262 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 2 / Monday, January 5, 1998 / Notices

listed on the application. Instead,

Respondent has indicated that it intends

to manufacture marijuana on farms in a

number of different states, however it

has not submitted applications for

registration for these locations.

Therefore, since Respondent’s

manufacturer application fails to

identify the principal place(s) of

business where it intends to

manufacture marijuana, it does not

comply with 21 U.S.C. 822.

Regarding Respondent’s application

to conduct research, pursuant to 21

U.S.C. 823(f), DEA is authorized to

register ‘‘practitioners’’ to conduct

research with controlled substances.

‘‘Practitioner’’ is defined in 21 U.S.C.

802(21) as:

[A] physician, dentist, veterinarian,

scientific investigator, pharmacy, hospital, or

other person licensed, registered, or

otherwise permitted, by the United States or

the jurisdiction in which he practices or does

research, to distribute, dispense, conduct

research with respect to, administer, or use

in teaching or chemical analysis, a controlled

substance in the course of professional

practice or research.

Therefore, state authorization to

conduct research is a prerequisite to

DEA registration. See also 21 U.S.C.

823(f). Like with its manufacturer

application, Respondent’s researcher

application lists an address where

Respondent has conceded that it has no

intention of conducting research.

Instead, in its research protocol,

Respondent merely lists 20 states from

which it intends to obtain hemp, and

acknowledges that it has not yet

obtained laboratory space. Because

Respondent has not identified the

specific location(s) where it intends to

conduct its research on marijuana, DEA

cannot determine whether Respondent

is authorized to do so in the

jurisdiction(s) where the proposed

research will take place. Therefore, the

Acting Deputy Administrator concurs

with Judge Randall’s conclusion that

‘‘DEA lacks the authority under 21

U.S.C. 823(f) to register the Respondent

as a researcher.’’

It is well settled that where there is no

material question of fact involved, or

when the facts are agreed upon, there is

no need for a plenary, administrative

hearing. Congress did not intend for

administrative agencies to perform

meaningless tasks. Gilbert Ross, M.D., 61

FR 8664 (1996); Dominick A. Ricci,

M.D., 58 FR 51,104 (1993); Philip E.

Kirk, M.D., 48 FR 32,887 (1983), aff’d

sub nom Kirk v. Mullen, 749 F.2d 297

(6th Cir. 1984).

In this case, there does appear to be

some dispute as to whether or not

Respondent refused to allow DEA to

conduct on-site inspections of the

locations where it is proposing to

manufacture or conduct research on

marijuana. However, the Acting Deputy

Administrator finds it unnecessary to

reach this issue, since as Judge Randall

found, it is undisputed that ‘‘(1) the

Respondent has failed to submit

separate manufacturing [applications]

for each proposed manufacturing site;

(2) the address on the pending

manufacturing application is not a

proposed manufacturing site; and (3) the

Respondent has failed to identify the

location where it intends to do research

with a controlled substance.’’ Therefore,

Judge Randall concluded that

Respondent ‘‘has not complied with the

statutory and regulatory requirements

pertaining to the content of its

applications[,] * * * that there are no

relevant factual matters in dispute

concerning the information lacking in

the Respondent’s applications[,] * * *

[and] that the DEA lacks the authority

to grant the Respondent’s currently

pending, incomplete applications for

DEA Certificates of Registration.’’

As a result, Judge Randall granted the

Government’s Motion for Summary

Disposition and recommended that

Respondent’s applications for

registration be denied. The Acting

Deputy Administrator concurs with

Judge Randall’s conclusions. DEA is

precluded by statute to issue

Respondent a manufacturer registration

at a location where Respondent does not

intend to manufacture a controlled

substance which would authorize

Respondent to manufacture marijuana at

different locations in a number of states.

Further, since Respondent has failed to

specifically identify the state(s) where it

intends to conduct its research on

marijuana, DEA cannot determine

whether Respondent is properly

authorized by the state(s) to conduct

such research, and therefore, DEA is

precluded by statute from issuing

Respondent a researcher registration.

Consequently, the Acting Deputy

Administrator concludes that

Respondent’s applications for

registration cannot be granted. The

Acting Deputy Administrator agrees

with Judge Randall that since ‘‘the

current applications [are] so defective

that the DEA lack[s] authority to grant

them in their current state . . . it [is]

unnecessary to make any further

findings or conclusions concerning any

of the other issues raised by the parties

about the propriety of granting or

denying the Respondent’s applications.’’

In her November 21, 1997 letter

transmitting the record to the Acting

Deputy Administrator, Judge Randall

noted that Respondent had filed with

her office several exhibits including

‘‘hemp paper, fiber, hurds and stalks

(whole and chipped).’’ Judge Randall

asked to be advised whether the Acting

Deputy Administrator ‘‘would like for

these items to be destroyed or retrieved

for [his] viewing.’’ In light of the

conclusions made in this matter, the

Acting Deputy Administrator finds it

unnecessary to view these exhibits.

Accordingly, the Acting 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 the applications

dated March 14, 1995, and May 18,

1995, submitted by Hemp Products

Research Company, for DEA Certificates

of Registration as a researcher and as a

manufacturer, be, and they hereby are,

denied. This order is effective February

4, 1998.

Dated: December 22, 1997.

James S. Milford,

Acting Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98–024 Filed 1–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–09–M

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND

SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Docket 97–170]

Notice of Prospective Patent License

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and

Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of prospective patent

license.

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice

that Automated Analysis Corporation,

2805 South Industrial, Suite 100, Ann

Arbor, Michigan 48104–6767, has

applied for an exclusive copyright

license for computer software entitled

‘‘Structural Acoustics Optimization

(SAOpt) Software.’’ NASA received

assignment of the copyright on

September 18, 1997, from Lockheed

Martin Aeronautical Systems Company.

