Trinity Pharmacy I; Order Terminating Registration, 7220 [2018-03297]
Download as PDF
7220
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2018 / Notices
New Hampshire, the State in which he
is registered with the Agency and,
therefore, he is not entitled to maintain
his DEA registration. Hooper, 76 FR at
71,371–72; Blanton, 43 FR at 27,617.
Accordingly, I will order that
Respondent’s registration be revoked
and that any pending application for the
renewal or modification of his
registration be denied. 21 U.S.C.
824(a)(3), id. § 823(f).
Order
Pursuant to the authority vested in me
by 21 U.S.C. 824(a), as well as 28 CFR
0.100(b), I order that DEA Certificate of
Registration FV0660565 issued to Robert
C. Vidaver, M.D., be, and it hereby is,
revoked. Pursuant to the authority
vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f), as well
as 28 CFR 0.100(b), I further order that
any pending application of Robert C.
Vidaver, M.D., to renew or modify this
registration, as well as any other
pending application by him for
registration in the State of New
Hampshire, be, and it hereby is, denied.
This order is effective March 22, 2018.
Dated: February 6, 2018.
Robert W. Patterson,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018–03303 Filed 2–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 15–27]
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Trinity Pharmacy I; Order Terminating
Registration
On July 10, 2015, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Trinity Pharmacy I
(hereinafter ‘‘Trinity I’’ or Respondent),
which proposed the revocation of its
DEA Certificate of Registration
BT9848170, pursuant to which it is
authorized to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V as
a retail pharmacy, at the registered
location of 11130 Seminole Boulevard,
Seminole, Florida. Administrative Law
Judge Exhibit (ALJ Ex.) 1a, at 1. As
grounds for the proposed action, the
Show Cause Order alleged that
Respondent’s ‘‘continued registration is
inconsistent with the public interest.’’
Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and
824(a)(4)). The Show Cause Order
notified Respondent of its right to
request a hearing on the allegations or
to submit a written statement in lieu of
a hearing, the procedure for electing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Feb 16, 2018
Jkt 244001
either option, and the consequence for
failing to elect either option. Id. at 15.
In a letter from its counsel dated
August 12, 2015, Trinity I requested a
hearing on the allegations. ALJ Ex. 2a.
The matter was placed on the docket of
the Office of Administrative Law Judges
and assigned to Chief Administrative
Law Judge John J. Mulrooney, II
(hereinafter, CALJ), who conducted a
hearing on the allegations on January 4–
8, 2016, in Arlington, Virginia, and on
January 11–12, 2016, in Tampa, Florida.
On May 12, 2016, the CALJ issued and
served his Recommended Decision,
which included the CALJ’s
recommendation that I revoke
Respondent’s registration and deny any
pending applications for renewal.
Recommended Decision (R.D.), at 66.1
On June 2, 2016, the Government and
Respondent each filed Exceptions to the
CALJ’s Recommended Decision.
Thereafter, the record was forwarded to
me for final agency action.
On March 22, 2017, during the course
of reviewing the record, my office
received a ‘‘Notice of Trinity Pharmacy
I Change of Business Status’’
(hereinafter, ‘‘Notice’’) from the
Government. In its Notice, the
Government ‘‘informs the Acting
Administrator of the change of business
status for’’ Trinity I. Notice, at 1.
Specifically, the Government states that,
on March 17, 2017, counsel for Trinity
I sent an email to the Group Supervisor
of the Agency’s Tampa, Florida District
Office, which in turn attached a copy of
a February 27, 2017 letter to the DEA’s
Registration Unit stating that Trinity I
‘‘desires to discontinue business
activities’’ and enclosed ‘‘the original
DEA Certificate of Registration for
Cancellation.’’ Feb. 27, 2017 Letter to
DEA Registration Unit from Dale R.
Sisco, Counsel for Trinity I, attached as
Exhibit B to Notice, at 1. The
Government attached to its Notice a
copy of the email, the letter, and a copy
of Trinity I’s ‘‘original DEA Certificate of
Registration’’ sent to the Agency. Notice
at 1; Exhibits A–B to Notice. It is
undisputed that Trinity I surrendered its
‘‘original DEA Certificate of
Registration’’ to the Agency.
Based on these facts, I find that
Respondent has surrendered its DEA
registration certificate. Pursuant to 21
CFR 1301.52(a), ‘‘the registration of any
1 Trinity Pharmacy II (‘‘Trinity II’’), located in
Clearwater, Florida, was served with a separate July
10, 2015 Order to Show Cause by the Government.
