Heather M. Entrekin, DVM; Decision and Order, 17266-17267 [2023-05804]

Download as PDF 17266 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2023 / Notices lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).4 Pursuant to the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, a ‘‘practitioner’’ means ‘‘a physician licensed to practice medicine in all its branches . . . or other person licensed, registered, or otherwise lawfully permitted by the United States or this State to distribute, dispense, conduct research with respect to, administer or use in teaching or chemical analysis, a controlled substance in the course of professional practice or research.’’ 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 570/102(kk) (2022). Further, the Illinois Controlled Substances Act requires that ‘‘[e]very person who manufactures, distributes, or dispenses any controlled substances . . . must obtain a registration issued by the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation in accordance with its rules.’’ Id. at 570/302(a).5 Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant currently lacks authority to handle controlled substances in Illinois as both his Illinois medical license and his Illinois controlled substance license are suspended. As already discussed, a practitioner must hold a valid controlled substance license to dispense a controlled substance in Illinois. Thus, because Registrant lacks state authority to handle controlled substances, Registrant is not eligible to maintain a 4 This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the CSA. First, Congress defined the term ‘‘practitioner’’ to mean ‘‘a physician . . . or other person 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.’’ 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Second, in setting the requirements for obtaining a practitioner’s registration, Congress directed that ‘‘[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners . . . if the applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.’’ 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1) (this section, formerly § 823(f), was redesignated as part of the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act, Public Law 117–215, 136 Stat. 2257 (2022)). Because Congress has clearly mandated that a practitioner possess state authority in order to be deemed a practitioner under the CSA, the DEA has held repeatedly that revocation of a practitioner’s registration is the appropriate sanction whenever he is no longer authorized to dispense controlled substances under the laws of the state in which he practices. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371 and 71372; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 27617. 5 The Illinois Controlled Substances Act also authorizes the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation to discipline a practitioner holding a controlled substance license, stating that ‘‘[a] registration under Section 303 to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance . . . may be denied, refused renewal, suspended, or revoked by the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.’’ Id. at 570/304(a). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Mar 21, 2023 Jkt 259001 DEA registration. Accordingly, the Agency will order that Registrant’s DEA registration be revoked. Order Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate of Registration No. FM7946481 issued to Shahid Masood, M.D. Further, pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I hereby deny any pending applications of Shahid Masood, M.D., to renew or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application of Shahid Masood, M.D., for additional registration in Illinois. This Order is effective April 21, 2023. Signing Authority This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on March 15, 2023, by Administrator Anne Milgram. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DEA. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DEA Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of DEA. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register. Heather Achbach, Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug Enforcement Administration. [FR Doc. 2023–05807 Filed 3–21–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–09–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. 23–8] Heather M. Entrekin, DVM; Decision and Order On August 9, 2022, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Heather M. Entrekin, DVM (Respondent). OSC, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of Respondent’s Certificate of Registration 1 because Respondent is ‘‘without authority to handle controlled substances in the State of Alabama, the 1 Registration No. FE4914164 at the registered address of 1360 Montgomery Hwy., Ste. 114, Vestavia Hills, AL 35216–2750. Id. at 1. PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 state in which [she is] registered with DEA.’’ Id. at 2. Respondent timely requested a hearing; thereafter, the Government filed and the Chief Administrative Law Judge (CALJ) granted a Motion for Summary Disposition recommending the revocation of Respondent’s registration. Order Granting the Government’s Motion for Summary Disposition and Recommended Rulings, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision of the Administrative Law Judge (Recommended Decision or RD), at 5–7. Respondent did not file exceptions to the RD. Having reviewed the entire record, the Agency adopts and hereby incorporates by reference the entirety of the CALJ’s rulings, findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended sanction and summarizes and expands upon portions thereof herein. Findings of Fact On May 19, 2022, the Alabama Board of Veterinary Examiners issued an Order that suspended Respondent’s Alabama controlled substance license. RD, at 4; see also Government’s Motion for Summary Disposition, Exhibit (GX) 2, Attachment A, at 1. As of November 22, 2022, Respondent’s Alabama controlled substance license was still suspended. RD, at 4; GX 2, Attachment B.2 Accordingly, the Agency finds that Respondent is not currently licensed to handle controlled substances in Alabama, the state in which she is registered with the DEA. Discussion Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized to suspend or revoke a registration issued under section 823 of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) ‘‘upon a finding that the registrant . . . has had his State license or registration suspended . . . 2 The Agency has no indication that the status of Respondent’s license (which is not publically available information) has changed. Prior to the issuance of the RD, Respondent acknowledged that her license was suspended. See Respondent’s Response, at 3–4. Following the issuance of the RD, Respondent did not file any Exceptions to indicate that her license had been restored, nor has the Agency to date received any correspondence from Respondent regarding any changes to the status of her license. Accordingly, the Agency finds that Respondent’s Alabama controlled substance license remains suspended as of the date of signature of this Order. Respondent may dispute the Agency’s finding by filing a motion for reconsideration of findings of fact within fifteen calendar days of the date of this Order with supporting documentation (showing that Respondent was able to dispense controlled substances on or before the date of this Order). Any such motion and response shall be filed and served by email to the other party and to the DEA Office of the Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration at dea.addo.attorneys@dea.gov. E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 2023 / Notices lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 [or] revoked . . . by competent State authority and is no longer authorized by State law to engage in the . . . dispensing of controlled substances.’’ With respect to a practitioner, the DEA has also long held that the possession of authority to dispense controlled substances under the laws of the state in which a practitioner engages in professional practice is a fundamental condition 3 for obtaining and maintaining a practitioner’s registration. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, M.D., 76 FR 71371 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App’x 826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).4 According to Alabama statute, ‘‘[e]very person who manufactures, distributes, or dispenses any controlled substance within [the] state or who proposes to engage in the manufacture, distribution, or dispensing of any controlled substance within [the] state 3 As such, the Agency finds Respondent’s arguments regarding the permissive nature of 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), see Respondent’s Response, at 3– 4, to be unavailing. RD, at 5; see also Bhanoo Sharma, M.D., 87 FR 41355, 41356 n.4 (2022). 4 This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the CSA. First, Congress defined the term ‘‘practitioner’’ to mean ‘‘a physician . . . veterinarian . . . or other person 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.’’ 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Second, in setting the requirements for obtaining a practitioner’s registration, Congress directed that ‘‘[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners . . . if the applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.’’ 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1) (this section, formerly section 823(f), was redesignated as part of the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act, Public Law 117–215, 136 Stat. 2257 (2022)). Because Congress has clearly mandated that a practitioner possess state authority in order to be deemed a practitioner under the CSA, the DEA has held repeatedly that revocation of a practitioner’s registration is the appropriate sanction whenever he is no longer authorized to dispense controlled substances under the laws of the state in which he practices. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 76 FR 71371– 72; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 27617. Moreover, because ‘‘the controlling question’’ in a proceeding brought under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3) is whether the holder of a practitioner’s registration ‘‘is currently authorized to handle controlled substances in the [S]tate,’’ Hooper, 76 FR at 71371 (quoting Anne Lazar Thorn, 62 FR 12847, 12848 (1997)), the Agency has also long held that revocation is warranted even where a practitioner is still challenging the underlying action. Bourne Pharmacy, 72 FR 18273, 18274 (2007); Wingfield Drugs, 52 FR 27070, 27071 (1987). Thus, it is of no consequence here that the final outcome of the underlying action against Respondent may still be pending. See Respondent’s Response, at 3–4. What is consequential is the Agency’s finding that Respondent is not currently authorized to dispense controlled substances in Alabama, the state in which she is registered with the DEA. Austin J. Kosier, M.D., 87 FR 4941, 4943 (2022). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Mar 21, 2023 Jkt 259001 must obtain annually a registration issued by the certifying boards in accordance with [their] rules.’’ Ala. Code section 20–2–51(a) (2022); see also Ala. Admin. Code r. 930–X–1.13(1) (2022) (‘‘[a]ll licensed veterinarians who handle controlled substances must register annually with the State Board and get a state controlled substance number from the Board’’). Further, ‘‘dispense’’ means ‘‘[t]o deliver a controlled substance to an ultimate user or research subject by or pursuant to the lawful order of a practitioner, including the prescribing, administering, packaging, labeling, or compounding necessary to prepare the substance for that delivery.’’ Ala. Code section 20–2– 2(7) (2022). Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Respondent currently lacks authority to dispense controlled substances in Alabama because her Alabama controlled substance license has been suspended. RD, at 5. As discussed above, an individual must hold an Alabama controlled substance license to dispense a controlled substance in Alabama. RD, at 5–6. Thus, because Respondent lacks authority to handle controlled substances in Alabama, Respondent is not eligible to maintain a DEA registration. See RD, at 6. Accordingly, the Agency will order that Respondent’s DEA registration be revoked. Order Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate of Registration No. FE4914164 issued to Heather M. Entrekin, DVM. Further, pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I hereby deny any pending applications of Heather M. Entrekin, DVM, to renew or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application of Heather M. Entrekin, DVM, for additional registration in Alabama. This Order is effective April 21, 2023. Signing Authority This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on March 15, 2023, by Administrator Anne Milgram. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DEA. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DEA Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of DEA. This administrative process in no PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17267 way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register. Heather Achbach, Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug Enforcement Administration. [FR Doc. 2023–05804 Filed 3–21–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–09–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. 23–2] Christina Collins, APRN; Decision and Order On September 28, 2022, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Christina Collins, APRN (Respondent). OSC, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the denial of Respondent’s renewal application 1 because Respondent is ‘‘without authority to handle controlled substances in the State of Tennessee, the state in which [she is] registered with DEA.’’ Id. at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)). Respondent requested a hearing; 2 thereafter the Government filed and the ALJ granted a Motion for Summary Disposition recommending the denial of Respondent’s renewal application for her registration. RD, at 7–8. Respondent did not file exceptions to the RD. Having reviewed the entire record, the Agency adopts and hereby incorporates by reference the entirety of the ALJ’s rulings, findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended sanction and summarizes and expands upon portions thereof herein. Findings of Fact On February 28, 2022, the Tennessee Board of Nursing issued a Final Order revoking Respondent’s Tennessee license to practice as an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN license). RD, at 6–7; Government’s Submission of Evidence Regarding Proof of Service and Motion for Summary Disposition, Exhibit (GX) D, at 1, 11, 1 Certificate of Registration No. MC1638696 at the registered address of 6523 Central Avenue Pike, Knoxville, Tennessee 37912. Id. at 1. 2 Respondent’s Request for Hearing is dated October 31, 2022, see Administrative Law Judge Exhibit (ALJX) 4, at 1, but was deemed filed on November 1, 2022. Further, although Respondent’s Request for Hearing was untimely, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) accepted the filing. Order Granting the Government’s Motion for Summary Disposition, and Recommended Rulings, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision of the Administrative Law Judge (Recommended Decision or RD), at 2–4. E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM 22MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17266-17267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05804]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. 23-8]


