How to Submit Public Comments to the DEA: A Guide for Kratom Users
When federal agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) propose new regulations or scheduling actions, they're required by law to provide an opportunity for public input. This isn't just a formality—public comments are part of the official record and must be reviewed and considered before any final decision is made.
For kratom users, this public comment process has proven to be one of the most powerful tools for influencing policy. In fact, it's already worked once: in 2016, over 19,000 public comments helped convince the DEA to withdraw its kratom scheduling attempt. Understanding how to participate effectively in this process could be critical to protecting kratom access in the future.
If you've never submitted a public comment before, the process might seem intimidating. But it's actually straightforward, and your voice genuinely matters. This guide will walk you through exactly how to do it, what to say, and how to make your comment as effective as possible.
What Are Public Comments and Why Do They Matter?
Public comments are formal written statements submitted to federal agencies during rulemaking or regulatory decision-making processes. When agencies like the DEA, FDA, or others propose new rules, they must publish their proposal in the Federal Register and allow a designated period—typically 30 to 90 days—for the public to submit comments.
This requirement comes from the Administrative Procedure Act, a federal law that governs how agencies create and implement regulations. The law recognizes that regulations affect real people, and those people deserve a chance to be heard before policies become final.
Public comments aren't like social media posts or online petitions. They become part of the official administrative record for the proposed rule. The agency is legally required to review all comments, consider the substantive points raised, and respond to significant concerns in their final rule documentation.
This means your comment has weight. It's not a popularity contest where the most common opinion wins—a single well-reasoned comment can influence policy if it raises issues the agency hadn't fully considered or provides evidence that challenges their assumptions.
For kratom users specifically, the public comment process has already proven its power.
The 2016 Success Story: How Public Comments Saved Kratom
In August 2016, the DEA announced its intention to use emergency scheduling authority to place mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine (the primary alkaloids in kratom) into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. This would have made kratom as illegal as heroin or LSD, with no recognized medical use and high potential for abuse.
The announcement sent shockwaves through the kratom community. Emergency scheduling doesn't normally include a public comment period—the DEA can implement it immediately. But the backlash was so swift and substantial that the DEA took the unprecedented step of withdrawing its notice and opening a formal public comment period.
From August to December 2016, the DEA received over 19,000 comments through regulations.gov. These comments came from kratom users managing chronic pain, veterans using kratom for PTSD, people who had used kratom to quit opioids, healthcare providers, researchers, and advocates.
The comments weren't just emotional pleas—they included personal medical testimony, scientific evidence, policy analysis, and economic impact documentation. They challenged the DEA's characterization of kratom's abuse potential, provided evidence of medical value, and demonstrated the real-world consequences a ban would have.
In October 2016, the DEA withdrew its scheduling notice. The agency specifically cited the volume and substance of public comments, noting that they raised issues deserving further consideration. This was virtually unprecedented—the DEA almost never reverses course on scheduling decisions.
Kratom remains legal at the federal level today largely because of those 19,000 comments. This is proof that the public comment process works, and it's why your participation matters when the next regulatory threat emerges.
When to Expect a Public Comment Period for the 7-OH Recommendation
Following the FDA's July 2025 recommendation to schedule 7-hydroxymitragynine, the DEA will conduct its own review process. Once the DEA publishes a proposed rule in the Federal Register, a public comment period will open.
Based on the 2016 timeline and typical DEA rulemaking processes, the public comment period will likely open within 6-12 months of the FDA's recommendation. The comment period itself will run for 30 to 90 days once it opens.
You'll know the comment period has opened when:
- A notice appears in the Federal Register (https://www.federalregister.gov)
- A corresponding docket appears on regulations.gov (https://www.regulations.gov)
- Kratom advocacy organizations like the American Kratom Association announce the opening and provide guidance
- News coverage highlights the opportunity to comment
When it opens, you'll want to act relatively quickly. While you have the full comment period to submit, earlier comments often receive more attention, and you'll want to ensure you don't miss the deadline.
Step-by-Step: How to Submit Your Comment
The federal government uses regulations.gov as the central portal for all public comments. Here's exactly how to submit your comment when the DEA opens the docket for the 7-OH scheduling review:
Step 1: Find the Correct Docket
Go to https://www.regulations.gov and use the search function to find the DEA docket. You can search for "DEA 7-hydroxymitragynine" or "DEA kratom" or look for the specific docket number that will be announced when the comment period opens.
