Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 77 / Thursday, April 21, 2022 / Notices 23885 

set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and 

210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b) & 

210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which 

confidential treatment by the 

Commission is properly sought will be 

treated accordingly. Any non-party 

wishing to submit comments containing 

confidential information must serve 

those comments on the parties to the 

investigation pursuant to the applicable 

Administrative Protective Order. A 

redacted non-confidential version of the 

document must also be filed 

simultaneously with any confidential 

filing and must be served in accordance 

with Commission Rule 210.4(f)(7)(ii)(A) 

(19 CFR 210.4(f)(7)(ii)(A)). All 

information, including confidential 

business information and documents for 

which confidential treatment is properly 

sought, submitted to the Commission for 

purposes of this investigation may be 

disclosed to and used: (i) By the 

Commission, its employees and Offices, 

and contract personnel (a) for 

developing or maintaining the records 

of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in 

internal investigations, audits, reviews, 

and evaluations relating to the 

programs, personnel, and operations of 

the Commission including under 5 

U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. 

government employees and contract 

personnel, solely for cybersecurity 

purposes. All contract personnel will 

sign appropriate nondisclosure 

agreements. All nonconfidential written 

submissions will be available for public 

inspection on EDIS. 

This action is taken under the 

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), 

and in Part 210 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

part 210). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: April 18, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08518 Filed 4–20–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives 

[OMB Number 1140–0074] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed eCollection of 

eComments Requested; List of 

Responsible Persons 

AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms and Explosives, Department of 

Justice. 

ACTION: 30-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, 

Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives 

(ATF), Department of Justice (DOJ) will 

submit the following information 

collection request to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval in accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Comments are encouraged and 

will be accepted for an additional 30 

days until May 23, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written 

comments and suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection of information 

are encouraged. Your comments should 

address one or more of the following 

four points: 

—Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

—Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

—Evaluate whether and, if so, how the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected can be 

enhanced; and 

—Minimize the burden of the collection 

of information on those who are to 

respond, including through the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms 

of information technology, e.g., 

permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Extension without Change of a 

Currently Approved Collection. 

(2) The Title of the Form/Collection: 

List of Responsible Persons. 

(3) The agency form number, if any, 

and the applicable component of the 

Department sponsoring the collection: 

Form number: None. 

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, 

Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. 

Department of Justice. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 

abstract: 

Primary: Business or other for-profit. 

Other: None. 

Abstract: All holders of Bureau of 

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 

Explosives (ATF) explosives licensees 

or permits must report any change in 

responsible persons (RPs) and 

possessors of explosives to ATF, within 

30 days of the change. 

(5) An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond: An estimated 50,000 

respondents will respond to this 

collection twice annually, and it will 

take each respondent approximately one 

hour to complete their responses. 

(6) An estimate of the total public 

burden (in hours) associated with the 

collection: The estimated annual public 

burden associated with this collection is 

100,000 hours, which is equal to 50,000 

(total respondents) * 2 (# of response 

per respondents) * 1 (# of hours or the 

time taken to prepare each response). 

If additional information is required 

contact: Melody Braswell, Department 

Clearance Officer, United States 

Department of Justice, Justice 

Management Division, Policy and 

Planning Staff, Two Constitution 

Square, 145 N Street NE, Mail Stop 3.E– 

405A, Washington, DC 20530. 

Dated: April 18, 2022. 

Melody Braswell, 

Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. 

Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08516 Filed 4–20–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–FY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Larry S. Everhart, M.D.; Decision and 

Order 

On January 14, 2022, a former Acting 

Assistant Administrator, Diversion 

Control Division, Drug Enforcement 

Administration (hereinafter, 

Government), issued an Order to Show 

Cause (hereinafter, OSC) to Larry S. 

Everhart, M.D. (hereinafter, Registrant) 

of Powell, Ohio. Request for Final 

Agency Action (hereinafter, RFAA), 

Exhibit (hereinafter, RFAAX) A (OSC), 

at 1. The OSC proposed the revocation 

of Registrant’s Certificate of Registration 

No. AE5735557. Id. It alleged that 

Registrant is ‘‘without authority to 

prescribe controlled substances in the 

State of Ohio, the state in which [he is] 

registered with the DEA.’’ Id. at 2 (citing 

21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3)). 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
23886 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 77 / Thursday, April 21, 2022 / Notices 

1Under 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 my finding by filing a 

properly supported motion for reconsideration of 

finding 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 

dea.addo.attorneys@dea.usdoj.gov. 

Specifically, the OSC alleged that on 

or about July 14, 2021, the State Medical 

Board of Ohio permanently revoked 

Registrant’s medical license after 

finding that on numerous occasions, 

Registrant relied on an unproven 

diagnostic device to diagnose and treat 

patients; inappropriately prescribed an 

anti-parasitic drug and prescribed it in 

excess of recommended dosages; 

inappropriately prescribed multiple 

antibiotics in excess of recommended 

dosages; and failed to maintain 

complete and/or legible medical 

records. Id. 