Heather M. Entrekin, DVM; Decision and Order

    On August 9, 2022, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or 
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Heather M. Entrekin, 
DVM (Respondent). OSC, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of 
Respondent's Certificate of Registration \1\ because Respondent is 
``without authority to handle controlled substances in the State of 
Alabama, the state in which [she is] registered with DEA.'' Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Registration No. FE4914164 at the registered address of 1360 
Montgomery Hwy., Ste. 114, Vestavia Hills, AL 35216-2750. Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Respondent timely requested a hearing; thereafter, the Government 
filed and the Chief Administrative Law Judge (CALJ) granted a Motion 
for Summary Disposition recommending the revocation of Respondent's 
registration. Order Granting the Government's Motion for Summary 
Disposition and Recommended Rulings, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of 
Law, and Decision of the Administrative Law Judge (Recommended Decision 
or RD), at 5-7. Respondent did not file exceptions to the RD. Having 
reviewed the entire record, the Agency adopts and hereby incorporates 
by reference the entirety of the CALJ's rulings, findings of fact, 
conclusions of law, and recommended sanction and summarizes and expands 
upon portions thereof herein.

Findings of Fact

    On May 19, 2022, the Alabama Board of Veterinary Examiners issued 
an Order that suspended Respondent's Alabama controlled substance 
license. RD, at 4; see also Government's Motion for Summary 
Disposition, Exhibit (GX) 2, Attachment A, at 1. As of November 22, 
2022, Respondent's Alabama controlled substance license was still 
suspended. RD, at 4; GX 2, Attachment B.\2\ Accordingly, the Agency 
finds that Respondent is not currently licensed to handle controlled 
substances in Alabama, the state in which she is registered with the 
DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Agency has no indication that the status of Respondent's 
license (which is not publically available information) has changed. 
Prior to the issuance of the RD, Respondent acknowledged that her 
license was suspended. See Respondent's Response, at 3-4. Following 
the issuance of the RD, Respondent did not file any Exceptions to 
indicate that her license had been restored, nor has the Agency to 
date received any correspondence from Respondent regarding any 
changes to the status of her license. Accordingly, the Agency finds 
that Respondent's Alabama controlled substance license remains 
suspended as of the date of signature of this Order. Respondent may 
dispute the Agency's finding by filing a motion for reconsideration 
of findings of fact within fifteen calendar days of the date of this 
Order with supporting documentation (showing that Respondent was 
able to dispense controlled substances on or before the date of this 
Order). Any such motion and response shall be filed and served by 
email to the other party and to the DEA Office of the Administrator, 
Drug Enforcement Administration at [email protected].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized 
to suspend or revoke a registration issued under section 823 of the 
Controlled Substances Act (CSA) ``upon a finding that the registrant . 
. . has had his State license or registration suspended . . .