Written objections to the prospective

grant of a license should be sent to Ms.

Robin W. Edwards, Patent Attorney,

NASA Langley Research Center.

DATES: Responses to this notice must be

received by March 6, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Robin W. Edwards, Patent Attorney,

NASA Langley Research Center, Mail

Code 212, Hampton, VA 23681–0001,

telephone (757) 864–3230.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 2 / Monday, January 5, 1998 / Notices 263

Dated: December 22, 1997.

Edward A. Frankle,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 98–133 Filed 1–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510–01–M

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND

SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Docket 97–172]

Notice of Prospective Patent License

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and

Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of prospective patent

license.

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice

that Dataforce Development Corporation

of Scotts Valley, California 95067–7425,

has applied for a partially exclusive

patent license to practice the inventions

described and claimed in U.S. Patent

Numbers 5,426,512 and 5,629,780, both

entitled ‘‘Image Data Compression

Having Minimum Perceptual Error,’’ for

which United States Patents were issued

on June 20, 1995 and May 13, 1997,

respectively, to the United States of

America as represented by the

Administrator of the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Written objections to the prospective

grant of a license should be sent to

Ames Research Center.

DATES: Responses to this notice must be

received by March 6, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. William Sheehan, Patent Attorney,

Ames Research Center, Mail Stop 202A–

3, Moffett Field, CA 94035, telephone

(650) 604–5104.

Dated: December 22, 1997.

Edward A. Frankle,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 98–136 Filed 1–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510–01–M

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND

SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 97–171]

Prospective Patent License

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and

Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of prospective patent

license.

SUMMARY: NASA hereby gives notice

that Vacuum Arc Technologies, Inc. of

Scottsboro, Alabama, has applied for an

exclusive license to practice the

invention described and claimed in U.S.

Patent No. 5,380,415, entitled ‘‘Vacuum

Vapor Deposition,’’ and the invention

described in NASA Case No. MFS–

30,119–1, for ‘‘Enhanced Vacuum Arc

Vapor Deposition Electrode,’’ which are

assigned to the United States of America

as represented by the Administrator of

the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration. Written objections to

the prospective grant of a license should

be sent to Marshall Space Flight Center.

DATES: Responses to this notice must be

received by March 6, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert L. Broad, Jr., Patent Counsel,

Marshall Space Flight Center, Mail Code

CC01, Huntsville, Alabama 35812,

telephone (205) 544–0021, fax (205)

544–0258.

Dated: December 22, 1997.

Edward A. Frankle,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 98–135 Filed 1–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510–01–M

NATIONAL GAMBLING IMPACT STUDY

COMMISSION

Meeting

AGENCY: National Gambling Impact

Study Commission.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

DATES: Wednesday, January 21, 1998,

9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and Thursday,

January 22, 1998, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting site will be:

The Atlantic City Convention Center,

Room 302, 2001 Kirkman Blvd., Atlantic

City, NJ 08401. Written comments can

be sent to the Commission at 800 North

Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 450,

Washington, D.C. 20002.

STATUS: The meeting will be open to the

public both days. However, the meeting

will adjourn in the afternoon for

approximately six hours on January 21st

while the Commission conducts its first

two site visits. Additionally, the

meeting will adjourn on January 22nd

before the Commission conducts the

meeting’s final site visit.

SUMMARY: At its first on-site meeting the

National Gambling Impact Study

Commission, established under Pub. L.

104–169, dated August 3, 1996, will

hear presentations from invited panels

of speakers, conduct site visits, receive

public comment, and conduct its

normal meeting business.

CONTACT PERSONS: For further

information contact Amy Ricketts at

(202) 523–8217 or write to 800 North

Capitol St., N.W., Suite 450,

Washington, D.C. 20002.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

meeting agenda will include

presentations from Federal, State, and

local officials; testimony from invited

panels of speakers on the social and

economic impact of gambling; testimony

from an expert panel on pathological

gambling; site visits to the Atlantic City

Rescue Mission, Trump Taj Mahal

Casino, and boardwalk area; normal

meeting business; and an open forum

period for public comment.

An open forum for public

participation will be held from 7:00

p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on January 21 on

issues relevant to the Commission’s

work. Anyone wishing to make an oral

presentation at the meeting must contact

Mr. Tim Bidwill by telephone only at

(202) 523–8217 no later than 5:00 p.m.,

January 16, 1998. No requests will be

accepted before 9:00 a.m. (EST) the day

this notice appears in the Federal

Register.

Open forum participants will be asked

to provide name, organization (if

applicable), address, and telephone

number. No requests will be accepted

via mail, facsimile, e-mail, or voice

mail. A waiting list will be compiled

once the allotted number of slots

becomes filled. Oral presentations will

be limited to three (3) minutes per

speaker. If this is not enough time to

complete comments, please restrict to

three minutes a summary of your

comments and bring a typed copy of full

comments to file with the Commission.

Persons speaking at the forum are

requested, but not required, to supply

twenty (20) copies of their written

statements to the registration desk prior

to the evening session on January 21.

Members of the public, on the waiting

list or otherwise, are always invited to

send written comments to the

Commission at any time. However, if

individuals wish to have their written

comments placed into the official record

of the meeting, the Commission must

receive them by February 11, 1998. Each

speaker is kindly asked to be prepared

prior to their presentation; to refrain

from any use of profanity, vulgar

language, or obscene signage; to refrain

from making any comments or

disrupting sounds during the

presentation of another speaker; and to

remain seated. If visual aids are

necessary during the course of a

speaker’s presentation, each speaker is

responsible for providing the equipment

to run the visual aid.

Nancy Mohr Kennedy,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 98–89 Filed 1–2–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6802–ET–P