42744 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2022 / Notices 

considered for listing or related actions 

in the National Register of Historic 

Places. Nominations for their 

consideration were received by the 

National Park Service before July 9, 

2022. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 

CFR part 60, comments are being 

accepted concerning the significance of 

the nominated properties under the 

National Register criteria for evaluation. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Nominations submitted by State or 

Tribal Historic Preservation Officers: 

FLORIDA 

Polk County 

Evans, John H., House, 730 Buena Vista Dr., 

Lake Alfred, SG100008019 

GEORGIA 

Muscogee County 

Columbus Coca-Cola Bottling Company, 1147 

6th Ave., Columbus, SG100008016 

LOUISIANA 

Caldwell Parish 

Graves Homeplace, 281 Davis Lake Rd., 

Columbia vicinity, SG100008005 

MICHIGAN 

Wayne County 

McGhee, Orsel and Minnie, House, (The Civil 

Rights Movement and the African 

American Experience in 20th Century 

Detroit MPS), 4626 Seebaldt St, Detroit, 

MP100008009 

NEW YORK 

Erie County 

Buffalo Public School #92–PS 92, 340 

Fougeron St., Buffalo, SG100008007 

OHIO 

Hamilton County 

United Colored American Cemetery, 4732– 

4734 Duck Creek Rd. (at corner of 4805 

Duck Creek Rd.), Cincinnati, SG100008017 

Summit County 

Mentzer-Sorrick Farm, 365 Center Rd., New 

Franklin, SG100008020 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

Brown County 

Blanchard, William C., House, 1016 South 

Kline St., Aberdeen, SG100008006 

VIRGINIA 

New Kent County 

Shuttlewood, 8830 Saint Peters Ln., New 

Kent vicinity, SG100008021 

Roanoke Independent City 

English Gardens, 2325, 2331, 2333, 2339, 

2343, 2345, 2349 Memorial Ave. SW, 1208, 

1218, 1222, Fauquier St. SW, 2324, 2330, 

2332, 2336, 2340, 2346, 2352 Denniston 

Ave. SW, Roanoke, SG100008022 

Staunton Independent City 

Staunton Steam Laundry, 110 West 

Hampton, 709 Hall, and 710 Robertson 

Sts., Staunton, SG100008023 

WISCONSIN 

Dane County 

Stoughton Municipal Power Plant No.1, 601 

South 4th St., Stoughton, SG100008010 

WYOMING 

Sheridan County 

Gable House, (Ranches, Farms, and 

Homesteads in Wyoming, 1860–1960 

MPS), 142 SR Buffalo Creek Rd., Wyarno, 

MP100008015 

In the interest of preservation, a 

SHORTENED comment period has been 

requested for the following resource: 

OHIO 

Stark County 

Portage Street Elementary School, 239 and 

301 Portage St., North Canton, 

SG100008013, Comment period: 3 days 

A request for removal has been made 

for the following resources: 

MICHIGAN 

Monroe County 

New York Central River Raisin Railroad 

Bridge, (City of Monroe MRA), Across 

River Raisin, east of Winchester St., 

Monroe, OT82005048 

Wayne County 

Fort Street-Pleasant Street and Norfolk & 

Western Railroad Viaduct, (Highway 

Bridges of Michigan MPS), Fort St. over 

Pleasant St. and N&W RR., Detroit, 

OT00000116 

St. Boniface Roman Catholic Church, 2356 

Vermont Ave., Detroit, OT89000487 

Additional documentation has been 

received for the following resource: 

ARKANSAS 

Pulaski County 

Governor’s Mansion Historic District 

(Additional Documentation), Bounded by 

the Mansion grounds, 13th, Center, Gaines, 

and 18th Sts., Little Rock, AD78000620 

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR 

part 60. 

Dated: July 12, 2022. 

Sherry A. Frear, 

Chief, National Register of Historic Places/ 

National Historic Landmarks Program. 

[FR Doc. 2022–15288 Filed 7–15–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

[Docket No. 22–19] 

Faris Abusharif, M.D.; Decision and 

Order 

On March 2, 2022, the Administrator, 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

(hereinafter, DEA), issued an Order to 

Show Cause and Immediate Suspension 

of Registration (hereinafter, OSC/ISO) to 

Faris Abusharif, M.D. (hereinafter, 

Respondent) of Orland Park, Illinois. 

OSC/ISO, at 1 and 6. The OSC/ISO 

notified Respondent of the immediate 

suspension of his Certificate of 

Registration No. BA8201775 because 

‘‘[his] continued registration constitutes 

‘an imminent danger to the public 

health or safety.’ ’’ Id. at 1 (citing 21 

U.S.C. 824(d)). Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 

824(a)(4), the OSC/ISO also proposed 

the revocation of Respondent’s 

Certificate of Registration No. 

BA8201775 because ‘‘[his] continued 

registration is inconsistent with the 

public interest, as that term is defined 

in 21 U.S.C. 823(f).’’ Id. 

The OSC/ISO alleged that from at 

least February 10, 2017, through at least 

January 5, 2022, Respondent ‘‘issued 

numerous prescriptions for controlled 

substances to five individuals outside of 

the usual course of professional practice 

and not for a legitimate medical 

purpose.’’ Id. at 3. The OSC/ISO also 

alleged that during an interview by DEA 

on July 22, 2021, Respondent admitted 

to ordering Adderall from his distributor 

and taking it himself without a 

prescription as well as to prescribing 

Ritalin and tramadol to himself between 

November 14, 2020, and February 27, 

2021 in violation of state law. Id. at 2– 

3. Regarding Respondent’s alleged 

misconduct, the OSC/ISO alleged 

violations of 21 CFR 1306.04(a) and 7 

Ill. Adm. Code § 3100.380. Id. at 2. 

Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(d) and 21 

CFR 1301.36(e), the OSC/ISO 

immediately suspended Respondent’s 

Certificate of Registration No. 

BA8201775 after a preliminary finding 

that Respondent’s continued registration 

was inconsistent with the public 

interest and that Respondent’s 

continued registration during the 

pendency of the proceedings would 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2022 / Notices 42745 

1The Agency finds that the Government’s service 

of the OSC/ISO was adequate and that the Request 

for Hearing was timely filed on March 21, 2022. 

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. 

constitute an imminent danger to the 

public health or safety. Id. at 5. 

The OSC/ISO notified Respondent 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 5–6 (citing 

21 CFR 1301.43). 

By letter dated March 21, 2022, 

Respondent requested a hearing 1 and 

argued that his prescribing was 

consistent with the public interest, part 

of the usual course of professional 

practice, and only for legitimate medical 

purposes. Request for Hearing, at 1. The 

Office of Administrative Law Judges put 

the matter on the docket and assigned 

it to Chief Administrative Law Judge 

John J. Mulrooney, II (hereinafter, the 

Chief ALJ). On March 21, 2022, the 

Chief ALJ issued an Order for 

Prehearing Statements. On March 23, 

2022, the Government submitted a 

Motion to Exceed Page Limit, Opposed 

Motion for Summary Disposition, and 

Unopposed Motion for Continuance 

(hereinafter, Motion for Summary 

Disposition). In its Motion for Summary 

Disposition, the Government alleged 

that on March 18, 2022, after the OSC/ 

ISO had already been served, the State 

of Illinois Department of Financial and 

Professional Regulation issued a 

temporary suspension of Respondent’s 

state medical license. Motion for 

Summary Disposition, at 1. The 

Government provided documentation to 

support its claim and argued that, 

accordingly, Respondent’s lack of state 

authority formed an independent basis 

to revoke Respondent’s registration. Id.; 

see also id. Government Exhibit 

(hereinafter, GX) 3–5. The Government 

concluded by requesting that its Motion 

for Summary Disposition be granted and 

Respondent’s registration be revoked 

based on Respondent’s lack of state 

authority. Motion for Summary 

Disposition, at 7–8. 

The Government is not required to 

issue an amended OSC to notice an 

allegation of a registrant’s lack of state 

authority that arises during the 

pendency of a proceeding regarding a 

DEA registration. Hatem M. Ataya, M.D., 

81 FR 8221, 8244 (2016). Previous 

Agency decisions have stated that 

because the possession of state authority 

is a prerequisite for obtaining and 

maintaining a registration, the issue of 

state authority can be raised at any stage 

of a proceeding. See Ataya, 81 FR at 

8244; Joe M. Morgan, D.O., 78 FR 

61,961, 61,973–74 (2013). Nonetheless, 

in such cases, a registrant must be 

provided with a meaningful opportunity 

to contest the allegation. See, e.g., 

Lawrence E. Stewart, M.D., 86 FR 

15,257, 15,257 (2021); Cypress Creek 

Pharmacy LLC, 86 FR 71,927, 71,927 

(2021); Lesly Pompy, M.D., 84 FR 

57,749, 57,749–50 (2019); Ataya, 81 FR 

at 8245; Morgan, 78 FR at 61,973–74. 

On March 24, 2022, the Chief ALJ 

issued an Order Granting Leave to File 

a Motion With an Oversized 

Attachment, Setting a Briefing 

Schedule, and Modifying the Order for 

Prehearing Statements (hereinafter, 

Briefing Schedule). In the Briefing 

Schedule, Respondent was given the 

opportunity to file a reply to the 

Government’s allegation that he 

currently lacks state authority to handle 

controlled substances. Briefing 

Schedule, at 1. On April 1, 2022, 

Respondent filed his Response to Drug 

Enforcement Administration’s Opposed 

Motion for Summary Disposition 

(hereinafter, Response). In his Response, 

Respondent argued that the 

Government’s Motion for Summary 

Disposition should be denied because 

the suspension of Respondent’s state 

medical license was based on 

‘‘unproven allegations—not facts’’, and 

a hearing on the merits had not yet 

occurred. Response, at 2–3. Further, 

Respondent argued that he had had no 

truly meaningful opportunity to refute 

the Government’s claims because the 

Government had based its Motion for 

Summary Disposition on ‘‘unproven 

and unsubstantiated allegations.’’ Id. at 

3. 

On April 5, 2022, the Chief ALJ issued 

an Order Granting the Government’s 

Motion for Summary Disposition and 

Recommended Rulings, Findings of 

Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision 

of the Administrative Law Judge 

(hereinafter, Recommended Decision or 

RD). In the RD, the Chief ALJ granted 

the Government’s Motion for Summary 

Disposition, finding that there was no 

dispute of fact necessitating a hearing. 

RD, at 6–7. In concluding the RD, the 

Chief ALJ recommended that 

Respondent’s DEA registration be 

revoked based on his lack of state 

authority. Id. at 7. By letter dated May 

2, 2022, the Chief ALJ certified and 

transmitted the record to the Agency for 

final Agency action and advised that 

neither party filed exceptions. 

The Agency agrees with the Chief ALJ 

and issues this Decision and Order 

based on the entire record before the 

Agency. 21 CFR 1301.43(e). The Agency 

makes the following findings of fact. 

Findings of Fact 

Respondent’s DEA Registration 

Respondent is the holder of DEA 

Certificate of Registration No. 

BA8201775 at the registered address of 

16604 107th St, Orland Park, Illinois 

60467. GX 1 (Certificate of Registration). 

Pursuant to this registration, 

Respondent is authorized to dispense 

controlled substances in schedules II 

through V as a practitioner. Id. 

Respondent’s registration expires on 

June 30, 2024. Id. 

The Status of Respondent’s State 

License 

On March 18, 2022, the Illinois 

Department of Financial and 

Professional Regulation (hereinafter, the 

Department) issued an Order 

suspending both Respondent’s Illinois 

medical license and Illinois controlled 

substance license after finding that 

‘‘Respondent’s actions constitute[d] an 

immediate danger to the public.’’ GX 5, 

at 4–5; see also id. at 21–22 (Affidavit 

of S.G.). Respondent was notified that 

the suspension was temporary and that 

a hearing would be held on the 

allegations against him that formed the 

basis of the suspension. Id. at 1–2. 

According to the Department’s Petition 

for Temporary Suspension, these 

allegations included, among other 

things, that Respondent engaged in 

inappropriate sexual conduct with 

patients of his private practice, that 

Respondent inappropriately prescribed 

controlled substances to patients of his 

private practice, that Respondent selfprescribed controlled substances, and 

that Respondent ordered controlled 

substances from a supplier for his own 

use without a prescription. Id. at 6–14; 

see also id. at 23–54 (Complaint). 

According to Illinois online records, 

of which the Agency takes official 

notice, Respondent’s Illinois medical 

license is still suspended.2 Illinois 

Department of Financial and 

Professional Regulation License Lookup, 

https://online-dfpr.micropact.com/ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
42746 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 136 / Monday, July 18, 2022 / Notices 

lookup/licenselookup.aspx (last visited 

date of signature of this Order). Further, 

Illinois online records show that 

Respondent’s Illinois controlled 

substance license is also suspended. Id. 

Accordingly, the Agency finds that 

Respondent is not currently licensed to 

engage in the practice of medicine nor 

registered to dispense controlled 

substances in Illinois, 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 71,371 

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

826 (4th Cir. 2012); Frederick Marsh 

Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27,616, 27,617 

(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 71,371–72; 

Sheran Arden Yeates, M.D., 71 FR 

39,130, 39,131 (2006); Dominick A. 

Ricci, M.D., 58 FR 51,104, 51,105 (1993); 

Bobby Watts, M.D., 53 FR 11,919, 11,920 

(1988); Frederick Marsh Blanton, 43 FR 

at 27,617. Moreover, because ‘‘the 

controlling question’’ in a proceeding 

brought under 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3) is 

whether the holder of a practitioner’s 

registration ‘‘is currently authorized to 

handle controlled substances in the 

[S]tate,’’ Hooper, 76 FR at 71,371

(quoting Anne Lazar Thorn, 62 FR

12,847, 12,848 (1997)), the Agency has

also long held that revocation is

warranted even where a practitioner is

still challenging the underlying action.

Bourne Pharmacy, 72 FR 18,273, 18,274

(2007); Wingfield Drugs, 52 FR 27,070,

27,071 (1987). Thus, it is of no

consequence that Respondent is still

challenging the underlying action. What

is consequential is the Agency’s finding

that Respondent is not currently

authorized to dispense controlled

substances in Illinois, the state in which

he is registered with the DEA.

Pursuant to the Illinois Controlled 

Substances Act, a ‘‘practitioner’’ means 

‘‘a physician licensed to practice 

medicine in all its branches . . . or 

other person licensed, registered, or 

otherwise lawfully permitted by the 

United States or this State 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.’’ 720 Ill. Comp. 

Stat. Ann. 570/102(kk) (West 2022). 

Further, the Illinois Controlled 

Substances Act requires that ‘‘[e]very 

person who manufactures, distributes, 

or dispenses any controlled substances 

. . . must obtain a registration issued by 

the Department of Financial and 

Professional Regulation in accordance 

with its rules.’’ Id. at 570/302(a). The 

Illinois Controlled Substances Act also 

authorizes the Department of Financial 

and Professional Regulation to 

discipline a practitioner holding a 

controlled substance license, stating that 

‘‘[a] registration under Section 303 to 

manufacture, distribute, or dispense a 

controlled substance . . . may be 

denied, refused renewal, suspended, or 

revoked by the Department of Financial 

and Professional Regulation.’’ Id. at 570/ 

304(a). 

Here, the undisputed evidence in the 

record is that Respondent currently 

lacks authority to handle controlled 

substances in Illinois because both his 

Illinois medical license and his Illinois 

controlled substance license are 

suspended. As already discussed, a 

practitioner must hold a valid 

controlled substance license to dispense 

a controlled substance in Illinois. Thus, 

because Respondent lacks authority to 

handle controlled substances in Illinois, 

Respondent is not eligible to maintain a 

DEA registration. Accordingly, the 

Agency will order that Respondent’s 

DEA registration be revoked. 

Order 

Pursuant to 28 CFR 0.100(b) and the 

authority vested in the Administrator by 

21 U.S.C. 824(a), I hereby revoke DEA 

Certificate of Registration No. 

BA8201775 issued to Faris Abusharif, 

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 Faris Abusharif,

M.D. to renew or modify this

registration, as well as any other

pending application of Faris Abusharif,

M.D. for additional registration in

Illinois. This Order is effective August

17, 2022.

Signing Authority 

This document of the Drug 

Enforcement Administration was signed 

on July 13, 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. 

Heather Achbach, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug 

Enforcement Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–15279 Filed 7–15–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

Determinations Regarding Eligibility 

To Apply for Trade Adjustment 

Assistance 

In accordance with Sections 223 and 

284 (19 U.S.C. 2273 and 2395) of the 

Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271, et 

seq.) (‘‘Act’’), as amended, the 

Department of Labor herein presents 

summaries of determinations regarding 

eligibility to apply for trade adjustment 

assistance under Chapter 2 of the Act 

(‘‘TAA’’) for workers by (TA–W) issued 

during the period of June 1, 2022 

through June 30, 2022. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES