 to FY 2023. The estimated payroll
obligations and non-payroll obligations
are added to obtain the estimated total
obligations.
In April 2012, when the last fee
increase was made effective, DEA had
48 TDSs, 65 DGs, and 17 DSs. At end
of FY 2019, DEA had 86 TDSs, 87 DGs,
15 DSs, and 16 TDS-Extensions. To
continue to meet diversion control
challenges, DEA continues to increase
its field regulatory and enforcement
groups. DEA anticipates having 88
TDSs, 89 DGs, 17 DSs, and 14 TDSExtensions by end of FY 2020
(beginning of FY 2021), expanding to 94
TDSs, 95 DGs, 10 DSs, and 10 TDSExtensions by end of FY 2023. Table 3
summarizes the estimated number of
field groups by year.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
TABLE 3—NUMBER OF FIELD GROUPS BY YEAR
Regulatory and enforcement groups
As of 4/2012
TDS ..............................................................................................................................................
DG ................................................................................................................................................
DS ................................................................................................................................................
TDS-Extension .............................................................................................................................
48
65
17
........................
Estimated
EOY
FY 2020
Estimated
EOY
FY 2023
88
89
13
14
94
95
10
10
Additionally, in April 2012, DEA had
1,167 employees in DCFA funded
positions; at the end of FY 2020, DEA
will have an estimated 1,803 employees
in such positions. To continue to meet
diversion control challenges, and to staff
and support the increased number of
regulatory and enforcement groups
described above, DEA plans to expand
the DCP’s enforcement and regulatory
capacity, as well as its support
functions. From an estimated FTE of
1,782 DEA plans to increase FTEs by 90,
147, and 134, in FY 2021, FY 2022, and
FY 2023, respectively, for a total of
2,153 FTEs in FY 2023. The estimated
increase for the three year period is 371
FTEs.
The estimated payroll obligations are
based on the payroll cost of the FTEs
described above. The estimates also
account for the difference in payroll cost
between personnel leaving the program,
usually at higher grade level, and
personnel entering the program.
Additionally, the payroll obligations
include a yearly inflation factor to cover
Within-Grade Increases, Career
Ladders,23 Cost of Living Adjustment,
and increased benefits costs. From an
estimated base of $289,450,003 in FY
2020, estimated payroll obligations
increase to an estimated $311,587,162,
$344,462,812, and $376,513,554 in FY
2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023,
respectively, reflecting the increase in
FTEs.
Non-payroll obligations include items
such as rent, communications, utilities,
20 See this rulemaking docket found at
www.regulations.gov.
21 The position is structured to allow for entry at
a lower grade level and allows for progression at
predetermined GS-grade level (usually multi-level)
interval to the full performance grade level.
22 The full list of non-payroll obligations is
available in the FY 2020 Congressional Budget
Submission, Exhibits: Diversion Control Fee
Account (DCFA). https://www.justice.gov/doj/fy2020-congressional-budget-submission.
23 Position structured to allow for entry at a lower
grade level that allows for progression at
predetermined GS-grade level (usually multi-level)
interval to the full performance grade level.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
services, equipment, travel, etc. 24 Nonpayroll obligations generally follow
payroll obligations. As FTE and payroll
obligations increase, non-payroll
obligations also increase. The year-overyear increases to payroll are 7.6 percent,
10.6 percent and 9.3 percent in FY 2021,
2022, and FY 2023, respectively. From
an estimated base of $225,747,874 nonpayroll obligations in FY 2020,
increasing non-payroll obligations at the
same rate as payroll obligations results
44721
in estimated non-payroll obligations of
$243,013,089, $268,653,469, and
$293,650,487 in FY 2021, FY 2022, and
FY 2023, respectively.
TABLE 4—ESTIMATED TOTAL OBLIGATIONS
[Budget]
FY 2020
FY 2021
FY 2022
FY 2023
Payroll Obligations ($) .....................................................................................
Non-payroll Obligations ($) ..............................................................................
289,450,003
225,747,874
311,587,162
243,013,089
344,462,812
268,653,469
376,513,554
293,650,487
Total Obligations ($) .................................................................................
FTE ..................................................................................................................
515,197,876
1,782
554,600,250
1,872
613,116,281
2,019
670,164,040
2,153
In addition to the budget for each of
the fiscal years, DEA also considers the
cost components outlined below in
determining required registration fee
collections.
Recoveries From Money Not Spent as
Planned (Deobligation of Prior Year
Obligations)
At times, DEA enters into an
obligation to purchase a product or
service that is not delivered
immediately, such as in a multi-year
contract, or not at all. Changes in
obligations can occur for a variety of
reasons, (i.e., changes in planned
operations, delays in staffing,
implementation of cost savings, changes
in vendor capabilities, etc.). When DEA
does not spend the obligated money as
planned, that obligation is
‘‘deobligated.’’ The ‘‘deobligated’’ funds
are ‘‘recovered,’’ and the funds become
available for DCP use. Based on
historical trends, the recovery of money
not spent as planned (deobligation of
prior year obligations) is estimated at
3.5 percent of obligations.
Payment to Treasury
In the 1993 appropriations for DEA,
Congress determined that the DCP
would be fully funded by registration
fees and no longer by appropriations.25
Congress established the DCFA as a
separate account of the Treasury to
‘‘ensure the recovery of the full costs of
operating the various aspects of [the
Diversion Control Program]’’ by those
participating in the closed system
established by the CSA. 21 U.S.C.
886a(1)(C). Fees collected are deposited
into a separate Treasury account. Each
fiscal year, the first $15 million of
collected fees is transferred to the
Treasury and is not available for use by
the DCP. Therefore, DEA needs to
collect an additional $15 million per
year beyond estimated costs for
payment to the Treasury.
DCFA Balance
DEA maintains a DCFA balance, as
working capital, to maintain DCP
operations during low collection
periods.26 Monthly collections and
obligations fluctuate throughout the
year. There are times when obligations
(i.e., spending) exceed collections. This
can happen consecutively for several
months. Therefore, DEA maintains a
DCFA balance to avoid operational
disruptions due to these fluctuations.
The estimated DCFA balance at
beginning of FY 2021 is $69 million.
Based on the history of these
fluctuations, DEA has determined that
an end-of-year DCFA balance of $50
million is adequate. Therefore, the target
DCFA balance at the end of FY 2023 is
$50 million.
Other Collections
DEA derives revenue from the sale/
salvage of official government vehicles
dedicated for use in the DCP.
Additionally, under the Combat
Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of
2005 (CMEA), DEA collects a selfcertification fee of $21 for regulated
sellers of scheduled listed chemical
products. 21 CFR 1314.42(a). The fee is
waived for any person holding a current
DEA registration in good standing, such
as a pharmacy authorized to dispense
controlled substances. 21 CFR
1314.42(b). DEA’s estimate for these
other collections is $1 million per year.
Estimated Total Required Collections
(Target Collections)
Based on the estimated total
obligations and other financial
components outlined above, DEA
determined a 21 percent increase in
total collections is required to fund the
DCP for the three-year period and have
a $50 million in DCFA balance at the
end of FY 2023.
The target collections are $576
million, $596 million, and $624 million,
for FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023,
respectively. In total, DEA needs to
collect $1.8 billion (or $1,796 million)
in registration fees over the three-year
period, FY 2021 to FY 2023, to fully
fund the DCP.
TABLE 5—ESTIMATED DCFA CASH FLOW UNDER NEW FEE CALCULATION
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
FY 2021
($M)
DCFA Balance Carried Forward From Prior Year ...........................................
Total Collections ..............................................................................................
Treasury Amount .............................................................................................
24 Full list of non-payroll obligations is available
in the FY 2020 Congressional Budget Submission,
Exhibits: Diversion Control Fee Account (DCFA).
https://www.justice.gov/doj/fy-2020-congressionalbudget-submission.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
69
576
(15)
25 Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,
the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act of 1993, Public Law 102–395, codified in
relevant part at 21 U.S.C. 886a.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FY 2022
($M)
95
596
(15)
FY 2023
($M)
86
624
(15)
3-Years
combined
($M)
69
1,796
(45)
26 ‘‘DCFA balance’’ was called the ‘‘Operational
Continuity Fund (OCF)’’ in the last fee schedule
adjustment in March 2012.
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44722
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 5—ESTIMATED DCFA CASH FLOW UNDER NEW FEE CALCULATION—Continued
FY 2021
($M)
FY 2022
($M)
3-Years
combined
($M)
FY 2023
($M)
Other Collections (OGV, CMEA) .....................................................................
1
1
1
3
Net Collections .........................................................................................
Total Obligations ..............................................................................................
Recoveries from Deobligations ........................................................................
562
555
(20)
582
613
(22)
610
670
(24)
1,755
1,838
(65)
Net Obligations .........................................................................................
End of Year DCFA Balance ..............................................................
535
95
591
86
647
50
1,773
50
Note: This projection is based on the ‘‘target’’ collections for the purposes of calculated fees. To end with exactly $50 million DCFA Balance,
the calculated fees will need to have many decimal places. When fees are rounded to the nearest whole dollar, the projected cash flow will vary
slightly.
Without a fee increase, under current
fee structure, the estimated collection is
$474 million, $491 million, and $514
million, for FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY
2023, respectively, for a total of $1.5
billion (or $1,479 million) for the threeyear period. Without a fee increase, DEA
would have obligations that would
exceed the collections and DCFA
balance beginning in FY 2021.
TABLE 6—ESTIMATED DCFA CASH FLOW UNDER CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE
[If no actions are taken to reduce obligations *]
FY 2021
($M)
FY 2022
($M)
FY 2023
($M)
3-Years
combined
($M)
DCFA Balance Carried Forward From Prior Year ...........................................
Total Collections (at Current Fee) ...................................................................
Treasury Amount .............................................................................................
Other Collections (OGV, CMEA) .....................................................................
69
474
(15)
1
(6)
491
(15)
1
(121)
514
(15)
1
69
1,479
(45)
3
Net Collections .........................................................................................
Total Obligations ..............................................................................................
Recoveries from Deobligations ........................................................................
460
555
(20)
477
613
(22)
500
670
(24)
1,437
1,838
(65)
Net Obligations .........................................................................................
End of Year DCFA Balance ..............................................................
535
(6)
591
(121)
647
(267)
1,773
(267)
* This is a hypothetical scenario. DEA would not allow DCFA balance to go negative.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Selected Methodology for New Fee
Calculation
As shown in Table 5 above, the target
collections are $576 million, $596
million, and $624 million, for FY 2021,
FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively. In
total, DEA needs to collect $1.8 billion
in registration fees over the three-year
period, FY 2021 to FY 2023, to fully
fund the DCP. DEA must select a
method for determining fees for various
business activities that would generate
the target collections.
In developing this rule, DEA
examined alternative methodologies to
calculate the registration and
reregistration fees in light of its statutory
obligations under the CSA. First,
pursuant to statute, DEA is authorized
to charge reasonable fees relating to the
registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
importation, and exportation of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals. 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958(f).
Second, DEA must set fees at a level that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
ensures the recovery of the full costs of
operating the various aspects of its DCP.
21 U.S.C. 886a. Accordingly, in
examining each alternative
methodology, DEA considered whether
the fee calculation (1) was reasonable
and (2) could fully fund the costs of
operating the various aspects of the
DCP.
Moreover, the CSA requires that DEA
charge fees to fully fund the DCP, but
that the fees collected by DEA are to be
expended through the budget process
only. Specifically, each year, DEA is
required by statute to transfer the first
$15 million of fee revenues into the
general fund of the Treasury, while the
remainder of the fee revenues is
deposited into a separate fund of the
Treasury called the DCFA. 21 U.S.C.
886a(1). On at least a quarterly basis, the
Secretary of the Treasury is required to
refund DEA an amount from the DCFA
‘‘in accordance with estimates made in
the budget request of the Attorney
General for those fiscal years’’ for the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
operation of the DCP. 21 U.S.C.
886a(1)(B) and (D).
In developing this rule, DEA
considered three methodologies to
calculate registration and reregistration
fees: Flat Fee Option, Past-Based
Option, and Weighted-Ratio Option
(current and selected method). While
the fee increases may be passed down
to the registrants’ customers, the
analysis below assumes they are
absorbed fully by the registrants.
For each of the alternatives, the
calculated fees are analyzed for
reasonableness by examining: (1) The
absolute amount of the fee increase, (2)
the change in fee as a percentage of
revenue from 2012–2021, and (3) the
relative fee increase across registrant
groups. Additionally, each calculation
methodology is re-evaluated for its
overall strengths and weaknesses.
Flat Fee Option
Option 1 is called the Flat Fee Option.
The flat fee option would provide equal
fees across all registrant groups,
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
regardless of the proportion of DCP
costs and resources the registrant group
may require (e.g., investigation
resources). The fee calculation is
straightforward: The total amount
needed to be collected over the threeyear period is divided by the total
number of registration fee transactions
over the three year period, adjusting for
registrants on a three year registration
44723
cycle (so that the fees for a three-year
period are three times the annual fee).
DEA calculated the annual
registration fees under Option 1 and
compared these fees to the current fees.
TABLE 7—REGISTRATION FEES UNDER FLAT FEE OPTION
Current fees
($)
Business activity
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle *:
Pharmacy ..................................................................................................
Hospital/Clinic ...........................................................................................
Practitioner ................................................................................................
Teaching Institution ..................................................................................
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP) .....................................................................
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer .............................................................................................
Distributor .................................................................................................
Researcher/Canine Handler .....................................................................
Analytical Lab ...........................................................................................
Importer ....................................................................................................
Exporter ....................................................................................................
Reverse Distributor ...................................................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ....................................................................
Chemical Manufacturer ............................................................................
Chemical Importer ....................................................................................
Chemical Distributor .................................................................................
Chemical Exporter ....................................................................................
Option 1:
flat fee
($)
Difference
($)
Increase
over current
(%)
731
731
731
731
731
896
896
896
896
896
165
165
165
165
165
23
23
23
23
23
3,047
1,523
244
244
1,523
1,523
1,523
244
3,047
1,523
1,523
1,523
299
299
299
299
299
299
299
299
299
299
299
299
(2,748)
(1,224)
55
55
(1,224)
(1,224)
(1,224)
55
(2,748)
(1,224)
(1,224)
(1,224)
¥90
¥80
23
23
¥80
¥80
¥80
23
¥90
¥80
¥80
¥80
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
* Pharmacies, hospitals/clinics, practitioners, teaching institutions, and mid-level practitioners currently pay a fee for a three-year period. This
current three-year fee is $731. The fee under the flat fee scenario for the three year registration period would be $896. The three-year difference
is $165 or an annual difference of $55.
In the flat fee option, the registration
fee for practitioners increases by 23
percent to $299 on an annual basis. The
registration fees for manufacturers and
distributors are reduced significantly,
from $3,047 for manufacturers and
$1,523 for distributors to $299 for both.
This reduction represents a 90 percent
and 80 percent reduction for
manufacturers and distributors,
respectively.
The calculation considered in Option
1 results in a disparity in fee change
among registrant groups. For each
registrant group to pay the same flat fee,
the registration fee for practitioners
increases by 23 percent, while
registration fees for manufacturers and
distributors decrease 90 percent and 80
percent, respectively.
The flat fee option has positive and
negative aspects. The calculation is
simple and straight-forward. The fee
that DEA is required to charge
registrants is based on a statutory
requirement—it is not a user fee. A user
fee calculation would require a
calculation of the direct and indirect
costs associated with each registrant
group, and set fees to recover the costs
associated with each group. Because the
registration fee is not a user fee, DEA is
not required to calculate fees according
to the regulatory and enforcement costs
associated with each registrant group.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
However, general historical costs of
regulatory and enforcement activities
support different fees among the
categories. DEA believes that setting the
same fees for all registrants, from multinational corporations to mid-level
practitioners, is unreasonable.
Conclusion for Flat Fee Option
After consideration of the flat fee
option, DEA did not select this option
to calculate the new fees. The fee
disparity among registrant groups
caused by this calculation alternative is
too great. Under this option, the
calculation would result in reduced fees
for manufacturers and distributors by 90
percent and 80 percent respectively,
while practitioner fees would increase
by 23 percent. Setting the fees at the
same level across all registrant groups is
therefore not ‘‘reasonable’’ as required
by statute. While the vast majority of
registrants are practitioners, such as
individual physicians and nurse
practitioners, DEA registrants also
include some of the largest corporations
in the world. To satisfy the ‘‘reasonable’’
standard, registration fees should be
different among the categories to
account for cost and economic
differences among the registrant
categories. Option 1 did not satisfy this
requirement.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Past-Based Option
Option 2 is called the Past-Based
Option, and uses historic investigative
work hour data to apportion the cost to
each registrant category. In considering
Option 2, DEA used historic
investigative work hour data from FY
2016–FY 2018. DEA’s records provide
an accurate apportionment of work
hours for certain types of diversion
control activities (e.g., investigations)
among different classes of registrants.
DEA estimates that approximately three
percent of costs can be directly linked
to pre-registration and scheduled
investigations. Although some criminal
investigations can be attributed to
registrant groups, DEA did not include
the cost of criminal investigations for
the fee calculation under the Past-Based
Option due to the unpredictable nature
of this investigations. While DEA
develops annual work plans for the
number of scheduled investigations by
registrant type, DEA does not develop
such plans for criminal investigations.
Therefore, the cost of criminal
investigations is allocated equally across
all registrant groups, regardless of
business activity. The remaining costs
associated with DCP activities and
components benefit all registrants (e.g.,
policy, registration, and legal activities);
however, DEA records cannot attribute
these costs by registrant class. Under
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44724
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Option 2, pre-registration and scheduled
investigation costs are assigned to
registrant classes and all other costs are
recovered on an equal, per-registrant
basis.
DEA calculated the annual
registration fees under Option 2 and
compared these fees to the current fees.
Although distributors and importers/
exporters are in the same fee class in the
current fee structure (Weighted-Ratio
Option), in this analysis, distributors are
separated from importers and exporters
based on the available historic work
hour data and reported work hours by
type of registrant.
TABLE 8—REGISTRATION FEES UNDER PAST-BASED OPTION
Current fees
($)
Business activity
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle:
Pharmacy ..................................................................................................
Hospital/Clinic ...........................................................................................
Practitioner ................................................................................................
Teaching Institution ..................................................................................
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP) .....................................................................
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer .............................................................................................
Distributor .................................................................................................
Researcher/Canine Handler .....................................................................
Analytical Lab ...........................................................................................
Importer ....................................................................................................
Exporter ....................................................................................................
Reverse Distributor ...................................................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ....................................................................
Chemical Manufacturer ............................................................................
Chemical Importer ....................................................................................
Chemical Distributor .................................................................................
Chemical Exporter ....................................................................................
Option 2:
Past-Based
($)
Difference
($)
% Increase
over current
(%)
731
731
731
731
731
1,030
872
873
1,694
868
299
141
142
963
137
41
19
19
132
19
3,047
1,523
244
244
1,523
1,523
1,523
244
3,047
1,523
1,523
1,523
4,212
3,303
565
565
1,906
1,906
3,303
2,332
1,703
1,386
1,824
1,386
1,165
1,780
321
321
383
383
1,780
2,088
(1,344)
(137)
301
(137)
38
117
132
132
25
25
117
856
¥44
¥9
20
¥9
In the Past-Based option, the percent
change in fees from current fees ranges
from negative 44 percent (reduction of
44 percent) for list I chemical
manufacturers to an increase of 856
percent for narcotic treatment programs.
The increase for a large majority of
registrations, practitioners, mid-level
practitioners, and hospital/clinics, is 19
percent.
While Option 2 is based on accurate
historical data, it does not allow for
future needs, demands, and shifting
responsibilities of the DCP, including
Agency priorities, new legislation,
control of substances, new investigative
requirements, and other program needs.
fees would increase by 856 percent,
while the change for the remaining
registrant groups range from a decrease
of 44 percent to an increase of 131
percent. DEA deemed this unreasonable.
Second, the Past-Based option is
backward looking and implicitly
assumes that the future will be similar
to the past. DEA cannot assume that
future workload will reflect past DEA
work hour data. For example, DEA
plans to conduct more scheduled
investigations in accordance with the
new scheduled investigation work plan.
As a result, DEA has concluded that
past data is not a reasonable basis for
the calculation of new fees.
Conclusion for Past-Based Option
DEA did not select the Past-Based
option for two key reasons. First, the fee
increase is disproportionately
burdensome to a small number of
registrants. Narcotic treatment program
Weighted-Ratio Option (Current and
Selected Method)
The Weighted-Ratio Option has been
used since the inception of the fee. This
option distinguishes among the
categories to establish a ‘‘reasonable’’
fee for each category. In this option, fees
are assigned to different registrant
categories based on DEA’s general
historical cost data expressed as
weighted ratios. The different fees are
expressed in ratios: 1.0 for researchers,
canine handlers, analytical labs, and
narcotics treatment programs; 3.0 for
registrants on three-year registration
cycles, pharmacies, hospitals/clinics,
practitioners, teaching institutions, and
mid-level practitioners; 6.25 for
distributors and importers/exporters;
and 12.5 for manufacturers. The
adopted ratios are applied for
administrative convenience because
historically costs vary and a fee must be
set in advance. To determine the fee, the
amount needed to be collected over the
FY 2021 to FY 2023 period is divided
by the weighted number of estimated
registrations.
TABLE 9—REGISTRATION FEES UNDER WEIGHTED-RATIO OPTION
Current fees
($)
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Business activity
Registrations on Three Year Registration Cycle: *
Pharmacy ..................................................................................................
Hospital/Clinic ...........................................................................................
Practitioner ................................................................................................
Teaching Institution ..................................................................................
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP) .....................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Option 3:
Weighted
Ratio
($)
731
731
731
731
731
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
888
888
888
888
888
24JYR1
Difference
($)
157
157
157
157
157
Increase
over current
(%)
21
21
21
21
21
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
44725
TABLE 9—REGISTRATION FEES UNDER WEIGHTED-RATIO OPTION—Continued
Current fees
($)
Business activity
Registrations on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer .............................................................................................
