[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 202 (Thursday, October 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52943-52944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-26181]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


William Peterson, M.D.; Revocation of Registration

    On October 31, 2000, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an 
Order to show Cause (OTSC) by certified mail to William Peterson, M.D., 
(Respondent) notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to why 
the DEA should not revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration 
AP1632810, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), and deny any pending 
applications for renewal of this registration, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 
824(a)(4) and 823(f), for the reasons that Respondent's license to 
practice medicine in the jurisdiction in which Respondent practices, 
North Carolina, was suspended by the North Carolina Medical Board 
(Board). The Order to Show Cause further alleged that the Board made a 
finding that, on numerous occasions, the Respondent prescribed 
controlled substances to individuals for no legitimate medical reason.
    By letter filed November 16, 2000, Respondent, pro se, requested a 
hearing in this matter.
    On November 22, 2000, Administrative Law Judge Gail A. Randall 
issued an order for Prehearing Statements. Judge Randall also mailed a 
letter to Respondent, informing him of his right to representation at 
his own expense, and enclosed therein a copy of the regulation 
explaining that right, 21 CFR 1316.50 (2000). On December 13, 2000, the 
Government filed a motion seeking summary disposition, arguing that 
Respondent's license to practice medicine, and therefore, to handle 
controlled substances in the jurisdiction of his DEA registration, was 
suspended. Since the Government has not received any information that 
the suspension has been lifted, the Government asserts that the 
Respondent's registration cannot be maintained.
    The Government attached to its motion a sworn Certificate of 
Registration Status, signed by the Chief of the Registration Unit of 
the DEA and certifying the Certificate's authenticity; a copy of 
Respondent's DEA Certificate of Registration, AP1632810, currently 
assigned to the Respondent in North Carolina, with an expiration date 
of March 31, 2002; and a Notice of Charges and a copy of an Order of 
Summary Suspension of License, both of which are signed by the 
President of the Board and dated August 2, 1999.
    By an Order dated December 13, 2000, Judge Randall stayed the 
proceedings pending the resolution of the Government's motion, and she 
allowed the Respondent until January 3, 2000, to respond to the 
Government's motion. No response has been received as of this date.
    The Administrator has considered the record in its entirety, and 
pursuant to 21 CFR 1316.67, hereby issues his final order based upon 
findings of fact and conclusions of law as hereinafter set forth. The 
Administrator adopts in full the Opinion and Recommended Decision of 
the Administrative Law Judge.
    The DEA does not have the statutory authority pursuant to the 
Controlled Substances Act to issue or to maintain a registration if the 
applicant or registrant is without state authority to handle controlled 
substances in the state in which he or she practices. See 21 U.S.C. 
Secs. 802(21), 823(f), and 824(a)(3). This prerequisite has been 
consistently upheld in prior DEA cases. See Graham Travers Schuler, 
M.D., 65 FR 50,570 (2000); Romeo J. Perez, M.D., 62 FR 16193 (1997); 
Demetris A. Green, M.D., 61 FR 60728 (1996); Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 
58 FR 51104 (1993).
    In the instant case, the Administrator finds the Government has 
presented evidence demonstrating that the Respondent is not authorized 
to practice medicine in North Carolina, and therefore, the 
Administrator infers that Respondent is also not authorized to handle 
controlled substances in North Carolina, where he conducts his 
business, according to the address listed on his DEA Certificate of 
Registration. The Administrator finds that Judge Randall allowed 
Respondent ample time to refute the Government's evidence, and that 
Respondent has submitted no evidence or assertions to the contrary. 
Thus, there is no genuine issue of material fact concerning 
Respondent's lack of authorization to practice medicine in North 
Carolina or to handle controlled substances in that State.
    The Administrator concurs with Judge Randall's finding that it is 
well settled that when there is no question of material fact involved, 
there is no need for plenary, administrative hearing. Congress did not 
intend for administrative agencies to perform meaningless tasks. See 
Michael G. Dolin, M.D., 65 FR 5661 (2000); Jesus R. Juarez, M.D., 62 FR 
14945 (1997); see also Philip E. Kirk, M.D., 48 FR 32887 (1983), aff'd 
sub nom. Kirk v. Mullen, 749 F.2d 297 (6th Cir. 1984).
    Accordingly, the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration, pursuant to the authority vested in him

[[Page 52944]]

by 21 U.S.C. 823 and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, hereby orders 
that DEA Certificate of Registration AP1632810, issued to William 
Peterson, M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked; and that any pending 
applications for the renewal or modification of said Certificate be 
denied. This order is effective November 19, 2001.

    Dated: October 10, 2001.
Asa Hutchinson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 01-26181 Filed 10-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M