ALJ Ex. 1b. Although the CALJ eventually ordered
the consolidation of the evidentiary hearings for
Trinity I and Trinity II, see ALJ Ex. 10 at 2, the CALJ
wrote separate recommendations regarding each
Respondent, and I therefore will issue a separate
Order regarding the disposition of the Show Cause
Order directed at Trinity II.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
person . . . shall terminate, without any
further action by the Administration, if
and when such person . . . surrenders
a registration.’’ As a result, I find that
Respondent’s registration terminated
upon its surrender to the Agency, and
accordingly, that the Show Cause
proceeding is now moot.2
Pursuant to the authority vested in me
under 5 U.S.C. 554(e) and 28 CFR
0.100(b), I declare that DEA Certificate
of Registration BT9848170, issued to
Trinity I, terminated upon its surrender
to the Agency. Pursuant to the authority
vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and
824(a), as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b), I
further order that the Order to Show
Cause issued to Trinity I be, and it
hereby is, dismissed. This Order is
effective immediately.
Dated: February 6, 2018.
Robert W. Patterson,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018–03297 Filed 2–16–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
2 In its Notice, the Government stated that it
forwarded the February 27, 2017 correspondence
from Trinity I’s counsel for my consideration
because it is ‘‘unsure of how Trinity ‘disposed of’
the ‘controlled substances in the possession of the
pharmacy,’ when it disposed of them, and if
applicable, to whom the controlled substances were
provided.’’ Notice at 2 (quoting Ex. B to Notice, at
1). This uncertainty, in turn, is based solely on the
Government’s observation that Trinity I’s counsel
cited to federal regulations in his letter that ‘‘do[ ]
not exist.’’ Id. Specifically, Trinity I’s counsel stated
that Trinity I ‘‘desires to discontinue business
activities.’’ Ex. B to Notice, at 1. As a result, he
enclosed Trinity I’s ‘‘original DEA Certificate of
Registration’’ ‘‘as required by 21 CFR Section
1307.14’’ and stated that Trinity I ‘‘does not possess
any unexecuted Order forms,’’ and ‘‘[a]ll controlled
substances in the possession of the pharmacy have
been disposed of in accordance with 21 CFR
Section 1307.21.’’ Id.
The Government observed, correctly, that ‘‘21
CFR Section 1307.14’’ and ‘‘21 CFR Section
1307.21’’ ‘‘do[ ] not exist,’’ and that the federal
regulation setting forth the procedures a DEA
registrant must follow when it desires to
discontinue business activities altogether is 21 CFR
1301.52(c). Notice, at 2. However, the Government
failed to note that the provision cited by Trinity I’s
counsel related to the disposal of controlled
substances (21 CFR 1307.21) did exist until it was
re-codified and amended on September 9, 2014 to
what is now 21 CFR 1301.52(c) and part 1317 of
Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations. See
generally Disposal of Controlled Substances Final
Rule, 79 FR 53520 (Sept. 9, 2014). Most
importantly, the Government offered no factual
basis for why it is ‘‘unsure’’ of how Trinity I
disposed of its controlled substances when Trinity
I discontinued its business activities. Nevertheless,
if the Government has a factual basis to believe that
Trinity I violated the Controlled Substances Act
when it disposed of its controlled substances as a
result of its discontinued business activities, then
I direct the Government to investigate such
violations immediately.
E:\FR\FM\20FEN1.SGM
20FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 7220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03297]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
[Docket No. 15-27]
Trinity Pharmacy I; Order Terminating Registration
On July 10, 2015, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Trinity Pharmacy I (hereinafter ``Trinity I'' or
Respondent), which proposed the revocation of its DEA Certificate of
Registration BT9848170, pursuant to which it is authorized to dispense
controlled substances in schedules II through V as a retail pharmacy,
at the registered location of 11130 Seminole Boulevard, Seminole,
Florida. Administrative Law Judge Exhibit (ALJ Ex.) 1a, at 1. As
grounds for the proposed action, the Show Cause Order alleged that
Respondent's ``continued registration is inconsistent with the public
interest.'' Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(4)). The Show Cause
Order notified Respondent of its right to request a hearing on the
allegations or to submit a written statement in lieu of a hearing, the
procedure for electing either option, and the consequence for failing
to elect either option. Id. at 15.