[[Page 17267]]

[or] revoked . . . by competent State authority and is no longer 
authorized by State law to engage in the . . . dispensing of controlled 
substances.'' With respect to a practitioner, the DEA has also long 
held that the possession of authority to dispense controlled substances 
under the laws of the state in which a practitioner engages in 
professional practice is a fundamental condition \3\ for obtaining and 
maintaining a practitioner's registration. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 
M.D., 76 FR 71371 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App'x 826 (4th 
Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 
(1978).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As such, the Agency finds Respondent's arguments regarding 
the permissive nature of 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), see Respondent's 
Response, at 3-4, to be unavailing. RD, at 5; see also Bhanoo 
Sharma, M.D., 87 FR 41355, 41356 n.4 (2022).
    \4\ This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the 
CSA. First, Congress defined the term ``practitioner'' to mean ``a 
physician . . . veterinarian . . . or other person 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.'' 21 U.S.C. 802(21). Second, in setting the 
requirements for obtaining a practitioner's registration, Congress 
directed that ``[t]he Attorney General shall register practitioners 
. . . if the applicant is authorized to dispense . . . controlled 
substances under the laws of the State in which he practices.'' 21 
U.S.C. 823(g)(1) (this section, formerly section 823(f), was 
redesignated as part of the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol 
Research Expansion Act, Public Law 117-215, 136 Stat. 2257 (2022)). 
Because Congress has clearly mandated that a practitioner possess 
state authority in order to be deemed a practitioner under the CSA, 
the DEA has held repeatedly that revocation of a practitioner's 
registration is the appropriate sanction whenever he is no longer 
authorized to dispense controlled substances under the laws of the 
state in which he practices. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 76 FR 
71371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); 
Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, 
M.D., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 
27617. Moreover, because ``the controlling question'' in a 
proceeding brought under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3) is whether the holder 
of a practitioner's registration ``is currently authorized to handle 
controlled substances in the [S]tate,'' Hooper, 76 FR at 71371 
(quoting Anne Lazar Thorn, 62 FR 12847, 12848 (1997)), the Agency 
has also long held that revocation is warranted even where a 
practitioner is still challenging the underlying action. Bourne 
Pharmacy, 72 FR 18273, 18274 (2007); Wingfield Drugs, 52 FR 27070, 
27071 (1987). Thus, it is of no consequence here that the final 
outcome of the underlying action against Respondent may still be 
pending. See Respondent's Response, at 3-4. What is consequential is 
the Agency's finding that Respondent is not currently authorized to 
dispense controlled substances in Alabama, the state in which she is 
registered with the DEA. Austin J. Kosier, M.D., 87 FR 4941, 4943 
(2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Alabama statute, ``[e]very person who manufactures, 
distributes, or dispenses any controlled substance within [the] state 
or who proposes to engage in the manufacture, distribution, or 
dispensing of any controlled substance within [the] state must obtain 
annually a registration issued by the certifying boards in accordance 
with [their] rules.'' Ala. Code section 20-2-51(a) (2022); see also 
Ala. Admin. Code r. 930-X-1.13(1) (2022) (``[a]ll licensed 
veterinarians who handle controlled substances must register annually 
with the State Board and get a state controlled substance number from 
the Board''). Further, ``dispense'' means ``[t]o deliver a controlled 
substance to an ultimate user or research subject by or pursuant to the 
lawful order of a practitioner, including the prescribing, 
administering, packaging, labeling, or compounding necessary to prepare 
the substance for that delivery.'' Ala. Code section 20-2-2(7) (2022).
    Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Respondent 
currently lacks authority to dispense controlled substances in Alabama 
because her Alabama controlled substance license has been suspended. 
RD, at 5. As discussed above, an individual must hold an Alabama 
controlled substance license to dispense a controlled substance in 
Alabama. RD, at 5-6. Thus, because Respondent lacks authority to handle 
controlled substances in Alabama, Respondent is not eligible to 
maintain a DEA registration. See RD, at 6. Accordingly, the Agency will 
order that Respondent's DEA registration be revoked.

Order

    Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 
U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA Certificate of Registration No. 
FE4914164 issued to Heather M. Entrekin, DVM. Further, pursuant to 28 
CFR 0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(g)(1), I 
hereby deny any pending applications of Heather M. Entrekin, DVM, to 
renew or modify this registration, as well as any other pending 
application of Heather M. Entrekin, DVM, for additional registration in 
Alabama. This Order is effective April 21, 2023.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
March 15, 2023, by Administrator Anne Milgram. That document with the 
original signature and date is maintained by DEA. For administrative 
purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the 
Federal Register, the undersigned DEA Federal Register Liaison Officer 
has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic 
format for publication, as an official document of DEA. This 
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this 
document upon publication in the Federal Register.

Heather Achbach,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023-05804 Filed 3-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.