[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 204 (Friday, October 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62080-62081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23708]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. 04-38]


Roland F. Chalifoux, Jr., D.O.; Revocation of Registration

    On April 9, 2004, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), issued an 
Order to show Cause to Roland F. Chalifoux, Jr., D.O. (Respondent) 
notifying him of an opportunity to show cause as to why DEA should not 
revoke his DEA Certificate of Registration, BC1457818, under 21 U.S.C. 
824(a)(3), and deny his pending application for renewal of that 
registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f). Specifically, the Order to 
Show Cause alleged in relevant part that on July 19, 2002, the Texas 
State Board of Medical Examiners (Medical Board) temporarily suspended 
Respondent's Texas medical license; that on March 20, 2003, the Texas 
Department of Public Safety (Department) revoked Respondent's state 
controlled substances registration; and that as a result, Respondent is 
not authorized to handle controlled substances in Texas, the state in 
which he maintains his DEA registration.
    By letter dated May 7, 2004, the Respondent, through his legal 
counsel, timely requested a hearing in this matter. As part of his 
hearing request, the Respondent asserted that he ``* * * has a license 
to practice medicine in Texas [and no] action has been taken to date 
that has deprived him of the license.'' On May 24, 2004, the presiding 
Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner (Judge Bittner) issued to 
counsel for DEA as well as the Respondent an Order for Prehearing 
Statements.
    In lieu of filing a Prehearing Statement, counsel for DEA filed 
Government's Motion for Summary Disposition and Motion to Stay the 
Filing of Prehearing Statements on May 25, 2004. In its motion, the 
Government recited the primary allegations raised in the Order to Show 
Cause regarding the July 2002 Temporary Suspension Order of the Medical 
Board suspending the Respondent's medical license and the Department's 
March 30, 2003 revocation of the Respondent's Texas state controlled 
substance registration. In support of its motions, the Government 
attached copies of the aforementioned Temporary Suspension Order of the 
Medical Board as well as the revocation notice of the Department. 
Accordingly, the Government argued that a motion for summary 
disposition is appropriate in this matter and Respondent's DEA 
Certicate of Registration should be revoked.
    On June 15, 2004, counsel for the Respondent filed a Response to 
Motion for Summary Disposition. In his reply brief, the Respondent 
argued in relevant part that because he currently has licenses to 
practice in jurisdictions outside of Texas, and since the DEA 
registration may be utilized in any jurisdiction where a practitioner 
has a license, the DEA matter is ``premature.'' The Respondent further 
argued that the Department's revocation notice does not evidence a 
final action. The Respondent's reply however did not address whether he 
is currently authorized to handle controlled substances under Texas 
state law.
    On June 28, 2004, Judge Bittner issued her Opinion and Recommended 
Decision of the Administrative Law Judge (Opinion and Recommended 
Decision). As part of her recommended ruling, Judge Bittner granted the 
Government's Motion for Summary Disposition and found that the 
Respondent lacked authorization to handle controlled substances in 
Texas, the jurisdiction in which he is registered with DEA. In granting 
the Government's motion, Judge Bittner also recommended that the 
Respondent's DEA registration be revoked. No exceptions were filed by 
either party to Judge Bittner's Opinion and Recommended Decision, and 
on August 10, 2004, the record of these proceedings was transmitted to 
the Office of the DEA Deputy Administrator.
    The Deputy Administrator has considered the record in its entirety 
and pursuant to 21 CFR 1316.67, hereby issues her final order based 
upon findings of fact and conclusions of law as hereinafter set forth. 
The Deputy Administrator adopts, in full, the Opinion and Recommended 
Decision of the Administrative Law Judge.
    The Deputy Administrator finds that the Respondent currently 
possesses DEA Certificate of Registration BC1457818, and is registered 
to handle controlled substances at a location in Arlington, Texas, as 
well as a second medical practice location in South Lake, Texas. As 
outlined above, the Respondent is currently without authorization to 
handle controlled substances in Texas based upon the suspension of his 
medical license, and

[[Page 62081]]

most significant, the revocation of his Texas state controlled 
substances registration. While the Respondent has presented some 
evidence that he is licensed to practice medicine in jurisdictions 
other than Texas, there is no evidence before the Deputy Administrator 
that the Respondent applied for, or has been granted reinstatement of 
his Texas controlled substance license, the state where he holds a DEA 
registration.
    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 Kanwaljit S. Serai, M.D., 68 FR 48943 (2003); Dominick A. Ricci, 
M.D., 58 FR 51104 (1993); Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919 (1988).
    Here, it is clear that the Respondent's state controlled substance 
license has been revoked and there is no information before the Deputy 
Administrator which points to the Department's revocation order having 
been rescinded. As a result, the Respondent is not licensed to handle 
controlled substances in Texas, where he is registered with DEA, and 
therefore, he is not entitled to maintain that registration.
    In further support of his continued registration with DEA, 
Respondent argues that consideration should be given to his state 
licensure to practice medicine in jurisdictions other than Texas. 
However, as noted in Judge Bittner's Opinion and Recommended Decision, 
DEA regulations require a separate registration ``for each principal 
place of business or professional practice * * * where controlled 
substances are manufactured, distributed, imported, exported, or 
dispensed by a person.'' Therefore, the Respondent's assertions 
regarding his licensure status in jurisdictions outside of Texas are 
ultimately irrelevant since his DEA Certificate of Registration is for 
a Texas address, and he is currently not authorized to handle 
controlled substances in that state. See, Layfe Robert Anthony, M.D., 
67 FR 35582 (2002).
    Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 
Administration, pursuant to the authority vested in her by 21 U.S.C. 
823 and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, hereby orders that DEA 
Certificate of Registration, BC1457818, issued to Roland F. Chalifoux, 
Jr., D.O., 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 November 22, 2004.

    Dated: October 5, 2004.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 04-23708 Filed 10-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M