Distributor .................................................................................................
Researcher/Canine Handler .....................................................................
Analytical Lab ...........................................................................................
Importer ....................................................................................................
Exporter ....................................................................................................
Reverse Distributor ...................................................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ....................................................................
Chemical Manufacturer ............................................................................
Chemical Importer ....................................................................................
Chemical Distributor .................................................................................
Chemical Exporter ....................................................................................
Option 3:
Weighted
Ratio
($)
3,047
1,523
244
244
1,523
1,523
1,523
244
3,047
1,523
1,523
1,523
Difference
($)
3,699
1,850
296
296
1,850
1,850
1,850
296
3,699
1,850
1,850
1,850
652
327
52
52
327
327
327
52
652
327
327
327
Increase
over current
(%)
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
* Pharmacies, hospitals/clinics, practitioners, teaching institutions, and mid-level practitioners currently pay a fee for a three-year period. This
current three-year fee is $731. The fee under the weighted-ratio scenario for the three-year registration period would be $888. The three-year difference is $157, or an annual difference of $52.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
In the Weighted-Ratio Option, the
registration fees for all registrant groups
increase by 21 percent from current fees,
although the absolute dollar amount
may differ. The registration fees range
from $296 annually (or annual
equivalent) to $3,699, and a
corresponding increase of $52 annually
(or annual equivalent) to $652.
Registration fees are collected by
location and by registered business
activity. Registration fees for all
registrant groups increase by 21 percent,
and as a result, there is no disparity in
the percentage fee increase among
registrant groups. Furthermore, a 21
percent increase ($731 to $888) over
nine years, from FY 2012 to FY 2021,
equates to a 2.2 percent annual rate (on
a compound annual growth rate basis),
which is comparable to the rate of
inflation. The same increase equates to
a 1.8 percent annual rate over 11 years,
from FY 2012 to FY 2023.
The Weighted-Ratio methodology,
much like the flat fee, is straightforward
and easy to understand, but unlike the
flat fee, it applies historic weighted
ratios to differentiate fees among
registrant groups. This methodology has
the advantage of differentiating fees
based on historic weighted ratios, but
does not create a disproportionate fee
increase in any registrant group.
Conclusion for Weighted-Ratio Option
DEA selected this option to calculate
the new fees. This approach has been
used since Congress established
registrant fees and continues to be a
reasonable reflection of differing costs.
The registration fees under the
Weighted-Ratio option result in
differentiated fees among registrant
groups, where registrants with generally
larger revenues and costs pay higher
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
fees than registrants with lower
revenues and costs. Furthermore, the
Weighted-Ratio option does not create a
disparity in the relative increase in fees
from the current to the new fees. The
weighted-ratios used by DEA to
calculate the current fee have proven
effective and reasonable over time, and
generally reflects the differences in
activity level, notably in inspections,
scheduled investigations, and other
control and monitoring, by registrant
category (i.e., these costs are higher for
manufacturers). DEA selected this
option because it is the only option that
resulted in ‘‘reasonable’’ fees for all
registrant groups.
Regulatory Analyses
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review), 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review), and 13771 (Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs)
This rule has been developed in
accordance with the principles of
Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and
13563. E.O. 12866 directs agencies to
assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and when
regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, public health and safety, and
environmental advantages, distributive
impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 is
supplemental to and reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions
governing regulatory review as
established in E.O. 12866. The
Executive Order classifies a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ requiring review by
OMB as any regulatory action that is
likely to result in a rule that may: (1)
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Have an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more, or adversely
affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, 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 the Executive
Order.
DEA estimates that this rule will have
an annual effect, in the form of transfers,
on the economy of $100 million or more
and, therefore, is an economically
significant regulatory action. Fees paid
to DEA are considered transfer
payments and not costs.27 The analysis
of benefits and transfers is below. The
OMB’s Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has determined that
this rulemaking is a significant
regulatory action under the meaning of
E.O. 12866, and it therefore has been
reviewed by the OMB.
a. Need for the Rule
Under the CSA, DEA is authorized to
charge reasonable fees relating to the
registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
import, and export of controlled
substances and listed chemicals. 21
U.S.C. 821 and 958(f). DEA must set fees
at a level that ensures the recovery of
the full costs of operating the various
aspects of the DCP. 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(C).
27 OMB
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
Circular A–4.
24JYR1
44726
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
DEA continually monitors the
anticipated budget and collections to
determine whether the registration fees
need to be adjusted. DEA has
determined that the fees need to
increase in beginning October 1, 2020,
FY 2021, to the amounts indicated
above in order to fully fund the DCP as
required by statute. Therefore, this
rulemaking is required for DEA to
recover the full costs of operating the
DCP.
b. Alternative Approaches
As described in detail above, DEA
examined three alternative
methodologies to calculate the
registration and registration fees: Flat
Fee Option, Past-Based Option, and
Weighted-Ratio Option (current and
selected method).
For each of the alternatives
considered, the calculated fees are
analyzed for reasonableness by
examining: (1) The absolute amount of
the fee increase; (2) the change in fee as
a percentage of revenue from 2012 to
2021; and (3) the relative fee increase
across registrant groups. Additionally,
each calculation methodology is reevaluated for its overall strengths and
weaknesses.
Flat Fee Option
Option one is called the Flat Fee
Option. The flat fee option would
provide equal fees across all registrant
groups, regardless of the proportion of
DCP costs and resources the registrant
group may require (e.g., investigation
resources). The calculation results in a
dramatic disparity in fee change among
registrant groups. After consideration of
the flat fee option, DEA did not select
this option to calculate the new fees.
The fee disparity among registrant
groups caused by this calculation
alternative is too great. Under this
option, the practitioner fees would
increase by 23 percent to $299 on an
annual basis, while manufacturer and
distributor fees would decrease by 90
percent and 80 percent respectively, to
an annual fee of $299. Setting the fees
at the same level across all registrant
groups is therefore not ‘‘reasonable’’ as
required by statute. While the vast
majority of registrants are practitioners,
such as individual physicians and nurse
practitioners, DEA registrants also
include some of the largest corporations
in the world. To satisfy the ‘‘reasonable’’
standard, registration fees should be
different among the categories to
account for cost and economic
differences among the registrant
categories. This option did not satisfy
this requirement.
Past-Based Option
Option two is called the Past-Based
Option, and uses historic investigative
work hour data to apportion the cost to
each registrant category. Under Option
two, pre-registration and scheduled
investigation costs are assigned to
registrant classes and all other costs are
recovered on an equal, per-registrant
basis. In the Past-Based option, the
percent change in fees from current fees
ranges from negative 44 percent
(reduction of 44 percent) for list I
chemical manufacturers to an increase
of 856 percent for narcotic treatment
programs. The increase for a large
majority of registrations, practitioners,
mid-level practitioners, and hospital/
clinics, is 19 percent. DEA did not select
the Past-Based option for two key
reasons. First, the fee increase is
disproportionately burdensome to a
small number of registrants. Narcotic
treatment program fees would increase
by 856 percent, while the change for the
remaining registrant groups range from
a decrease of 44 percent to an increase
of 131 percent. DEA deemed this
unreasonable. Second, the Past-Based
option is backward looking and
implicitly assumes that the future will
be similar to the past. The past may not
necessarily be a bad estimate. However,
DEA develops a work plan for
scheduled investigations annually and
investigation frequency may be
modified based on need or diversion
risk. DEA cannot assume that future
workload will reflect past DEA work
hour data. As a result, DEA has
concluded that past data is not a
reasonable basis for the calculation of
new fees.
Weighted-Ratio Option (Current and
Selected Method)
The Weighted-Ratio Option has been
used since the inception of the fee. This
option distinguishes among the
categories to establish a ‘‘reasonable’’
fee for each category. In this option, fees
are assigned to different registrant
categories based on DEA’s general
historical cost data expressed as
weighted-ratios. The Weighted-Ratio
methodology, much like the flat fee, is
straightforward and easy to understand,
but unlike the flat fee, it applies historic
weighted ratios to differentiate fees
among registrant groups. This method
would result in across-the-board 21
percent increase in fees for all
registrations.
DEA selected this option to calculate
the new fees. This approach has been
used since Congress established
registrant fees and continues to be a
reasonable reflection of differing costs.
The registration fees under the
Weighted-Ratio option result in
differentiated fees among registrant
groups, where registrants with generally
larger revenues and costs pay higher
fees than registrants with lower
revenues and costs. Furthermore, the
Weighted-Ratio option does not create a
disparity in the relative increase in fees
from the current to the new fees. The
weighted-ratios used by DEA to
calculate the current fee have proven
effective and reasonable over time, and
generally reflects the differences in
activity level, notably in inspections,
scheduled investigations, and other
control and monitoring, by registrant
category (i.e., these costs are higher for
manufacturers). DEA selected this
option because it is the only option that
resulted in ‘‘reasonable’’ fees for all
registrant groups.
c. Summary of Impact of New Fees
Relative to Current Fees
Affected Entities
As of September 2019, DEA issued
1,840,501 issued controlled substances
and chemical registrations (1,839,556
controlled substances registrations and
945 chemical registrations), as shown in
Table 10.
TABLE 10—NUMBER OF REGISTRATIONS BY BUSINESS ACTIVITY
[September 2019]
Controlled
substances
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Registrant class/business
Pharmacy .................................................................................................................................................................
Hospital/Clinic ..........................................................................................................................................................
Practitioner ...............................................................................................................................................................
Teaching Institute ....................................................................................................................................................
Mid-Level Practitioner ..............................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
70,851
18,305
1,324,438
264
408,468
Chemicals
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
44727
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 10—NUMBER OF REGISTRATIONS BY BUSINESS ACTIVITY—Continued
[September 2019]
Controlled
substances
Registrant class/business
Chemicals
Researcher ..............................................................................................................................................................
Analytical Labs .........................................................................................................................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ...................................................................................................................................
Manufacturer ............................................................................................................................................................
Distributor .................................................................................................................................................................
Reverse Distributor ..................................................................................................................................................
Importer ....................................................................................................................................................................
Exporter ...................................................................................................................................................................
11,986
1,514
1,738
570
843
68
253
258
........................
........................
........................
207
370
........................
209
159
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
1,839,556
945
Grand total (all registrations) .....................................................................................................................
1,840,501
* Includes fee-paying and fee-exempt registrations.
Not all registrants listed in Table 10
are subject to the fees. Any hospital or
other institution operated by an agency
of the U.S. of any state, or any political
subdivision of an agency thereof, is
exempt from the payment of registration
fees. Likewise, an individual who is
required to obtain a registration in order
to carry out his/her duties as an official
of a federal or state agency is also
exempt from registration fees.28 Feeexempt registrants are not affected by
the new fees.
Based on historical registration data
and estimated growth trends, DEA
estimates the average total registration
population over the three-year period,
FY 2021 to FY 2023, will be 2,004,358
as shown in Table 11. Estimated annual
growth in fee-paying registrations is
approximately 3.8 percent. The largest
growth is in the MLPs. Approximately
eight percent of all registrations are feeexempt.
TABLE 11—ESTIMATED AVERAGE FEE-PAYING REGISTRATIONS, FY 2021–FY 2023
Controlled
substances
Registrant class/business
Pharmacy .................................................................................................................................................................
Hospital/Clinic ..........................................................................................................................................................
Practitioner ...............................................................................................................................................................
Teaching Institute ....................................................................................................................................................
Mid-Level Practitioner ..............................................................................................................................................
Researcher ..............................................................................................................................................................
Analytical Labs .........................................................................................................................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ...................................................................................................................................
Manufacturer ............................................................................................................................................................
Distributor .................................................................................................................................................................
Reverse Distributor ..................................................................................................................................................
Importer ....................................................................................................................................................................
Exporter ...................................................................................................................................................................
80,199
16,638
1,356,876
130
539,899
5,038
908
1,978
578
666
73
222
264
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
208
329
........................
202
150
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
2,003,469
889
Grand total (all registrations) .....................................................................................................................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Chemicals
The CSA requires a separate
registration for each location where
controlled substances are handled, and
a separate registration for each business
activity—that is, a registration for
activities related to the handling of
controlled substances, and a registration
for activities related to the handling of
list I chemicals. Some registrants may
conduct multiple activities under a
single registration (e.g., manufacturers
may distribute substances they have
manufactured without being registered
as a distributor), but firms may hold
multiple registrations for a single
location. Individual practitioners who
prescribe, but do not store controlled
substances, may use a single registration
at multiple locations within a state, but
need separate registrations for each state
in which they practice and are
authorized to dispense controlled
substances. Firms with multiple
locations must have separate
registrations for each location.
Characteristics of Entities
This rule affects those manufacturers,
distributors, dispensers, importers, and
exporters of controlled substances and
list I chemicals that are required to
obtain and pay a registration fee with
DEA pursuant to the CSA. As of
September 2019, DEA issued 1,840,501
total controlled substances and
chemical registrations (1,839,556
controlled substances registrations and
945 chemical registrations), as shown
above in Table 10. DEA estimates an
average total fee-paying population of
2,004,358 over the three-year period, FY
2021 to FY 2023, as shown in Table 11.
The registrations on a three-year cycle
(i.e., pharmacies, hospitals/clinics,
practitioners, teaching institutions, and
28 See 21 CFR 1301.21 for complete fee exemption
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2,004,358
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44728
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
mid-level practitioners), make up 99.5
percent of all registrations not exempt
from paying registration applications
fees. All other categories of registration
(i.e., manufacturers, distributors, reverse
distributors, importers, exporters,
chemical manufacturers, chemical
distributors, chemical importers, and
chemical exporters) maintain an annual
registration. Registration and
reregistration costs vary by registrant
category as is described in more detail
in the sections below.
The new fees would affect a wide
variety of entities. Table 12 indicates the
sectors, as defined by the North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS), affected by the rule
and their enterprise average annual
revenue, provided by the U.S. Census
Bureau, Statistics of U.S. Businesses
(SUSB). Most DEA registrants are, or are
employed by, small entities under Small
Business Administration (SBA)
standards.
TABLE 12—INDUSTRIAL SECTORS OF DEA REGISTRANTS
Business activity
NAICS code
Manufacturer ...........................................
325411
325412
424210
5621
5622
445110
446110
* 452210
* 452311
541380
611310
* 541715
Distributor, Importer, Exporter ................
Reverse Distributor .................................
Pharmacy ................................................
Analytical Labs .......................................
Teaching institute ...................................
Researcher .............................................
Canine Handler .......................................
Practitioner,
Mid-level
Practitioner,** Narcotic Treatment Program,
Hospital/Clinic.
561612
541940
621111
621112
621210
621330
621391
621420
621491
621493
622110
622210
622310
325
424690
Chemical Manufacturer ..........................
Chemical Distributor, Chemical Importer,
Chemical Exporter.
Average annual
revenue ($)
NAICS code description
Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing ...................................................................
Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing .............................................................
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant Wholesalers ...........................................
Waste Collection ......................................................................................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ...............................................................................
Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except Convenience) Stores ...........................
Pharmacies and Drug Stores ..................................................................................
Department Stores ...................................................................................................
Warehouse Clubs and Supercenters .......................................................................
Testing Laboratories ................................................................................................
Colleges, Universities and Professional Schools ....................................................
Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology).
Security Guards and Patrol Services ......................................................................
Veterinary Services ..................................................................................................
Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists) .......................................
Offices of Physicians, Mental Health Specialists ....................................................
Offices of Dentists ...................................................................................................
Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians) ....................................
Offices of Podiatrists ................................................................................................
Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Centers ......................................
HMO Medical Centers .............................................................................................
Freestanding Ambulatory Surgical and Emergency Centers ..................................
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals .................................................................
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals ...........................................................
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals .............................
Chemical Manufacturing ..........................................................................................
Other Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers ..................................
33,905,094
148,265,482
103,097,459
5,168,825
11,553,838
12,740,365
12,533,279
2,899,338,610
13,159,528,688
3,031,746
97,657,501
11,331,597
3,740,383
1,067,601
2,299,354
476,408
836,911
393,471
550,257
2,982,804
68,506,712
5,844,323
284,660,783
48,476,596
97,844,233
80,834,558
26,492,119
Source: SUSB, 2012 SUSB Annual Datasets by Establishment Industry. (latest available) https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/2012/econ/susb/2012-susb.html
(accessed 10/5/2019).
* NAICS code was updated in the 2017 NAICS. The annual revenue figures for these industries are based on corresponding 2012 SUSB industry data.
** Practitioners and mid-level practitioners are generally employed in one of these industries.
Additionally, while many practitioner
and mid-level practitioner registration
application fees may be paid by the
employer, some may pay out-of-pocket.
Table 13 indicates the labor categories
and average annual wages, as provided
by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics (BLS), affected by the
rule.
TABLE 13—LABOR CATEGORIES OF DEA REGISTRANTS
Occupation code
29–1021
29–1060
29–1071
29–1171
Annual mean
wage
($)
Occupation title
...................................................
...................................................
...................................................
...................................................
Dentists, General .....................................................................................................
Physicians and Surgeons ........................................................................................
Physician Assistants ................................................................................................
Nurse Practitioners ..................................................................................................
175,840
210,980
108,430
110,030
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Source: BLS, May 2018 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, United States. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm
(accessed 10/5/2019).
The listing of industry sectors and
labor categories in Tables 12 and 13 are
not intended to be exhaustive, but to
generally represent DEA registrants.
Economic Impact Analysis of New Fee
The new fees are expected to have
two levels of impact. Initially, the fee
increase will impact the registrants.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
Then, the fee increase, or portion of the
fee increase, is expected to be
eventually passed on to the general
public. To be analytically conservative,
the analysis below assumes that the
impact of the fee increase is absorbed
entirely by the registrants.
DEA assumes that the registration fees
are business expenses for all registrants.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
As a result, the increase in registration
fees may result in reduced tax liability,
which may diminish the impact of the
increase. For example, if a practitioner
pays an additional $52 per year in
registration fees, and the combined
federal and state income tax is 35
percent, the net cash impact is $34, not
$52. The additional expense of $52
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44729
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
causes income/profit to decrease by $52,
decreasing the tax liability by $18. The
net cash outlay is $34.29 However, to be
analytically conservative, the analysis
does not consider the impact of reduced
tax liability.
As individual practitioners and small
businesses are expected to experience
the greatest impact, DEA examined the
new fees as a percentage of income for
physicians, dentists, physician
assistants, nurse practitioners, and small
businesses. Physicians, dentists,
physician assistants, and nurse
practitioners reflect a representative
sub-group of the practitioner and midlevel practitioner registrant groups. The
new fee for practitioners and mid-level
practitioners of $888 per three years
represents a $157 increase over the
current fee of $731 per three years. The
annual increase is $52, representing
0.025 percent, 0.030 percent, 0.048
percent, and 0.048 percent of average
annual income for physicians, dentists,
physician assistants, and nurse
practitioners, respectively. Table 14
indicates the annual effect as a
percentage of income. The impact on
small businesses is discussed in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act section.
TABLE 14—FEE INCREASE AS PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEAN WAGE
Occupation code
29–1060
29–1021
29–1071
29–1171
Annual mean
wage
($)
Occupation title
.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
.......................................
Physicians and Surgeons .................................................................
Dentists, General ..............................................................................
Physician Assistants .........................................................................
Nurse Practitioners ............................................................................
Additionally, the impact of the fee
increase is also diminished by an
estimated increase in registrant income.
The table below describes the annualequivalent fee as a percentage of income
in 2012, the year of the last fee increase,
and 2021. This analysis assumes that
the fee increase is absorbed personally
by each practitioner or mid-level
practitioner. In 2012, the new fee of
$244 (on an annual basis) represented
approximately 0.15 percent, 0.13
percent, 0.26 percent, and 0.27 percent
of annual income for dentists,
physicians, physician assistants, and
nurse practitioners, respectively. While
the new fees are 21 percent above the
current fees implemented in 2012, the
average incomes for dentists,
physicians, physician assistants, and
nurse practitioners increased an average
12 percent, 17 percent, 26 percent, and
30 percent, respectively, since that
time.30 This estimated increase in
average income lessens the impact of
the fee increase as a percentage of
average income. The new fees are
estimated to represent approximately
0.16 percent, 0.13 percent, 0.25 percent,
and 0.25 percent of annual income for
dentists, physicians, physician
assistants, and nurse practitioners,
Annual fee
increase of
annual mean
wage
(%)
210,980
175,840
108,430
110,030
0.025
0.030
0.048
0.048
respectively. Furthermore, a 21 percent
increase ($731 to $888) over nine years,
from FY 2012 to FY 2021, equates to a
2.2 percent annual rate (on compound
annual growth rate basis), which is
comparable to the rate of inflation. The
same increase equates to a 1.8 percent
annual rate over 11 years, from FY 2012
to FY 2023. This analysis ignores the
dampening effect of registration fees as
a business expense and the potential
that the fee increase might be passed on
to customers. Table 15 represents fees as
percentage of average income.
TABLE 15—FEES AS PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL MEAN WAGE IN 2012 AND 2021
2012
Occupation title
Annual
mean wage
($)
Dentists, General .....................................
Physicians and Surgeons ........................
Physician Assistants ................................
Nurse Practitioners ..................................
2018
Annual fee
($) *
163,240
190,060
92,460
91,450
244
244
244
244
2021
Fee of wage
(%)
Annual
mean wage
($)
Annual
mean wage
($) **
0.15
0.13
0.26
0.27
175,840
210,980
108,430
110,030
182,140
221,440
116,415
119,320
Annual fee
($) ***
296
296
296
296
Fee of wage
(%)
0.16
0.13
0.25
0.25
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Source: BLS. https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm (accessed 10/5/2019).
* The current fee is $731 per three years, annual-equivalent of $244.
** Annual mean wage data for 2012 and 2018 is provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 2021 annual mean wage figures are estimated based on linear extrapolation, where an average annual increase is calculated from years 2012 to 2018, then extending out the increase
for three more years to 2021.
