[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 89 (Thursday, May 8, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24760-24761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-11433]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. 01-30]


Michael D. Jackson, M.D.; Revocation of Registration

    On June 8, 2001, the then-Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration (DEA), issued an Order to Show Cause, Immediate 
Suspension of Registration to Michael Delano Jackson, M.D. (hereinafter 
referred to as ``Respondent'') of the Myrtle Beach Medical Center in 
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The Order to Show Cause notified the 
Respondent of an opportunity to show cause as the why DEA should not 
revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration, BJ5063532 pursuant to 21 
U.S.C. 824(a)(4) and deny any pending applications for renewal or 
modification of that registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f), for 
reason that Respondent's continued registration with DEA would be 
inconsistent with the public interest.
    Specifically, the Order to Show Cause outlined numerous allegations 
related to inter alia, the Respondent issuing various Schedules II 
through IV controlled substances for no legitimate medical purpose. 
Included among the drug purportedly prescribed in this fashion was 
OxyContin, a heavily abused Scheduled II narcotic controlled substance. 
The Order to Show Cause further notified the Respondent of the 
immediate suspension of his DEA Certificate of Registration, with the 
suspension to remain in effect until the final determination was 
reached in this matter.
    By letter dated June 20, 2001, the Respondent acting pro se 
requested a hearing on the matter raised in the Order to Show Cause. 
Following the filing of various pre-hearing submissions by the 
respective parties, on May 22, 2002, the Government filed Government's 
Request for Stay of Proceedings and Motion for Summary Judgment 
(Motion). The Government asserted in its motion that the Respondent was 
without state authority to handle controlled substances in the State of 
South Carolina as well as in Alabama where he has apparently relocated 
his medical practice. On May 28, 2002, the presiding Administrative Law 
Judge Mary Ellen Bittner (Judge Bittner) issued a Memorandum to Counsel 
and Ruling on Motion affording the Respondent until June 11, 2002, to 
respond to the Government's Motion. However, the Respondent did not 
file a response.
    On June 13, 2002, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and Recommended 
Ruling of the Administrative Law Judge (Opinion and Recommended Ruling) 
where she granted the Government's Motion for Summary Disposition and 
found that the Respondent lacks authorization to handle controlled 
substances in South Carolina. In granting the Government's motion, 
Judge Bittner further recommended that the Respondent's DEA 
registration be revoked and any pending applications for modification 
or renewal be denied. Neither party filed exceptions to the 
Administrative Law Judge's Opinion and Recommended Decision, and on 
July 17, 2002, Judge Bittner transmitted the record of these 
proceedings to the Office of the Deputy Administrator. Following a 
review of the record in this proceeding, the Deputy Administrator now 
enters his final order pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.46.
    The Deputy Administrator finds that the South Carolina Department 
of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), Bureau of Drug Control, 
maintains a database of practitioners in South Carolina who possess 
valid state authority to handle controlled substances. On May 17, 2002, 
a DEA Diversion Investigator assigned to the agency's South Carolina 
District Office contacted DHEC and inquired whether the Respondent 
possessed state authority to handle controlled substances in that 
state. The investigator was informed that on June 14, 2001, DHEC 
revoked Respondent's state controlled substance license following the 
suspension of his DEA Certificate of Registration. DHEC divulged 
further that the Respondent surrendered his state medical license on 
June 29, 2001, and as a consequence, he lacks authority to handle 
controlled substances in South Carolina.
    The Deputy Administrator's review of the records of the Alabama 
State Board of Medical Examiners reveals that the Respondent was also 
issued a controlled substance certificate in that state on June 29, 
2001. That certificate expired on December 31, 2001. There is no 
evidence in the record that the Respondent's South Carolina medical 
license or his Alabama controlled substances certificate have been 
reinstated. It is clear that the Respondent lacks controlled substance 
authority in Alabama. In addition, since the Respondent is not 
currently authorized to practice medicine in the State of South 
Carolina, the Deputy Administrator finds it reasonable to infer that he 
is not authorized to handle controlled substances in that state as 
well.
    DEA does not have statutory authority under the Controlled 
Substances Act to issue or maintain a registration if the applicant or 
registrant is without state authority to handle controlled substances 
in the state in which he conducts business. See 21 U.S.C. 802(21), 
823(f) and 824(a)(3). This prerequisite has been consistently upheld. 
See Joseph Thomas Allevi, M.D., 67 FR 35581 (2002); Dominick A. Ricci, 
M.D., 58 FR 51104 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919 (1988).
    Here, it is clear that the Respondent is not licensed to handle 
controlled substances in South Carolina where he is registered with 
DEA, or in Alabama, where he has apparently relocated his medical 
practice. Therefore, the Respondent is not entitled to maintain his DEA 
Certificate of Registration. Because he is not entitled to a DEA 
registration due to his lack of state authorization to handle 
controlled substances, the Deputy Administrator concludes that it is 
unnecessary to

[[Page 24761]]

address whether the Respondent's registration should be revoked based 
upon the public interest grounds asserted in the Order to Show Cause. 
See Nathaniel-Aikens-Afful, M.D., 62 FR 16871 (1997).
    Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration, pursuant to the authority vested in him by 21 U.S.C. 
823 and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, hereby orders that DEA 
Certificate of Registration, BJ5063552, issued to Michael D. Jackson, 
M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. The Deputy Administrator further 
orders that any pending applications for renewal or modification of 
such registration be, and they hereby are, denied. This order is 
effective June 9, 2003.

    Dated: April 21, 2003.
John B. Brown, III,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-11433 Filed 5-7-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M