Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel, 75776-75777 [E8-29449]
Download as PDF
75776
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 240 / Friday, December 12, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
2005). Finally, where the Government
has made out its prima facie case, the
burden shifts to the Respondent to show
why its continued registration would be
consistent with the public interest. See,
e.g., Theodore Neujahr, 65 FR 5680,
5682 (2000); Service Pharmacy, Inc., 61
FR10791, 10795 (1996).
In this case, having considered all of
the factors, I conclude that the evidence
with respect to factors two and four
establishes a prima facie case that
Respondent’s continued registration is
‘‘inconsistent with the public interest.’’
21 U.S.C. 823(f). Accordingly,
Respondent’s registration will be
revoked and any pending application
for renewal of its registration will be
denied.
Factors Two and Four—Respondent’s
Experience in Dispensing Controlled
Substances and Its Record of
Compliance With Applicable
Controlled Substance Laws
As found above, the evidence in this
matter establishes that Respondent was
a supply source for the illicit drug
market in such highly abused
prescription drugs as oxycodone, a
schedule II controlled substance, and
alprazolam, a schedule IV controlled
substance. As the record shows, at least
three individuals including
Respondent’s owner unlawfully
distributed prescription controlled
substances which had been obtained by
the pharmacy. See 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1).
Even if it was the case that LeeRichards (the pharmacy technician) and
Friedberg (the pharmacist) had stolen
the drugs they were distributing, the
criminal acts of Stanley Dyen,
Respondent’s owner and pharmacist-incharge, in distributing hydrocodone and
alprazolam, provide ample support to
conclude that its continued registration
is ‘‘inconsistent with the public
interest.’’ See VI Pharmacy, Rushdi Z.
Salem, 69 FR 5584, 5585 (2004) (‘‘It is
well settled that a pharmacy operates
under the control of owners,
stockholders, pharmacists, * * * and if
any such person is convicted of a felony
offense related to controlled substances,
grounds exists to revoke the pharmacy’s
registration.’’); Charles J. Gartland,
R.Ph., d.b.a. Manoa Pharmacy, 48 FR
28760, 28761 (1983) (‘‘Pharmacies must
operate through the agency of natural
persons, owners or stockholders, or
other key employees. When such
persons misuse the pharmacy’s
registration by diverting controlled
substances obtained there under, and
when those individuals are convicted as
a result of that diversion, the
pharmacy’s registration becomes subject
to revocation under 21 U.S.C. 824, just
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:56 Dec 11, 2008
Jkt 217001
as if the pharmacy itself had been
convicted.’’).
Nor is this rule limited to those
instances in which a pharmacy’s owner
or key employee has been formally
convicted of a crime. As explained
above, under Federal law, a registration
is subject to revocation when a
registrant commits acts which render its
registration ‘‘inconsistent with the
public interest.’’ 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(4).
Where a pharmacy’s owner/key
employee commits criminal acts, the
Agency is not required to wait for the
judicial process to work its course
before revoking a registration. I therefore
conclude that Respondent’s continued
registration ‘‘is inconsistent with the
public interest,’’ 21 U.S.C. 823(f), and
that its registration should be revoked.
Order
Pursuant to the authority vested in me
by 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(4), as
well as 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I
hereby order that DEA Certificate of
Registration, AY1916103, issued to Your
Druggist Pharmacy, be, and it hereby is,
revoked. I further order that any
pending applications to renew or
modify the registration be, and they
hereby are, denied. This Order is
effective immediately.
Dated: December 2, 2008.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8–29407 Filed 12–11–08; 8:45 am]
to 5:30 p.m. on January 8th, and 9 a.m.
to 3:30 p.m. on January 9th, will be
closed.
The closed portions of meetings are
for the purpose of Panel review,
discussion, evaluation, and
recommendations on financial
assistance under the National
Foundation on the Arts and the
Humanities Act of 1965, as amended,
including information given in
confidence to the agency. In accordance
with the determination of the Chairman
of February 28, 2008, these sessions will
be closed to the public pursuant to
subsection (c)(6) of section 552b of Title
5, United States Code.
Any person may observe meetings, or
portions thereof, of advisory panels that
are open to the public, and if time
allows, may be permitted to participate
in the panel’s discussions at the
discretion of the panel chairman. If you
need special accommodations due to a
disability, please contact the Office of
AccessAbility, National Endowment for
the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20506, 202/682–
5532, TDY–TDD 202/682–5496, at least
seven (7) days prior to the meeting.