*** The new fee is $888 per three years, annual-equivalent of $296.
Exempt from the payment of
registration fees are any hospital or
other institution that is operated by an
agency of the U.S., of any State, or any
political subdivision of an agency
thereof. Likewise, an individual who is
required to obtain a registration in order
to carry out his/her duties as an official
of a federal or State agency is also
exempt from registration fees. Fee
exempt registrants are not affected by
the new fees.
29 This example is for illustration purposes only.
Each entity should seek competent tax advice for
tax consequences of the rule.
30 From Table 14, the increase in annual mean
wages from 2012 to 2021 are for dentists 12 percent
(182,140/163,240–1), physicians 17 percent
(221,440/190,060–1), physician assistants 26
percent (116,415/92,460–1), and nurse practitioners
30 percent (119,320/91,450–1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44730
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
d. Analysis of Benefits, Costs, and
Transfers
Benefits
The primary benefit of the rule is
continued support to the DCP, without
the need for any additional
congressional appropriations. The DCP
is a strategic component of U.S. law and
policy aimed at preventing, detecting,
and eliminating the diversion of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals into the illicit market while
ensuring a sufficient supply of
controlled substances and listed
chemicals for legitimate medical,
scientific, research, and industrial
purposes. The absence of, or significant
reduction in, this program would result
in enormous costs for the citizens and
residents of the U.S. due to the
diversion of controlled substances and
listed chemicals into the illicit market
as discussed earlier in this document.
Costs
This rule has little or no cost, as fees
to DEA are transfer payments.
Transfers
The difference between the current
fees and the new fees—the fee
increase—is $318 million over the three
year period, from FY 2021 to FY 2023,
or approximately $106 million annually.
The difference in the fees projected to
be collected under the current fee rates
and the new fee rates is $102 million,
$105 million, and $110 million in FY
2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023,
respectively. Table 16 summarizes the
estimated collections under the current
fees, estimated collections under the
new fees, and the difference between
the current and the new fees.
TABLE 16—ESTIMATED COLLECTIONS UNDER CURRENT AND NEW FEES
FY 2021
($M)
Estimated collections
Current Fee ......................................................................................................
New Fee ..........................................................................................................
Difference .........................................................................................................
The present value of the transfer is
$299 million at a three percent discount
rate and $277 million at a seven percent
discount rate.
E.O. 13771 was issued on January 30,
2017, and published in the Federal
Register on February 3, 2017. 82 FR
9339. This rule is not subject to the
requirements of E.O. 13771 because this
rule is expected to result in no more
than de minimis costs.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform
This rulemaking meets the applicable
standards set forth in Sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice
Reform to eliminate ambiguity,
minimize litigation, establish clear legal
standards, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This rulemaking 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 E.O. 13132.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This rule does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
474
576
102
relationship between the national
government and the States, or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Acting Administrator, in
accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–602,
has reviewed this rule and by approving
it, certifies that it will not, if
promulgated, have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze
options for regulatory relief of small
entities unless it can certify that the rule
will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. For
purposes of the RFA, small entities
include small businesses, nonprofit
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions. DEA evaluated the impact
of this rule on small entities, and
discussions of its findings are below.
As discussed above and in the
Economic Analysis section above, DEA
analyzed three fee calculation
methodologies—Flat Fee, Past-Based,
and Weighted-Ratio. DEA selected the
Weighted-Ratio (current) methodology
to calculate the new fee structure. This
approach has been used since Congress
established registration fees, and
continues to be a reasonable reflection
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FY 2022
($M)
491
596
105
FY 2023
($M)
514
625
110
Total
($M)
1,479
1,797
318
of differing costs. The registration fees
under the Weighted-Ratio option result
in differentiated fees among registrant
groups, where registrants with larger
revenues pay higher fees than
registrants with lower revenues.
Furthermore, the Weighted-Ratio option
does not create a disparity in the
relative increase in fees from the current
to the new fees. The weighted-ratios
used by DEA to calculate the current fee
have proven effective and reasonable
over time. Additionally, the weightedratio calculation methodology generally
reflects the differences in activity level,
notably in inspections, scheduled
investigations and other control and
monitoring, by registrant category; for
example, these costs are greatest for
manufacturers. DEA selected this option
because it is the only option that results
in reasonable fees for all registrant
groups.
This approach increases fees
proportionally (21 percent) across all
registrant groups, maintaining the
weighted-ratio of 1.0, 3.0, 6.25, and
12.5. The annual increase in fees are
$52, $327, and $652 based on business
activity. The table below summarizes
the difference in fees between the new
and current fees.
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
44731
TABLE 17—DIFFERENCE IN FEES UNDER CURRENT AND NEW FEES
Total
registrations
(FY 2021–
FY 2023)
Business activity
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle:
Pharmacy ......................................................................
Hospital/Clinic ...............................................................
Practitioner ....................................................................
Teaching Institution .......................................................
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP) .........................................
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer .................................................................
Distributor ......................................................................
Researcher/Canine Handler .........................................
Analytical Lab ...............................................................
Importer .........................................................................
Exporter ........................................................................
Reverse Distributor .......................................................
Narcotic Treatment Program ........................................
Chemical Manufacturer .................................................
Chemical Importer ........................................................
Chemical Distributor .....................................................
Chemical Exporter ........................................................
Total .......................................................................
Current fees
($)
New fees
($)
Total
collections
under new
fees
($)
Difference
in fees
($) *
80,199
16,638
1,356,876
130
539,899
731
731
731
731
731
888
888
888
888
888
71,216,712
14,774,544
1,204,905,888
115,440
479,430,312
157
157
157
157
157
1,733
1,999
15,113
2,724
666
792
219
5,935
624
606
988
450
3,047
1,523
244
244
1,523
1,523
1,523
244
3,047
1,523
1,523
1,523
3,699
1,850
296
296
1,850
1,850
1,850
296
3,699
1,850
1,850
1,850
6,410,367
3,698,150
4,473,448
806,304
1,232,100
1,465,200
405,150
1,756,760
2,308,176
1,121,100
1,827,800
832,500
652
327
52
52
327
327
327
52
652
327
327
327
2,025,591
N/A
N/A
1,796,779,951
N/A
* The difference for registrations on a three-year cycle is $157 or $52 on annual basis.
As shown in Table 12, the new fees
would affect a wide variety of entities
across many industry sectors. As some
industry sectors are expected to consist
primarily of DEA registrants, i.e.,
446110-Pharmacies and Drug Stores,
622110-General Medical and Surgical
Hospitals, etc., this rule is expected to
affect a substantial number of small
entities.
DEA compared the annual increase in
fees from current fees to new fees for the
smallest of small businesses in each
industry sectors. For each of the affected
industry sectors, the annual increase
was not more than 0.1 percent of
average annual revenue. The table
below summarizes the results.
TABLE 18—FEE INCREASE AS PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL REVENUE
NAICS code description
325 ................
325411 ..........
325412 ..........
Chemical Manufacturing ...........................
Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing ....
Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing.
Drugs and Druggists’ Sundries Merchant
Wholesalers.
Other Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers.
Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except
Convenience) Stores.
Pharmacies and Drug Stores ...................
Discount Department Stores ....................
Warehouse Clubs and Supercenters .......
Testing Laboratories .................................
Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
(except Biotechnology).
Veterinary Services ...................................
Security Guards and Patrol Services .......
Waste Collection .......................................
Waste Treatment and Disposal ................
Colleges, Universities, and Professional
Schools.
Offices of Physicians (except Mental
Health Specialists).
Offices of Physicians, Mental Health Specialists.
Offices of Dentists ....................................
Offices of Optometrists .............................
424210 ..........
424690 ..........
445110 ..........
446110
452112
452910
541380
541712
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
541940 ..........
561612 ..........
5621 ..............
5622 ..............
611310 ..........
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Enterprise
size
(number of
employees)
NAICS code
621111 ..........
621112 ..........
621210 ..........
621320 ..........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Number of
establishments
Average
revenue per
establishment
($)
0–4
0–4
* 5–9
3,148
108
129
1,938,546
727,444
2,639,287
652
652
652
0.0319
0.0851
0.0235
0–4
3,630
1,367,131
327
0.0239
0–4
3,352
2,007,996
327
0.0154
0–4
23,710
453,787
52
0.0108
0–4
0–4
0–4
0–4
0–4
6,360
6
12
2,415
5,013
1,069,655
266,167
326,333
297,737
427,790
52
52
52
52
52
0.0046
0.0184
0.0150
0.0165
0.0115
0–4
0–4
0–4
0–4
0–4
8,881
2,162
3,853
616
372
292,166
114,198
365,902
461,159
913,078
52
52
327
327
52
0.0168
0.0429
0.0844
0.0670
0.0054
0–4
95,648
447,715
52
0.0109
0–4
8,980
253,837
52
0.0193
0–4
0–4
50,781
10,939
330,868
269,348
52
52
0.0148
0.0182
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Fee increase
($)
Fee increase
of revenue
(%)
44732
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 18—FEE INCREASE AS PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL REVENUE—Continued
Enterprise
size
(number of
employees)
NAICS code
NAICS code description
621330 ..........
Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians).
Offices of Podiatrists .................................
Outpatient Mental Health and Substance
Abuse Centers.
HMO Medical Centers ..............................
Freestanding Ambulatory Surgical and
Emergency Centers.
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals ..
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals.
Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
621391 ..........
621420 ..........
621491 ..........
621493 ..........
622110 ..........
622210 ..........
622310 ..........
Number of
establishments
Average
revenue per
establishment
($)
0–4
16,149
145,005
52
0.0338
0–4
0–4
5,300
1,810
288,546
211,249
52
52
0.0170
0.0232
* 5–9
0–4
16
1,011
620,188
549,974
52
52
0.0079
0.0089
0–4
* 20–99
39
27
10,621,308
5,142,444
52
52
0.0005
0.0010
0–4
21
8,561,238
52
0.0006
Fee increase
($)
Fee increase
of revenue
(%)
* Where the revenue figure for the smallest size category is unavailable, the next size up with available revenue figure is used.
While this rule affects a substantial
number of small businesses, because the
economic impact for the smallest of
small businesses is not significant, the
rule will not have a significant impact
on small entities as a whole. In
summary, DEA’s evaluation of economic
impact by size category indicates that
the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the
expenditure by state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $154 million or more
(adjusted for inflation) in any one year,
and will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Therefore, no
actions were deemed subject to the
provisions of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1532.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
This rulemaking does not create or
modify a collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This
rulemaking will not impose additional
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
on State or local governments,
individuals, businesses, or other
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
information unless it displays a valid
OMB control number.
Congressional Review Act
This final rule is a major rule as
defined by the Congressional Review
Act, 5 U.S.C. 804. This rule will result
in an annual effect on the economy of
$100,000,000 or more in the form of
transfers, as fees paid to DEA are
considered transfer payments and not
costs. However, this rule will not cause
a major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of U.S.-based companies to
compete with foreign-based companies
in domestic and export markets. DEA
submitted a copy of the final rule to
both Houses of Congress and to the
Comptroller General.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 1301
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drug traffic control, Security
measures.
21 CFR Part 1309
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drug traffic control, Exports,
Imports, Security measures.
For the reasons set forth above, DEA
amends 21 CFR parts 1301 and 1309 as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
PART 1301—REGISTRATION OF
MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS
AND DISPENSERS OF CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCES
1. The authority citation for part 1301
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 821, 822, 823, 824,
831, 871(b), 875, 877, 886a, 951, 952, 956,
957, 958, 965.
2. Amend § 1301.13 by revising the
fourth sentence in paragraph (e)
introductory text and revising paragraph
(e)(1) to read as follows:
■
§ 1301.13 Application for registration; time
for application; expiration date; registration
for independent activities; application
forms, fees, contents and signature;
coincident activities.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * * Generally, the application
fees are not refundable; however, they
may be issued in limited circumstances
at the discretion of the Administrator.
These circumstances include: Applicant
error, such as duplicate payments,
payment for incorrect business
activities, or payments made by persons
who are exempt under this section from
application or renewal fees; DEA error;
and death of a registrant within the first
year of the three-year registration cycle.
* * *
(1)
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
44733
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY OF REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS
Application fee
($)
Registration
period
(years)
Business activity
Controlled substances
DEA application forms
(i) Manufacturing .............
Schedules I –V ..............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
3,699
1
(ii) Distributing .................
Schedules I–V ...............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
1,850
1
(iii) Reverse distributing ..
Schedules I–V ...............
1,850
1
(iv) Dispensing or instructing (includes
Practitioner, Hospital/
Clinic, Retail Pharmacy, Central fill pharmacy, Teaching Institution).
Schedules II–V ..............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
New—224 .....................
Renewal—224a .............
888
3
(v) Research ...................
Schedule I .....................
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
296
1
(vi) Research ..................
Schedules II–V ..............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
296
1
(vii) Narcotic Treatment
Program (including
compounder).
(viii) Importing .................
Narcotic Drugs in
Schedules II–V.
New—363 .....................
Renewal—363a .............
296
1
Schedules I–V ...............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
1,850
1
(ix) Exporting ...................
Schedules I–V ...............
1,850
1
(x) Chemical Analysis .....
Schedules I–V ...............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
New—225 .....................
Renewal—225a .............
296
1
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Coincident activities allowed
Schedules I–V: May distribute that substance or
class for which registration was issued; may
not distribute or dispose any substance or
class for which not registered.
Schedules II–V: May conduct chemical analysis
and preclinical research (including quality control analysis) with substances listed in those
schedules for which authorization as a mfr.
was issued.
May acquire Schedules II–V controlled substances from collectors for the purposes of destruction.
May conduct research and instructional activities
with those substances for which registration
was granted, except that a mid-level practitioner may conduct such research only to the
extent expressly authorized under state statute. A pharmacist may manufacture an aqueous or oleaginous solution or solid dosage
form containing a narcotic controlled substance in Schedule II–V in a proportion not exceeding 20% of the complete solution, compound or mixture. A retail pharmacy may perform central fill pharmacy activities.
A researcher may manufacture or import the
basic class of substance or substances for
which registration was issued, provided that
such manufacture or import is set forth in the
protocol required in § 1301.18 and to distribute
such class to persons registered or authorized
to conduct research with such class of substance or registered or authorized to conduct
chemical analysis with controlled substances.
May conduct chemical analysis with controlled
substances in those schedules for which registration was issued; manufacture such substances if and to the extent that such manufacture is set forth in a statement filed with the
application for registration or reregistration and
provided that the manufacture is not for the
purposes of dosage form development; import
such substances for research purposes; distribute such substances to persons registered
or authorized to conduct chemical analysis, instructional activities or research with such substances, and to persons exempted from registration pursuant to § 1301.24; and conduct
instructional activities with controlled substances.
May distribute that substance or class for which
registration was issued; may not distribute any
substance or class for which not registered.
May manufacture and import controlled substances for analytical or instructional activities;
may distribute such substances to persons
registered or authorized to conduct chemical
analysis, instructional activities, or research
with such substances and to persons exempted from registration pursuant to § 1301.24;
may export such substances to persons in
other countries performing chemical analysis
or enforcing laws related to controlled substances or drugs in those countries; and may
conduct instructional activities with controlled
substances.
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44734
*
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
PART 1309—REGISTRATION OF
MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS,
IMPORTERS, AND EXPORTERS OF
LIST I CHEMICALS
3. The authority citation for part 1309
continues to read as follows:
■
5. Amend § 1309.12 by revising the
last sentence in paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 802, 821, 822, 823,
824, 830, 871(b), 875, 877, 886a, 952, 953,
957, 958.
■
4. Revise § 1309.11 to read as follows:
§ 1309.11
applicant shall pay an annual fee of
$3,699.
(b) For each application for
registration or reregistration to
distribute (either retail distribution or
non-retail distribution), import, or
export a list I chemical, the applicant
shall pay an annual fee of $1,850.
Fee Amounts.
§ 1309.12
refund.
Time and method of payment;
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * * Generally, the application
fees are not refundable; however, they
(a) For each application for
registration or reregistration to
manufacture for distribution the
may be issued in limited circumstances
at the discretion of the Administrator.
These circumstances include: Applicant
error, such as duplicate payments,
payment for incorrect business
activities, or payments made by persons
who are exempt under this section from
application or renewal fees; DEA error;
and death of a registrant within the first
year of the three-year registration cycle.
6. Amend § 1309.21 by revising the
table in paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
§ 1309.21
*
Persons required to register.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
SUMMARY OF REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS
Chemicals
DEA forms
(1) Manufacturing ....
List I, ........................................
Drug products containing
ephedrine,
pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine.
List I, ........................................
Scheduled listed chemical
products.
List I, ........................................
Drug Products containing
ephedrine,
pseudoephedrine, phenylpropanolamine.
List I, ........................................
Scheduled listed chemical
products.
New–510 .................
Renewal–510a ........
3,699
1
New–510 .................
Renewal–510a ........
1,850
1
New–510 .................
Renewal–510a ........
1,850
1
New–510 .................
Renewal–510a ........
1,850
1
(2) Distributing ........
(3) Importing ...........
(4) Exporting ...........
Timothy J. Shea,
Acting Administrator.
temporary safety zone is necessary to
protect mariners and vessels from the
navigational hazards associated with a
fireworks display. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited
unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port Buffalo or a
designated representative.
[FR Doc. 2020–16169 Filed 7–23–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
This rule is effective from 8 p.m.
through 10:45 p.m. on August 1, 2020.
DATES:
Coast Guard
[Docket Number USCG–2020–0394]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Erie Yacht Club 125th
Anniversary Summer Event, Presque
Isle Bay, Erie, PA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
If
you have questions on this rule, contact
LT Sean Dolan, Chief of Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Buffalo via telephone 716–843–9322 or
email D09-SMB-SECBuffalo-WWM@
uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters within a 420-foot
radius of the Lake Shore Towing barge
launching fireworks at the position of
42°07′60″ N 80°08′00″ W. This
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
To view documents
mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2020–
0394 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click
‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket
Folder on the line associated with this
rule.
ADDRESSES:
33 CFR Part 165
ACTION:
Application fee
Registration
period
(years)
Business activity
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Coincident activities allowed
May distribute that chemical
for which registration was
issued; may not distribute
any chemical for which not
registered.
May distribute that chemical
for which registration was
issued; may not distribute
any chemical for which not
registered.
I. Table of Abbreviations
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background Information and
Regulatory History
The Coast Guard is issuing this
temporary rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to
authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule
without prior notice and opportunity to
comment when the agency for good
cause finds that those procedures are
‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the
event sponsor did not submit notice to
the Coast Guard with sufficient time
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 143 (Friday, July 24, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44710-44734]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16169]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
21 CFR Parts 1301 and 1309
[Docket No. DEA-501]
RIN 1117-AB51
Registration and Reregistration Fees for Controlled Substance and
List I Chemical Registrants
AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is adjusting the fee
schedule for registration and reregistration fees necessary to recover
the costs of its Diversion Control Program relating to the registration
and control of the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, importation
and exportation of controlled substances and list I chemicals as
mandated by the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This final rule adopts
the notice of proposed rulemaking published on March 16, 2020, to
change the fee schedule and codify existing practices of the issuance
of refunds by DEA for applicant registration fees, without change.
DATES: This final rule is effective October 1, 2020. The new fee
schedule will be in effect for all new applications submitted on or
after October 1, 2020, and for all renewal applications submitted on or
after October 1, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott A. Brinks, Regulatory Drafting &
Policy Support Section (DPW), Diversion Control Division, Drug
Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive,
Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (571) 362-3261.
I. Executive Summary
The Diversion Control Program
DEA's Diversion Control Program (DCP) is administered by the
Diversion Control Division (DC). DC ensures the availability of
controlled substances and listed chemicals for legitimate use in the
United States. The DCP is responsible for maintaining a closed system
of distribution by preventing diversion of controlled substances and
listed chemicals in the United States and enforcing the provisions of
the CSA for DEA. The DCP regulates over 1.8 million registrants,
ensuring their compliance with the CSA.
Legal Authority
The DCP is a strategic component of DEA's law enforcement mission,
which regulates the registration and control of the manufacture,
distribution, dispensing, importation, and exportation of
pharmaceutical controlled substances and listed chemicals. The DCP
implements and enforces the CSA to help prevent, detect, and eliminate
the diversion of controlled substances and listed chemicals into the
illicit market while ensuring a sufficient supply of controlled
substances and listed chemicals for legitimate medical, scientific,
research, and industrial purposes.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Attorney General's delegation of authority to DEA may be
found at 28 CFR 0.100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the CSA, DEA is authorized to charge reasonable fees relating
to the registration and control of the manufacture, distribution,
dispensing, import, and export of controlled substances and listed
chemicals. 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958(f). DEA must set fees at a level that
ensures the recovery of the full costs of operating the various aspects
of its DCP. 21 U.S.C. 886a. Each year, DEA is required by statute to
transfer the first $15 million of fee revenues into the general fund of
the Treasury and the remainder of the fee revenues is deposited into a
separate fund of the Treasury called the Diversion Control Fee Account
(DCFA). 21 U.S.C. 886a(1). On at least a quarterly basis, the Secretary
of the Treasury is required to reimburse DEA an amount from the DCFA
``in accordance with estimates made in the budget request of the
Attorney General for those fiscal years'' for the operation of the
DCP.\2\ 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(B) and (D). The first $15 million of fee
revenues that are transferred to the Treasury do not support any DCP
activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The DCP consists of the pharmaceutical controlled substance
and listed chemical diversion control activities of DEA. These
activities are related to the registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing, importation, and exportation
of controlled substances and listed chemicals (21 U.S.C. 886a(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Proposed Rule
DEA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on March 16,
2020, in the Federal Register, proposing new registration and
reregistration fees for registrants, as well as proposing to codify
existing practices of issuing refunds for these fees in limited
[[Page 44711]]
circumstances. 85 FR 14810. In the NPRM, DEA proposed to amend 21 CFR
1301.13, 1309.11, 1309.12, and 1309.21 within the Code of Federal
Regulations.
In the NPRM, DEA proposed a new fee of $3,699 per year for
manufacturers of controlled substances. For distributors, reverse
distributors, importers, and exporters of controlled substances, DEA
proposed a new fee of $1,850 per year. For controlled substance
business activities involving dispensing, a new fee of $888 per three
year cycle was proposed. For all other business activities of
controlled substances (research, narcotic treatment programs (NTPs),
and chemical analysis), the proposed new fee was $296 per year. For
manufacturers of list I chemicals, DEA proposed a new fee of $3,699 per
year. For distributors, importers, and exporters of list I chemicals,
DEA proposed a new fee of $1,850 per year.
This final rule adopts the March 16, 2020, NPRM proposal to change
the fee schedule and codify existing practices of the issuance of
refunds by DEA for applicant registration fees, without change.
II. Background
History of Fees
In October 1992, Congress passed the Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 102-395), which changed the source of funding for
DEA's DCP from being part of DEA's annual Congressional appropriation
to full funding by registration and reregistration fees through the
establishment of the DCFA.\3\ The Appropriations Act of 1993 required
that ``[f]ees charged by the Drug Enforcement Administration under its
diversion control program shall be set at a level that ensures the
recovery of the full costs of operating the various aspects of that
program.'' The legislation did not, however, provide clarification on
what constituted the ``Diversion Control Program,'' thus leaving open
the issue as to what fee-setting criteria should be used to determine
which costs could be reimbursed from the DCFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the Appropriations Act of 1993, DEA published an
NPRM in December 1992 to adjust the registration and reregistration
fees for controlled substance registrants (57 FR 60148, December 18,
1992). In the absence of guidelines from Congress regarding the
specific criteria to be followed in identifying costs and setting the
fees, DEA relied on the plain language of the Appropriations Act of
1993 and proposed fees necessary to cover the costs of the activities
that were identified within the budget decision unit known as the
``Diversion Control Program.''
At the time that the Appropriations Act of 1993 was passed, 21
U.S.C. 821 did not extend to chemical control activities; accordingly,
there were no registration or fee requirements for handlers of list I
chemicals. DEA therefore excluded chemical control costs from its Final
Rule implementing the requirements of the Appropriations Act of 1993
(58 FR 15272, March 22, 1993). Congress amended 21 U.S.C. 821 on
December 17, 1993, to require reasonable fees relating to ``the
registration and control of regulated persons and of regulated
transactions'' (Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993, 3(a),
Pub. L. 103-200, 107 Stat. 2333); however, despite this amendment, DEA
continued to endeavor to maintain separate funding for its controlled
substances diversion control and its chemical diversion control
activities.
Following publication of DEA's Final Rule, the American Medical
Association (AMA) and others filed a lawsuit objecting to the increase
in registration and reregistration fees on the grounds that DEA had
failed to provide adequate information as to what activities were
covered by the fees and how they were justified. The district court
issued its final order granting DEA's motion for summary judgment and
disposing of all claims on July 5, 1994.\4\ Upon AMA's appeal, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit remanded, without
vacating, the rule to DEA, requiring the agency to provide an
opportunity for meaningful notice and comment on the fee-funded
components of the DCP. In doing so, the court confirmed the boundaries
of the DCP that DEA can fund by registration fees, finding that the
current statutory scheme (21 U.S.C. 821 and 958) required DEA to set
reasonable registration fees to recover the full costs of the DCP. See
AMA v. Reno, 57 F.3d 1129, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1995). DEA responded to the
remand requirement through a notice and comment in the Federal Register
on December 30, 1996, describing the fee-funded components and
activities of the DCP with an explanation of how each satisfies the
statutory requirements for fee-funding (61 FR 68624-32, December 30,
1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ AMA v. Reno, 857 F. Supp. 80 (D.D.C. 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, in the absence of a simple, objective measure by which DCP
costs could be identified and the appropriate fees calculated, both DEA
and the courts have looked to 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958 to define the
guidelines for determining what costs should be included in the
calculation of the fees and from whom the fees might be collected.
The Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2005 was signed into law on
December 8, 2004, as Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act
of 2005 (Pub. L. 108-447). Title IV, Section 634 of the Appropriations
Act of 2005 provided clarification as to the activities constituting
the DCP. The Appropriations Act of 2005 amended 21 U.S.C. 886a(2)(A) to
define the Diversion Control Program as ``the controlled substance and
chemical diversion control activities of the Drug Enforcement
Administration,'' which are further defined as the ``activities related
to the registration and control of the manufacture, distribution and
dispensing, importation and exportation of controlled substances and
listed chemicals.'' It also amended 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(B) to provide
that reimbursements from the DCFA ``shall be made without
distinguishing between expenses related to controlled substances
activities and expenses related to chemical activities.'' Finally, the
Appropriations Act of 2005 amended 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958(f) to make the
language of those sections consistent with the definition of the DCP
(Pub. L. 108-447). The net effect of the amendments was to allow DEA to
deposit all registration and reregistration fees (controlled substance
and chemical) into the DFCA and fund all controlled substance and
chemical diversion control activities from the account without
distinguishing as to the type of activity (controlled substance or
chemical) being funded.
Independent of the passage of the Appropriations Act of 2005, DEA
undertook an internal reorganization to increase operational
efficiencies and overall effectiveness. As discussed in detail in DEA's
Final Rule published on August 29, 2006 (71 FR 51105), the resulting
internal reorganization removed the focus from the single business
decision unit of the DCP to a focus on diversion control activities
irrespective of the business decision unit. That is, the diversion
control activities of DEA are no longer contained in a single business
decision unit identified as the DCP. Thus, in identifying the
activities that constitute the DCP, DEA looks across the agency
[[Page 44712]]
at all functions related to the registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, dispensing, importation, and exportation of
controlled substances and listed chemicals. This approach adheres both
to the language contained in 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958 and to the court's
requirement that there must be a nexus between the DCP's activities
funded through fees, and the registration and control of the
manufacture, distribution, and dispensing of controlled substances and
listed chemicals of regulated persons and regulated transactions.
In keeping with this organizational and functional change, DEA
continues to identify the diversion control activities to be funded by
the DCFA. Accordingly, this NPRM describes the activities that
constitute the DCP, irrespective of organizational structure within the
agency and in compliance with 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958, and 21 U.S.C.
886a, which require that DEA charge reasonable fees relating to the
registration and control of the manufacture, distribution, dispensing,
importation, and exportation of controlled substances and listed
chemicals and that DEA collect fees adequate to fully fund the
controlled substances and listed chemical diversion control activities
that constitute the DCP, as defined by DEA.
The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General
(OIG) completed a review of DEA's use of the DCFA in 2008 and did not
find any misused DCFA funds for non-diversion control activities
between Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 and FY 2007. To the contrary, the OIG
found that DEA did not fully fund all diversion control costs with the
DCFA as required by law.\5\ Therefore, in 2011 DEA published a NPRM to
continue efforts to fully fund the DCP. The 2011 NPRM included
additional DCP costs which were identified in the OIG report and
resulted in an approximately 33 percent fee increase across all
registrant groups. The 2011 NPRM was finalized in 2012, and this was
the last time DEA adjusted the fees prior to the current fee increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Review of the Drug Enforcement Administration's Use of the
Diversion Control Fee Account,'' I-2008-002, February 2008, https://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/DEA/e0802/final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Diversion Control Program
Scope of the Diversion Control Program
The mission of DEA's DC is to prevent, detect and investigate the
diversion of pharmaceutical controlled substances and listed chemicals
from legitimate channels while ensuring an adequate and uninterrupted
supply of pharmaceutical controlled substances and listed chemicals to
meet legitimate medical, commercial, and scientific needs. This
Division administers the DCP, which is responsible for enforcing the
provisions of the CSA, as they pertain to ensuring the availability of
controlled substances and listed chemicals for legitimate uses in the
U.S., while exercising controls to prevent the diversion of these
substances and chemicals for illegal uses. This Division maintains an
overall geographic picture of drug and chemical diversion and abuse
problems to identify new trends or patterns in diversion and abuse,
which enables it to appropriately direct resources.
The DCP is executed by maintaining a closed system of distribution
by regulating and managing over 1.8 million DEA registrants and
investigating activity related to the diversion of pharmaceutical
controlled substances and listed chemicals. To ensure accountability
within the closed system of distribution, the DCP administers,
maintains, and oversees DEA's registration system. This entails
processing, reviewing, and, if necessary, investigating all
applications for registration and reregistration, collecting fees, and,
when appropriate, proposing to take administrative action on
registrations or applications for registration, such as restriction,
revocation, suspension, or denial of an application.
The DCP's regulatory function is accomplished by registering those
entities that handle controlled substances or listed chemicals,
conducting regulatory inspections, providing information and guidance
to registrants, and controlling and monitoring the manufacture,
distribution, dispensing, import, and export of controlled substances
and listed chemicals. The DCP determines the appropriate procedures
necessary for ordering and distributing schedule I and II controlled
substances, using DEA Form 222 or its electronic equivalent.\6\ This
enables the DCP to monitor the flow of certain controlled substances
from their point of manufacture through commercial distribution. The
DCP also executes its regulatory functions by fulfilling its U.S.
treaty obligations pertaining to the CSA, such as the preparation of
periodic reports for submission to the United Nations (UN) as mandated
by U.S. international drug control treaty obligations on the
manufacture and distribution of narcotic and psychotropic substances,
as well as determining the anticipated future needs for narcotic and
psychotropic substances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 21 U.S.C. 828, 21 CFR part 1305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DCP ensures that registrants are in compliance with the
safeguards of the CSA. This allows for the identification and the
prevention of diversion of pharmaceutical controlled substances and
listed chemicals into illicit markets. Registrant compliance is
determined primarily through pre-registration, scheduled, and complaint
investigations. DCP regulatory activities have an inherent deterrent
function, and they are designed to ensure that those businesses and
individuals registered with DEA to handle controlled substances or
listed chemicals have sufficient measures in place to prevent the
diversion of these substances. These investigations also help
registrants understand and comply with the CSA, identify those
registrants who violate the CSA, and implement regulations. Pre-
registration investigations reduce the possibility of registering
unauthorized entities, ensure that the means to prevent diversion are
in place, and determine whether registration is consistent with the
public interest.
Not only does the DCP exercise authority and control over the
registrant population, the DCP exercises authority over the
classification of substances.\7\ This is accomplished by evaluating
drugs and chemicals to determine whether these substances are being
abused or potentially involved in illicit traffic, and to evaluate
whether any substances should be scheduled as a controlled substance or
regulated as a listed chemical. This requires the collection and
analysis of a large amount of data from various sources. These
evaluations are used by DEA as a basis for developing appropriate drug
control policies; determining the status of controlled, excluded, or
exempted drugs and drug products; and supporting U.S. initiatives in
international forums.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 21 U.S.C. 811-814.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DCP's authority over controlled substances and listed chemicals
requires its support of domestic and foreign investigations of these
substances. As such, the DCP serves as the competent national authority
for the U.S. regarding listed chemicals and international treaties. The
DCP works with the international community to identify and seize
international shipments of listed chemicals destined for the U.S. The
DCP also works on a bilateral basis to urge international partners to
take effective action, in cooperation with chemical companies, to
establish controls and prevent the diversion of listed chemicals from
legitimate trade. In
[[Page 44713]]
addition to its other oversight and regulatory responsibilities in this
area, the DCP reviews the importation and exportation notifications of
listed chemicals.
The DCP also controls the manufacture of controlled substances by
setting the aggregate production quotas, individual manufacturing
quotas, and procurement quotas for basic classes of schedule I and II
controlled substances. Similarly, the DCP controls the manufacture of
list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine by
setting the assessment of annual needs, individual manufacturing
quotas, procurement quotas and import quotas for these three list I
chemicals. As such, the DCP maintains and monitors the Year-End
Reporting System/Quota Management System (YERS/QMS), which provides
information on entities manufacturing schedule I and II controlled
substances and list I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and
phenylpropanolamine. Furthermore, the DCP issues import and export
registrations and permits, and monitors declared imports, exports, and
transshipments of these substances. The DCP must ensure that all
imports and exports of controlled substances and listed chemicals meet
the requirements of the CSA. As such, the DCP maintains and monitors
many electronic reporting systems, such as the Chemical Handlers
Enforcement Management System, which provides information on entities
manufacturing, distributing, and exporting and importing regulated
chemicals, and encapsulating and tableting machines.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 21 U.S.C. 830, 957-58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To effectively execute its regulatory functions, the DCP reviews
legislation pertinent to the availability of controlled substances and
listed chemicals for legitimate uses in the U.S. and controls to
prevent the diversion of these substances and chemicals. The DCP drafts
and implements regulations to keep DEA in compliance with legislation
enacted by Congress. The DCP constantly reviews its own regulations and
develops and implements regulations designed to enhance DEA's diversion
control efforts. The DCP's regulatory activities also require education
and outreach to ensure understanding of and compliance with the CSA and
applicable regulations, and to ensure registrants have sufficient
measures in place to prevent diversion. The DCP's outreach efforts
include establishing and maintaining liaison and working relationships
with other Federal agencies, the regulated community, and foreign,
state, and local governments. Other efforts include developing and
maintaining manuals and other publications; organizing and conducting
national conferences on current issues, policies, and initiatives; and
providing scientific support for policy guidance, expert witness
testimony, and conference presentations.
The DCP continues to address the growing threat of synthetic
substances through the collection and evaluation of pharmacological,
medical, epidemiological and other scientific data for new drugs of
abuse and when appropriate, initiate the necessary administrative
procedures to place these substances under regulatory control.
Since the last fee increase in 2012, the nature of the diversion
control problem has increased in size and complexity. The increased
diversion threats and changing diversion schemes such as the opioid
epidemic, as well as amendments to the CSA, have necessitated the need
to increase DEA registration fees in order to fully fund all aspects of
the DCP.
Although DEA has been fiscally responsible and has not increased
registration fees since 2012, a registration fee increase is needed.
This increase will fund personnel and operations supporting the DCP's
mission to prevent and detect diversion, protect the closed system of
distribution in the U.S., and combat the nation's opioid crisis.
Without an increase in registration fees, DEA will be unable to
continue current operations and will be in violation of the statutory
mandate that fees charged ``shall be set at a level that ensures the
recovery of the full costs of operating the various aspects of [the
diversion control program].'' 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(C).
IV. Discussion of Comments
Following publication of the NPRM on March 16, 2020, 85 FR 14810-
14837, DEA received twelve comments in response to the rule. Of these
comments, five comments are out of scope in their entirety, and did not
address the fee calculation or the issuance of refunds by DEA for
applicant registration fees. Two comments supported the proposed rule
in part. The remainder of the comments expressed concern about the fee
increase, as further described below.
Support for the Fee Increase and Proposal To Grant Registration Refunds
Issue: An association agreed with DEA's proposed methodology for
the new fee calculation and the proposal to grant registration fee
refunds under certain circumstances. The commenter expressed its
appreciation for DEA's acknowledgement that there will be a certain
amount of honest errors either on the part of the registrant or on
DEA's part. This commenter wrote that the proposed rule provides a
useful explanation of the three alternative methodologies to calculate
the new registration fees and agreed with DEA's selection of the
weighted-ratio method. The commenter wrote that because all supply
chain trading partners share a responsibility for helping to avoid the
misuse/abuse of the controlled substances and other products that DEA
regulates, adopting a method that applies an equivalent increase to all
registrants is reasonable.
Another association also supported the proposal to allow the
Administrator to refund registration fees under certain circumstances.
They requested that information regarding the refund process be easily
accessible, and that an efficient process be established to issue the
refunds.
DEA Response: DEA appreciates the support for the selected fee
calculation methodology, and the codification of DEA policy regarding
refunding of registration fees in certain circumstances. In developing
the fee schedule, DEA conducted a thorough analysis of the identified
fee calculation options--including the anticipated economic impact on
registrants--and determined that the weighted-ratio option represents
the most reasonable approach to calculate registrant fees sufficient to
fully fund the DCP.
Based on the Administrator's discretionary authority, the refunds
for fees will be issued under limited circumstances, to include
applicant error, DEA error, and death of a registrant within the first
year of the three-year registration cycle. The process for obtaining a
refund will be made available on DEA Diversion Control's website
(www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov).
Objection to the Fee Increase
Auditing Mechanisms
Issue: Two commenters, one of whom is a physician, the other of
whom is anonymous, raised concern about tracking DEA's accountability
with respect to the DCFA. These commenters wrote that an audit should
be done on the DCFA to avoid waste and to ensure that the DCFA does not
become a blank check for DEA to do whatever they want with it. In
particular, the commenters were concerned with how the fees are being
spent. The physician commenter objected to the fee increase and
proposed that an independent, non-
[[Page 44714]]
governmental audit be performed on an annual basis to ensure that there
is no fraud or waste of the fees.
DEA Response: As required by the Chief Financial Officers (CFO)
Act, DOJ OIG annually audits DEA's financial statements, using a third
party auditor (currently KPMG). These audits cover all of DEA's funding
sources and lines of business, including the DCFA. DEA has received an
unqualified audit opinion for approximately twenty years.
Additionally, DEA has established a robust system of internal
controls to ensure that DEA recovers the full cost of the DCP, and that
the DCFA is used only for all of that program's costs, as directed by
law. These internal controls over non-personnel expenses are managed by
the Cost Diversion Validation Unit. This unit is independent of the DCP
and resides within the Financial Management Division, which is
responsible for all of DEA's financial management, including that of
the DCFA. The unit reviews every DCFA expenditure over $500 for a
justification for how it relates to the DCP and ensures that DCFA
funding is in compliance with established methodologies. The Cost
Diversion Validation Unit recommends methodologies for the appropriate
and consistent use of DCFA funding across commodities and cost areas,
to ensure the funding is used to pay for only costs attributable to the
DCP.
Along with the oversight of the Cost Diversion Validation Unit over
non-personnel expenses, DEA's Office of Resource Management reviews the
investigative work performed by DEA's workforce, including Special
Agents, on a quarterly basis. These reviews enable DEA to ensure that
the DCFA pays for all payroll costs associated with DCP casework and
does not pay for the payroll or employees working on non-DCP casework.
In instances where DCFA funded employees work on non-DCP cases, DEA's
salaries and expenses (non-DCFA) account reimburses the DCFA for those
payroll expenses. These internal controls ensure that DCFA funding is
used only for the requirements of the DCP and not made available for
non-diversion related expenses within DEA.
DC, as part of DEA, must adhere to Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular A-123, Management's Responsibility for Enterprise Risk
Management,\9\ and Internal Control and Federal Managers' and Financial
Integrity Act \10\ which have been at the center of Federal
requirements to improve accountability in Federal programs and
operations since 1981. Under OMB Circular A-123, DEA must maintain
internal controls that reduce the risk of fraud, waste, and error. DEA
is also responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls
to achieve specific internal control objectives related to operations,
reporting, and compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-123,
Management's Responsibility for Internal Control.
\10\ 31 U.S.C. 3512.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to DEA's internal inspection and evaluation practices,
DEA's programs are subject to external audits and reviews, as part of
maintaining the public's trust in DEA's ability to manage resources in
fulfillment of its mission. DOJ, OIG, and the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) are the primary auditing agencies that review DEA's
programs on an ad hoc basis. The outcome of external audits, whether
positive or negative, has a significant impact on DEA's programs.
Moreover, all budget submissions for the DCP are subject to
multiple levels of scrutiny and review within DEA, the DOJ, and OMB.
Each of DEA's annual budget requests to Congress, which includes the
DCP, is available for public view. Each budget request is examined and
approved by both DOJ and OMB.
The DCP's implementation of internal inspection and evaluation
practices coupled with federal mandates established by OMB, OIG, and
GAO are sufficient to maintain DC's program integrity, efficiency, and
transparency. All aspects of the DCP are inspected to detect any waste,
fraud, or abuse. An external, non-governmental audit, as suggested by
the physician commenter, would require a large expenditure of
registrant fees, and would be excessive, given the other safeguards
that are already in effect.
Hiring of Additional Personnel To Address DCP's Mission; Finalizing
Rules and Updates to DEA Publications
Issue: The anonymous commenter raised concern about the increase in
fees as it relates to the hiring of additional personnel, and the
physician questioned what is being funded by registrant fees. The
anonymous commenter stated that hiring personnel did not seem to be the
answer because enforcement was not working on the opioid epidemic. The
anonymous commenter further suggested that hiring additional people
would not solve the problems of the opioid epidemic, and opined that
DEA believes that additional people will magically solve the opioid
epidemic. Both commenters stated that DEA has failed to meet many
Congressional deadlines that were imposed by the enactment of various
legislation. The physician also added that DEA has been slow to draft
implementing regulations for statutory amendments to the CSA, and to
draft other rules, schedule substances, or update manuals and
publications that help registrants.
DEA Response: As a part of executing the DCP's mission, DEA is
focused on combatting the opioid epidemic, as well as addressing the
diversion of other controlled substances and listed chemicals. While
DEA knows that the hiring of additional people will not automatically
solve the epidemic, hiring more people will improve DEA's ability to
successfully investigate diversion. By increasing personnel and
devoting more resources towards prioritizing and drafting rules, DEA
will be able to more efficiently and effectively meet deadlines and
address diversion.
While DEA aims to meet every deadline Congress puts in place when
creating new legislation, DEA's rulemaking process involves many steps.
Where Congress has enacted statutory amendments to the CSA, such as the
SUPPORT Act, DEA complies with these laws while finalizing implementing
regulations for these amendments. Moreover, finalizing and implementing
rules require the publication of proposed rules or interim final rules
and final rules. These documents require significant drafting and
analysis, as well as a lengthy review process to ensure that the rule
is legal, fair, and will be effective in meeting the goal of the
particular rule.
In the proposed rule to increase fees, DEA chose not to discuss any
other proposed rules or their status, due to the sensitive nature of
rule drafting, as well as the fact that proposed rules can change prior
to finalization. However, DEA received comments questioning the
necessity of the fee increase due to the fact that implementing
regulations for statutory amendments to the CSA, as well as a
regulation related to marijuana growers, have yet to be published. As
stated above, the rulemaking process is lengthy and involves multiple
phases. In 2019, DEA published two NPRMs, three Final Rules, and two
Notices (regarding the setting of the aggregate production quota and
assessment of annual needs). So far, in 2020, DEA has published three
NPRMs and one Notice (to adjust the established aggregate production
quotas and assessment of annual needs).
The physician commenter also noted that DEA's Diversion Control
website Manuals and Publications section contains older manuals.
However, this
[[Page 44715]]
is not indicative of DEA's continuous efforts to keep policies and
procedures current with regulations, technology, and industry best
practices. DEA is in the process of updating the entire Manuals and
Publications section on its website and several manuals are being
drafted. DCFA funds will be used to provide the DCP with additional
resources to update the manuals and outdated documents. The physician
also contended that DEA publishes an average of only three scheduling
actions per year. This is inaccurate. Since FY 2019 alone, DEA has
published in the Federal Register over twenty final rules placing
dangerous substances in schedules I and II of the CSA.
Quotas
Issue: The physician commenter raised a concern about DEA's process
for setting quotas. In particular, the commenter did not understand how
proposing new use-specific quotas would expedite the process or provide
clarity. The commenter wrote that it is unsettling to pay for
leadership that is unsure about how certain processes under their
purview work.
DEA Response: DC's leadership fully understands the quota setting
process and plays an active role in the rule-making process.
In addition, DEA is committed to ensuring that quotas are set in
such a way as to grant manufacturers the ability to provide controlled
substances to meet the demand of the legitimate medical, scientific,
industrial, and research needs of the U.S. DEA is required to
understand what is available for legitimate patient need versus what is
available for product development to properly calculate the Aggregate
Production Quota (APQ) and individual quotas. Additionally, as the
number of manufacturers continues to increase and industry practices
and specializations change, the ability to methodically track movements
of material between registrants at all stages of manufacturing becomes
more critical. Use-specific subcategories improve the efficiency of the
application and reporting process for DEA-registered manufacturers. The
specification of quota subcategories reflects the manufacturing
activity of the applying DEA registrant, has facilitated the issuance
of manufacturing and procurement quotas, and has provided a more
accurate calculation of the APQs for the U.S. by preventing double
counting of quotas. Use-specific quotas have been informally in place
for well over a decade with no complaints from the registrants who have
found the system beneficial in separating their product development and
packaging efforts from their commercial manufacturing efforts when
requesting adjustments to their quotas.
Education and Outreach Programs
Issue: The physician commenter suggested that DEA could save money
and manpower by eliminating programs such as DEA 360 Strategy, National
Take-Back Initiative (NTBI), and Tactical Diversion Squads (TDS). This
commenter believes that DEA has not been proactive enough in its
mission to address or prevent the opioid problem.
DEA Response: DEA works diligently to achieve operational
efficiencies in all of its programs, including the DCP, while keeping
costs as low as possible. Due to increased diversion and prescription
drug abuse, as well as an increase in the production and use of
chemicals that contribute to the health emergency, DEA's 360 Strategy,
NTBI, and TDS groups are necessary tools to aid ending the deadly cycle
of prescription opioid misuse.
Through DEA's 360 program, prescription opioid misuse is targeted
using a holistic approach while leveraging enforcement resources. Given
the number of opioid-related deaths, the coordinated and targeted
enforcement efforts of federal, state, and local law enforcement are
needed resources to help fight the epidemic. This epidemic is too
massive for state and local governments to handle alone. The opioid
epidemic is a national matter, which requires coordinated law
enforcement, diversion control, and community outreach efforts, and
which is aided by DEA's 360 Strategy initiative.
Before DEA began NTBI, most U.S. communities did not routinely
offer opportunities to properly dispose of expired, unused, or unwanted
pharmaceutical controlled substances. As a result, many people kept
these drugs because they did not know how to dispose of them. In many
cases, dispensed controlled pharmaceutical drugs remain in household
medicine cabinets well after medication therapy has been completed,
thus providing easy access to non-medical users for abuse or accidental
ingestion. NTBI events have been overwhelmingly successful for over a
decade, and have resulted in the collection and disposal of over 6,349
tons of pharmaceuticals. The huge volume of drugs must be transported
for proper disposal. The assistance from local points of contact is
necessary to pick up collected drugs for disposal in accordance with
Federal and State environmental standards. The NTBI program is an
example of the DCP's commitment to community outreach efforts and the
need to properly dispose of unused and unwanted controlled substances.
This collaborative effort between DEA and State and local law
enforcement agencies is focused on removing potentially dangerous
controlled pharmaceutical substances from our nation's medicine
cabinets to reduce opportunities for diversion.
The TDS program has been a successful tool employed by the DCP to
combat the illegal diversion of controlled substances. Combining the
criminal drug investigative experience of DEA Special Agents, the
subject matter expertise of Diversion Investigators (DIs), and the
local knowledge and capabilities of deputized Task Force Officers, the
TDSs can effectively confront the diversion problem on multiple levels.
Since the initial deployment, TDSs have initiated an average of more
than 1,500 cases and made more than 2,100 arrests per year.
The opioid epidemic is a national matter, which requires consistent
coordinated law enforcement, diversion control, and community outreach
efforts through DEA's 360, NTBI, and TDSs to represent the interests of
the nation as a whole. Elimination of these programs would reduce the
awareness of the opioid crisis, increase opportunities for diversion,
and possibly result in a rise in opioid-related deaths.
Fee Calculation Methodology
Issue: The physician commenter believes that the methods described
by the Agency that were used to come up with the fee increase seem
arbitrary.
DEA Response: In developing this rule, DEA considered three
methodologies to calculate registration and reregistration fees. DEA
selected the current weighted-ratio option to calculate the new fees.
This approach has been used since Congress established registrant fees
and continues to be a reasonable reflection of differing costs. The
registration fees under the weighted-ratio option result in
differentiated fees among registrant groups, where registrants with
generally larger revenues and costs pay higher fees than registrants
with lower revenues and costs. Furthermore, the weighted-ratio does not
create a disparity in the relative increase in fees from the current to
the new fees. The weighted-ratios used by DEA to calculate the current
fee have proven effective and reasonable over time, and generally
reflect the differences in activity level, notably in inspections,
scheduled investigations, and other control and monitoring, by
registrant category (i.e., these costs are higher for
[[Page 44716]]
manufacturers). DEA selected this option because it is the only option
that resulted in ``reasonable'' fees for all registrant groups.
Fees for Registrant Categories
Issue: The pharmaceutical company objected to the increased
registration fees, especially for small businesses. This commenter
proposed two alternatives for assessing registration fees: Assessing
fees based on the size of the business, or having registrants with a
significant history of CSA violations pay higher registration fees. The
commenter stated that in the first proposal, registration fees would be
assessed based on the size of the business (e.g., the number of
employees, annual earnings, etc.). The commenter's second proposal
requires registrants with a significant history of CSA violations to
pay dramatically increased registration fees. The commenter believes
that specific manufacturers and wholesale distributors contributed to
the opioid epidemic by turning a blind eye to CSA laws and implementing
regulations, and were lured by sales of opioid medications and profits
over their responsibilities as DEA registrants.
DEA also received a comment from an association agreeing with the
concern for imposing disproportionately higher fees on NTPs, but
objecting because they believe distributors will not be paying their
fair share under the proposed ``weighted ratio option.'' The comment
states that the ``past-based option'' would lead to a 117 percent
increase for distributors, as opposed to the lower 21 percent that is
being proposed. In their view, practitioners under the current and
proposed ``weighted ration option'' would be paying too much as
compared to manufacturers and distributors. The association also
included a suggestion to lower fees for physicians who comply with DEA
regulations that impose an extra cost upon the registrants, such as the
electronic prescribing of controlled substances (EPCS) or a waiver to
prescribe buprenorphine. The association takes the position that if
EPCS is supposed to reduce diversion, then DCP must be incurring lower
costs for those who adopt EPCS. Similarly, they state that physicians
trained to prescribe buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder are
lowering DCP costs by lowering the costs associated with drug
addiction.
A company in support of the fee increase suggested that DEA
eliminate the duplicative registration requirement. This company
previously sent a letter to the Office of Legal Policy, U.S. Department
of Justice, dated August 14, 2017, requesting that DEA amend the
regulations to waive the chemical registration requirement for
wholesale distributors who are also registered as controlled substance
handlers. The company further stated that it is redundant, unnecessary,
and unfair to make a single facility pay two registration fees. The
company was specifically concerned that wholesale distributors that
possess and distribute both controlled substances and certain iodine
products must apply and pay registration fees for two separate
registrations, even though they are storing and distributing these
products at a single warehouse.
DEA Response: It is important to emphasize that the focus of DEA's
fee calculation methodology is to account for DCP program costs among
the registrant categories and not to set fees according to business
size or quantities of controlled substances handled. DEA provided
economic impact analysis demonstrating the relatively minor proportion
of registrant's total income needed to pay a registration fee.
Additionally, the analysis showed that the percentage fee increase is
comparable to inflation.
DEA continues to review possible methodologies for differentiating
fees between various registrant groups. However, at this time, DEA has
determined that it is both practicable and reasonable to continue to
apply the weighted-ratio methodology without distinction between small
and large businesses.
Regarding using CSA violations as a factor in setting registration
fees, DEA's statutory authority is to charge reasonable registration
fees set at a level that ensures the recovery of the full costs of
operating the various aspects of the DCP. As a practical matter, the
vast majority of DEA registrants are in compliance with the CSA, and
DEA works with any registrant who is not in full compliance with the
CSA to bring that registrant into compliance. The CSA provides for
mechanisms independent of the registration fee by which to exact
financial penalties from registrants who violate the law. Registrants
who violate the CSA may be subject to civil and criminal penalties, as
well as forfeitures. 21 U.S.C. 841, 842, 843, 881. Additionally, DEA
would move to suspend the registration of a person whose registration
is inconsistent with the public interest.
As discussed in the NPRM and in the final rule, DEA examined three
alternative methodologies to calculate registration and reregistration
fees. DEA did not select the past-based option for two key reasons.
First, the fee increase is disproportionately burdensome to a small
number of registrants. Narcotic treatment program fees would increase
by 856 percent, while the change for the remaining registrant groups
would range from a decrease of 44 percent to an increase of 131
percent. DEA deemed this option unreasonable. Second, the past-based
option is backward looking and implicitly assumes that the future will
be similar to the past. DEA cannot assume that future workload will
reflect past DEA work hour data. For example, DEA plans to conduct more
scheduled investigations in accordance with the new scheduled
investigation work plan. As a result, DEA has concluded that past data
is not the best basis for the calculation of new fees. The selected
methodology must be applied to all registrants. For example, DEA cannot
only apply the past-based option to distributors.
DEA does not have access to practitioners' rates of EPCS use or
buprenorphine prescribing rates. In fact, many states with prescription
drug monitoring programs prohibit law enforcement entities from using
prescribing data without specific, independent legal authority to do so
(e.g., a subpoena or warrant). Even so, DEA does not have the resources
to calculate the rate of prescribing for each registrant or to
personalize each registrant's registration fee. Additionally, allowing
individualized calculations based on EPCS use, prescribing rates,
business size, or type of patients served would introduce uncertainty
and unpredictable fluctuations in the collection cycle, thereby
jeopardizing the statutory mandate to recover the full costs of
operating the DCP.
Purchasers and suppliers of controlled substances and listed
chemicals are regulated under the CSA and are therefore subject to the
registration and reregistration requirement and fees.\11\ The CSA is
Federal law and cannot be changed by DEA. DEA carries out the mandates
of the CSA by preventing the diversion of controlled substances and
listed chemicals into the illicit market, but does not have the
authority to change Federal provisions. The commenter suggested that
DEA eliminate the duplicative registration requirement for certain
chemicals (e.g., iodine). The CSA requires a separate registration for
certain chemicals to prevent its diversion into the illicit market.
Iodine is not identified as a listed chemical that is contained in a
drug marketed or distributed lawfully in the U.S. under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
[[Page 44717]]
Act.\12\ Furthermore, iodine may be used for non-research, illegitimate
purposes, and is also used in the illicit manufacture of
methamphetamine. DEA requires a separate registration for this chemical
due to the high probability that it may be diverted to the clandestine
manufacture of methamphetamine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 21 U.S.C. 822(a)(1); 21 U.S.C. 833(b).
\12\ 21 CFR 1300.02(1)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extension of Implementation Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 Public
Health Emergency
Issue: Three commenters recommended deferring the proposed fee
increase and one objected to its implementation due to the Coronavirus
Disease (COVID-19) pandemic and the economic uncertainty that it has
engendered. A pharmaceutical company suggested that DEA postpone the
fee increases and the comment period at least until January 2021, and
noted that publishing a proposed fee increase during a worldwide health
pandemic with looming economic uncertainties was poorly timed, as the
nation's current priority is to focus public health and safety measures
on the COVID-19 pandemic. An association recommended that the fee
increases be postponed until the conclusion of the public health
emergency, stating that implementing the proposed 21 percent increase
would be a heavy burden to pharmacists who are already struggling
during this time, as the pandemic has led to a decrease in patient
services and revenues. A third commenter, also an association, urged
that DEA defer the registration fee increases for at least 12 months
due to the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic recession, or until
the business community has recovered.
A fourth commenter objected to the increase in practitioners'
registration fees because physicians cannot afford to pay higher DEA
registration and reregistration fees. It stated that Medicare payment
rates are in the midst of a six-year freeze, and COVID-19 has led to
steep declines in patient services and associated revenues, even for
frontline physicians caring for patients with COVID-19, who may face a
reduction in revenues from elective procedures and increased expenses
due to new infection control processes and supplies.
DEA Response: DEA recognizes that industry is experiencing unique
challenges, including financial challenges, during the current
coronavirus pandemic. Protecting the health and safety of our
communities is DEA's top priority, and that commitment has continued
during the unprecedented public health emergency caused by the ongoing
COVID-19 pandemic. During this emergency, DC is responding quickly and
appropriately to ensure continued access to necessary controlled
substances. DC's efforts include supporting prescribing practices that
limit exposure, enabling uninterrupted access to practitioners, and
safeguarding a consistent and reliable drug supply. Some of the ways DC
continues to fulfill its mission and serve the American people during
this challenging time include:
Working with registrants to facilitate satellite
hospitals and clinic locations;
Temporarily lifting restrictions on DEA's ``five
percent rule'';
Temporarily raising aggregate production quotas for
certain medications;
Providing clear guidance on electronic prescribing of
controlled substances;
Allowing Narcotic Treatment Programs to sign invoices
post delivery;
Ensuring Narcotic Treatment Programs can get medication
to their patients; and
Supporting responsible use of telemedicine while
providing medication assisted treatment.
These additional COVID-19-related responsibilities have put
additional pressure on the DCP and its resource needs.
Moreover, DEA's scope of responsibilities has expanded due to
Congressional mandates since the last fee schedule revision in 2012.
DEA outlined the legal authority, the history of the fees, the need for
an increase in fees, the methodology, and the proposed fee calculation
in the NPRM to explain why there is a fee, why there is a periodic
recalculation, and how the proposed new fee schedule was calculated.
The registration fee is a statutory requirement for those seeking to
participate in the closed system of distribution by handling, or having
access to, controlled substances or List I chemicals. These fees fund
the DCP, which includes providing and maintaining services to DEA
registrants.
DEA is sensitive to the challenges facing many registrants and has
endeavored to set the fee as low as possible, consistent with its
statutory mandates, and has provided a 60-day comment period to solicit
input from interested parties. DEA continuously strives to be fiscally
responsible. The last fee increase was set in FY 2012, and was intended
to encompass only FYs 2012-2014. Through various efforts and cost-
saving measures, the DCP has been able to operate under that fee
structure through FY 2020. While DEA is publishing this final rule at
this current time, the increase will not immediately go into effect on
the date of publication of this rule. The new fee schedule will be
implemented for all new applications submitted on or after October 1,
2020, and for all renewal applications submitted on or after October 1,
2020. Thus, not all registrants will be paying registration and
reregistration fees on October 1, 2020. Those whose reregistration fees
are due between now and September 30, 2020, will continue to pay the
current fees until their next date of renewal. As such, only a small
subset of registrants will be affected when the rule is first
implemented.
Without an adjustment in the annual registration fees, the DCP will
be unable to continue current operations and will be in violation of
the statutory mandate that fees ``shall be set at a level that ensures
the recovery of the full costs of operating the various aspects of [the
diversion control program.]'' 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(C). Continued
collections under the current fee schedule would require the DCP to
significantly cut existing and planned DCP operations vital to its
mission. DEA relies on the DCP to maintain the integrity of the closed
system of distribution as outlined in the proposed rule, particularly
at this time of increased abuse and diversion.
V. Provisions of the Final Rule
After careful consideration of all the comments, DEA is finalizing,
without change, the fee schedule, and codifying existing practices of
the issuance of refunds by DEA for applicant registration fees as
proposed in the NPRM published on March 16, 2020. 85 FR 14810-14837.
Revised Fees
Based on thorough analysis of the identified fee calculation
options--including the anticipated economic impact on registrants--DEA
has determined that the weighed-ratio option represents the most
reasonable approach to calculate registrant fees sufficient to fully
fund the DCP.
The fee schedule replaces the current fee schedule for controlled
substance and chemical registrants to recover the full costs of the DCP
so it can continue to meet the programmatic responsibilities set forth
by statute, Congress, and the President. As discussed, without an
adjustment to fees, the DCP will be unable to continue current
operations, necessitating dramatic program reductions, and possibly
weakening the closed system of distribution. Accordingly, DEA finalizes
[[Page 44718]]
the following new fees for the FY 2021 to FY 2023 period.
Table 1--Registration and Reregistration Fees by Business Activity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current fees Difference
Business activity ($) New fees ($) ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle *
Pharmacy.................................................... 731 888 157
Hospital/Clinic............................................. 731 888 157
Practitioner................................................ 731 888 157
Teaching Institution........................................ 731 888 157
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP)................................ 731 888 157
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer................................................ 3,047 3,699 652
Distributor................................................. 1,523 1,850 327
Researcher/Canine Handler................................... 244 296 52
Analytical Lab.............................................. 244 296 52
Importer.................................................... 1,523 1,850 327
Exporter.................................................... 1,523 1,850 327
Reverse Distributor......................................... 1,523 1,850 327
Narcotic Treatment Program.................................. 244 296 52
Chemical Manufacturer....................................... 3,047 3,699 652
Chemical Importer........................................... 1,523 1,850 327
Chemical Distributor........................................ 1,523 1,850 327
Chemical Exporter........................................... 1,523 1,850 327
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Pharmacy, hospital/clinic, practitioner, teaching institution, and mid-level practitioner registration fees
are for a three-year period. This current three-year fee is $731. The revised fee for the three-year
registration period is $888. The three-year difference is $157 or an annual difference of $52.
The fees are estimated to fund the full cost of the DCP--to include
the increased programmatic and personnel requirements currently, or
expected to be in place from FY 2021 to FY 2023, and have a FY 2023
end-of-year balance of at least $50 million.
Table 2--Overview of Diversion Control Fee Account
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Years
FY 2021 ($M) FY 2022 ($M) FY 2023 ($M) combined ($M)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCFA Balance Carried Forward From Prior Year.... 69 96 86 69
Total Collections............................... 576 596 625 1,797
Treasury Amount................................. (15) (15) (15) (45)
Other Collections (OGV, CMEA)................... 1 1 1 3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Net Collections............................. 562 582 611 1,755
Total Obligations............................... 555 613 670 1,838
Recoveries from Deobligations................... (20) (22) (24) (65)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Net Obligations............................. 535 591 647 1,773
End of Year DCFA Balance................ 96 86 50 50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Refund of Registration Fees
DEA is amending 21 CFR 1301.13(e) and 1309.12(b) to codify existing
practices of the issuance of refunds by DEA for applicant registration
fees. Generally, registration fees are not refundable. This regulation
was implemented when registration fees were nominal. With increased
registration fees, DEA recognizes the need to issue refunds in limited
circumstances. These provisions of the rule will give the DEA
Administrator discretionary authority to refund registration fees in
limited circumstances, such as: Applicant error, DEA error, and death
of a registrant within the first year of the three-year registration
cycle. Refunds will be issued for applicant error when there has been a
duplicate payment for the same renewal, incorrect billing or incorrect
transposing of credit card digits, payment for incorrect business
activity, or when an applicant is fee-exempt. Refunds will be issued
based on DEA error when DEA caused the error; for example, when DEA
incorrectly advised that a new application was needed, or advised a
registrant to submit payment for a wrong business activity. While these
provisions will have no economic costs or benefits, DEA believes it is
important to accurately codify existing practices.
VI. Need for a New Fee Calculation
As discussed in the NPRM, DEA last adjusted the fee schedule in
March 2012, with collections beginning in April 2012.\13\ This fee
schedule was intended to cover the ``full costs'' of the DCP for FY
2012 through FY 2014, or October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2014.
