[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41354-41355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14832]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Alphonsus Okoli, M.D.; Decision and Order

    On June 7, 2021, the Drug Enforcement Administration (hereinafter, 
DEA or Government), issued an Order to Show Cause (hereinafter, OSC) to 
Alphonsus Okoli, M.D. (hereinafter, Registrant). OSC, at 1 and 4. The 
OSC proposed the revocation of Registrant's Certificate of Registration 
No. BO4917780 at the registered address of 7525 Greenway Center Drive, 
Suite 110, Greenbelt, Maryland 20770. Id. at 1. The OSC alleged that 
Registrant's registration should be revoked because Registrant is 
``without authority to handle controlled substances in Maryland, the 
state in which [he is] registered with DEA.'' Id. at 2 (citing 21 
U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The OSC also alleged that Registrant's registration should 
be revoked because Registrant has ``committed such acts as would 
render [his] registration inconsistent with the public interest, as 
that term is defined under the Controlled Substances Act,'' based on 
Registrant's lack of compliance with a DEA Memorandum of Agreement 
(MOA). OSC, at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and 824(a)(4)). However, 
in its Request for Final Agency Action (RFAA) submitted to this 
Office on June 22, 2022, the Government noted that while it does not 
concede that Registrant complied with the MOA, Registrant's lack of 
state authority to handle controlled substances is ``case 
dispositive and the Government does not seek a Final Order on the 
public interest allegations.'' RFAA, at n.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency makes the following findings of fact based on the 
uncontroverted evidence submitted by the Government in its Request for 
Final Agency Action (RFAA).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ By letter dated July 12, 2021, Registrant submitted a 
written statement in response to the OSC in which he waived his 
right to a hearing. RFAA, Exhibit (hereinafter, RFAAX) B, at 1-2. As 
the Government seeks Final Agency Action solely on the ground that 
Registrant lacks state authority to handle controlled substances, 
the Agency will not consider Registrant's explanation in response to 
the public interest allegations at this time. See id. Registrant 
also argues that his DEA registration should not be revoked for lack 
of state authority because he still has a North Carolina medical 
license in ``inactive status.'' Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Findings of Fact

    On March 23, 2021,\3\ Registrant and the Maryland State Board of 
Physicians (hereinafter, the Board) entered into a Consent Order 
suspending Registrant's Maryland medical license and permanently 
prohibiting him from prescribing and dispensing Controlled Dangerous 
Substances (hereinafter, CDS). See RFAAX C-4 (Consent Order), at 12-18. 
On September 29, 2021, the Board issued an Order Terminating Suspension 
and Imposing Probation that ended the suspension of Registrant's 
Maryland medical license, but maintained that, as had been ordered in 
Registrant's Consent Order with the Board, Registrant was permanently 
prohibited from prescribing and dispensing all controlled dangerous 
substances. RFAAX C-5, at 1-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On April 13, 2020, an Administrative Law Judge of the 
Maryland Office of Administrative Hearings issued a Proposed 
Decision recommending that Registrant's Maryland Controlled 
Dangerous Substances (CDS) license be revoked. RFAAX C-2, at 1, 21. 
On June 25, 2020, the Designee of the Maryland Secretary of Health 
issued a Final Decision and Order adopting the Proposed Decision in 
full and revoking Registrant's Maryland CDS license. RFAAX C-3, at 
1-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Maryland's online records, of which the Agency takes 
official notice, Registrant's Maryland CDS license is still revoked.\4\ 
Maryland Department of Health CDS Search, https://health.maryland.gov/ocsa/pages/cdssearch.aspx (last visited date of signature of this 
Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds that Registrant is not currently 
licensed to dispense controlled dangerous substances in Maryland, the 
state in which he is registered with the DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency ``may take 
official notice of facts at any stage in a proceeding--even in the 
final decision.'' United States Department of Justice, Attorney 
General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act 80 (1947) (Wm. 
W. Gaunt & Sons, Inc., Reprint 1979). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 556(e), 
``[w]hen an agency decision rests on official notice of a material 
fact not appearing in the evidence in the record, a party is 
entitled, on timely request, to an opportunity to show the 
contrary.'' Accordingly, Registrant may dispute the Agency's finding 
by filing a properly supported motion for reconsideration of 
findings of fact within fifteen calendar days of the date of this 
Order. Any such motion and response shall be filed and served by 
email to the other party and to 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 (hereinafter, CSA) ``upon a finding that the 
registrant . . . has had his State license or registration suspended . 
. . [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 for obtaining and 
maintaining a practitioner's registration. See, e.g., James L. Hooper, 
M.D., 76 FR 71,371 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App'x

[[Page 41355]]

826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27,616, 
27,617 (1978).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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(f). 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 at 
71,371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 39,130, 39,131 (2006); 
Dominick A. Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104, 51,105 (1993); Bobby Watts, 
M.D., 53 FR 11,919, 11,920 (1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR at 
27,617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to Maryland statute, ``a person shall be registered by 
the Department before the person manufactures, distributes, or 
dispenses a controlled dangerous substance in the State or transports a 
controlled dangerous substance into the State.'' Md. Code. Ann., Crim. 
Law Sec.  5-301(a)(1) (West 2022). Maryland law further defines 
``dispense'' to mean ``to deliver to the ultimate user or the human 
research subject by or in accordance with the lawful order of an 
authorized provider'' and states that the term includes ``to prescribe, 
administer, package, label, or compound a substance for delivery.'' Id. 
at Sec.  5-101(I)(1)-(2).
    Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant's 
CDS license was revoked. As already discussed, a practitioner must hold 
a valid controlled substance license to dispense a controlled substance 
in Maryland.\6\ Thus, Registrant is not eligible to maintain a DEA 
registration in Maryland and the Agency will order that Registrant's 
DEA registration be revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Agency finds that Registrant's inactive North Carolina 
medical license has no bearing on the issue in this case, which is 
whether Registrant has authority to handle controlled substances in 
the Maryland, the state of his DEA registration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. 
BO4917780 issued to Alphonsus Okoli, M.D. Further, pursuant to 28 CFR 
0.100(b) and the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 823(f), I hereby 
deny any pending applications of Alphonsus Okoli, M.D. to renew or 
modify this registration, as well as any other pending application of 
Alphonsus Okoli, M.D. for additional registration in Maryland. This 
Order is effective August 11, 2022.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on 
July 6, 2022, 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. 2022-14832 Filed 7-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P