alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 73 FR 33329, June 12, 2008.

§ 40.205 How are drug test problems corrected? ( a ) As a collector, you have the responsibility of trying to successfully complete a collection procedure for each employee. ( 1 ) If, during or shortly after the collection process, you become aware of any event that prevents the completion of a valid test or collection (*e.g.,* a procedural or paperwork error), you must try to correct the problem promptly, if doing so is practicable. You may conduct another collection as part of this effort.
( 2 ) If another collection is necessary, you must begin the new collection procedure as soon as possible, using a new CCF and a new collection kit.
( b ) If, as a collector, laboratory, MRO, employer, or other person implementing these drug testing regulations, you become aware of a problem that can be corrected (see § 40.203), but which has not already been corrected under paragraph (a) of this section, you must take all practicable action to correct the problem so that the test is not cancelled. ( 1 ) If the problem resulted from the omission of required information, you must, as the person responsible for providing that information, supply in writing the missing information and a statement that it is true and accurate. For example, suppose you are a collector, and you forgot to make a notation on the “Remarks” line of the CCF that the employee did not sign the certification. You would, when the problem is called to your attention, supply a signed statement that the employee failed or refused to sign the certification and that your statement is true and accurate. You must supply this information on the same business day on which you are notified of the problem, transmitting it by fax or courier.
( 2 ) If the problem is the use of a non-Federal form or an expired Federal form, you must provide a signed statement (i.e., a memorandum for the record). It must state that the incorrect form contains all the information needed for a valid DOT drug test, and that the incorrect form was used inadvertently or as the only means of conducting a test, in circumstances beyond your control. The statement must also list the steps you have taken to prevent future use of non-Federal forms or expired Federal forms for DOT tests. For this flaw to be corrected, the test of the specimen must have occurred at a HHS-certified laboratory where it was tested consistent with the requirements of this part. You must supply this information on the same business day on which you are notified of the problem, transmitting it by fax or courier.
( 3 ) You must maintain the written documentation of a correction with the CCF.
( 4 ) You must mark the CCF in such a way (*e.g.,* stamp noting correction) as to make it obvious on the face of the CCF that you corrected the flaw.
( c ) If the correction does not take place, as the MRO you must cancel the test.
[65 FR 79526, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 41954, Aug. 9, 2001]
Editorial Note on Part 386
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 386 appear at 65 FR 7755, Feb. 16, 2000, and 88 FR 80182, Nov. 17, 2023.

§ 386.8 Computation of time. ( a ) *Generally.* In computing any time period set out in these rules or in an order issued hereunder, the time computation begins with the day following the act, event, or default. The last day of the period is included unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal Federal holiday in which case the time period will run to the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal Federal holiday. All Saturdays, Sundays, and legal Federal holidays except those falling on the last day of the period will be computed.
( b ) *Date of entry of orders.* In computing any period of time involving the date of the entry of an order, the date of entry is the date the order is served.
( c ) *Computation of time for delivery by mail.* ( 1 ) Service of all documents is deemed effected at the time of mailing.
( 2 ) Documents are not deemed filed until received by Docket Operations.
( 3 ) Whenever a party has a right or a duty to act or to make any response within a prescribed period after service by mail, or on a date certain after service by mail, 5 days will be added to the prescribed period.
[70 FR 28480, May 18, 2005, as amended at 78 FR 58481, Sept. 24, 2013]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on June 2, 2023, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Petroleum Environmental Research Forum (“PERF”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Marathon Petroleum Company LP, Findlay, OH, has been added as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and PERF intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On February 10, 1986, PERF filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on March 14, 1986 (51 FR 8903).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on February 2, 2022. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on March 11, 2022 (87 FR 14044).                

Suzanne Morris,

Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2023-18065 Filed 8-21-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
U.S., Afghan soldiers partner in Eastern Afghanistan
 By Army Pfc. Zackary Root , Regional Command-East Public Affairs
  
 ﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿WASHINGTON (November 10, 2011) – American and Afghan soldiers met here recently at this eastern Afghanistan outpost to discuss battlefield support operations and training needs. “Having key leader engagements is vital in facilitating our relationship with the ANA (Afghan National Army),” said Army Maj. Ebony Lambert, the executive officer for the 172nd Support Battalion. The Americans discussed their desire to have Afghan soldiers work with them in the operations cell, officials said. This, officials said, would enable Afghan troops to see how their U.S. counterparts obtain and employ real-time operational information from the battlefield. “It is going to give them a better understanding of our military decision-making process and what each company does to execute the commander’s intent,” said Army Command Sgt. Major Terry Burton, of Roanoke, Va. The Afghans and Americans also discussed improvements to enhance training in order to support the needs of the Afghan soldiers as they become more proficient. The week before the meeting, Afghan soldiers participated in joint medical training and a joint soldier of the month board. These events provide the Afghan troops with skills necessary to improve as a fighting force, Lambert said. “I think we were successful in articulating what the goals are for training,” Lambert said. Meeting and sharing knowledge with their Afghan counterparts helps the Americans strengthen the relationships that they have established, allowing for closer ties and making it easier to communicate and work together. “These meetings improve our partnerships and increase our ability to do training with them,” Lambert said. With a rapidly improving Afghan army poised to take over Regional Command East’s battle space, officials said, face-to-face discussions are vital in the process of transition to the Afghan National Army taking over command of security for Afghanistan.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000022767
<NAME> TEXAS-NEW MEXICO POWER CO.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      933,939
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      1,884
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          34,213
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        32,121
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,002,157
<COMMON>                                           107
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      222,133
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             65,308
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 287,548
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,420
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           533,800
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      100
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 177,289
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                1,002,157
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      502,737
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            10,333
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     389,527
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     408,860
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         93,877
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               2,348
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  96,225
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        69,363
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,862
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        167
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   26,695
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        10,700
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       64,654
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          69,313
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Hillsborough,

June, 1899.

#### White *v.*Dearborn & *a.*

Bill on Exceptions, to an order of -the court denying the plaintiff’s motion for a continuance.

*Henry B. Atherton*and *Bertis A.*Pease, for the plaintiff.

*Charles J.*Hamblett, for the defendants.

Young, J.

No question of law is raised by the plaintiff’s bill -of exceptions. The motion for a continuance raised a question of fact, and all such questions are for the trial term. *Clark*v. Clough, 62 N. H. 693.

*Exception overruled.*

Peaslee, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
#### § 599.511 Counsel.

A party has the right to be represented at all stages of the proceeding by counsel. A party electing to be represented by counsel must notify the Hearing Officer of this election in writing, after which point the Hearing Officer will direct all further communications to that counsel. A party represented by counsel bears all of its own attorneys' fees and costs.
Learning from Each Other: Joining Forces 

Clay E. Simpson, Jr., MSPH, PhD


Deputy Assistant Secretary for Minority Health


Closing the Gap, The U.S. and U.K. Collaborate on Minority Health • March 1998 

We are here today from different countries, but we are united by what we 

have in common. Although the demographics of our populations are 

very different, we both have racial and ethnic minority populations who 

have poorer health than the general population. We are both working to reverse this 

trend. It is this commitment to improving minority health status that brings us here. 

We share common problems, and now we are here to share solutions. This is an 

opportunity for us to learn from each other and join forces. 

The Office of Minority Health was created by the U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services (HHS) in 1985 as a result of the Report of the Secretary’s Task 

Force on Black and Minority Health. We believe in disease prevention and health 

promotion. But we don’t just focus on diseases because so many other factors contribute to our health status. We also address cross-cutting issues, such as the ability to 

pay for care and culturally competent delivery. 

Over the last few years, we have seen increasing signs of support for minority 

health issues in HHS. We have been able to support the establishment of HHS-wide 

initiatives for each of our target populations. This means that every health agency 

within HHS is responsible for making commitments to address the health of African 

Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, American Indians/Alaska Natives, Asians, and Native 

Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders. 

Through these initiatives, we are making and shaping policies that affect the 

health outcomes of our people. Our department-wide efforts not only increase minority representation in HHS, but help put minorities in decision-making positions. 

OMH knows that no matter how optimistic we are, we cannot solve all of our 

nation’s minority health problems. This is why our approach centers on building 

partnerships to strengthen our resources. Our OMH Resource Center has served as 

a national resource and referral service on minority health for 10 years. We encourage 

increased awareness of minority health through free services such as database searches, 

publications, and mailing lists. 

OMH has also helped establish other offices of minority health in more than 

half of our states, and in our federal agencies. This is a network we are building. It 

involves not only government, but promotes community, family, and individual 

action as a way to improve minority health. 

What I propose today is that we pay close attention to the lessons we’ve learned. 

We have come here to sign a joint agreement between the U.S. and the U.K. to take 

what we learn at this conference to the next level—a level of ongoing international 

collaboration that produces results, benefits both countries, and improves the quality 

of life for our people. 

This editorial was part of Dr. Simpson’s speech at the U.S./U.K. Conference. 

Office of Minority Health Resource Center U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-3552

___________

Gabriel Wade Mills, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Arkansas.