In 2016, the kratom docket was DEA-442. The new docket will have a different number, which advocacy organizations will publicize when it opens.
You can also access the docket through the Federal Register at https://www.federalregister.gov, which often has a "Submit a Formal Comment" button that links directly to regulations.gov.
Step 2: Click "Comment"
Once you've found the correct docket, click the blue "Comment" button. This will open the comment submission form.
Step 3: Complete the Form
The form will ask for:
Your name: You can submit anonymously if you prefer, but signed comments often carry more weight. If you're concerned about privacy but want to sign your comment, you can use just your first name and last initial.
Organization (optional): If you're affiliated with a relevant organization, research institution, or advocacy group, include it. If you're an individual kratom user, you can leave this blank or write "Private Citizen."
Email (optional): Providing an email allows the agency to contact you if they have questions about your comment, though this is rare.
Comment text: This is where you'll write your substantive input. There's typically a 5,000-character limit, though you can attach longer documents if needed.
Step 4: Write Your Comment
This is the most important part. Your comment should be substantive, specific, and personal. We'll cover exactly what to include in the next section.
Step 5: Attach Supporting Documents (Optional)
If you have supporting documentation—medical records, research studies, physician letters, or other evidence—you can attach them as files. This is optional but can strengthen your comment significantly.
Step 6: Review and Submit
Before submitting, review your comment carefully. Once submitted, comments become part of the public record and cannot be edited or deleted.
Click "Submit Comment" when you're ready.
Step 7: Save Your Confirmation
After submission, you'll receive a tracking number. Save this for your records. Your comment will be publicly viewable on regulations.gov within a few days (though your email address and other contact information will not be displayed publicly).
What to Include in Your Comment
Effective public comments are specific, personal, and evidence-based. Here's what to include:
Personal Introduction and Credibility
Start by briefly introducing yourself and establishing why your perspective matters. Are you a kratom user? For how long? What conditions do you manage? Do you participate in research?
Example: "I am a 42-year-old military veteran who has used kratom daily for three years to manage chronic pain from service-connected injuries. I participate in the Log & Taper It kratom research study, logging every dose in real-time to contribute to the scientific evidence base."
Your Specific Concerns with the Proposal
Address the specific scheduling recommendation. For the 7-OH proposal, you might focus on:
- The distinction between concentrated 7-OH products and natural kratom leaf
- Support for regulating concentrated products while preserving access to traditional kratom
- The importance of clear definitions and exemptions for natural plant material
- Concerns about how the rule might be implemented or enforced
Example: "I support the FDA's focus on concentrated and synthetic 7-hydroxymitragynine products, which differ substantially from the traditional kratom leaf I use. However, I urge the DEA to clearly distinguish between these concentrated products and natural kratom powder in any final rule. The kratom powder I use contains less than 2% 7-OH naturally, and scheduling this natural plant material would eliminate access to a botanical that has dramatically improved my quality of life."
Medical Necessity and Personal Impact
This is where your story matters most. Explain specifically how kratom helps you, what you tried before kratom, and what would happen if access were eliminated.
Be honest and specific. Don't exaggerate or make unsupported medical claims, but do explain your real experience.
Example: "Before kratom, I was prescribed oxycodone for pain management. The medication was effective for pain but caused severe constipation, cognitive fog, and made it impossible to work. I tried various alternatives including gabapentin, tramadol, and high-dose NSAIDs, but each came with side effects I couldn't tolerate. Kratom provides comparable pain relief without the cognitive impairment or severe side effects. I'm able to work full-time, care for my family, and maintain quality of life. If kratom were scheduled, I would have no viable alternatives."
Research Participation and Data Contribution
If you participate in the kratom research study through Log & Taper It, mention this specifically. It demonstrates that:
- You're committed to evidence-based policy
- You're contributing to the scientific record that regulators need
- The kratom community is proactive about generating quality research data
Example: "I actively participate in the Log & Taper It kratom research study, where I log every dose in real-time and document effects through standardized tags. This research is creating the comprehensive, longitudinal dataset that previous kratom studies have lacked. My participation includes logging dose amounts, product information, effects experienced, and usage context. To date, I've logged over 500 doses, contributing to a dataset that now includes thousands of users across all 50 states. This research directly addresses the evidence gaps that regulators cite when evaluating kratom."
Support for Quality Standards
Rather than opposing all regulation, express support for reasonable quality and safety standards. This positions you as responsible and safety-conscious.
