norml23 - Page 46

 dependence, or high psychologicai dependence risk should they be
 abused°
 Section 841 prescribes that for the unlawful possession or
 distribution or any Schedule _ or Schedule I! drug which is not
 narcotic, or in the case of any Schedule Ill drug, the maximum penalty
 is 5 years or a fine of $15,000. The maximum term for a Schedule IV
 drug is 3 years and $10,000 and for Schedule V drugs, the maximum term
 is 1 year and $5,000. Section 84i aJso provides more severe penalties
 for amounts in excess of 1,000 pounds and Section 960 (importation)
 provides varying degrees of penalties for illegal importation.
 In NORML v. Ingersoll, 497 F.2d 654. (D.C. Ciro 1974) the Court of
 Appeals noted that the classification scheme was a cardinal feature of
 Congress' effort to rationalize the Federal Government's control
 program. Pursuant to this classification program, the Act and its
 administrators would grade drugs subject to control on the basis of
 their dangers and benefits. In addition, the Court specifically noted
 that "Congress contemplated that the classification set forth in the
 Act as originaJJy passed wou}d be subject to continuing review by the
 executive officials concerned... Provision is made for further
 consideration, when taking into account studies and data not avaiJable
 to Congress when the Act was passed in 1970. In short, the provisions
 for modification of ScheduJes are based on an approach of ongoing
 research." Id., 4.97 FoZd 657-658.
 C. THE DEA HAS NEVER COMPLIED WITH THE APPLICABLE
 PROVISIONS OF THE CSA; iTS ACTIONS IN REFUSING TO
 RECLASSIFY MARIJUANA CONSTITUTE A GROSS ABUSE OF
 DISCRETION
 As the statement of facts makes dear, the DEA has refused to re-
 classify marijuana, has refused to abide by the procedures of the Con-
 trolled Substances Act, has refused to seriously consider the lawful
 petition of NORML to reclassify marijuana and has three times been
 reversed by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia because
 its final orders denying the petition for reclassification were
 erroneous.
 Although, pursuant to court order, the DEA finally did request HEW
 to make findings and recommendations regarding marijuana, the HEW
 report and the DEA decision were amazingly remiss in their ability to
 follow the specific instructions of the decision in NORML v. DEA,