Public Availability of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory, 7183-7184 [2012-3185]

Download as PDF srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Notices term is used in 21 U.S.C. § 823(f) (2006 & Supp. III 2010).1 OSC at 1. On October 26, 2011, the Respondent, through counsel, timely filed a request for hearing coupled with a request for a continuance. An order issued that day which denied the Respondent’s continuance request and set a briefing schedule on the issue of whether he possessed state authority to possess controlled substances. The parties timely complied. On October 28, 2011, the Government filed a document styled ‘‘Government’s Motion for Summary Disposition’’ (Motion for Summary Disposition) and on November 4, 2011, the Respondent filed his reply (Respondent’s Reply). The Government’s Motion for Summary Disposition attached a copy of a February 3, 2010 Order of Immediate Suspension of Controlled Substance Registration (Suspension Order) issued by the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection, as well as an August 13, 2011 Interim Consent Order, executed by the Respondent and an official of the Connecticut Department of Health, which memorialized the former’s suspension and surrender of his state license to practice medicine. Both parties agree that the Respondent is currently without authorization to practice medicine and handle controlled substances in Connecticut, the jurisdiction where he holds the DEA COR that is the subject of this litigation. Although the Respondent does not contest the current status of his state license and lack of authorization to handle controlled substances, in his Reply, he has stresses his intention to contest these issues before the Connecticut authorities in the future. Reply at 2. The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) requires that a practitioner must be currently authorized to handle controlled substances in ‘‘the jurisdiction in which he practices’’ in order to maintain a DEA registration. See 21 U.S.C. § 802(21) (‘‘[t]he term ‘practitioner’ means a physician * * * licensed, registered, or otherwise permitted, by * * * the jurisdiction in which he practices * * * to distribute, dispense, [or] administer * * * a controlled substance in the course of professional practice’’); see also id. § 823(f) (‘‘The Attorney General shall register practitioners * * * if the applicant is authorized to dispense * * * controlled substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.’’). Therefore, because ‘‘possessing authority under state law to handle controlled substances is an essential condition for holding a DEA registration,’’ this Agency has consistently held that ‘‘the CSA requires the revocation of a registration issued to a practitioner who lacks [such authority].’’ Roy Chi Lung, 74 FR 20346, 20347 (2009); Scott Sandarg, D.M.D., 74 FR 17528, 174529 (2009); John B. Freitas, D.O., 74 FR 17524, 17525 (2009); Roger A. 1 Interestingly, lack of state authority is the only ground for which the Government’s charging document has supplied a factual basis. Beyond the issue of state authority, no factual basis has been included that would provide the Respondent with notice as to why his continued registration might be inconsistent with the public interest. VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:29 Feb 09, 2012 Jkt 226001 Rodriguez, M.D., 70 FR 33206, 33207 (2005); Stephen J. Graham, M.D., 69 FR 11661 (2004); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104 (1993); Abraham A. Chaplan, M.D., 57 FR 55280 (1992); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919 (1988); see also Harrell E. Robinson, 74 FR 61370, 61375 (2009). In order to revoke a registrant’s DEA registration, the DEA has the burden of proving that the requirements for revocation are satisfied. 21 C.F.R. § 1301.44(e). Once DEA has made its prima facie case for revocation of the registrant’s DEA COR, the burden of production then shifts to the Respondent to show that, given the totality of the facts and circumstances in the record, revoking the registrant’s registration would not be appropriate. Morall v. DEA, 412 F.3d 165, 174 (DC Cir. 2005); Humphreys v. DEA, 96 F.3d 658, 661 (3d Cir. 1996); Shatz v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 873 F.2d 1089, 1091 (8th Cir. 1989); Thomas E. Johnston, 45 FR 72311 (1980). Regarding the Government’s motion, summary disposition of an administrative case is warranted where, as here, ‘‘there is no factual dispute of substance.’’ See Veg-Mix, Inc., 832 F.2d 601, 607 (DC Cir. 1987) (‘‘an agency may ordinarily dispense with a hearing when no genuine dispute exists’’). A summary disposition would likewise be warranted even if the period of suspension were temporary, or if there were (as he avers) the potential that Respondent’s state controlled substances privileges could be reinstated, because ‘‘revocation is also appropriate when a state license has been suspended, but with the possibility of future reinstatement,’’ Rodriguez, 70 FR at 33207 (citations omitted), and even where there is a judicial challenge to the state medical board action actively pending in the state courts. Michael G. Dolin, M.D., 65 FR 5661, 5662 (2000). It is well-settled that where no genuine question of fact is involved, or when the material facts are agreed upon, a plenary, adversarial administrative proceeding is not required, see Jesus R. Juarez, M.D., 62 FR 14945 (1997); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104 (1993), under the rationale that Congress does not intend for administrative agencies to perform meaningless tasks. See Philip E. Kirk, M.D., 48 FR 32887 (1983), aff’d sub nom. Kirk v. Mullen, 749 F.2d 297 (6th Cir. 1984); see also Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. EPA, 35 F.3d 600, 605 (1st Cir. 1994); NLRB v. Int’l Assoc. of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Ironworkers, AFL– CIO, 549 F.2d 634 (9th Cir. 1977); United States v. Consol. Mines & Smelting Co., 455 F.2d 432, 453 (9th Cir. 1971). At this juncture, no genuine dispute exists over the established material fact that Respondent currently lacks state authority to handle controlled substances. Because the Respondent lacks such state authority, both the plain language of applicable federal statutory provisions and Agency interpretive precedent dictate that the Respondent is not entitled to maintain his DEA registration. Simply put, there is no contested factual matter adducible at a hearing that can provide me with authority to continue his entitlement to a COR under the circumstances. I therefore conclude that further delay in ruling on the Government’s PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7183 motion for summary disposition is not warranted. See Gregory F. Saric, M.D., 76 FR 16821 (2011) (stay denied in the face of Respondent’s petition based on pending state administrative action wherein he was seeking reinstatement of state privileges). Accordingly, I hereby GRANT the Government’s Motion for Summary Disposition; DENY the Government’s Motion for Stay of Proceedings as moot; and further RECOMMEND that the Respondent’s DEA registration be REVOKED forthwith and any pending applications for renewal be DENIED. Dated: November 4, 2011. John J. Mulrooney, II, Chief Administrative Law Judge. [FR Doc. 2012–3057 Filed 2–9–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–09–P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION Public Availability of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory National Aeronautics and Space Administration. AGENCY: Notice of Public Availability of Analysis of the FY 2010 Service Contract Inventories and the FY 2011 Service Contract Inventories. ACTION: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–117), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of its analysis of FY 2010 Service Contract inventory and the FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory. This inventory provides information on service contract actions over $25,000 that were made in FY 2011. The information is organized by function to show how contracted resources are distributed throughout the agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance issued on December 19, 2011 by the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). NASA has posted its analysis of the FY 2010 inventory, the FY 2011 inventory and a summary of the FY 2011 inventory on the NASA Office of Procurement homepage at the following link: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/ procurement/scinventory/. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\10FEN1.SGM 10FEN1 7184 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 2012 / Notices following link: https://www.archives.gov/ contracts/. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Singman, Deputy Director Acquisitions Division, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740–6001. Telephone: 301–837–0712. Email: Robert.singman@nara.gov. Point of contact for this initiative is Sandra Morris (202) 358–0532, Sandra.Morris@nasa.gov. William McNally, Assistant Administrator for Procurement. [FR Doc. 2012–3185 Filed 2–9–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510–01–P NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Dated: February 3, 2012. Charles K. Piercy, Executive Business Support Services. Public Availability of the National Archives and Records Administration FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory [FR Doc. 2012–3078 Filed 2–9–12; 8:45 am] National Archives and Records Administration. ACTION: Notice of public availability of FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AGENCY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–117), the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of its FY 2011 Service Contract inventory. This inventory provides information on service contract actions over $25,000 that were made in FY 2011. The information is organized by function to show how contracted resources are distributed throughout the agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance issued on November 5, 2010 by the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). OFPP’s guidance is available at https:// www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ omb/procurement/memo/servicecontract-inventories-guidance11052010.pdf. NARA has posted its inventory and a summary of the inventory on the NARA homepage at the SUMMARY: BILLING CODE 7515–01–P [Docket No. 50–247] Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC; Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2; Exemption 1.0 Background Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee) is the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR– 026, which authorizes operation of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 (IP2). The license provides, among other things, that the facility is subject to all rules, regulations, and orders of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) now or hereafter in effect. IP2 is a pressurized-water reactor located approximately 24 miles north of the New York City boundary line on the east bank of the Hudson River in Westchester County, New York. 2.0 Request/Action Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Section 50.48(b), requires that nuclear power plants that were licensed to operate before January 1, 1979, satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, ‘‘Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,’’ Section III.G, ‘‘Fire protection of safe shutdown capability.’’ The circuit separation and protection requirements being addressed in this request for exemption are specified in Section III.G.2. Since IP2 was licensed to operate before January 1, 1979, IP2 is required to meet Section lll.G.2 of Appendix R to 10 CFR part 50. The underlying purpose of Section III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR part 50 is to establish reasonable assurance that safe shutdown (SSD) of the reactor can be achieved and maintained in the event of a postulated fire in any plant area. Circuits which could cause maloperation or prevent operation of redundant trains of equipment required to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions as a result of fire in a single fire area must be protected in accordance with lll.G.2. If conformance with the technical requirements of III.G.2 cannot be assured in a specific fire area, an alternative or dedicated shutdown capability must be provided in accordance with Section III.G.3, or an exemption obtained in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, ‘‘Specific exemptions.’’ By letter dated March 6, 2009, Entergy requested an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12. Specifically, Entergy requested an exemption to allow the use of Operator Manual Actions (OMAs) in lieu of meeting certain technical requirements of III.G.2 in Fire Areas C, F, H, J, K, P, and YD of IP2. The table below provides the dates and topics of the submittals related to this request. ADAMS Accession Author Date Description Exemption Request from Appendix R. Revised Exemption Request. Entergy ........................ March 6, 2009 ............. Original Submittal .............................................. ML090770151. Entergy ........................ October 1, 2009 ........... NRC ............................. January 20, 2010 ......... Entergy ........................ NRC ............................. May 4, 2010 ................. August 11, 2010 .......... RAI Response #2 ......... RAI #3 .......................... RAI Response #3 ......... Entergy ........................ NRC ............................. Entergy ........................ September 29, 2010 .... December 16, 2010 ..... January 19, 2011 ......... Letter to revise previously submitted information. Entergy ........................ February 10, 2011 ....... Revision to March 2009 submittal, incorporated changes to Attachment 2, Technical Basis in Support of Exemption Request. Request for information on the overall defensein-depth for each fire zone.. Response to the staff’s January 20, 2010, RAI. RAI on reactor coolant system makeup, separation distances, etc. Response to the staff’s August 11, 2010, RAI .. RAI on reactor coolant system makeup ............ Responses to the staff’s December 16, 2010, RAI. Letter updating tables contained in previous submittals. ML092810231 Request for Additional Information (RAI) #1. RAI Response #1 ......... RAI #2 .......................... srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Subject VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:29 Feb 09, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10FEN1.SGM 10FEN1 ML100150128 ML101320230 ML102180331 ML102930237 ML103500204 ML110310013 ML110540321

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7183-7184]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3185]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION


Public Availability of the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Public Availability of Analysis of the FY 2010 
Service Contract Inventories and the FY 2011 Service Contract 
Inventories.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117), National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is publishing this notice 
to advise the public of the availability of its analysis of FY 2010 
Service Contract inventory and the FY 2011 Service Contract Inventory. 
This inventory provides information on service contract actions over 
$25,000 that were made in FY 2011. The information is organized by 
function to show how contracted resources are distributed throughout 
the agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance with 
guidance issued on December 19, 2011 by the Office of Management and 
Budget's Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). NASA has posted 
its analysis of the FY 2010 inventory, the FY 2011 inventory and a 
summary of the FY 2011 inventory on the NASA Office of Procurement 
homepage at the following link: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/scinventory/.

[[Page 7184]]

    Point of contact for this initiative is Sandra Morris (202) 358-
0532, Sandra.Morris@nasa.gov.

William McNally,
Assistant Administrator for Procurement.
[FR Doc. 2012-3185 Filed 2-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.