Example: "I fully support quality standards for kratom products, including lab testing for contaminants, accurate labeling, and age restrictions. States that have implemented the Kratom Consumer Protection Act have successfully balanced consumer access with safety requirements. I purchase only from GMP-certified vendors who test for heavy metals, pathogens, and alkaloid content. Regulation that ensures product quality while preserving access to traditional kratom serves both public health and consumer interests."
Specific Recommendations
Offer concrete suggestions for how the rule could be improved or implemented effectively.
Example: "I respectfully recommend that any final rule:
- Clearly define the threshold for 7-OH concentration that triggers scheduling, with exemptions for natural plant material containing typical alkaloid ratios
- Focus enforcement on synthetic and highly concentrated products marketed as 'enhanced' or 'super concentrated'
- Allow continued access to traditional kratom powder and leaf products
- Include a transition period for industry compliance
- Coordinate with state KCPA frameworks to ensure consistent regulation"
Conclusion
End with a brief summary of your key points and a respectful request for consideration.
Example: "As a kratom user who has benefited immensely from access to this botanical, I support targeted regulation of concentrated 7-OH products while preserving access to traditional kratom. I urge the DEA to implement clear distinctions in any final rule to ensure that legitimate safety concerns are addressed without eliminating access to the natural plant material that millions of Americans use safely and effectively."
Example Comments
Here are three complete example comments representing different user perspectives:
Example 1: Chronic Pain Patient and Research Participant
"My name is Sarah M., and I am a 38-year-old chronic pain patient who has used kratom for four years. I was diagnosed with fibromyalgia in 2018, and prior to discovering kratom, I tried numerous medications including Lyrica, Cymbalta, and various opioid painkillers. Each came with severe side effects that made normal life impossible.
I now use kratom powder three times daily at doses of 3-4 grams. The kratom I use is plain leaf powder from GMP-certified vendors, containing natural alkaloid ratios including less than 2% 7-hydroxymitragynine. This is dramatically different from the concentrated 7-OH products that are the focus of the FDA's scheduling recommendation.
I participate in the Log & Taper It kratom research study, where I have logged over 800 doses in real-time over the past 18 months. I document not only the amount I take but also the effects I experience through standardized tags, including pain relief, energy levels, and any adverse effects. This research is creating the longitudinal data that policymakers need to make informed decisions about kratom.
I support the FDA's focus on concentrated and synthetic 7-OH products. These products are marketed as dramatically more potent than traditional kratom and may pose different risks. However, I urge the DEA to clearly distinguish between these concentrated products and the natural kratom leaf powder that I and millions of others use.
If the DEA schedules natural kratom alongside concentrated 7-OH products, I would lose access to the only pain management option that has allowed me to work, care for my two children, and maintain quality of life. I have no viable alternatives—I've tried them all, and the side effects made them unsustainable.
I respectfully request that any final rule:
- Define clear concentration thresholds for 7-OH scheduling with exemptions for natural plant material
- Focus enforcement on synthetic and highly concentrated products
- Allow continued access to traditional kratom powder and leaf
- Coordinate with state Kratom Consumer Protection Act frameworks
Thank you for considering my perspective and the experiences of the millions of Americans who use kratom safely and responsibly."
Example 2: Veteran Using Kratom for PTSD and Chronic Pain
"I am a United States Marine Corps veteran who served two tours in Iraq. I live with PTSD, chronic back pain from a service-connected injury, and the daily challenge of managing both conditions while trying to live a normal life.
The VA prescribed me a combination of oxycodone for pain and various psychiatric medications for PTSD symptoms. While these medications were somewhat effective, they made me feel disconnected from my family and unable to function normally. I gained weight, struggled with cognitive fog, and felt like a shell of my former self.
Three years ago, I discovered kratom through a fellow veteran. I was skeptical, but I tried plain kratom powder—not concentrated extracts or enhanced products, but simple ground leaf. The difference was immediate. I could manage my pain without the stupor of prescription opioids. My PTSD symptoms became manageable without feeling sedated all day.
I use 5-6 grams of kratom powder three times per day. I buy from vendors who participate in the American Kratom Association's GMP Standards Program and provide lab testing certificates. The kratom I use contains the natural alkaloid profile of the plant, including less than 2% 7-hydroxymitragynine.
I contribute to the Log & Taper It kratom research study because I believe evidence should drive policy. I've logged every dose for the past year, documenting effects, usage context, and any issues I experience. This research creates the real-world data that previous kratom studies have lacked.