Further information with reference to
these meetings can be obtained from Ms.
Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of
Guidelines & Panel Operations, National
Endowment for the Arts, Washington,
DC 20506, or call 202/682–5691.
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE
ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES
Dated: December 9, 2008.
Kathy Plowitz-Worden,
Panel Coordinator, Panel Operations,
National Endowment for the Arts.
[FR Doc. E8–29431 Filed 12–11–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537–01–P
National Endowment for the Arts; Arts
Advisory Panel
Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
L. 92–463), as amended, notice is hereby
given that two meetings of the Arts
Advisory Panel to the National Council
on the Arts will be held at the Nancy
Hanks Center, 1100 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506 as
follows (ending times are approximate):
State & Regional/Arts Education
(State Arts Agency Partnership
Agreements/Arts Education review):
January 6–7, 2009 in Room 730. This
meeting, from 9 a.m. 10:15 a.m. and
from 12:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. on January
6th and from 9 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on
January 7th, will be open.
Folk & Traditional Arts/National
Heritage Fellowships (review of
nominations): January 6–9, 2009 in
Room 716. This meeting, from 9 a.m. to
6:30 p.m. on January 6th and 7th, 9 a.m.
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Licensing Support System Advisory
Review Panel
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of renewal of the Charter
of the Licensing Support Network
Advisory Review Panel (LSNARP).
SUMMARY: The Licensing Support
System Advisory Review Panel was
established by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission as a Federal
Advisory Committee in 1989. Its
purpose was to provide advice on the
fundamental issues of design and
development of an electronic
information management system to be
used to store and retrieve documents
relating to the licensing of a geologic
repository for the disposal of high-level
radioactive waste, and on the operation
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 240 / Friday, December 12, 2008 / Notices
and maintenance of the system. This
electronic information management
system was known as the Licensing
Support System (LSS). In November,
1998 the Commission approved
amendments to 10 CFR Part 2 that
renamed the Licensing Support System
Advisory Review Panel as the Licensing
Support Network Advisory Review
Panel. The Licensing Support Network
(LSN) became available for use in 2004
and it is anticipated that a hardware and
software refresh program will be
initiated in 2009–2010.
Membership on the Panel will
continue to be drawn from those
interests that will be affected by the use
of the LSN, including the Department of
Energy, the NRC, the State of Nevada,
the National Congress of American
Indians, affected units of local
governments in Nevada, the Nevada
Nuclear Waste Task Force, and a
coalition of nuclear industry groups.
Federal agencies with expertise and
experience in electronic information
management systems may also
participate on the Panel.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
has determined that renewal of the
charter for the LSNARP until December
5, 2010, is in the public interest in
connection with duties imposed on the
Commission by law. This action is being
taken in accordance with the Federal
Advisory Committee Act after
consultation with the Committee
Management Secretariat, General
Services Administration.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew L. Bates, Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555: Telephone 301–
415–1963.
Dated: December 8, 2008.
Andrew L. Bates,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–29449 Filed 12–11–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PRESIDIO TRUST
Presidio Trust Management Plan Main
Post Update Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
The Presidio Trust.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare a
Supplement to a Draft Environmental
Impact Statement.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c)
of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (Pub.
L. 91–190, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
in response to public comment, the
Presidio Trust (Trust) is notifying
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:56 Dec 11, 2008
Jkt 217001
interested parties that it will
supplement the June 2008 Draft
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (SEIS) for the Presidio Trust
Management Plan (PTMP) Main Post
Update. The supplement will identify
and discuss the environmental impacts
of a preferred alternative that combines
elements of alternatives previously
analyzed in the draft SEIS.
The Trust
is updating the planning concept for the
Main Post district of the Presidio of San
Francisco (Presidio) in order to take into
account several proposals, including the
Contemporary Art Museum at the
Presidio (CAMP), the Main Post Lodge
and the Presidio Theatre, that were not
fully contemplated in the 2002 PTMP
and its final environmental impact
statement. The updated planning
concept for the Main Post was evaluated
as the proposed action in the draft SEIS
that was circulated on June 13, 2008 (73
FR 33814).
Concurrent with the draft SEIS
analyses, the Trust is also providing for
the review of the proposals under other
federal environmental laws. Chief
among these is the consultation process
required by section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). This
process identifies the historic resources
that may be affected by an undertaking,
assesses the effects on historic resources
through a Finding of Effect (FOE), and
then explores ways to ‘‘avoid, minimize,
or mitigate’’ the effects identified in the
FOE. The draft FOE was circulated for
comment on August 8, 2008. The draft
SEIS and draft FOE are available at
https://www.Presidio.gov in the Major
Projects section.
Following the release of the draft SEIS
and the draft FOE, the Trust has been
working with the National Park Service,
the State Historic Preservation Officer,
and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation to develop approaches that
would avoid, minimize, or mitigate
effects from the various proposals on the
National Historic Landmark District.
These approaches include ways to
reduce building size, scale, and mass;
ways to orient the buildings to the site;
and ways to articulate the buildings
with architectural features. The Trust
shared the results of this work with the
consulting parties in the NHPA
consultation and the proponents’
respective design teams, and also held
a public workshop on November 19,
2008 to communicate these conforming
strategies to interested individuals. The
information, presented as a series of
matrices, is available for public review
on the Trust Web site at https://
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75777
library.presidio.gov/archive/documents/
StandardsEvaluationMatrix.pdf.
Additionally, the Trust conducted a
series of three workshops with the
public on September 25, September 28
and October 2, 2008 that focused on the
development of a preferred alternative.
Through this public process, the Trust
has identified a preferred alternative
that combines elements of the
previously analyzed alternatives, and
which will be the subject of the
supplement. The Trust has elected to
address the preferred alternative in a
supplement to the draft SEIS to best
integrate and satisfy its NEPA and
NHPA requirements. Additional
information on the preferred alternative
is available at https://www.Presidio.gov
(click on Presidio Trust Identifies a
Preferred Alternative). Interested parties
wishing to provide comments on the
previously analyzed alternatives or the
merits of the draft SEIS may continue to
do so, or wait until the supplement is
made available.
The Trust will file the supplement as
a draft and will circulate it at the same
time that a revised draft FOE will be
circulated through the parallel NHPA
section 106 consultation process. The
availability of the supplement (expected
to occur in early 2009) for public and
agency review and comment will be
announced through an EPA-published
notice in the Federal Register, in the
Trust’s regular electronic newsletter
(Presidio E-news), on the Trust web site,
as well as direct mailing to the project
mailing list and other appropriate
means. Both the draft supplement and
the revised draft FOE will be considered
in a final SEIS before the Trust Board of
Directors takes any action (no earlier
than 30 days after release of the final
SEIS).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John
Pelka, 415.561.5300.
Dated: December 8, 2008.
Karen A. Cook,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E8–29447 Filed 12–11–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–4R–P
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 240 (Friday, December 12, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75776-75777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-29449]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of renewal of the Charter of the Licensing Support
Network Advisory Review Panel (LSNARP).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel was
established by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission as a Federal
Advisory Committee in 1989. Its purpose was to provide advice on the
fundamental issues of design and development of an electronic
information management system to be used to store and retrieve
documents relating to the licensing of a geologic repository for the
disposal of high-level radioactive waste, and on the operation
[[Page 75777]]
and maintenance of the system. This electronic information management
system was known as the Licensing Support System (LSS). In November,
1998 the Commission approved amendments to 10 CFR Part 2 that renamed
the Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel as the Licensing
Support Network Advisory Review Panel. The Licensing Support Network
(LSN) became available for use in 2004 and it is anticipated that a
hardware and software refresh program will be initiated in 2009-2010.
Membership on the Panel will continue to be drawn from those
interests that will be affected by the use of the LSN, including the
Department of Energy, the NRC, the State of Nevada, the National
Congress of American Indians, affected units of local governments in
Nevada, the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force, and a coalition of nuclear
industry groups. Federal agencies with expertise and experience in
electronic information management systems may also participate on the
Panel.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has determined that renewal of
the charter for the LSNARP until December 5, 2010, is in the public
interest in connection with duties imposed on the Commission by law.
This action is being taken in accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act after consultation with the Committee Management
Secretariat, General Services Administration.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew L. Bates, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555:
Telephone 301-415-1963.
Dated: December 8, 2008.
Andrew L. Bates,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-29449 Filed 12-11-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P