John Anderson, Evaluations, *

Arkansas State Hospital; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Albert Kittrell, Doctor, Arkansas *

State Hospital; Konis, Dr., Medical *

Doctor, Arkansas State Hospital; *

Arkansas Partnership Program, *

Medical Doctor, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 26, 2008

 Filed: March 31, 2008

___________

Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
1

The Honorable George Howard, Jr., late a United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable J. Thomas Ray, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of

Arkansas.

-2-

Gabriel Mills appeals the district court’s1 grant of summary judgment for

defendants in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, in which Mills sought to challenge his

commitment to the Arkansas State Hospital (ASH) under the Arkansas Act 911

Program and alleged that he received inadequate treatment for a medical condition

while he was a patient at ASH and later at another Act 911 Program facility. We

conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to

defendants. See Anderson v. Larson, 327 F.3d 762, 767 (8th Cir. 2003) (de novo

review). First, Mills’s challenge to his commitment is not properly brought in this

section 1983 action, cf. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489-90 (1973) (state

prisoner’s challenge to fact or duration of confinement must be brought through

habeas corpus after exhaustion of state remedies); and second, the medical records

show that Mills received reasonable testing and medication for his medical

complaints, see Logan v. Clarke, 119 F.3d 647, 649-50 (8th Cir. 1997) (prison doctors

were not deliberately indifferent where they treated prisoner on numerous occasions

and offered sensible medication and treatment); Kayser v. Caspari, 16 F.3d 280, 281

(8th Cir. 1994) (plaintiff’s self-diagnosis alone will not suffice to establish serious

medical condition); Coleman v. Rahija, 114 F.3d 778, 784 (8th Cir. 1997) (failure to

establish “the detrimental effect of delay in treatment precludes a claim of deliberate

indifference”).

The judgment is affirmed.

______________________________
§ 529.6 Requirements for final-stage manufacturers. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each final-stage manufacturer whose manufacturing operations on an incomplete automobile cause the completed automobile to exceed the maximum curb weight or maximum frontal area set forth in the document specified in § 529.4(b) and furnished it by the incomplete automobile manufacturer under § 529.4(c)(1) or by the last intermediate manufacturer under § 529.5(b), as appropriate, is considered the manufacturer of the completed automobile for the purpose of the requirements of Title V and rules issued thereunder, other than those in part 537, Fuel Economy Reports.
( b ) Each final-stage manufacturer that becomes the manufacturer of a multistage automobile under paragraph (a) of this section shall, within 10 days after completing its manufacturing operations on that automobile, send written notification of its exceeding the curb weight or frontal area maximum to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and to the manufacturer previously considered under this part to be the manufacturer of the automobile.
( c ) ( 1 ) If the final-stage manufacturer becomes the manufacturer of a multistage automobile under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, that manufacturer shall prepare a new fuel economy label for that automobile in accordance with 40 CFR part 600.
( 2 ) If the final-stage manufacturer places the portion of the body including the windshield and front seat side windows on the incomplete automobile, that manufacturer shall attach the fuel economy label furnished by the incomplete automobile manufacturer under § 529.4(c)(2) or by the last intermediate manufacturer under § 529.5(d)(2) or the fuel economy label prepared by the final-stage manufacturer under paragraph (c)(1) of this section, as appropriate, to that automobile in accordance with 40 CFR part 600.
( 3 ) The final-stage manufacturer shall attach to the completed automobile in accordance with 40 CFR part 600 a fuel economy label identical to the label that is required under this part to have been prepared by the manufacturer considered under this part to be the manufacturer of that automobile if: ( i ) The portion of the body including the windshield and front seat side windows was added to the completed automobile by a previous manufacturer;
( ii ) The final-stage manufacturer's manufacturing operations do not cause that automobile to exceed either of the maxima specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section; and
( iii ) That fuel economy label is not on that automobile when received by that manufacturer or is removed from that automobile while it is in the possession of that manufacturer.
#### Joseph M. Valentine and others, v. Edward J. Knauer.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 11:04 AM

To: 'bpufpaff@gmail.com'

Subject: Petition for Exemption: RPM, LLC (Docket No. FAA-2014-1125)

April 1, 2015 

Mr. Bradley Pufpaff 

Chief Operations Officer 

RPM, LLC 

P.O. Box 1018 

Rogersville, AL 35652 

Dear Mr. Pufpaff: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-1125). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your 

petition. 

 Describe the aircraft make, model, and type (i.e. - fixed-wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the 

proposed UAS operation. The description should include the maximum weight (including 

payload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit 

any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to 

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information 

described above by April 15, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without 

notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov