Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Notices 62891

from the continuous or sustained use of a

narcotic drug and as a method of bringing the

individual to a narcotic drug-free state within

such period.

Further, the statute defines

‘‘maintenance treatment’’ as the

dispensing, ‘‘for a period in excess of

twenty-one days, of a narcotic drug in

the treatment of an individual for

dependence upon heroin or other

morphine-like drugs.’’ 21 U.S.C.

802(29). However, the applicable

implementing regulation states in

pertinent part:

This section is not intended to impose any

limitations on a physician * * * to

administer or dispense narcotic drugs in a

hospital to maintain or detoxify a person as

an incidental adjunct to medical or surgical

treatment of conditions other than addiction,

or * * * to persons with intractable pain in

which no relief or cure is possible or none

has been found after reasonable efforts.

21 CFR 1306.07(c).

The preponderance of the evidence

supports a finding that the Respondent

was tapering the drugs prescribed to

Patient A after acute pain resolved. Dr.

Ling, as well as others, testified that

such tapering would be appropriate

under such circumstances. Further, the

record does not establish that Patient A

experienced ‘‘adverse physiological or

psychological effects incident to

withdrawal’’ nor that, in fact, Patient A

exhibited behavior consistent with the

finding that she was an ‘‘addict.’’

Therefore, the Deputy Administrator

agrees with Judge Tenney, that the

‘‘Respondent made a reasonable effort to

manage the patient’s intractable pain

and limit the patient’s use of controlled

substances in terms of treatment of

[Patient A’s] other medical conditions,

and did not prescribe controlled

substances to her primarily to wean her

from dependence on narcotic

analgesics.’’ Thus, the Respondent was

not maintaining Patient A’s addiction

nor detoxifying Patient A without a

prior registration.

Finally, the Government argued that

from March 1986 through October 1988,

the Respondent failed to keep adequate

medical records of his treatment of

Patient A, and thus, his prescriptions

were not issued for a legitimate medical

purpose nor in the usual course of

professional practice in violation of 21

CFR 1306.04, and California Health and

Safety Code Sections 11168, 11190, and

11191. Yet the Government failed to cite

to any specific inadequacies of the

Respondent’s records in either their

proposed findings of fact or in the

exceptions filed to the Administrative

Law Judge’s recommended decision.

Pursuant to 21 CFR 1304.03(c), a

‘‘registered individual practitioner is not

required to keep records of controlled

substances in Schedules II, III, IV, and

V which are prescribed in the lawful

course of professional practice, unless

such substances are prescribed in the

course of maintenance or detoxification

treatment of an individual.’’ Further, a

‘‘registered individual practitioner is not

required to keep records of controlled

substances listed in [Schedules II

through V] which are administered in

the lawful course of professional

practice unless the practitioner regularly

engaged in the dispensing or

administering of controlled substances

and charges patients, either separately

or together with charges for other

professional services, for substances so

dispensed or administered.’’ 21 CFR

1304.03(d). Here, the Respondent

prescribed controlled substances to

Patient A, but the record does not

indicate that he ‘‘regularly dispensed’’

those substances to her nor that he

prescribed them ‘‘in the course of

maintenance or detoxification

treatment.’’ The Deputy Administrator

thus agrees with Judge Tenney’s

conclusion that ‘‘the Government failed

to prove that Respondent kept

inadequate records. No violation of the

Federal statute is found.’’

As for violations of State law,

California Health and Safety Code

Section 11190 provides that a

practitioner who issues a prescription of

a controlled substance classified in

Schedule II must make a record for each

transaction which shows the name and

address of the patient, the date of the

transaction, the ‘‘character, including

the name and strength, and quantity of

controlled substances involved’’, and

the pathology and purpose for which

the prescription was issued. The

Government did not cite to any specific

instances where the Respondent failed

to provide this required information.

Thus, after reviewing the record, the

Deputy Administrator agrees with Judge

Tenney’s conclusion that the ‘‘DEA did

not prove that there were recordkeeping

violations by a preponderance of the

evidence.’’

As to factor five, ‘‘such other conduct

which may threaten the public health

and safety,’’ the Government argued that

the Respondent’s pattern of prescribing

to Patient A caused a threat to the

public health and safety. As Judge

Tenney noted, this is an unusual case

for it involved the Respondent’s

prescribing practices for a single patient,

and no evidence was provided to show

a pattern of excessive prescribing to any

other patients. Further, as to that single

patient, the Deputy Administrator

concurs with Judge Tenney’s finding

that the ‘‘overriding purpose of [the]

Respondent’s prescribing practices was

the treatment of Patient A’s pain,’’ a

legitimate medical purpose. In the

balance, the Deputy Administrator finds

that it is in the public interest for the

Respondent to retain his DEA Certificate

of Registration.

However, the Deputy Administrator

notes with concern the large quantities

of controlled substances prescribed to

Patient A over an extended period of

time. Yet the conflicting expert opinion

evidence presented leads to the

conclusion that the medical community

has not reached a consensus as to the

appropriate level of prescribing of

controlled substances in the treatment

of chronic pain patients. Given this

dispute, the Deputy Administrator is

reluctant to conclude that the

Respondent’s prescribing of controlled

substances to Patient A lacked a

legitimate medical purpose or was

outside the usual course of professional

practice. It remains the role of the

treating physician to make medical

treatment decisions consistent with a

medical standard of care and the

dictates of the Federal and State law.

Here, the preponderance of the evidence

established that the Respondent so

acted.

Therefore, the Deputy Administrator

finds that the public interest is best

served by taking no action with respect

to the continued registration of the

Respondent. Accordingly, the Deputy

Administrator of the Drug Enforcement

Administration, pursuant to the

authority vested in him by 21 U.S.C. 823

and 824, and 21 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104,

hereby orders DEA Certificate of

Registration AS7287534, issued to

William F. Skinner, M.D., be, and it

hereby is, continued, and that any

pending applications be, and they

hereby are, granted. This order is

effective January 8, 1996.

Dated: November 30, 1995.

Stephen H. Greene,

Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–29770 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–09–M

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS

ADMINISTRATION

Records Schedules; Availability and

Request for Comments

AGENCY: National Archives and Records

Administration, Office of Records

Administration.

ACTION: Notice of availability of

proposed records schedules; request for

comments.
62892 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Notices

SUMMARY: The National Archives and

Records Administration (NARA)

publishes notice at least once monthly

of certain Federal agency requests for

records disposition authority (records

schedules). Records schedules identify

records of sufficient value to warrant

preservation in the National Archives of

the United States. Schedules also

authorize agencies after a specified

period to dispose of records lacking

administrative, legal, research, or other

value. Notice is published for records

schedules that (1) propose the

destruction of records not previously

authorized for disposal, or (2) reduce

the retention period for records already

authorized for disposal. NARA invites

public comments on such schedules, as

required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a).

DATES: Request for copies must be

received in writing on or before January

22, 1996. Once the appraisal of the

records is completed, NARA will send

a copy of the schedule. The requester

will be given 30 days to submit

comments.

ADDRESSES: Address requests for single

copies of schedules identified in this

notice to the Records Appraisal and

Disposition Division (NIR), National

Archives and Records Administration,

College Park, MD 20740. Requesters

must cite the control number assigned

to each schedule when requesting a

copy. The control number appears in

the parentheses immediately after the

name of the requesting agency.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year

U.S. Government agencies create

billions of records on paper, film,

magnetic tape, and other media. In order

to control this accumulation, agency

records managers prepare records

schedules specifying when the agency

no longer needs the records and what

happens to the records after this period.

Some schedules are comprehensive and

cover all the records of an agency or one

of its major subdivisions. These

comprehensive schedules provide for

the eventual transfer to the National

Archives of historically valuable records

and authorize the disposal of all other

records. Most schedules, however, cover

records of only one office or program or

a few series of records, and many are

updates of previously approved

schedules. Such schedules also may

include records that are designated for

permanent retention.

Destruction of records requires the

approval of the Archivist of the United

States. This approval is granted after a

thorough study of the records that takes

into account their administrative use by

the agency of origin, the rights of the

Government and of private persons

directly affected by the Government’s

activities, and historical or other value.

This public notice identifies the

Federal agencies and their subdivisions

requesting disposition authority,

includes the control number assigned to

each schedule, and briefly describes the

records proposed for disposal. The

records schedule contains additional

information about the records and their

disposition. Further information about

the disposition process will be

furnished to each requester.

Schedules Pending

1. Department of Agriculture,

Agricultural Research Service (N1–310–

95–2). Background records and input

and source documents for applied

human nutrition projects.

2. Department of Energy,

Superconducting Super Collider Project

Office (N1–434–95–4). Administrative,

routine facilities, and interim

construction records associated with the

Superconducting Super Collider Project.

3. Department of Health and Human

Services, Indian Health Service (N1–

513–94–1). Comprehensive schedule of

major electronic data systems.

4. Department of the Interior, Bureau

of Reclamation (N1–115–94–5). General

administrative records pertaining to

economics, repayment, and water sales

and rights.

5. Department of the Interior, Bureau

of Reclamation (N1–115–94–6). General

administrative records pertaining to

land operations and realty functions.

6. Department of Justice, Immigration

and Naturalization Service (N1–85–96–

1). Service Center receipt files.

7. Department of State, Bureau of

Economic and Business Affairs (N1–59–

94–36). Duplicative records maintained

in all bureau offices.

8. Department of State, Bureau of

Diplomatic Security (N1–59–94–43).

Routine, facilitative, and duplicative

records. Policy records are scheduled as

permanent.

9. The Administrative Conference of

the United States (N1–451–96–1).

Unrecoverable electronic roster and

unidentified/uncaptioned still

photographs.

10. Board of Governors of the Federal

Reserve System (N1–82–95–1).

Comprehensive schedule for the Federal

Open Market Committee.

11. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and

Firearms (N1–436–96–1). Requisition

requests for firearms explosives forms.

12. Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation (N1–465–94–1). Special

project or task force case files that are

non-precedent in nature.

13. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–93–13). Reduction in retention

period for employee rehabilitation case

files.

14. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–93–17). Employee service surveys

and suggestions.

15. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–95–2). Heavy equipment contract

files.

16. Tennessee Valley Authority (N1–

142–95–7). Oscillogram and transient

recorder record created in monitoring

power generation equipment and

facilities.

Dated: November 28, 1995.

James W. Moore,

Assistant Archivist for Records

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–29854 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7515–01–M

NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

National Endowment for the Arts;

Challenge and Advancement

Teleconference

Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.

L. 92–463), as amended, notice is hereby

given that a teleconference of the

Challenge and Advancement Advisory

Panel (Design Review Section) to the

National Council on the Arts will occur

from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. on December 12,

1995 at the Nancy Hanks Center, 1100

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,

DC 20506.

This meeting is for the purpose of

application evaluation, under the

National Foundation on the Arts and the

Humanities Act of 1965, as amended,

including discussion of information

given in confidence to the Agency by

grant applicants. In accordance with the

determination of the Chairman on June

22, 1995 these sessions will be closed to

the public pursuant to subsections (c)

(4), (6) and 9(B) of section 552b of Title

5, United States Code.

Further information with reference to

this meeting can be obtained from Ms.

Yvonne Sabine, Committee Management

Officer, National Endowment for the

Arts, Washington, DC 20506, or call

(202) 682–5433.

Dated: December 1, 1995.

Yvonne M. Sabine,

Director, Council & Panel Operations,

National Endowment for the Arts.

[FR Doc. 95–29793 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7537–01–M