Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant # 9, Shelby, NC, and Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant # 14, Cherryville, NC; Notice of Termination of Investigation, 50409 [E5-4683]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 165 / Friday, August 26, 2005 / Notices schedule II controlled substance for a legitimate medical purpose without seeing the patient in person, the physician may mail the prescription to the patient or pharmacy. In addition, as the DEA regulations state: ‘‘A prescription for a schedule II controlled substance may be transmitted by the practitioner or the practitioner’s agent to a pharmacy via facsimile equipment, provided that the original written, signed prescription is presented to the pharmacist for review prior to the actual dispensing of the controlled substance, except as noted [elsewhere in this section of the regulations].’’ 21 CFR 1306.11(a). Thus, as this provision of the regulations provides, faxing may be used to facilitate the filling of a schedule II prescription, but only if the pharmacy receives the original written, signed prescription prior to dispensing the drug to the patient. 4. The CSA and DEA regulations contain no specific limit on the number of days worth of a schedule II controlled substance that a physician may authorize per prescription. Some states, however, do impose specific limits on the amount of a schedule II controlled substance that may be prescribed. Any limitations imposed by state law apply in addition to the corresponding requirements under Federal law, so long as the state requirements do not conflict with or contravene the Federal requirements. 21 U.S.C. 903. Again, the essential requirement under Federal law is that the prescription for a controlled substance be issued for a legitimate medical purpose in the usual course of professional practice. In addition, physicians and pharmacies have a duty as DEA registrants to ensure that their prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances occur in a manner consistent with effective controls against diversion and misuse, taking into account the nature of the drug being prescribed. 21 U.S.C. 823(f). Finally, as stated in the Solicitation of Comments, once DEA has completed its review of the comments, the agency plans to issue a new Federal Register document, which will provide a recitation of the pertinent legal principles relating to the dispensing of controlled substances for the treatment of pain. Dated: August 19, 2005. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. 05–16954 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–56,114] [TA–W–57,428] Americal Corporation, Henderson, NC; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on June 22, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Americal Corporation, Henderson, North Carolina. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of July, 2005. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5–4678 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–57,639 and TA-W–57,639A] Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant # 9, Shelby, NC, and Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant # 14, Cherryville, NC; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation was initiated on July 28, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant #9, Shelby, North Carolina (TA–W–57,639) and Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant #14, Cherryville, North Carolina (TA–W– 57,639A). The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed in Washington, DC, this 10th day of August, 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5–4683 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P BILLING CODE 4410–09–P VerDate jul<14>2003 16:18 Aug 25, 2005 Jkt 205001 50409 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc., a Subsidiary of Bourns Inc., New Berlin, WI; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand On June 29, 2005, the United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the Department of Labor’s motion for voluntary remand in Former Employees of Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc. v. U.S. Secretary of Labor (Court No. 045–00350). A petition, dated November 30, 2004, for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) was filed on behalf of workers and former workers of MMC Bidding, Inc., Division of Bourns, New Berlin, Wisconsin. The investigation revealed that the workers previously worked for Microelectronics Modules Corporation (MMC), New Berlin, Wisconsin and that the workers’ employment with MMC was terminated when Bourns acquired the assets of MMC on October 30, 2003. The investigation also revealed that the Department granted a certification for the former workers of MMC (TA–W– 42,217; expired December 6, 2004). On December 27, 2004, the investigation for the case at hand was terminated because it was believed that the workers were covered by the previous certification for MMC (TA–W– 42,217). (The Department had also terminated another investigation for a previous petition for the same location (TA–W–54,790) on June 4, 2004 because the Department found that the workers were covered by the certification for MMC (TA–W–42,217)). The Department’s Notice of Termination of Investigation for this case was published in the Federal Register (70 FR 3732). By letter dated January 14, 2005, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration, stating that the workers were hired by and then separated from Bourns, that the petitioner helped ship machines and documentation to, and provided training to persons in Costa Rica, China and Taiwan, and that parts were being imported to satisfy customers’ demands. By letter dated March 10, 2005, the petitioner’s request for reconsideration was dismissed based on the finding that no new facts of a substantive nature which would bear importantly on the Department’s determination was provided by the petitioner. On March 11, 2005, the Dismissal of Application E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM 26AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 165 (Friday, August 26, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 50409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-4683]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-57,639 and TA-W-57,639A]


Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant  9, Shelby, NC, and 
Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant  14, Cherryville, NC; 
Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on July 28, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a 
company official on behalf of workers at Bernhardt Furniture Company, 
Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina (TA-W-57,639) and Bernhardt 
Furniture Company, Plant 14, Cherryville, North Carolina (TA-
W-57,639A).
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 10th day of August, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5-4683 Filed 8-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.