The OSC notified Registrant of the 

right to request a hearing on the 

allegations or to submit a written 

statement, while waiving the right to a 

hearing, the procedures for electing each 

option, and the consequences for failing 

to elect either option. Id. at 2–3 (citing 

21 CFR 1301.43). The OSC also notified 

Registrant of the opportunity to submit 

a corrective action plan. Id. at 3 (citing 

21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C)). 

Adequacy of Service 

In a Declaration dated March 4, 2022, 

a Diversion Investigator (hereinafter, the 

DI) assigned to the Columbus District 

Office of the Detroit Field Division 

stated that on or about January 20, 2022, 

she sent a copy of the OSC via certified 

mail to Registrant’s registered address. 

RFAAX B (DI’s Declaration), at 1–2. 

According to the DI, United States 

Postal Service (USPS) tracking 

information indicates that the copy of 

the OSC was delivered on or about 

January 24, 2022. Id. at 2. 

The Government forwarded its RFAA, 

along with the evidentiary record, to 

this office on March 15, 2022. 

According to the Government’s RFAA, 

‘‘[Registrant] has not corresponded or 

otherwise communicated with DEA 

regarding the [OSC].’’ RFAA, at 2. 

Further, the Government states that, 

‘‘[m]ore than 30 days have passed since 

[Registrant] was served with the [OSC] 

and, therefore, the deadline for 

requesting a hearing or submitting a 

written statement of position has 

passed.’’ Id. (citing 21 CFR 1301.43). 

The Government requests that 

‘‘[Registrant’s] DEA Certificate of 

Registration as a practitioner be revoked 

based on his lack of authority to handle 

controlled substances in the State of 

Ohio, the state in which he is registered 

with DEA.’’ Id. at 6. 

Based on the DI’s Declaration, the 

Government’s written representations, 

and my review of the record, I find that 

the Government accomplished service 

of the OSC on Registrant on or before 

January 24, 2022. I also find that more 

than thirty days have now passed since 

the Government accomplished service 

of the OSC. Further, based on the DI’s 

Declaration, the Government’s written 

representations, and my review of the 

record, I find that neither Registrant, nor 

anyone purporting to represent 

Registrant, requested a hearing, 

submitted a written statement while 

waiving Registrant’s right to a hearing, 

or submitted a corrective action plan. 

Accordingly, I find that Registrant has 

waived the right to a hearing and the 

right to submit a written statement or 

corrective action plan. 21 CFR 

1301.43(d); 21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C). I, 

therefore, issue this Decision and Order 

based on the record submitted by the 

Government, which constitutes the 

entire record before me. 21 CFR 

1301.43(e). 

Findings of Fact 

Registrant’s DEA Registration 

Registrant is the holder of DEA 

Certificate of Registration No. 

AE5735557 at the registered address of 

3779 Attucks Drive, Powell, Ohio 

43065. RFAAX B (DI’s Declaration), at 1. 

Pursuant to this registration, Registrant 

is authorized to dispense controlled 

substances in schedules II through V as 

a practitioner. Id. Registrant’s 

registration expires on August 31, 2022. 

Id. 

The Status of Registrant’s State License 

On May 13, 2020, the State Medical 

Board of Ohio (hereinafter, the Board) 

notified Registrant that the Board 

intended to ‘‘determine whether or not 

to limit, revoke, permanently revoke, 

suspend, refuse to grant or register or 

renew or reinstate [his] license or 

certificate to practice medicine and 

surgery, or to reprimand [him] or place 

[him] on probation.’’ RFAAX B, Exhibit 

B–1, at 124–125. According to the 

Board’s letter, from on or about January 

24, 2005, to July 24, 2019, Registrant 

relied on ‘‘an unproven electrodermal 

diagnostic device’’ to diagnose and treat 

ten different patients. Id. at 124. 

Regarding these diagnoses, Registrant 

failed to confirm the results through 

laboratory testing and/or consultation 

from a specialist before employing 

treatment measures. Id. The Board’s 

letter also alleged that, in regard to the 

treatment of the ten patients, Registrant 

inappropriately prescribed an 

antiparasitic drug and multiple 

antibiotics, prescribing the medications 

in excess of recommended dosages and 

without appropriately confirming 

diagnoses. Id. Finally, the Board’s letter 

alleged that Registrant’s medical records 

for the ten patients were ‘‘incomplete 

and/or illegible.’’ Id. The Board argued, 

citing to Ohio State law, that 

Registrant’s conduct constituted a 

‘‘ ‘departure from, or the failure to 

conform to, minimal standards of 

care.’ ’’ Id. The Board also argued, citing 

to Ohio State law, that Registrant’s 

conduct constituted a ‘‘ ‘[f]ailure to 

maintain minimal standards applicable 

to the selection or administration of 

drugs, or failure to employ acceptable 

scientific methods in the selection of 

drugs or other modalities for treatment 

of disease.’ ’’ Id. at 124–125. On July 14, 

2021, the Board issued its Entry of 

Order permanently revoking Registrant’s 

Ohio medical license and ordering 

Registrant to pay a fine of $3,500. Id. at 

3. 

According to Ohio’s online records, of 

which I take official notice, Registrant’s 

medical license is still permanently 

revoked.1 https://elicense.ohio.gov/oh_

verifylicense (last visited date of 

signature of this Order). Accordingly, I 

find that Registrant is not currently 

licensed to practice medicine in Ohio, 

the state in which he is registered with 

the DEA. 

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 71371 

(2011), pet. for rev. denied, 481 F. App’x 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 77 / Thursday, April 21, 2022 / Notices 23887 

826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh 

Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 

(1978). 

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 71371–72; 

Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 

39130, 39131 (2006); Dominick A. Ricci, 

M.D., 58 FR 51104, 51105 (1993); Bobby 

Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11919, 11920 (1988); 

Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR at 

27617. 

According to Ohio law, ‘‘No person 

shall knowingly obtain, possess, or use 

a controlled substance or a controlled 

substance analog,’’ except pursuant to a 

‘‘prescription issued by a licensed 

health professional authorized to 

prescribe drugs if the prescription was 

issued for a legitimate medical 

purpose.’’ Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 

§§ 2925.11(A), (B)(1)(d) (West, current 

through File 85 of the 134th General 

Assembly (2021–2022)). Ohio law 

further states that a ‘‘[l]icensed health 

professional authorized to prescribe 

drugs’’ or ‘‘prescriber’’ means ‘‘an 

individual who is authorized by law to 

prescribe drugs or dangerous drugs or 

drug therapy related devices in the 

course of the individual’s professional 

practice.’’ Id. at § 4729.01(I). The 

definition further provides a limited list 

of authorized prescribers, the relevant 

provision of which is ‘‘[a] physician 

authorized under Chapter 4731[ ] of the 

Revised Code to practice medicine and 

surgery, osteopathic medicine and 

surgery, or podiatric medicine and 

surgery.’’ Id. at § 4729.01(I)(5). 

Additionally, Ohio law permits ‘‘[a] 

licensed health professional authorized 

to prescribe drugs, if acting in the 

course of professional practice, in 

accordance with the laws regulating the 

professional’s practice’’ to prescribe or 

administer schedule II, III, IV, and V 

controlled substances to patients. Id. at 

§ 3719.06(A)(1)(a)–(b). 

Here, the undisputed evidence in the 

record is that Registrant currently lacks 

authority to practice medicine in Ohio. 

As already discussed, a physician is 

authorized by law to prescribe or 

administer drugs in Ohio only when 

authorized to practice medicine and 

surgery under Ohio law. Thus, because 

Registrant lacks authority to practice 

medicine in Ohio and, therefore, is not 

authorized to handle controlled 

substances in Ohio, Registrant is not 

eligible to maintain a DEA registration. 

Accordingly, I 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. AE5735557 issued to 

Larry S. Everhart, 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 

application of Larry S. Everhart, M.D. to 

renew or modify this registration, as 

well as any other pending application of 

Larry S. Everhart, M.D. for additional 

registration in Ohio. This Order is 

effective May 23, 2022. 

Anne Milgram, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08513 Filed 4–20–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[OMB Number 1122–0001] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed eCollection 

Requested; Revision of a Currently 

Approved Collection 

AGENCY: Office on Violence Against 

Women, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: 60-Day Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice, 

Office on Violence Against Women 

(OVW) will be submitting the following 

information collection request to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Comments are encouraged and 

will be accepted for 60 days until June 

21, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Written comments and/or suggestion 

regarding the items contained in this 

notice, especially the estimated public 

burden and associated response time, 

should be directed to Cathy Poston, 

Office on Violence Against Women, at 

202–514–5430 or Catherine.poston@

usdoj.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written 

comments and suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection of information 

are encouraged. Your comments should 

address one or more of the following 

four points: 

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(4) Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Revision of a currently approved 

collection. 

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: 

Certification of Compliance with the 

Statutory Eligibility Requirements of the 

Violence Against Women Act as 

Amended. 

(3) Agency form number, if any, and 

the applicable component of the 

Department of Justice sponsoring the 

collection: Form Number: 1122–0001. 

U.S. Department of Justice, Office on 

Violence Against Women. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 

abstract: The affected public includes 

STOP formula grantees (50 states, the 

District of Columbia and five territories 

(Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, 

Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana 

Islands). The STOP Violence Against 

Women Formula Grant Program was 

authorized through the Violence Against 

Women Act of 1994 and reauthorized 

and amended in 2000, 2005, 2013 and 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1