Notice2024-23515
William J. Mack, M.D.; Decision and Order
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 11, 2024
Issuing agencies
Justice DepartmentDrug Enforcement Administration
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 198 (Friday, October 11, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 198 (Friday, October 11, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82637-82638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23515]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
William J. Mack, M.D.; Decision and Order
On March 21, 2024, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA or
Government) issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to William J. Mack,
M.D., of Leawood, Kansas (Registrant). Request for Final Agency Action
(RFAA), Exhibit (RFAAX) 2, at 1, 3. The OSC proposed the revocation of
Registrant's Certificate of Registration No. BM8877473, alleging that
Registrant's registration should be revoked because Registrant is
``currently without authority to prescribe, administer, dispense, or
otherwise handle controlled substances in the State of Kansas, the
state in which [he is] registered with DEA.'' Id. at 2 (citing 21
U.S.C. 824(a)(3)).
The OSC notified Registrant of his right to file with DEA a written
request for hearing, and that if he failed to file such a request, he
would be deemed to have waived his right to a hearing and be in
default. Id. (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). Here, Registrant did not request
a hearing. RFAA, at 2.\1\ ``A default, unless excused, shall be deemed
to constitute a waiver of the [registrant's] right to a hearing and an
admission of the factual allegations of the [OSC].'' 21 CFR 1301.43(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on the Government's submissions in its RFAA dated May
3, 2024, the Agency finds that service of the OSC on Registrant was
adequate. Specifically, the Government's Notice of Service of Order
to Show Cause indicates that Registrant was personally served with
the OSC on March 26, 2024. RFAAX 1, at 1, 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, ``[i]n the event that a registrant . . . is deemed to be
in default . . . DEA may then file a request for final agency action
with the Administrator, along with a record to support its request. In
such circumstances, the Administrator may enter a default final order
pursuant to [21 CFR] Sec. 1316.67.'' Id. Sec. 1301.43(f)(1). Here,
the Government has requested final agency action based on Registrant's
default pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43(c), (f), 1301.46. RFAA, at 1; see
also 21 CFR 1316.67.
Findings of Fact
The Agency finds that, in light of Registrant's default, the
factual allegations in the OSC are admitted. According to the OSC,
Registrant's Kansas medical license was suspended on January 30, 2024.
RFAAX 2, at 2. According to Kansas online records, of which the Agency
takes official notice, Registrant's Kansas medical license is under a
``Previous'' status with the ``License Type'' listed as ``Cancelled--
Suspended.'' \2\ Kansas Board of Healing Arts Licensee & Registrant
Profile Search, <a href="https://www.kansas.gov/ssrv-ksbhada/search.html">https://www.kansas.gov/ssrv-ksbhada/search.html</a> (last
visited date of signature of this Order). Accordingly, the Agency finds
that Registrant is not licensed to practice medicine in Kansas, the
state in which he is registered with DEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3b5f5e5a155a5f5f54155a4f4f5449555e42487b5f5e5a155c544d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="93f7f6f2bdf2f7f7fcbdf2e7e7fce1fdf6eae0d3f7f6f2bdf4fce5">[email protected]</span></a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion
Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), the Attorney General is authorized
to suspend or revoke a registration issued under 21 U.S.C. 823 ``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
[[Page 82638]]
State law to engage in the . . . dispensing of controlled substances.''
With respect to a practitioner, 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, D.O., 76 FR
71371, 71372 (2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App'x 826 (4th Cir.
2012); Frederick Marsh Blanton, D.O., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This rule derives from the text of two provisions of the
Controlled Substances Act (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). Because Congress has clearly mandated that a
practitioner possess state authority in order to be deemed a
practitioner under the CSA, 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 71371-72; Sheran Arden Yeates, D.O.,
71 FR 39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, D.O., 58 FR 51104,
51105 (1993); Bobby Watts, D.O., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988);
Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 27617.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to Kansas statute, ``dispense'' means ``to deliver a
controlled substance to an ultimate user or research subject by or
pursuant to the lawful order of a practitioner, including the
packaging, labeling or compounding necessary to prepare the substance
for that delivery . . . .'' Kan. Stat. Ann. sec. 65-4101(l) (2024).
Further, a ``practitioner'' includes, among others, ``a person licensed
to practice medicine and surgery . . . .'' Id. sec. 65-4101(ll).
Here, the undisputed evidence in the record is that Registrant
lacks authority to practice medicine in Kansas. As discussed above, an
individual must be a licensed practitioner to dispense a controlled
substance in Kansas. Thus, because Registrant lacks authority to
practice medicine in Kansas and, therefore, is not authorized to handle
controlled substances in Kansas, Registrant is not eligible to maintain
a 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.
BM8877473 issued to William J. Mack, 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 William J. Mack, M.D., to renew
or modify this registration, as well as any other pending application
of William J. Mack, M.D., for additional registration in Kansas. This
Order is effective November 12, 2024.
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug Enforcement Administration was signed on
October 2, 2024, 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. 2024-23515 Filed 10-10-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on October 11, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.