Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 38183 

1Based on the affidavit of a DEA Diversion 

Investigator that the Government submitted with 

the RFAA, the Agency finds that the Government’s 

attempts to serve Registrant with the OSC were 

adequate. RFAA Exhibit B. Further, based on the 

assertions of the Government, the Agency finds that 

more than thirty days have passed and Registrant 

has not requested a hearing, submitted a written 

statement or corrective action plan and therefore 

has waived any such rights. 21 CFR 1301.43(d) and 

21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C). RFAA, at 2. 

2Under 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, 

Respondent 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 

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

3This 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 71, 371–72; 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. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

1. Type of Information Collection 

(check justification or form 83): 

Revision of a Currently Approved 

Collection. 

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: 

Application and Permit for Importation 

of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense 

Articles. 

3. The agency form number, if any, 

and the applicable component of the 

Department sponsoring the collection: 

Form number (if applicable): ATF 

Form 6—Part II (5330.3B). 

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 (if applicable): Individuals or 

households. 

Abstract: The information collected 

on the Application and Permit for 

Importation of Firearms, Ammunition 

and Defense Articles—ATF Form 6— 

Part II (5330.3B) is used to determine if 

the article(s) described in the 

application qualifies for importation by 

the importer, and also serves as 

authorization for the importer. 

5. An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond: An estimated 400 respondents 

will respond to this collection once 

annually, and it will take each 

respondent approximately 30 minutes 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 

200 hours, which is equal to 400 (total 

respondents) * 1 (# of response per 

respondent) * .5 (30 minutes or the time 

taken to prepare each response). 

If additional information is required 

contact: Robert Houser, Assistant 

Director, 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. 

Robert Houser, 

Assistant Director, Policy and Planning Staff, 

U.S. Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13604 Filed 6–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–FY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Julie Halling, M.D.; Decision and Order 

On November 4, 2021, the Drug 

Enforcement Administration 

(hereinafter, DEA or Government), 

issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to 

Julie Halling, M.D. (hereinafter, 

Registrant). OSC, at 1. The OSC 

proposed the revocation of Registrant’s 

Certificate of Registration, No. 

BH6450174, at the registered address of 

5102 Galley Road, Lot 304C, Colorado 

Springs, Colorado. The OSC alleged that 

Registrant’s registration should be 

revoked because Registrant is without 

‘‘authority to handle controlled 

substances in the state in which 

[Registrant is] registered with the DEA.’’ 

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

The Agency makes the following 

findings of fact based on the 

uncontroverted evidence submitted by 

the Government in a Request for Final 

Agency Action (RFAA) on May 16, 

2022.1

Findings of Fact 

On February 29, 2021, the Colorado 

Medical Board issued a Final Board 

Order that revoked Registrant’s license 

to practice medicine in the State of 

Colorado. RFAA Exhibit 2, App.1 (Final 

Board Order). According to Colorado’s 

online records, of which the Agency 

takes official notice, Registrant’s license 

is still revoked.2 Colorado Professional 

or Business License Lookup, https://

apps.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/ 

Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx (last 

visited date of signature of this Order). 

Accordingly, the Agency finds that 

Registrant currently is not licensed to 

engage in the practice of medicine in 

Colorado, the state in which Registrant 

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 (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.3 See, e.g., 

James L. Hooper, M.D., 76 FR 71371 

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

826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh 

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

(1978). 

According to Colorado statute, 

‘‘[e]very person who manufactures, 

distributes, or dispenses any controlled 

substance within this state . . . shall 

obtain . . . a registration, issued by the 

respective licensing board . . . . For 

purposes of this section and this article 

[ ], ‘registration’ or ‘registered’ means 

. . . the licensing of physicians by the 

Colorado medical board . . . .’’ Colo. 

Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18–18–302(1) (West 

2019). Here, the undisputed evidence in 

the record is that Registrant’s Colorado 

medical license was revoked by the 

Colorado Medical Board. Registrant, 

therefore, is not authorized to dispense 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
38184 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 

1Respondent made a timely hearing request and 

submitted a Corrective Action Plan (CAP). RFAAX 

4. DEA rejected Respondent’s CAP on or about 

December 21, 2017, RFAAX 5, and a revised CAP 

was rejected on or about January 29, 2018, RFAAX 

6. Respondent waived his right to a hearing, 

RFAAX 7, and proceedings were terminated on 

November 29, 2017, RFAAX 8. 

2Although the language of 21 U.S.C. 824(a) 

discusses suspension and revocation of a 

registration, it may also serve as the basis for the 

denial of a DEA registration application. E.g., 

Crosby Pharmacy and Wellness, 87 FR 21,212, 

21,214 (2022); Robert Wayne Locklear, 86 FR 

33,738. 33,744–45 (2021) (collecting Agency 

decisions). 

controlled substances in Colorado and 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. BH6450174 issued to 

Julie Halling, 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 

Julie Halling, M.D. to renew or modify 

this registration, as well as any other 

pending application of Julie Halling, 

M.D. for additional registration in 

Colorado. This Order is effective [insert 

Date Thirty Days From the Date of 

Publication in the Federal Register]. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Drug 

Enforcement Administration was signed 

on June 16, 2022, 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. 

Scott Brinks, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug 

Enforcement Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13602 Filed 6–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Kevin J. Dobi, APRN; Decision and 

Order 

On October 4, 2017, the Drug 

Enforcement Administration 

(hereinafter, DEA or Government) 

issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC), 

seeking to deny the March 31, 2017 DEA 

Certificate of Registration application 

filed by Kevin J. Dobi APRN 

(Respondent) for registration in 

Montana. Request for Final Agency 

Action Exhibit (RFAAX) 2. The OSC 

alleged Respondent’s application should 

be denied pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 

824(a)(1) because Respondent materially 

falsified his application. Id. at 1. 

The Agency makes the following 

findings of fact based on the 

uncontroverted evidence submitted by 

the Government in a Request for Final 

Agency Action (RFAA) on May 16, 

2022.1

I. Findings of Fact 

Respondent surrendered for cause a 

Texas state registered nurse license on 

or about October 6, 1997. RFAAX 3, at 

11 (Order of the Board of Nurse 

Examiners for the State of Texas). 

Respondent also surrendered for cause a 

DEA controlled substance registration, 

no. MD1340710, on September 9, 2011. 

RFAAX 1, at 2 (Certification of 

Respondent’s Registration History). 

On March 31, 2017, Respondent filed 

an application seeking a DEA controlled 

substance registration for schedules II– 

V. RFAAX 1, at 3–6 (Respondent’s 

application). On the application, 

Respondent was asked whether he had 

‘‘ever surrendered (for cause) . . . a 

federal controlled substance 

registration.’’ Respondent answered no. 

Id. at 4. Respondent was also asked 

whether he had ‘‘ever surrendered (for 

cause) . . . a state professional license.’’ 

Respondent answered no. Id. The 

Agency finds that Respondent’s answers 

were clearly false because Respondent 

had surrendered a controlled substance 

registration and a state professional 

license for cause. 

II. Discussion 

The Administrator may deny an 

application for registration if the 

applicant materially falsified an 

application. 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(1).2 Here, 

Respondent provided false information 

to two liability questions on his March 

31, 2017 application—falsely 

responding that he had never 

surrendered for cause a state 

professional license or a federal 

controlled substances registration. 

Agency decisions have repeatedly held 

that false responses to the liability 

questions on an application for 

registration are material. E.g., Crosby 

Pharmacy and Wellness, 87 FR 21,214; 

Frank Joseph Stirlacci, M.D., 85 FR 

45,229, 45,234–35 (2020). Accordingly, 

the Agency finds that the Government 

has established grounds to deny 

Respondent’s application. 

III. Sanction 

Where, as here, the Government has 

established grounds to deny an 

application for registration, the burden 

shifts to the respondent to show why he 

can be entrusted with the responsibility 

carried by a registration. Garret Howard 

Smith, M.D., 83 FR 18,882, 18,910 

(2018) (citing Samuel S. Jackson, 72 FR 

23,848, 23,853 (2007)). The issue of trust 

is necessarily a fact-dependent 

determination based on the 

circumstances presented by the 

individual respondent; therefore, the 

Agency looks at factors, such as the 

acceptance of responsibility and the 

credibility of that acceptance as it 

relates to the probability of repeat 

violations or behavior and the nature of 

the misconduct that forms the basis for 

sanction, while also considering the 

Agency’s interest in deterring similar 

acts. See Arvinder Singh, M.D., 81 FR 

8247, 8248 (2016). 

In this matter, Respondent did not 

avail himself of the opportunity to 

refute the Government’s case or 

demonstrate why he can be entrusted 

with a registration. Accordingly, the 

Agency will order the sanctions the 

Government requested, as contained in 

the Order below. 

Order 

Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the 

authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 

823(f), I hereby deny the pending 

application for a Certification of 

Registration in Montana submitted by 

Kevin J. Dobi, APRN. This Order is 

effective July 27, 2022. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Drug 

Enforcement Administration was signed 

on June 16, 2022, 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1