In a letter from its counsel dated August 12, 2015, Trinity I
requested a hearing on the allegations. ALJ Ex. 2a. The matter was
placed on the docket of the Office of Administrative Law Judges and
assigned to Chief Administrative Law Judge John J. Mulrooney, II
(hereinafter, CALJ), who conducted a hearing on the allegations on
January 4-8, 2016, in Arlington, Virginia, and on January 11-12, 2016,
in Tampa, Florida. On May 12, 2016, the CALJ issued and served his
Recommended Decision, which included the CALJ's recommendation that I
revoke Respondent's registration and deny any pending applications for
renewal. Recommended Decision (R.D.), at 66.\1\ On June 2, 2016, the
Government and Respondent each filed Exceptions to the CALJ's
Recommended Decision. Thereafter, the record was forwarded to me for
final agency action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Trinity Pharmacy II (``Trinity II''), located in Clearwater,
Florida, was served with a separate July 10, 2015 Order to Show
Cause by the Government. ALJ Ex. 1b. Although the CALJ eventually
ordered the consolidation of the evidentiary hearings for Trinity I
and Trinity II, see ALJ Ex. 10 at 2, the CALJ wrote separate
recommendations regarding each Respondent, and I therefore will
issue a separate Order regarding the disposition of the Show Cause
Order directed at Trinity II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 22, 2017, during the course of reviewing the record, my
office received a ``Notice of Trinity Pharmacy I Change of Business
Status'' (hereinafter, ``Notice'') from the Government. In its Notice,
the Government ``informs the Acting Administrator of the change of
business status for'' Trinity I. Notice, at 1. Specifically, the
Government states that, on March 17, 2017, counsel for Trinity I sent
an email to the Group Supervisor of the Agency's Tampa, Florida
District Office, which in turn attached a copy of a February 27, 2017
letter to the DEA's Registration Unit stating that Trinity I ``desires
to discontinue business activities'' and enclosed ``the original DEA
Certificate of Registration for Cancellation.'' Feb. 27, 2017 Letter to
DEA Registration Unit from Dale R. Sisco, Counsel for Trinity I,
attached as Exhibit B to Notice, at 1. The Government attached to its
Notice a copy of the email, the letter, and a copy of Trinity I's
``original DEA Certificate of Registration'' sent to the Agency. Notice
at 1; Exhibits A-B to Notice. It is undisputed that Trinity I
surrendered its ``original DEA Certificate of Registration'' to the
Agency.
Based on these facts, I find that Respondent has surrendered its
DEA registration certificate. Pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.52(a), ``the
registration of any person . . . shall terminate, without any further
action by the Administration, if and when such person . . . surrenders
a registration.'' As a result, I find that Respondent's registration
terminated upon its surrender to the Agency, and accordingly, that the
Show Cause proceeding is now moot.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In its Notice, the Government stated that it forwarded the
February 27, 2017 correspondence from Trinity I's counsel for my
consideration because it is ``unsure of how Trinity `disposed of'
the `controlled substances in the possession of the pharmacy,' when
it disposed of them, and if applicable, to whom the controlled
substances were provided.'' Notice at 2 (quoting Ex. B to Notice, at
1). This uncertainty, in turn, is based solely on the Government's
observation that Trinity I's counsel cited to federal regulations in
his letter that ``do[ ] not exist.'' Id. Specifically, Trinity I's
counsel stated that Trinity I ``desires to discontinue business
activities.'' Ex. B to Notice, at 1. As a result, he enclosed
Trinity I's ``original DEA Certificate of Registration'' ``as
required by 21 CFR Section 1307.14'' and stated that Trinity I
``does not possess any unexecuted Order forms,'' and ``[a]ll
controlled substances in the possession of the pharmacy have been
disposed of in accordance with 21 CFR Section 1307.21.'' Id.
The Government observed, correctly, that ``21 CFR Section
1307.14'' and ``21 CFR Section 1307.21'' ``do[ ] not exist,'' and
that the federal regulation setting forth the procedures a DEA
registrant must follow when it desires to discontinue business
activities altogether is 21 CFR 1301.52(c). Notice, at 2. However,
the Government failed to note that the provision cited by Trinity
I's counsel related to the disposal of controlled substances (21 CFR
1307.21) did exist until it was re-codified and amended on September
9, 2014 to what is now 21 CFR 1301.52(c) and part 1317 of Title 21
of the Code of Federal Regulations. See generally Disposal of
Controlled Substances Final Rule, 79 FR 53520 (Sept. 9, 2014). Most
importantly, the Government offered no factual basis for why it is
``unsure'' of how Trinity I disposed of its controlled substances
when Trinity I discontinued its business activities. Nevertheless,
if the Government has a factual basis to believe that Trinity I
violated the Controlled Substances Act when it disposed of its
controlled substances as a result of its discontinued business
activities, then I direct the Government to investigate such
violations immediately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the authority vested in me under 5 U.S.C. 554(e) and 28
CFR 0.100(b), I declare that DEA Certificate of Registration BT9848170,
issued to Trinity I, terminated upon its surrender to the Agency.
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a),
as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b), I further order that the Order to Show
Cause issued to Trinity I be, and it hereby is, dismissed. This Order
is effective immediately.
Dated: February 6, 2018.
Robert W. Patterson,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-03297 Filed 2-16-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P