Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Notices 18273 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Flight 93 National Memorial Advisory 

Commission; Notice of meeting 

AGENCY: National Park Service. 

ACTION: Notice of April 28, 2007 

meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the date 

of the April 28, 2007 meeting of the 

Flight 93 Advisory Commission. 

DATES: The public meeting of the 

Advisory Commission will be held on 

Saturday, April 28, 2007 from 12 noon 

to 3 p.m. (Eastern) and 9 a.m. to 12 noon 

(Pacific). The Commission will meet 

jointly with the Flight 93 Memorial Task 

Force. 

Location: The meeting will be held in 

Fort Mason, Building 201, Golden Gate 

National Parks, San Francisco, 

California 94123–0022. To access Fort 

Mason, please use the entrance at 

Franklin and Bay Streets. 

The meeting will be connected to the 

East Coast via teleconference at the 

Flight 93 National Memorial Office, 109 

West Main Street, Suite 104, Somerset, 

Pennsylvania 15501. The public is 

encouraged and welcome to attend 

either the west coast meeting or the east 

coast teleconference. 

Agenda: The April 28, 2007 joint 

Commission and Task Force meeting 

will consist of: 

(1) Opening of Meeting and Pledge of 

Allegiance. 

(2) Review and Approval of 

Commission Minutes from January 27, 

2007. 

(3) Reports from the Flight 93 

Memorial Task Force and National Park 

Service. Comments from the public will 

be received after each report and/or at 

the end of the meeting. 

(4) Old Business. 

(5) New Business. 

(6) Public Comments. 

(7) Closing Remarks. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joanne M. Hanley, Superintendent, 

Flight 93 National Memorial, 109 West 

Main Street, Somerset, PA 15501, 

814.443.4557. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

meeting will be open to the public. Any 

member of the public may file with the 

Commission a written statement 

concerning agenda items. Address all 

statements to: Flight 93 Advisory 

Commission, 109 West Main Street, 

Somerset, PA 15501. 

Dated: March 23, 2007. 

Joanne M. Hanley, 

Superintendent, Flight 93 National Memorial. 

[FR Doc. 07–1781 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–25–M 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

[Docket No. 06–68] 

Bourne Pharmacy, Inc.; Revocation of 

Registration 

On July 26, 2006, the Deputy 

Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 

Administration, issued an Order to 

Show Cause to Bourne Pharmacy, Inc., 

(Respondent) of Buzzards Bay, 

Massachusetts. The Show Cause Order 

proposed the revocation of 

Respondent’s DEA Certificate of 

Registration, AB2802468, as a retail 

pharmacy, and to deny any pending 

applications for renewal or modification 

of the registration, on the ground that 

Respondent’s continued registration 

would be inconsistent with the public 

interest. Show Cause Order at 1 (citing 

21 U.S.C. 823(f) & 824(a)(4)). 

The Show Cause Order alleged that on 

September 21, 2005, investigators from 

DEA and the Massachusetts Board of 

Pharmacy had executed an 

administrative inspection warrant at 

Respondent and found it to be in 

violation of various federal regulations. 

See id. at 2. Specifically, the Show 

Cause Order alleged that: (1) 

Respondent had failed to maintain a 

biennial inventory as required by 21 

CFR 1304.11(c) and 1304.21, (2) had 

failed to maintain drug destruction 

records as required by 21 CFR 

1304.21(a), (3) was storing controlled 

substances at a non-registered location 

in violation of 21 CFR 1304.04, and (4) 

was improperly storing order forms for 

Schedule II controlled substances. Show 

Cause Order at 2. 

The Show Cause Order further alleged 

that on August 22, 2005, Dr. Michael 

Brown, a Massachusetts based 

physician, was arrested and charged 

with various drug offenses under state 

law, including conspiracy to violate 

drug laws and possession of various 

categories of controlled substances with 

the intent to distribute. See id. at 2. 

According to the Show Cause Order, 

investigators further determined that 

during the calendar year 2005, forty-five 

percent of the prescriptions for 

Schedule II controlled substances filled 

by Respondent were written by Dr. 

Brown; in the month of April 2005 

alone, 92 of 168 Schedule II 

prescriptions filled by Respondent were 

written by Dr. Brown. Id. at 2–3. 

Finally, the Show Cause Order alleged 

that on October 25, 2005, the 

Massachusetts Board of Pharmacy had 

issued a ‘‘Final Order of Summary 

Suspension,’’ which suspended 

Respondent’s state pharmacy permit 

and controlled substance registration, 

and that these suspensions remain in 

effect. Id. at 3. The Show Cause Order 

thus alleged that Respondent lacked 

authority under state law to handle 

controlled substances and that this 

authority is ‘‘a necessary prerequisite for 

DEA registration.’’ Id. 

Respondent, through its counsel, 

requested a hearing; the matter was 

assigned to Administrative Law Judge 

(ALJ) Mary Ellen Bittner. Shortly 

thereafter, the Government moved for 

summary disposition on the ground that 

the Massachusetts Board of Pharmacy 

had issued a Final Order of Summary 

Suspension against Respondent’s state 

pharmacy permit and the pharmacist’s 

license of its owner (Mr. Gerald 

Liberfarb) and pharmacist in charge. 

Mot. for Summ. Disp. at 2. Attached to 

the Government’s motion was the 

State’s summary suspension order, as 

well as a copy of Respondent’s DEA 

registration (which does not expire until 

July 31, 2008). See Attachments 1 & 2 

to Mot. for Summ. Disp. 

Respondent opposed the 

Government’s motion. Respondent 

contended that ‘‘on October 24, 2005, 

[it] had already voluntarily surrendered 

its [state] registered drug store 

certificate’’ and controlled substance 

registration to the Massachusetts 

Department of Public Health, ‘‘to be 

held in escrow pending a hearing on the 

merits to be held * * * before the Board 

of Registration in Pharmacy.’’ Resp. 

Opp. at 1. Respondent also argued that 

the Massachusetts Board ‘‘has never 

implemented or executed the Final 

Order of Summary Suspension,’’ and 

that it has meritorious defenses to the 

DEA Show Cause Order. Id. Finally, 

Respondent contended that it was ‘‘both 

premature and unduly prejudicial to act 

upon the Government’s Motion * * * 

until after [the] state agency’’ held its 

hearing and made a decision. Id. at 2. 

In support of its contention, 

Respondent’s counsel attached a letter 

he had written to an attorney for the 

State Board memorializing the fact that 

Respondent had delivered its state 

registration and certificates to be held 

by the State ‘‘in escrow until a final 

decision is issued on the merits.’’ Ex. 1 

to Resp. Opp. Respondent also attached 

other documents including a ‘‘Notice of 

Fourth Rescheduled Hearing,’’ Ex. 2 to 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with NOTICES