I understand the FDA's concern about concentrated 7-OH products. I've seen these products in smoke shops, marketed as 'super kratom' or 'maximum strength extract,' and I avoid them specifically because they're not the traditional botanical that has helped me.
What I use is traditional kratom leaf—the same form that's been used in Southeast Asia for centuries. Scheduling this natural plant material alongside concentrated synthetic products would be like scheduling coffee beans because someone created a dangerous concentrated caffeine product.
If kratom is scheduled, I will likely return to VA medications that left me unable to function. The impact on my family, my work, and my recovery would be devastating.
I urge the DEA to:
- Distinguish clearly between concentrated 7-OH products and natural kratom leaf
- Preserve access to traditional kratom powder and leaf products
- Focus enforcement on the products that actually pose elevated risks
- Consider the voices of veterans like me who have found kratom to be the only viable option
I've served my country, and now I'm asking my country to let me manage my service-connected conditions with a botanical that works. Please don't schedule traditional kratom in your effort to regulate concentrated products."
Example 3: Former Opioid User Who Used Kratom to Quit
"My name is Michael R., and I am a recovering opioid addict. Five years ago, I was addicted to prescription painkillers that started with a legitimate back injury and spiraled into full dependency. I tried to quit multiple times, went through medical detox twice, and could never maintain sobriety for more than a few weeks.
Kratom gave me a way out. I'm not saying kratom isn't without its own challenges—I developed some dependence on it, and I still use it daily. But kratom allowed me to get off opioids without the devastating withdrawal, and it doesn't produce the same compulsive use pattern that prescription pills did.
I use plain kratom powder, 6-8 grams twice daily. I've been using this same routine for four years now. I'm employed, I've rebuilt my relationship with my family, and I haven't touched prescription opioids since I started using kratom.
I participate in the Log & Taper It research study because I want researchers and policymakers to understand how people like me use kratom. I log every dose, I document effects, and I've completed surveys about my history with opioids and my current usage patterns. This data shows that kratom can serve as harm reduction for people who would otherwise be using more dangerous substances.
The FDA's recommendation to schedule 7-hydroxymitragynine in concentrated forms makes sense to me. I've seen the 'ultra-concentrated' products, and they're not what helped me get sober. What helped me was simple kratom powder with natural alkaloid levels.
If the DEA schedules all kratom because of concerns about concentrated 7-OH products, people like me will be pushed back toward prescription opioids or worse. I've been where that road leads, and it nearly killed me.
I'm not asking the DEA to ignore safety concerns. I support regulation. I support age restrictions and quality standards and lab testing. What I'm asking is that the DEA distinguish between the concentrated products that pose unique risks and the traditional kratom that serves as a lifeline for people in recovery.
Please:
- Define clear boundaries between scheduled concentrated products and exempt natural kratom
- Recognize kratom's role in harm reduction and opioid substitution
- Consider the real-world impact on people using kratom to avoid more dangerous substances
- Implement regulation that addresses safety without eliminating access
I'm rebuilding my life with the help of kratom. Please don't take away the tool that made my recovery possible."
What to Avoid in Your Comment
While it's important to be passionate and personal, certain approaches can undermine your comment's effectiveness:
Don't attack regulators or use hostile language
Comments that insult agency staff, use profanity, or adopt a combative tone are less likely to receive serious consideration. Remain respectful even if you're frustrated.
Example of what NOT to write: "The DEA is corrupt and doesn't care about people's health. This is just another example of government tyranny trying to control what plants people can use."
Better approach: "I respectfully disagree with the characterization of kratom as having no medical value. My experience and participation in ongoing research demonstrate therapeutic applications that merit further study."
Don't make unsupported medical claims
Avoid claiming that kratom "cures" diseases or stating that it's proven to be medically effective for specific conditions. Stick to your personal experience and acknowledge where research is still needed.
Example of what NOT to write: "Kratom cures chronic pain, PTSD, and opioid addiction. The research proves it's completely safe with no risks."
Better approach: "In my experience, kratom has been effective for managing chronic pain. While more clinical research is needed, preliminary studies and user data from research initiatives like Log & Taper It suggest therapeutic potential worth investigating."
Don't deny all risks or claim kratom is perfectly safe
Acknowledging that kratom isn't risk-free actually strengthens your credibility. Support reasonable regulation while arguing against overly restrictive approaches.
Example of what NOT to write: "Kratom is 100% safe with zero risks and anyone saying otherwise is lying."
Better approach: "Like any substance, kratom isn't without risks. Some users develop dependence, and there are documented cases of adverse effects. However, the risk profile appears substantially lower than the prescription opioids many kratom users are trying to avoid. Quality regulation can address legitimate safety concerns without eliminating access."
Don't submit form letters or copy-paste comments
While advocacy organizations may provide templates, personalize your comment. Agencies give more weight to unique, personal testimony than to hundreds of identical form letters.
Use templates as guides, but tell your own story in your own words.
Don't wait until the last minute
Comments submitted early in the process often receive more careful attention. While you have the full comment period, don't wait until the deadline approaches. Technical issues, website problems, or personal emergencies could prevent last-minute submission.
How Research Participation Strengthens Your Comment
One of the most powerful elements you can include in your comment is your participation in kratom research. Here's why this matters and how to present it effectively:
It establishes your credibility
Mentioning that you're a research participant demonstrates that you're not just a casual user defending your habit—you're someone committed to building the evidence base that informs policy.
Example: "I participate in the Log & Taper It kratom research study, where I have logged 647 doses over 14 months. I document not only how much I take but also the effects I experience through standardized effect tags. This contribution to research demonstrates my commitment to evidence-based policy."
It counters the "no research" argument
One of the most common arguments used to support kratom bans is "there's no quality research on kratom." When you mention your research participation, you're directly refuting this claim.
Example: "Regulators often cite a lack of comprehensive kratom research. I'm actively helping to address this gap through my participation in the Log & Taper It study, which uses real-time longitudinal tracking to build a dataset of thousands of users across all 50 states. This research approach eliminates the recall bias that limits survey-based studies and captures how kratom use evolves over time."
It shows community responsibility
Research participation demonstrates that the kratom community is proactive about safety and evidence generation, not reactive and defensive.
Example: "Rather than simply defending kratom access, I'm contributing to the scientific record by participating in research. I've logged detailed information about my usage patterns, effects experienced, and product quality. This kind of community-driven data collection helps ensure that policy decisions are based on evidence rather than assumptions."
It provides specific examples of what research reveals
If you've learned something about your own usage through research participation, share it.
Example: "Through my research participation and use of the Log & Taper It app's effect tracking system, I've documented that my pain relief is most effective at doses of 3-4 grams, while doses above 6 grams provide no additional benefit and cause side effects like nausea. This kind of dose-response data, multiplied across thousands of users, provides the detailed information regulators need to understand kratom's safety profile."
How to mention your research participation:
Include it in your introduction: "I am a 45-year-old kratom user and participant in the Log & Taper It kratom research study."
Reference specific data you've contributed: "I've logged 800+ doses over 18 months, documenting effects through 100+ standardized tags."
Explain why this research approach matters: "This real-time longitudinal tracking eliminates recall bias and captures usage patterns as they naturally evolve."
Link it to policy needs: "This research provides exactly the kind of comprehensive, real-world data that regulators cite as missing from kratom policy discussions."
If you're not yet a research participant, consider joining the study before the comment period opens. If you're a free user, you can request a sponsor code through the sponsorship system, or support the research through a donation that funds research access for community members.
Following Up After Submission
After you submit your comment, you can track the docket on regulations.gov to see:
- How many total comments have been submitted (public engagement level matters)
- Other comments from kratom users, advocates, and stakeholders
- The agency's timeline for reviewing comments and issuing a response
Advocacy organizations like the American Kratom Association typically provide updates on comment submission numbers and may analyze trends in the comments received.
While you can't edit or delete your comment after submission, you can submit additional comments if you have new information or want to respond to points raised by other commenters.
The Power of Your Voice
The 2016 kratom scheduling reversal proved that public comments matter. The DEA specifically cited the volume and substance of public input when withdrawing its scheduling notice. Your comment contributes to that record.
You don't need to be a scientist, lawyer, or policy expert. You need to be honest, specific, and personal. Your lived experience with kratom is expertise that regulators don't have. Your participation in research like the Log & Taper It study demonstrates commitment to evidence-based policy.
When the public comment period opens for the 7-OH scheduling review, your voice could help ensure that any final rule distinguishes between concentrated products and traditional kratom, preserving access while addressing legitimate safety concerns.
The kratom community changed the DEA's mind once. With preparation, participation, and thoughtful engagement in the public comment process, we can do it again.