The DCP has continued to operate under this fee schedule by being
fiscally responsible, optimizing its organizational structure,
maximizing the use of technological enhancements, as
[[Page 44719]]
well as unforeseen delays in hiring. As indicated by the above-
referenced 2008 OIG report, the DCP has assumed a number of costs since
the last fee increase, including indirect pay and rightsizing,
additional salary, and other costs attributable to diversion control
activities. In addition, Congress has expanded DCP's responsibility to
address the opioid epidemic public health emergency. DEA's 360 Strategy
was launched with the purpose of ending the deadly cycle of
prescription opioid misuse through coordinated law enforcement,
diversion control, and community outreach efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 77 FR 15234, March 15, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to increased diversion and prescription drug abuse, as well as
an increase in the production and use of chemicals that contribute to
the opioid epidemic, the DCP has increased its use of TDS groups to
meet its enforcement mission, and hired more DIs working in Diversion
Groups (DG) and Diversion Staff (DS) across the nation to support its
increased regulatory mission. In April 2012, DEA had 48 TDSs, 65 DGs
and 17 DSs. At the end of FY 2019, DEA had 86 TDSs, 87, DG, 15 DSs, and
16 TDS-Extensions.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ A TDS-Extension is an extension of a TDS into a location,
usually staffed by two Special Agents to provided law enforcement
coverage while not incurring the full cost of a TDS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DCP continues to draw technical expertise from DIs, and the DCP
has incorporated greater numbers of Special Agents, Chemists,
Information Technology Specialists, Attorneys, Intelligence Research
Specialists, and state and local personnel to meet its increased
responsibilities. In April 2012, DEA had 1,167 employees in DCFA funded
positions; at the end of FY 2019, DEA had 1,681. To continue to meet
diversion control challenges and to staff and support the increased
number of regulatory and enforcement groups, DEA must expand the DCP's
enforcement and regulatory capacity, as well as its support functions.
DEA plans to increase its full-time-equivalent (FTE) staffing level of
1,782 in FY 2020, DEA plans to increase FTEs by 90, 147, and 134, in FY
2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively, for a total of 2,153 FTEs in
FY 2023. The estimated increase for the three year period is 371 FTEs.
DEA has been, and will continue to be fiscally responsible and seek
to improve efficiencies and identify other cost saving measures. As
discussed above, however, a new fee calculation is needed. Without an
adjustment in the registration fees, DEA will be unable to continue
current operations and will be in violation of the statutory mandate
that fees charged ``shall be set at a level that ensures the recovery
of the full costs of operating the various aspects of [the diversion
control program].'' 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(C). For example, collections
under the current fee schedule will require the DCP to significantly
cut existing and planned DCP operations vital to its mission. DEA
relies on the DCP to maintain the integrity of the closed system for
pharmaceutical controlled substances and listed chemicals, particularly
at this time of dramatic increases in drug abuse and diversion.
Fee Calculation
As described above, DEA is delegated the task of determining the
details of how to fulfill the statutory requirement to recover the full
costs of operating the DCP and charging registrants reasonable fees
relating to the registration and control ``of the manufacture,
distribution, dispensing'' \15\ and ``importers and exporters'' \16\ of
controlled substances and listed chemicals. In advance of actual
expenditures, DEA must determine reasonable fees to be charged. To
project the annual costs of the DCP, DEA uses historical data and
projections, together with actual and current costs. Additionally, a
reasonable fee must be calculated that will fully recover the costs of
the DCP based on a variable number of registrants in the different
categories of registration (e.g., manufacturers, distributors,
importers, exporters, reverse distributors, practitioners, and
individual researchers). Because the fees collected must be available
to fully fund the DCFA and to reimburse DEA for expenses incurred in
the operation of the DCP (21 U.S.C. 886a), DEA must collect more than
is actually spent to avoid running a deficit and being in violation of
federal fiscal law.\17\ In operating the DCP, DEA must be prepared for
changes in investigative priorities, diversion trends, and emerging
drugs or chemicals posing new threats to the public health and safety.
By definition, it is an inexact effort. Consequently, the agency must
select and follow a single methodology throughout any given fee cycle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 21 U.S.C. 821.
\16\ 21 U.S.C. 958(f).
\17\ In general, no officer or employee of the United States
Government may make or authorize an expenditure or obligation in
excess of an amount available in an appropriation or fund. 31 U.S.C.
1341.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the inception of the fee, the agency has selected a weighted-
ratio method to determine a reasonable fee for each category of
registrants. Under this method, registrants are assigned to a business
activity or category (e.g., researcher, practitioner, distributor,
manufacturer, etc.) based on the statutory fee categories, and the
projected population is calculated for each category or business
activity. Then, DEA estimates the full cost of the DCP for the analysis
period, which is generally three years. The corresponding registration
fees required to pay the full cost of the DCP for the analysis period
are then calculated by employing a ratio of 1.0 for researchers, 3.0
for practitioners (for administrative convenience, the fee is collected
every three years for practitioners), 6.25 for distributors, and 12.5
for manufacturers. These are long-established ratios, utilized in
previous fee increases, and repeatedly determined to be reasonable.\18\
By utilizing these different ratios, DEA recognizes the statutory need
to charge reasonable fees relating to the registration and control of
the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, importation, and exportation
of controlled substances and listed chemicals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 77 FR 15234 (March 15, 2012); 71 FR 51105 (August 29,
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current fees, some of which are paid annually, and some of
which are paid every three years, range from $244 for ratio 1 to $3,047
for ratio 12.5, depending upon the particular registrant category.
Practitioners, mid-level practitioners, dispensers, researchers, and
narcotic treatment programs pay an annual registration fee of $244. For
administrative convenience, both the collection and the payment,
practitioners pay a combined registration fee of $731 every three
years. Distributors, importers, and exporters pay an annual fee of
$1,523, while manufacturers pay an annual fee of $3,047. 21 CFR 1301.13
and 1309.11.
Since the last fee schedule adjustment in March 2012,\19\ DEA
continued to review possible alternative methodologies to differentiate
registration fees between various registration business activities. In
developing this rule, DEA examined three alternative methodologies to
calculate the registration and registration fees: Flat Fee Option,
Past-Based Option, and Weighted-Ratio Option (current and selected
method). In examining each alternative methodology, DEA considered
whether the fee calculation (1) was reasonable, and (2) could fully
fund the costs of operating the various aspects of the DCP. DEA has
determined that the current ``weighted-ratio'' fee structure is the
most reasonable. Therefore, DEA
[[Page 44720]]
selected the current weighted-ratio method to calculate and
differentiate fees between registrant groups. A detailed discussion of
the alternatives is provided below. Additionally, the selected fee
calculation method is summarized below and detailed in ``Proposed
Registration Fee Schedule Calculation'' in the rulemaking docket at
https://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 77 FR 15234, March 15, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Costs for the Diversion Control Program
In calculating fees to recover the mandated full costs of operating
the DCP, DEA estimated the cost of operating the DCP for the next three
fiscal years. To develop the DCFA budget request estimates for FY 2021
to FY 2023, DEA compiled: (1) The DCFA Budget for FY 2020, which forms
a base spending level for the current level of service, (2) the
estimated additional required funds for FY 2021 to FY 2023, and (3) the
required annual $15 million transfer to the United States Treasury as
mandated by the CSA (21 U.S.C. 886a). The following paragraphs explain
the annual revenue calculations and how the total amount to be
collected for the FY 2021 to FY 2023 period was calculated. In
developing this figure, DEA began with annual projected DCP
obligations, including payroll, operational expenses, and necessary
equipment. The DCP budget has increased due to inflationary adjustments
for rent and payroll, and adding staffing resources that support the
regulatory and law enforcement activities of the program. The basis of
current fees was to fund the DCP for the time period of FY 2012 to FY
2014, and the fees need to be adjusted to reflect these factors.
Specific details on the DCP budget are available in the annual
President's Budget Submission and supplemental budget justification
documents provided to Congress. \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See this rulemaking docket found at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEA must set fees to recover the full cost of the DCP. Therefore,
the estimated budget for FY 2021 to FY 2023 forms the basis for
required collections (target collections) from registration fees. The
process for estimating the budget for each year is the same. Generally,
the budget for a particular year is set by starting from the previous
year (base year), adjusting for inflation, and then adding enhancements
(growth) to the budget. DCP personnel growth is the key factor in
formulating the budget.
The estimated budget is based on two estimated components: (1)
Payroll obligations based on estimated FTEs, and (2) non-payroll
obligations based on changes to payroll obligations. The estimated
payroll obligations are based on the payroll cost of the FTEs described
earlier. The estimates also account for the difference in payroll cost
between personnel leaving the program, usually at a higher grade level,
and personnel entering the program. Additionally, the payroll
obligations include a yearly inflation factor of two percent to cover
Within-Grade Increases, Career Ladders,\21\ Cost of Living Adjustment,
and increased benefits costs. Non-payroll obligations generally follow
payroll obligations. As FTE and payroll obligations increase, non-
payroll obligations increase accordingly. Non-payroll obligations
include items such as rent, communications, utilities, services,
equipment, travel, etc. \22\ DEA believes its methodology supports the
estimated budget for the three-year period, FY 2021 to FY 2023. The
estimated payroll obligations and non-payroll obligations are added to
obtain the estimated total obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The position is structured to allow for entry at a lower
grade level and allows for progression at predetermined GS-grade
level (usually multi-level) interval to the full performance grade
level.
\22\ The full list of non-payroll obligations is available in
the FY 2020 Congressional Budget Submission, Exhibits: Diversion
Control Fee Account (DCFA). https://www.justice.gov/doj/fy-2020-congressional-budget-submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In April 2012, when the last fee increase was made effective, DEA
had 48 TDSs, 65 DGs, and 17 DSs. At end of FY 2019, DEA had 86 TDSs, 87
DGs, 15 DSs, and 16 TDS-Extensions. To continue to meet diversion
control challenges, DEA continues to increase its field regulatory and
enforcement groups. DEA anticipates having 88 TDSs, 89 DGs, 17 DSs, and
14 TDS-Extensions by end of FY 2020 (beginning of FY 2021), expanding
to 94 TDSs, 95 DGs, 10 DSs, and 10 TDS-Extensions by end of FY 2023.
Table 3 summarizes the estimated number of field groups by year.
Table 3--Number of Field Groups by Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated EOY Estimated EOY
Regulatory and enforcement groups As of 4/2012 FY 2020 FY 2023
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TDS............................................................. 48 88 94
DG.............................................................. 65 89 95
DS.............................................................. 17 13 10
TDS-Extension................................................... .............. 14 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, in April 2012, DEA had 1,167 employees in DCFA funded
positions; at the end of FY 2020, DEA will have an estimated 1,803
employees in such positions. To continue to meet diversion control
challenges, and to staff and support the increased number of regulatory
and enforcement groups described above, DEA plans to expand the DCP's
enforcement and regulatory capacity, as well as its support functions.
From an estimated FTE of 1,782 DEA plans to increase FTEs by 90, 147,
and 134, in FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively, for a total of
2,153 FTEs in FY 2023. The estimated increase for the three year period
is 371 FTEs.
The estimated payroll obligations are based on the payroll cost of
the FTEs described above. The estimates also account for the difference
in payroll cost between personnel leaving the program, usually at
higher grade level, and personnel entering the program. Additionally,
the payroll obligations include a yearly inflation factor to cover
Within-Grade Increases, Career Ladders,\23\ Cost of Living Adjustment,
and increased benefits costs. From an estimated base of $289,450,003 in
FY 2020, estimated payroll obligations increase to an estimated
$311,587,162, $344,462,812, and $376,513,554 in FY 2021, FY 2022, and
FY 2023, respectively, reflecting the increase in FTEs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Position structured to allow for entry at a lower grade
level that allows for progression at predetermined GS-grade level
(usually multi-level) interval to the full performance grade level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-payroll obligations include items such as rent, communications,
utilities,
[[Page 44721]]
services, equipment, travel, etc. \24\ Non-payroll obligations
generally follow payroll obligations. As FTE and payroll obligations
increase, non-payroll obligations also increase. The year-over-year
increases to payroll are 7.6 percent, 10.6 percent and 9.3 percent in
FY 2021, 2022, and FY 2023, respectively. From an estimated base of
$225,747,874 non-payroll obligations in FY 2020, increasing non-payroll
obligations at the same rate as payroll obligations results in
estimated non-payroll obligations of $243,013,089, $268,653,469, and
$293,650,487 in FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Full list of non-payroll obligations is available in the FY
2020 Congressional Budget Submission, Exhibits: Diversion Control
Fee Account (DCFA). https://www.justice.gov/doj/fy-2020-congressional-budget-submission.
Table 4--Estimated Total Obligations
[Budget]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payroll Obligations ($)......................... 289,450,003 311,587,162 344,462,812 376,513,554
Non-payroll Obligations ($)..................... 225,747,874 243,013,089 268,653,469 293,650,487
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total Obligations ($)....................... 515,197,876 554,600,250 613,116,281 670,164,040
FTE............................................. 1,782 1,872 2,019 2,153
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the budget for each of the fiscal years, DEA also
considers the cost components outlined below in determining required
registration fee collections.
Recoveries From Money Not Spent as Planned (Deobligation of Prior Year
Obligations)
At times, DEA enters into an obligation to purchase a product or
service that is not delivered immediately, such as in a multi-year
contract, or not at all. Changes in obligations can occur for a variety
of reasons, (i.e., changes in planned operations, delays in staffing,
implementation of cost savings, changes in vendor capabilities, etc.).
When DEA does not spend the obligated money as planned, that obligation
is ``deobligated.'' The ``deobligated'' funds are ``recovered,'' and
the funds become available for DCP use. Based on historical trends, the
recovery of money not spent as planned (deobligation of prior year
obligations) is estimated at 3.5 percent of obligations.
Payment to Treasury
In the 1993 appropriations for DEA, Congress determined that the
DCP would be fully funded by registration fees and no longer by
appropriations.\25\ Congress established the DCFA as a separate account
of the Treasury to ``ensure the recovery of the full costs of operating
the various aspects of [the Diversion Control Program]'' by those
participating in the closed system established by the CSA. 21 U.S.C.
886a(1)(C). Fees collected are deposited into a separate Treasury
account. Each fiscal year, the first $15 million of collected fees is
transferred to the Treasury and is not available for use by the DCP.
Therefore, DEA needs to collect an additional $15 million per year
beyond estimated costs for payment to the Treasury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1993, Public Law 102-395,
codified in relevant part at 21 U.S.C. 886a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCFA Balance
DEA maintains a DCFA balance, as working capital, to maintain DCP
operations during low collection periods.\26\ Monthly collections and
obligations fluctuate throughout the year. There are times when
obligations (i.e., spending) exceed collections. This can happen
consecutively for several months. Therefore, DEA maintains a DCFA
balance to avoid operational disruptions due to these fluctuations. The
estimated DCFA balance at beginning of FY 2021 is $69 million. Based on
the history of these fluctuations, DEA has determined that an end-of-
year DCFA balance of $50 million is adequate. Therefore, the target
DCFA balance at the end of FY 2023 is $50 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ ``DCFA balance'' was called the ``Operational Continuity
Fund (OCF)'' in the last fee schedule adjustment in March 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Collections
DEA derives revenue from the sale/salvage of official government
vehicles dedicated for use in the DCP. Additionally, under the Combat
Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005 (CMEA), DEA collects a self-
certification fee of $21 for regulated sellers of scheduled listed
chemical products. 21 CFR 1314.42(a). The fee is waived for any person
holding a current DEA registration in good standing, such as a pharmacy
authorized to dispense controlled substances. 21 CFR 1314.42(b). DEA's
estimate for these other collections is $1 million per year.
Estimated Total Required Collections (Target Collections)
Based on the estimated total obligations and other financial
components outlined above, DEA determined a 21 percent increase in
total collections is required to fund the DCP for the three-year period
and have a $50 million in DCFA balance at the end of FY 2023.
The target collections are $576 million, $596 million, and $624
million, for FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively. In total, DEA
needs to collect $1.8 billion (or $1,796 million) in registration fees
over the three-year period, FY 2021 to FY 2023, to fully fund the DCP.
Table 5--Estimated DCFA Cash Flow under New Fee Calculation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Years
FY 2021 ($M) FY 2022 ($M) FY 2023 ($M) combined ($M)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCFA Balance Carried Forward From Prior Year.... 69 95 86 69
Total Collections............................... 576 596 624 1,796
Treasury Amount................................. (15) (15) (15) (45)
[[Page 44722]]
Other Collections (OGV, CMEA)................... 1 1 1 3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Net Collections............................. 562 582 610 1,755
Total Obligations............................... 555 613 670 1,838
Recoveries from Deobligations................... (20) (22) (24) (65)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Net Obligations............................. 535 591 647 1,773
End of Year DCFA Balance................ 95 86 50 50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: This projection is based on the ``target'' collections for the purposes of calculated fees. To end with
exactly $50 million DCFA Balance, the calculated fees will need to have many decimal places. When fees are
rounded to the nearest whole dollar, the projected cash flow will vary slightly.
Without a fee increase, under current fee structure, the estimated
collection is $474 million, $491 million, and $514 million, for FY
2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively, for a total of $1.5 billion
(or $1,479 million) for the three-year period. Without a fee increase,
DEA would have obligations that would exceed the collections and DCFA
balance beginning in FY 2021.
Table 6--Estimated DCFA Cash Flow Under Current Fee Structure
[If no actions are taken to reduce obligations *]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Years
FY 2021 ($M) FY 2022 ($M) FY 2023 ($M) combined ($M)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCFA Balance Carried Forward From Prior Year.... 69 (6) (121) 69
Total Collections (at Current Fee).............. 474 491 514 1,479
Treasury Amount................................. (15) (15) (15) (45)
Other Collections (OGV, CMEA)................... 1 1 1 3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Net Collections............................. 460 477 500 1,437
Total Obligations............................... 555 613 670 1,838
Recoveries from Deobligations................... (20) (22) (24) (65)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Net Obligations............................. 535 591 647 1,773
End of Year DCFA Balance................ (6) (121) (267) (267)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This is a hypothetical scenario. DEA would not allow DCFA balance to go negative.
Selected Methodology for New Fee Calculation
As shown in Table 5 above, the target collections are $576 million,
$596 million, and $624 million, for FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023,
respectively. In total, DEA needs to collect $1.8 billion in
registration fees over the three-year period, FY 2021 to FY 2023, to
fully fund the DCP. DEA must select a method for determining fees for
various business activities that would generate the target collections.
In developing this rule, DEA examined alternative methodologies to
calculate the registration and reregistration fees in light of its
statutory obligations under the CSA. First, pursuant to statute, DEA is
authorized to charge reasonable fees relating to the registration and
control of the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, importation, and
exportation of controlled substances and listed chemicals. 21 U.S.C.
821 and 958(f). Second, DEA must set fees at a level that ensures the
recovery of the full costs of operating the various aspects of its DCP.
21 U.S.C. 886a. Accordingly, in examining each alternative methodology,
DEA considered whether the fee calculation (1) was reasonable and (2)
could fully fund the costs of operating the various aspects of the DCP.
Moreover, the CSA requires that DEA charge fees to fully fund the
DCP, but that the fees collected by DEA are to be expended through the
budget process only. Specifically, each year, DEA is required by
statute to transfer the first $15 million of fee revenues into the
general fund of the Treasury, while the remainder of the fee revenues
is deposited into a separate fund of the Treasury called the DCFA. 21
U.S.C. 886a(1). On at least a quarterly basis, the Secretary of the
Treasury is required to refund DEA an amount from the DCFA ``in
accordance with estimates made in the budget request of the Attorney
General for those fiscal years'' for the operation of the DCP. 21
U.S.C. 886a(1)(B) and (D).
In developing this rule, DEA considered three methodologies to
calculate registration and reregistration fees: Flat Fee Option, Past-
Based Option, and Weighted-Ratio Option (current and selected method).
While the fee increases may be passed down to the registrants'
customers, the analysis below assumes they are absorbed fully by the
registrants.
For each of the alternatives, the calculated fees are analyzed for
reasonableness by examining: (1) The absolute amount of the fee
increase, (2) the change in fee as a percentage of revenue from 2012-
2021, and (3) the relative fee increase across registrant groups.
Additionally, each calculation methodology is re-evaluated for its
overall strengths and weaknesses.
Flat Fee Option
Option 1 is called the Flat Fee Option. The flat fee option would
provide equal fees across all registrant groups,
[[Page 44723]]
regardless of the proportion of DCP costs and resources the registrant
group may require (e.g., investigation resources). The fee calculation
is straightforward: The total amount needed to be collected over the
three-year period is divided by the total number of registration fee
transactions over the three year period, adjusting for registrants on a
three year registration cycle (so that the fees for a three-year period
are three times the annual fee).
DEA calculated the annual registration fees under Option 1 and
compared these fees to the current fees.
Table 7--Registration Fees Under Flat Fee Option
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current fees Option 1: Difference Increase over
Business activity ($) flat fee ($) ($) current (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle *:
Pharmacy.................................... 731 896 165 23
Hospital/Clinic............................. 731 896 165 23
Practitioner................................ 731 896 165 23
Teaching Institution........................ 731 896 165 23
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP)................ 731 896 165 23
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer................................ 3,047 299 (2,748) -90
Distributor................................. 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
Researcher/Canine Handler................... 244 299 55 23
Analytical Lab.............................. 244 299 55 23
Importer.................................... 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
Exporter.................................... 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
Reverse Distributor......................... 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
Narcotic Treatment Program.................. 244 299 55 23
Chemical Manufacturer....................... 3,047 299 (2,748) -90
Chemical Importer........................... 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
Chemical Distributor........................ 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
Chemical Exporter........................... 1,523 299 (1,224) -80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Pharmacies, hospitals/clinics, practitioners, teaching institutions, and mid-level practitioners currently pay
a fee for a three-year period. This current three-year fee is $731. The fee under the flat fee scenario for
the three year registration period would be $896. The three-year difference is $165 or an annual difference of
$55.
In the flat fee option, the registration fee for practitioners
increases by 23 percent to $299 on an annual basis. The registration
fees for manufacturers and distributors are reduced significantly, from
$3,047 for manufacturers and $1,523 for distributors to $299 for both.
This reduction represents a 90 percent and 80 percent reduction for
manufacturers and distributors, respectively.
The calculation considered in Option 1 results in a disparity in
fee change among registrant groups. For each registrant group to pay
the same flat fee, the registration fee for practitioners increases by
23 percent, while registration fees for manufacturers and distributors
decrease 90 percent and 80 percent, respectively.
The flat fee option has positive and negative aspects. The
calculation is simple and straight-forward. The fee that DEA is
required to charge registrants is based on a statutory requirement--it
is not a user fee. A user fee calculation would require a calculation
of the direct and indirect costs associated with each registrant group,
and set fees to recover the costs associated with each group. Because
the registration fee is not a user fee, DEA is not required to
calculate fees according to the regulatory and enforcement costs
associated with each registrant group. However, general historical
costs of regulatory and enforcement activities support different fees
among the categories. DEA believes that setting the same fees for all
registrants, from multi-national corporations to mid-level
practitioners, is unreasonable.
Conclusion for Flat Fee Option
After consideration of the flat fee option, DEA did not select this
option to calculate the new fees. The fee disparity among registrant
groups caused by this calculation alternative is too great. Under this
option, the calculation would result in reduced fees for manufacturers
and distributors by 90 percent and 80 percent respectively, while
practitioner fees would increase by 23 percent. Setting the fees at the
same level across all registrant groups is therefore not ``reasonable''
as required by statute. While the vast majority of registrants are
practitioners, such as individual physicians and nurse practitioners,
DEA registrants also include some of the largest corporations in the
world. To satisfy the ``reasonable'' standard, registration fees should
be different among the categories to account for cost and economic
differences among the registrant categories. Option 1 did not satisfy
this requirement.
Past-Based Option
Option 2 is called the Past-Based Option, and uses historic
investigative work hour data to apportion the cost to each registrant
category. In considering Option 2, DEA used historic investigative work
hour data from FY 2016-FY 2018. DEA's records provide an accurate
apportionment of work hours for certain types of diversion control
activities (e.g., investigations) among different classes of
registrants. DEA estimates that approximately three percent of costs
can be directly linked to pre-registration and scheduled
investigations. Although some criminal investigations can be attributed
to registrant groups, DEA did not include the cost of criminal
investigations for the fee calculation under the Past-Based Option due
to the unpredictable nature of this investigations. While DEA develops
annual work plans for the number of scheduled investigations by
registrant type, DEA does not develop such plans for criminal
investigations. Therefore, the cost of criminal investigations is
allocated equally across all registrant groups, regardless of business
activity. The remaining costs associated with DCP activities and
components benefit all registrants (e.g., policy, registration, and
legal activities); however, DEA records cannot attribute these costs by
registrant class. Under
[[Page 44724]]
Option 2, pre-registration and scheduled investigation costs are
assigned to registrant classes and all other costs are recovered on an
equal, per-registrant basis.
DEA calculated the annual registration fees under Option 2 and
compared these fees to the current fees. Although distributors and
importers/exporters are in the same fee class in the current fee
structure (Weighted-Ratio Option), in this analysis, distributors are
separated from importers and exporters based on the available historic
work hour data and reported work hours by type of registrant.
Table 8--Registration Fees Under Past-Based Option
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 2: % Increase
Business activity Current fees Past-Based Difference over current
($) ($) ($) (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registrants on Three Year Registration Cycle:
Pharmacy.................................... 731 1,030 299 41
Hospital/Clinic............................. 731 872 141 19
Practitioner................................ 731 873 142 19
Teaching Institution........................ 731 1,694 963 132
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP)................ 731 868 137 19
Registrants on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer................................ 3,047 4,212 1,165 38
Distributor................................. 1,523 3,303 1,780 117
Researcher/Canine Handler................... 244 565 321 132
Analytical Lab.............................. 244 565 321 132
Importer.................................... 1,523 1,906 383 25
Exporter.................................... 1,523 1,906 383 25
Reverse Distributor......................... 1,523 3,303 1,780 117
Narcotic Treatment Program.................. 244 2,332 2,088 856
Chemical Manufacturer....................... 3,047 1,703 (1,344) -44
Chemical Importer........................... 1,523 1,386 (137) -9
Chemical Distributor........................ 1,523 1,824 301 20
Chemical Exporter........................... 1,523 1,386 (137) -9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Past-Based option, the percent change in fees from current
fees ranges from negative 44 percent (reduction of 44 percent) for list
I chemical manufacturers to an increase of 856 percent for narcotic
treatment programs. The increase for a large majority of registrations,
practitioners, mid-level practitioners, and hospital/clinics, is 19
percent.
While Option 2 is based on accurate historical data, it does not
allow for future needs, demands, and shifting responsibilities of the
DCP, including Agency priorities, new legislation, control of
substances, new investigative requirements, and other program needs.
Conclusion for Past-Based Option
DEA did not select the Past-Based option for two key reasons.
First, the fee increase is disproportionately burdensome to a small
number of registrants. Narcotic treatment program fees would increase
by 856 percent, while the change for the remaining registrant groups
range from a decrease of 44 percent to an increase of 131 percent. DEA
deemed this unreasonable. Second, the Past-Based option is backward
looking and implicitly assumes that the future will be similar to the
past. DEA cannot assume that future workload will reflect past DEA work
hour data. For example, DEA plans to conduct more scheduled
investigations in accordance with the new scheduled investigation work
plan. As a result, DEA has concluded that past data is not a reasonable
basis for the calculation of new fees.
Weighted-Ratio Option (Current and Selected Method)
The Weighted-Ratio Option has been used since the inception of the
fee. This option distinguishes among the categories to establish a
``reasonable'' fee for each category. In this option, fees are assigned
to different registrant categories based on DEA's general historical
cost data expressed as weighted ratios. The different fees are
expressed in ratios: 1.0 for researchers, canine handlers, analytical
labs, and narcotics treatment programs; 3.0 for registrants on three-
year registration cycles, pharmacies, hospitals/clinics, practitioners,
teaching institutions, and mid-level practitioners; 6.25 for
distributors and importers/exporters; and 12.5 for manufacturers. The
adopted ratios are applied for administrative convenience because
historically costs vary and a fee must be set in advance. To determine
the fee, the amount needed to be collected over the FY 2021 to FY 2023
period is divided by the weighted number of estimated registrations.
Table 9--Registration Fees Under Weighted-Ratio Option
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 3:
Business activity Current fees Weighted Ratio Difference Increase over
($) ($) ($) current (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registrations on Three Year Registration Cycle:
*
Pharmacy.................................... 731 888 157 21
Hospital/Clinic............................. 731 888 157 21
Practitioner................................ 731 888 157 21
Teaching Institution........................ 731 888 157 21
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP)................ 731 888 157 21
[[Page 44725]]
Registrations on Annual Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer................................ 3,047 3,699 652 21
Distributor................................. 1,523 1,850 327 21
Researcher/Canine Handler................... 244 296 52 21
Analytical Lab.............................. 244 296 52 21
Importer.................................... 1,523 1,850 327 21
Exporter.................................... 1,523 1,850 327 21
Reverse Distributor......................... 1,523 1,850 327 21
Narcotic Treatment Program.................. 244 296 52 21
Chemical Manufacturer....................... 3,047 3,699 652 21
Chemical Importer........................... 1,523 1,850 327 21
Chemical Distributor........................ 1,523 1,850 327 21
Chemical Exporter........................... 1,523 1,850 327 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Pharmacies, hospitals/clinics, practitioners, teaching institutions, and mid-level practitioners currently pay
a fee for a three-year period. This current three-year fee is $731. The fee under the weighted-ratio scenario
for the three-year registration period would be $888. The three-year difference is $157, or an annual
difference of $52.
In the Weighted-Ratio Option, the registration fees for all
registrant groups increase by 21 percent from current fees, although
the absolute dollar amount may differ. The registration fees range from
$296 annually (or annual equivalent) to $3,699, and a corresponding
increase of $52 annually (or annual equivalent) to $652. Registration
fees are collected by location and by registered business activity.
Registration fees for all registrant groups increase by 21 percent, and
as a result, there is no disparity in the percentage fee increase among
registrant groups. Furthermore, a 21 percent increase ($731 to $888)
over nine years, from FY 2012 to FY 2021, equates to a 2.2 percent
annual rate (on a compound annual growth rate basis), which is
comparable to the rate of inflation. The same increase equates to a 1.8
percent annual rate over 11 years, from FY 2012 to FY 2023.
The Weighted-Ratio methodology, much like the flat fee, is
straightforward and easy to understand, but unlike the flat fee, it
applies historic weighted ratios to differentiate fees among registrant
groups. This methodology has the advantage of differentiating fees
based on historic weighted ratios, but does not create a
disproportionate fee increase in any registrant group.
Conclusion for Weighted-Ratio Option
DEA selected this option to calculate the new fees. This approach
has been used since Congress established registrant fees and continues
to be a reasonable reflection of differing costs. The registration fees
under the Weighted-Ratio option result in differentiated fees among
registrant groups, where registrants with generally larger revenues and
costs pay higher fees than registrants with lower revenues and costs.
Furthermore, the Weighted-Ratio option does not create a disparity in
the relative increase in fees from the current to the new fees. The
weighted-ratios used by DEA to calculate the current fee have proven
effective and reasonable over time, and generally reflects the
differences in activity level, notably in inspections, scheduled
investigations, and other control and monitoring, by registrant
category (i.e., these costs are higher for manufacturers). DEA selected
this option because it is the only option that resulted in
``reasonable'' fees for all registrant groups.
Regulatory Analyses
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and 13771 (Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs)
This rule has been developed in accordance with the principles of
Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13563. E.O. 12866 directs agencies to
assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and
when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, public health and
safety, and environmental advantages, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 is supplemental to and reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review as established
in E.O. 12866. The Executive Order classifies a ``significant
regulatory action'' requiring review by OMB as any regulatory action
that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect
on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, 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 the Executive Order.
DEA estimates that this rule will have an annual effect, in the
form of transfers, on the economy of $100 million or more and,
therefore, is an economically significant regulatory action. Fees paid
to DEA are considered transfer payments and not costs.\27\ The analysis
of benefits and transfers is below. The OMB's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rulemaking is a significant
regulatory action under the meaning of E.O. 12866, and it therefore has
been reviewed by the OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ OMB Circular A-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Need for the Rule
Under the CSA, DEA is authorized to charge reasonable fees relating
to the registration and control of the manufacture, distribution,
dispensing, import, and export of controlled substances and listed
chemicals. 21 U.S.C. 821 and 958(f). DEA must set fees at a level that
ensures the recovery of the full costs of operating the various aspects
of the DCP. 21 U.S.C. 886a(1)(C).
[[Page 44726]]
DEA continually monitors the anticipated budget and collections to
determine whether the registration fees need to be adjusted. DEA has
determined that the fees need to increase in beginning October 1, 2020,
FY 2021, to the amounts indicated above in order to fully fund the DCP
as required by statute. Therefore, this rulemaking is required for DEA
to recover the full costs of operating the DCP.
b. Alternative Approaches
As described in detail above, DEA examined three alternative
methodologies to calculate the registration and registration fees: Flat
Fee Option, Past-Based Option, and Weighted-Ratio Option (current and
selected method).
For each of the alternatives considered, the calculated fees are
analyzed for reasonableness by examining: (1) The absolute amount of
the fee increase; (2) the change in fee as a percentage of revenue from
2012 to 2021; and (3) the relative fee increase across registrant
groups. Additionally, each calculation methodology is re-evaluated for
its overall strengths and weaknesses.
Flat Fee Option
Option one is called the Flat Fee Option. The flat fee option would
provide equal fees across all registrant groups, regardless of the
proportion of DCP costs and resources the registrant group may require
(e.g., investigation resources). The calculation results in a dramatic
disparity in fee change among registrant groups. After consideration of
the flat fee option, DEA did not select this option to calculate the
new fees. The fee disparity among registrant groups caused by this
calculation alternative is too great. Under this option, the
practitioner fees would increase by 23 percent to $299 on an annual
basis, while manufacturer and distributor fees would decrease by 90
percent and 80 percent respectively, to an annual fee of $299. Setting
the fees at the same level across all registrant groups is therefore
not ``reasonable'' as required by statute. While the vast majority of
registrants are practitioners, such as individual physicians and nurse
practitioners, DEA registrants also include some of the largest
corporations in the world. To satisfy the ``reasonable'' standard,
registration fees should be different among the categories to account
for cost and economic differences among the registrant categories. This
option did not satisfy this requirement.
Past-Based Option
Option two is called the Past-Based Option, and uses historic
investigative work hour data to apportion the cost to each registrant
category. Under Option two, pre-registration and scheduled
investigation costs are assigned to registrant classes and all other
costs are recovered on an equal, per-registrant basis. In the Past-
Based option, the percent change in fees from current fees ranges from
negative 44 percent (reduction of 44 percent) for list I chemical
manufacturers to an increase of 856 percent for narcotic treatment
programs. The increase for a large majority of registrations,
practitioners, mid-level practitioners, and hospital/clinics, is 19
percent. DEA did not select the Past-Based option for two key reasons.
First, the fee increase is disproportionately burdensome to a small
number of registrants. Narcotic treatment program fees would increase
by 856 percent, while the change for the remaining registrant groups
range from a decrease of 44 percent to an increase of 131 percent. DEA
deemed this unreasonable. Second, the Past-Based option is backward
looking and implicitly assumes that the future will be similar to the
past. The past may not necessarily be a bad estimate. However, DEA
develops a work plan for scheduled investigations annually and
investigation frequency may be modified based on need or diversion
risk. DEA cannot assume that future workload will reflect past DEA work
hour data. As a result, DEA has concluded that past data is not a
reasonable basis for the calculation of new fees.
Weighted-Ratio Option (Current and Selected Method)
The Weighted-Ratio Option has been used since the inception of the
fee. This option distinguishes among the categories to establish a
``reasonable'' fee for each category. In this option, fees are assigned
to different registrant categories based on DEA's general historical
cost data expressed as weighted-ratios. The Weighted-Ratio methodology,
much like the flat fee, is straightforward and easy to understand, but
unlike the flat fee, it applies historic weighted ratios to
differentiate fees among registrant groups. This method would result in
across-the-board 21 percent increase in fees for all registrations.
DEA selected this option to calculate the new fees. This approach
has been used since Congress established registrant fees and continues
to be a reasonable reflection of differing costs. The registration fees
under the Weighted-Ratio option result in differentiated fees among
registrant groups, where registrants with generally larger revenues and
costs pay higher fees than registrants with lower revenues and costs.
Furthermore, the Weighted-Ratio option does not create a disparity in
the relative increase in fees from the current to the new fees. The
weighted-ratios used by DEA to calculate the current fee have proven
effective and reasonable over time, and generally reflects the
differences in activity level, notably in inspections, scheduled
investigations, and other control and monitoring, by registrant
category (i.e., these costs are higher for manufacturers). DEA selected
this option because it is the only option that resulted in
``reasonable'' fees for all registrant groups.
c. Summary of Impact of New Fees Relative to Current Fees
Affected Entities
As of September 2019, DEA issued 1,840,501 issued controlled
substances and chemical registrations (1,839,556 controlled substances
registrations and 945 chemical registrations), as shown in Table 10.
Table 10--Number of Registrations by Business Activity
[September 2019]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Controlled
Registrant class/business substances Chemicals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmacy................................ 70,851 ..............
Hospital/Clinic......................... 18,305 ..............
Practitioner............................ 1,324,438 ..............
Teaching Institute...................... 264 ..............
Mid-Level Practitioner.................. 408,468 ..............
[[Page 44727]]
Researcher.............................. 11,986 ..............
Analytical Labs......................... 1,514 ..............
Narcotic Treatment Program.............. 1,738 ..............
Manufacturer............................ 570 207
Distributor............................. 843 370
Reverse Distributor..................... 68 ..............
Importer................................ 253 209
Exporter................................ 258 159
-------------------------------
Total............................... 1,839,556 945
-------------------------------
Grand total (all registrations). 1,840,501
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes fee-paying and fee-exempt registrations.
Not all registrants listed in Table 10 are subject to the fees. Any
hospital or other institution operated by an agency of the U.S. of any
state, or any political subdivision of an agency thereof, is exempt
from the payment of registration fees. Likewise, an individual who is
required to obtain a registration in order to carry out his/her duties
as an official of a federal or state agency is also exempt from
registration fees.\28\ Fee-exempt registrants are not affected by the
new fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See 21 CFR 1301.21 for complete fee exemption requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on historical registration data and estimated growth trends,
DEA estimates the average total registration population over the three-
year period, FY 2021 to FY 2023, will be 2,004,358 as shown in Table
11. Estimated annual growth in fee-paying registrations is
approximately 3.8 percent. The largest growth is in the MLPs.
Approximately eight percent of all registrations are fee-exempt.
Table 11--Estimated Average Fee-Paying Registrations, FY 2021-FY 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Controlled
Registrant class/business substances Chemicals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmacy................................ 80,199 ..............
Hospital/Clinic......................... 16,638 ..............
Practitioner............................ 1,356,876 ..............
Teaching Institute...................... 130 ..............
Mid-Level Practitioner.................. 539,899 ..............
Researcher.............................. 5,038 ..............
Analytical Labs......................... 908 ..............
Narcotic Treatment Program.............. 1,978 ..............
Manufacturer............................ 578 208
Distributor............................. 666 329
Reverse Distributor..................... 73 ..............
Importer................................ 222 202
Exporter................................ 264 150
-------------------------------
Total............................... 2,003,469 889
-------------------------------
Grand total (all registrations). 2,004,358
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CSA requires a separate registration for each location where
controlled substances are handled, and a separate registration for each
business activity--that is, a registration for activities related to
the handling of controlled substances, and a registration for
activities related to the handling of list I chemicals. Some
registrants may conduct multiple activities under a single registration
(e.g., manufacturers may distribute substances they have manufactured
without being registered as a distributor), but firms may hold multiple
registrations for a single location. Individual practitioners who
prescribe, but do not store controlled substances, may use a single
registration at multiple locations within a state, but need separate
registrations for each state in which they practice and are authorized
to dispense controlled substances. Firms with multiple locations must
have separate registrations for each location.
Characteristics of Entities
This rule affects those manufacturers, distributors, dispensers,
importers, and exporters of controlled substances and list I chemicals
that are required to obtain and pay a registration fee with DEA
pursuant to the CSA. As of September 2019, DEA issued 1,840,501 total
controlled substances and chemical registrations (1,839,556 controlled
substances registrations and 945 chemical registrations), as shown
above in Table 10. DEA estimates an average total fee-paying population
of 2,004,358 over the three-year period, FY 2021 to FY 2023, as shown
in Table 11.
The registrations on a three-year cycle (i.e., pharmacies,
hospitals/clinics, practitioners, teaching institutions, and
[[Page 44728]]
mid-level practitioners), make up 99.5 percent of all registrations not
exempt from paying registration applications fees. All other categories
of registration (i.e., manufacturers, distributors, reverse
distributors, importers, exporters, chemical manufacturers, chemical
distributors, chemical importers, and chemical exporters) maintain an
annual registration. Registration and reregistration costs vary by
registrant category as is described in more detail in the sections
below.
The new fees would affect a wide variety of entities. Table 12
indicates the sectors, as defined by the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS), affected by the rule and their
enterprise average annual revenue, provided by the U.S. Census Bureau,
Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB). Most DEA registrants are, or are
employed by, small entities under Small Business Administration (SBA)
standards.
Table 12--Industrial Sectors of DEA Registrants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average annual
Business activity NAICS code NAICS code description revenue ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer............................ 325411 Medicinal and Botanical 33,905,094
325412 Manufacturing. 148,265,482
Pharmaceutical Preparation
Manufacturing.
Distributor, Importer, Exporter......... 424210 Drugs and Druggists' Sundries 103,097,459
Merchant Wholesalers.
Reverse Distributor..................... 5621 Waste Collection................ 5,168,825
5622 Waste Treatment and Disposal.... 11,553,838
Pharmacy................................ 445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery 12,740,365
446110 (except Convenience) Stores. 12,533,279
* 452210 Pharmacies and Drug Stores...... 2,899,338,610
* 452311 Department Stores............... 13,159,528,688
Warehouse Clubs and Supercenters
Analytical Labs......................... 541380 Testing Laboratories............ 3,031,746
Teaching institute...................... 611310 Colleges, Universities and 97,657,501
Professional Schools.
Researcher.............................. * 541715 Research and Development in the 11,331,597
Physical, Engineering, and Life
Sciences (except Nanotechnology
and Biotechnology).
Canine Handler.......................... 561612 Security Guards and Patrol 3,740,383
Services.
Practitioner, Mid-level Practitioner,** 541940 Veterinary Services............. 1,067,601
Narcotic Treatment Program, Hospital/ 621111 Offices of Physicians (except 2,299,354
Clinic. 621112 Mental Health Specialists). 476,408
621210 Offices of Physicians, Mental 836,911
621330 Health Specialists. 393,471
621391 Offices of Dentists............. 550,257
621420 Offices of Mental Health 2,982,804
621491 Practitioners (except 68,506,712
621493 Physicians). 5,844,323
622110 Offices of Podiatrists.......... 284,660,783
622210 Outpatient Mental Health and 48,476,596
622310 Substance Abuse Centers. 97,844,233
HMO Medical Centers.............
Freestanding Ambulatory Surgical
and Emergency Centers.
General Medical and Surgical
Hospitals.
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse
Hospitals.
Specialty (except Psychiatric
and Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
Chemical Manufacturer................... 325 Chemical Manufacturing.......... 80,834,558
Chemical Distributor, Chemical Importer, 424690 Other Chemical and Allied 26,492,119
Chemical Exporter. Products Merchant Wholesalers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: SUSB, 2012 SUSB Annual Datasets by Establishment Industry. (latest available) https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/2012/econ/susb/2012-susb.html (accessed 10/5/2019).
* NAICS code was updated in the 2017 NAICS. The annual revenue figures for these industries are based on
corresponding 2012 SUSB industry data.
** Practitioners and mid-level practitioners are generally employed in one of these industries.
Additionally, while many practitioner and mid-level practitioner
registration application fees may be paid by the employer, some may pay
out-of-pocket. Table 13 indicates the labor categories and average
annual wages, as provided by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS), affected by the rule.
Table 13--Labor Categories of DEA Registrants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual mean wage
Occupation code Occupation title ($)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
29-1021....................... Dentists, General.... 175,840
29-1060....................... Physicians and 210,980
Surgeons.
29-1071....................... Physician Assistants. 108,430
29-1171....................... Nurse Practitioners.. 110,030
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: BLS, May 2018 National Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates, United States. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm
(accessed 10/5/2019).
The listing of industry sectors and labor categories in Tables 12
and 13 are not intended to be exhaustive, but to generally represent
DEA registrants.
Economic Impact Analysis of New Fee
The new fees are expected to have two levels of impact. Initially,
the fee increase will impact the registrants. Then, the fee increase,
or portion of the fee increase, is expected to be eventually passed on
to the general public. To be analytically conservative, the analysis
below assumes that the impact of the fee increase is absorbed entirely
by the registrants.
DEA assumes that the registration fees are business expenses for
all registrants. As a result, the increase in registration fees may
result in reduced tax liability, which may diminish the impact of the
increase. For example, if a practitioner pays an additional $52 per
year in registration fees, and the combined federal and state income
tax is 35 percent, the net cash impact is $34, not $52. The additional
expense of $52
[[Page 44729]]
causes income/profit to decrease by $52, decreasing the tax liability
by $18. The net cash outlay is $34.\29\ However, to be analytically
conservative, the analysis does not consider the impact of reduced tax
liability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ This example is for illustration purposes only. Each entity
should seek competent tax advice for tax consequences of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As individual practitioners and small businesses are expected to
experience the greatest impact, DEA examined the new fees as a
percentage of income for physicians, dentists, physician assistants,
nurse practitioners, and small businesses. Physicians, dentists,
physician assistants, and nurse practitioners reflect a representative
sub-group of the practitioner and mid-level practitioner registrant
groups. The new fee for practitioners and mid-level practitioners of
$888 per three years represents a $157 increase over the current fee of
$731 per three years. The annual increase is $52, representing 0.025
percent, 0.030 percent, 0.048 percent, and 0.048 percent of average
annual income for physicians, dentists, physician assistants, and nurse
practitioners, respectively. Table 14 indicates the annual effect as a
percentage of income. The impact on small businesses is discussed in
the Regulatory Flexibility Act section.
Table 14--Fee Increase as Percentage of Annual Mean Wage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual fee
Annual mean wage increase of
Occupation code Occupation title ($) annual mean wage
(%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29-1060................................. Physicians and Surgeons......... 210,980 0.025
29-1021................................. Dentists, General............... 175,840 0.030
29-1071................................. Physician Assistants............ 108,430 0.048
29-1171................................. Nurse Practitioners............. 110,030 0.048
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the impact of the fee increase is also diminished by
an estimated increase in registrant income. The table below describes
the annual-equivalent fee as a percentage of income in 2012, the year
of the last fee increase, and 2021. This analysis assumes that the fee
increase is absorbed personally by each practitioner or mid-level
practitioner. In 2012, the new fee of $244 (on an annual basis)
represented approximately 0.15 percent, 0.13 percent, 0.26 percent, and
0.27 percent of annual income for dentists, physicians, physician
assistants, and nurse practitioners, respectively. While the new fees
are 21 percent above the current fees implemented in 2012, the average
incomes for dentists, physicians, physician assistants, and nurse
practitioners increased an average 12 percent, 17 percent, 26 percent,
and 30 percent, respectively, since that time.\30\ This estimated
increase in average income lessens the impact of the fee increase as a
percentage of average income. The new fees are estimated to represent
approximately 0.16 percent, 0.13 percent, 0.25 percent, and 0.25
percent of annual income for dentists, physicians, physician
assistants, and nurse practitioners, respectively. Furthermore, a 21
percent increase ($731 to $888) over nine years, from FY 2012 to FY
2021, equates to a 2.2 percent annual rate (on compound annual growth
rate basis), which is comparable to the rate of inflation. The same
increase equates to a 1.8 percent annual rate over 11 years, from FY
2012 to FY 2023. This analysis ignores the dampening effect of
registration fees as a business expense and the potential that the fee
increase might be passed on to customers. Table 15 represents fees as
percentage of average income.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ From Table 14, the increase in annual mean wages from 2012
to 2021 are for dentists 12 percent (182,140/163,240-1), physicians
17 percent (221,440/190,060-1), physician assistants 26 percent
(116,415/92,460-1), and nurse practitioners 30 percent (119,320/
91,450-1).
Table 15--Fees as Percentage of Annual Mean Wage in 2012 and 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 2018 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupation title Annual mean
Annual mean Annual fee Fee of wage Annual mean wage ($) Annual fee Fee of wage
wage ($) ($) * (%) wage ($) ** ($) *** (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dentists, General............................................ 163,240 244 0.15 175,840 182,140 296 0.16
Physicians and Surgeons...................................... 190,060 244 0.13 210,980 221,440 296 0.13
Physician Assistants......................................... 92,460 244 0.26 108,430 116,415 296 0.25
Nurse Practitioners.......................................... 91,450 244 0.27 110,030 119,320 296 0.25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: BLS. https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm (accessed 10/5/2019).
* The current fee is $731 per three years, annual-equivalent of $244.
** Annual mean wage data for 2012 and 2018 is provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 2021 annual mean wage figures are estimated based on
linear extrapolation, where an average annual increase is calculated from years 2012 to 2018, then extending out the increase for three more years to
2021.
*** The new fee is $888 per three years, annual-equivalent of $296.
Exempt from the payment of registration fees are any hospital or
other institution that is operated by an agency of the U.S., of any
State, or any political subdivision of an agency thereof. Likewise, an
individual who is required to obtain a registration in order to carry
out his/her duties as an official of a federal or State agency is also
exempt from registration fees. Fee exempt registrants are not affected
by the new fees.
[[Page 44730]]
d. Analysis of Benefits, Costs, and Transfers
Benefits
The primary benefit of the rule is continued support to the DCP,
without the need for any additional congressional appropriations. The
DCP is a strategic component of U.S. law and policy aimed at
preventing, detecting, and eliminating the diversion of controlled
substances and listed chemicals into the illicit market while ensuring
a sufficient supply of controlled substances and listed chemicals for
legitimate medical, scientific, research, and industrial purposes. The
absence of, or significant reduction in, this program would result in
enormous costs for the citizens and residents of the U.S. due to the
diversion of controlled substances and listed chemicals into the
illicit market as discussed earlier in this document.
Costs
This rule has little or no cost, as fees to DEA are transfer
payments.
Transfers
The difference between the current fees and the new fees--the fee
increase--is $318 million over the three year period, from FY 2021 to
FY 2023, or approximately $106 million annually. The difference in the
fees projected to be collected under the current fee rates and the new
fee rates is $102 million, $105 million, and $110 million in FY 2021,
FY 2022, and FY 2023, respectively. Table 16 summarizes the estimated
collections under the current fees, estimated collections under the new
fees, and the difference between the current and the new fees.
Table 16--Estimated Collections Under Current and New Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated collections FY 2021 ($M) FY 2022 ($M) FY 2023 ($M) Total ($M)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Fee..................................... 474 491 514 1,479
New Fee......................................... 576 596 625 1,797
Difference...................................... 102 105 110 318
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The present value of the transfer is $299 million at a three
percent discount rate and $277 million at a seven percent discount
rate.
E.O. 13771 was issued on January 30, 2017, and published in the
Federal Register on February 3, 2017. 82 FR 9339. This rule is not
subject to the requirements of E.O. 13771 because this rule is expected
to result in no more than de minimis costs.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
This rulemaking meets the applicable standards set forth in
Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform to
eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal
standards, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
This rulemaking 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 E.O. 13132.
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This rule does not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Acting Administrator, in accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-602, has reviewed this rule and by
approving it, certifies that it will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief
of small entities unless it can certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. For
purposes of the RFA, small entities include small businesses, nonprofit
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. DEA evaluated the
impact of this rule on small entities, and discussions of its findings
are below.
As discussed above and in the Economic Analysis section above, DEA
analyzed three fee calculation methodologies--Flat Fee, Past-Based, and
Weighted-Ratio. DEA selected the Weighted-Ratio (current) methodology
to calculate the new fee structure. This approach has been used since
Congress established registration fees, and continues to be a
reasonable reflection of differing costs. The registration fees under
the Weighted-Ratio option result in differentiated fees among
registrant groups, where registrants with larger revenues pay higher
fees than registrants with lower revenues. Furthermore, the Weighted-
Ratio option does not create a disparity in the relative increase in
fees from the current to the new fees. The weighted-ratios used by DEA
to calculate the current fee have proven effective and reasonable over
time. Additionally, the weighted-ratio calculation methodology
generally reflects the differences in activity level, notably in
inspections, scheduled investigations and other control and monitoring,
by registrant category; for example, these costs are greatest for
manufacturers. DEA selected this option because it is the only option
that results in reasonable fees for all registrant groups.
This approach increases fees proportionally (21 percent) across all
registrant groups, maintaining the weighted-ratio of 1.0, 3.0, 6.25,
and 12.5. The annual increase in fees are $52, $327, and $652 based on
business activity. The table below summarizes the difference in fees
between the new and current fees.
[[Page 44731]]
Table 17--Difference in Fees Under Current and New Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Total
registrations Current fees collections Difference in
Business activity (FY 2021- FY ($) New fees ($) under new fees ($) *
2023) fees ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registrants on Three Year
Registration Cycle:
Pharmacy.................... 80,199 731 888 71,216,712 157
Hospital/Clinic............. 16,638 731 888 14,774,544 157
Practitioner................ 1,356,876 731 888 1,204,905,888 157
Teaching Institution........ 130 731 888 115,440 157
Mid-level Practitioner (MLP) 539,899 731 888 479,430,312 157
Registrants on Annual
Registration Cycle:
Manufacturer................ 1,733 3,047 3,699 6,410,367 652
Distributor................. 1,999 1,523 1,850 3,698,150 327
Researcher/Canine Handler... 15,113 244 296 4,473,448 52
Analytical Lab.............. 2,724 244 296 806,304 52
Importer.................... 666 1,523 1,850 1,232,100 327
Exporter.................... 792 1,523 1,850 1,465,200 327
Reverse Distributor......... 219 1,523 1,850 405,150 327
Narcotic Treatment Program.. 5,935 244 296 1,756,760 52
Chemical Manufacturer....... 624 3,047 3,699 2,308,176 652
Chemical Importer........... 606 1,523 1,850 1,121,100 327
Chemical Distributor........ 988 1,523 1,850 1,827,800 327
Chemical Exporter........... 450 1,523 1,850 832,500 327
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................... 2,025,591 N/A N/A 1,796,779,951 N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The difference for registrations on a three-year cycle is $157 or $52 on annual basis.
As shown in Table 12, the new fees would affect a wide variety of
entities across many industry sectors. As some industry sectors are
expected to consist primarily of DEA registrants, i.e., 446110-
Pharmacies and Drug Stores, 622110-General Medical and Surgical
Hospitals, etc., this rule is expected to affect a substantial number
of small entities.
DEA compared the annual increase in fees from current fees to new
fees for the smallest of small businesses in each industry sectors. For
each of the affected industry sectors, the annual increase was not more
than 0.1 percent of average annual revenue. The table below summarizes
the results.
Table 18--Fee Increase as Percentage of Annual Revenue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Enterprise Number of revenue per Fee increase Fee increase
NAICS code NAICS code description size (number establishments establishment ($) of revenue
of employees) ($) (%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
325.............................. Chemical Manufacturing............... 0-4 3,148 1,938,546 652 0.0319
325411........................... Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing 0-4 108 727,444 652 0.0851
325412........................... Pharmaceutical Preparation * 5-9 129 2,639,287 652 0.0235
Manufacturing.
424210........................... Drugs and Druggists' Sundries 0-4 3,630 1,367,131 327 0.0239
Merchant Wholesalers.
424690........................... Other Chemical and Allied Products 0-4 3,352 2,007,996 327 0.0154
Merchant Wholesalers.
445110........................... Supermarkets and Other Grocery 0-4 23,710 453,787 52 0.0108
(except Convenience) Stores.
446110........................... Pharmacies and Drug Stores........... 0-4 6,360 1,069,655 52 0.0046
452112........................... Discount Department Stores........... 0-4 6 266,167 52 0.0184
452910........................... Warehouse Clubs and Supercenters..... 0-4 12 326,333 52 0.0150
541380........................... Testing Laboratories................. 0-4 2,415 297,737 52 0.0165
541712........................... Research and Development in the 0-4 5,013 427,790 52 0.0115
Physical, Engineering, and Life
Sciences (except Biotechnology).
541940........................... Veterinary Services.................. 0-4 8,881 292,166 52 0.0168
561612........................... Security Guards and Patrol Services.. 0-4 2,162 114,198 52 0.0429
5621............................. Waste Collection..................... 0-4 3,853 365,902 327 0.0844
5622............................. Waste Treatment and Disposal......... 0-4 616 461,159 327 0.0670
611310........................... Colleges, Universities, and 0-4 372 913,078 52 0.0054
Professional Schools.
621111........................... Offices of Physicians (except Mental 0-4 95,648 447,715 52 0.0109
Health Specialists).
621112........................... Offices of Physicians, Mental Health 0-4 8,980 253,837 52 0.0193
Specialists.
621210........................... Offices of Dentists.................. 0-4 50,781 330,868 52 0.0148
621320........................... Offices of Optometrists.............. 0-4 10,939 269,348 52 0.0182
[[Page 44732]]
621330........................... Offices of Mental Health 0-4 16,149 145,005 52 0.0338
Practitioners (except Physicians).
621391........................... Offices of Podiatrists............... 0-4 5,300 288,546 52 0.0170
621420........................... Outpatient Mental Health and 0-4 1,810 211,249 52 0.0232
Substance Abuse Centers.
621491........................... HMO Medical Centers.................. * 5-9 16 620,188 52 0.0079
621493........................... Freestanding Ambulatory Surgical and 0-4 1,011 549,974 52 0.0089
Emergency Centers.
622110........................... General Medical and Surgical 0-4 39 10,621,308 52 0.0005
Hospitals.
622210........................... Psychiatric and Substance Abuse * 20-99 27 5,142,444 52 0.0010
Hospitals.
622310........................... Specialty (except Psychiatric and 0-4 21 8,561,238 52 0.0006
Substance Abuse) Hospitals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Where the revenue figure for the smallest size category is unavailable, the next size up with available revenue figure is used.
While this rule affects a substantial number of small businesses,
because the economic impact for the smallest of small businesses is not
significant, the rule will not have a significant impact on small
entities as a whole. In summary, DEA's evaluation of economic impact by
size category indicates that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the expenditure by state, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $154
million or more (adjusted for inflation) in any one year, and will not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no
actions were deemed subject to the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1532.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This rulemaking does not create or modify a collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This rulemaking will not impose additional recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or other organizations. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.
Congressional Review Act
This final rule is a major rule as defined by the Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804. This rule will result in an annual effect on
the economy of $100,000,000 or more in the form of transfers, as fees
paid to DEA are considered transfer payments and not costs. However,
this rule will not cause a major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the ability of U.S.-based companies to
compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets.
DEA submitted a copy of the final rule to both Houses of Congress and
to the Comptroller General.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 1301
Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control,
Security measures.
21 CFR Part 1309
Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control,
Exports, Imports, Security measures.
For the reasons set forth above, DEA amends 21 CFR parts 1301 and
1309 as follows:
PART 1301--REGISTRATION OF MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS AND
DISPENSERS OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
0
1. The authority citation for part 1301 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 821, 822, 823, 824, 831, 871(b), 875, 877,
886a, 951, 952, 956, 957, 958, 965.
0
2. Amend Sec. 1301.13 by revising the fourth sentence in paragraph (e)
introductory text and revising paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 1301.13 Application for registration; time for application;
expiration date; registration for independent activities; application
forms, fees, contents and signature; coincident activities.
* * * * *
(e) * * * Generally, the application fees are not refundable;
however, they may be issued in limited circumstances at the discretion
of the Administrator. These circumstances include: Applicant error,
such as duplicate payments, payment for incorrect business activities,
or payments made by persons who are exempt under this section from
application or renewal fees; DEA error; and death of a registrant
within the first year of the three-year registration cycle. * * *
(1)
[[Page 44733]]
Summary of Registration Requirements and Limitations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration
Business activity Controlled substances DEA application forms Application period Coincident activities allowed
fee ($) (years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Manufacturing.................... Schedules I -V.......... New--225................ 3,699 1 Schedules I-V: May distribute
Renewal--225a........... that substance or class for
which registration was
issued; may not distribute
or dispose any substance or
class for which not
registered.
Schedules II-V: May conduct
chemical analysis and
preclinical research
(including quality control
analysis) with substances
listed in those schedules
for which authorization as a
mfr. was issued.
(ii) Distributing.................... Schedules I-V........... New--225................ 1,850 1 May acquire Schedules II-V
Renewal--225a........... controlled substances from
collectors for the purposes
of destruction.
(iii) Reverse distributing........... Schedules I-V........... New--225................ 1,850 1
Renewal--225a...........
(iv) Dispensing or instructing Schedules II-V.......... New--224................ 888 3 May conduct research and
(includes Practitioner, Hospital/ Renewal--224a........... instructional activities
Clinic, Retail Pharmacy, Central with those substances for
fill pharmacy, Teaching Institution). which registration was
granted, except that a mid-
level practitioner may
conduct such research only
to the extent expressly
authorized under state
statute. A pharmacist may
manufacture an aqueous or
oleaginous solution or solid
dosage form containing a
narcotic controlled
substance in Schedule II-V
in a proportion not
exceeding 20% of the
complete solution, compound
or mixture. A retail
pharmacy may perform central
fill pharmacy activities.
(v) Research......................... Schedule I.............. New--225................ 296 1 A researcher may manufacture
Renewal--225a........... or import the basic class of
substance or substances for
which registration was
issued, provided that such
manufacture or import is set
forth in the protocol
required in Sec. 1301.18
and to distribute such class
to persons registered or
authorized to conduct
research with such class of
substance or registered or
authorized to conduct
chemical analysis with
controlled substances.
(vi) Research........................ Schedules II-V.......... New--225................ 296 1 May conduct chemical analysis
Renewal--225a........... with controlled substances
in those schedules for which
registration was issued;
manufacture such substances
if and to the extent that
such manufacture is set
forth in a statement filed
with the application for
registration or
reregistration and provided
that the manufacture is not
for the purposes of dosage
form development; import
such substances for research
purposes; distribute such
substances to persons
registered or authorized to
conduct chemical analysis,
instructional activities or
research with such
substances, and to persons
exempted from registration
pursuant to Sec. 1301.24;
and conduct instructional
activities with controlled
substances.
(vii) Narcotic Treatment Program Narcotic Drugs in New--363................ 296 1
(including compounder). Schedules II-V. Renewal--363a...........
(viii) Importing..................... Schedules I-V........... New--225................ 1,850 1 May distribute that substance
Renewal--225a........... or class for which
registration was issued; may
not distribute any substance
or class for which not
registered.
(ix) Exporting....................... Schedules I-V........... New--225................ 1,850 1
Renewal--225a...........
(x) Chemical Analysis................ Schedules I-V........... New--225................ 296 1 May manufacture and import
Renewal--225a........... controlled substances for
analytical or instructional
activities; may distribute
such substances to persons
registered or authorized to
conduct chemical analysis,
instructional activities, or
research with such
substances and to persons
exempted from registration
pursuant to Sec. 1301.24;
may export such substances
to persons in other
countries performing
chemical analysis or
enforcing laws related to
controlled substances or
drugs in those countries;
and may conduct
instructional activities
with controlled substances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 44734]]
* * * * *
PART 1309--REGISTRATION OF MANUFACTURERS, DISTRIBUTORS, IMPORTERS,
AND EXPORTERS OF LIST I CHEMICALS
0
3. The authority citation for part 1309 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 802, 821, 822, 823, 824, 830, 871(b), 875,
877, 886a, 952, 953, 957, 958.
0
4. Revise Sec. 1309.11 to read as follows:
Sec. 1309.11 Fee Amounts.
(a) For each application for registration or reregistration to
manufacture for distribution the applicant shall pay an annual fee of
$3,699.
(b) For each application for registration or reregistration to
distribute (either retail distribution or non-retail distribution),
import, or export a list I chemical, the applicant shall pay an annual
fee of $1,850.
0
5. Amend Sec. 1309.12 by revising the last sentence in paragraph (b)
to read as follows:
Sec. 1309.12 Time and method of payment; refund.
* * * * *
(b) * * * Generally, the application fees are not refundable;
however, they may be issued in limited circumstances at the discretion
of the Administrator. These circumstances include: Applicant error,
such as duplicate payments, payment for incorrect business activities,
or payments made by persons who are exempt under this section from
application or renewal fees; DEA error; and death of a registrant
within the first year of the three-year registration cycle.
0
6. Amend Sec. 1309.21 by revising the table in paragraph (c) to read
as follows:
Sec. 1309.21 Persons required to register.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Summary of Registration Requirements and Limitations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration Coincident
Business activity Chemicals DEA forms Application period activities
fee (years) allowed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Manufacturing............ List I,........ New-510........ 3,699 1 May distribute
Drug products Renewal-510a... that chemical
containing for which
ephedrine, registration
pseudoephedrin was issued;
e, may not
phenylpropanol distribute any
amine. chemical for
which not
registered.
(2) Distributing............. List I,........ New-510........ 1,850 1 ...............
Scheduled Renewal-510a...
listed
chemical
products.
(3) Importing................ List I,........ New-510........ 1,850 1 May distribute
Drug Products Renewal-510a... that chemical
containing for which
ephedrine, registration
pseudoephedrin was issued;
e, may not
phenylpropanol distribute any
amine. chemical for
which not
registered.
(4) Exporting................ List I,........ New-510........ 1,850 1 ...............
Scheduled Renewal-510a...
listed
chemical
products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Shea,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-16169 Filed 7-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P