Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 17393 

Examples of non-operating income 

include, but are not limited to: Interest 

income; foreign exchange gains; equity 

investment in an investor controlled 

company; intercompany transactions; 

dividend income; and net unrealized gains 

on marketable equity securities. 

Examples of non-operating expenses 

include, but are not limited to: Interest on 

long-term debt and capital leases; interest on 

short-term debt; imputed interest capitalized; 

amortization of discount and expense on 

debt; foreign exchange losses; fines or 

penalties imposed by governmental 

authorities; costs related to property held for 

future use; donations to charities, social and 

community welfare purposes; losses on 

reacquired and retired or resold debt 

securities; and losses on uncollectible nonoperating receivables. 

For reasons set forth elsewhere in § 331.7 

of this part, you may not include lobbying 

expenses that were incurred to promote 

reimbursement for losses after the terrorist 

attacks or enact Section 185 of Pub. L. 109–

115. Non-operating income is the result of 

subtracting the non-operating expenses from 

the non-operating revenues. Professional 

application fees provide for reimbursement 

of 80 percent of the cost of professional 

accounting services required in the 

preparation and submission of the 

application. Adjusted Income for each of the 

Columns A and B is the sum of the Operating 

profit (or loss) (line 3) plus line 6, Nonoperating income (loss). Each line of Column 

C is the result of subtracting Column B from 

Column A, except on line 7, Professional 

Application Fees, where the claimant may 

enter 80 percent of professional application 

fees (up to a maximum of $2,000). The 

Adjusted Income figure on the Total line of 

Column C represents the amount claimed as 

total reimbursement; it may of course be 

adjusted as the result of Department review. 

All Adjusted Income figures do not reflect 

taxes due in the current period, as a 

consequence, reimbursements will be pre-tax 

and income taxes may be due on reimbursed 

funds. 

The difference between column A and B is 

the basis for column C. This constitutes the 

total amount of your claim for 

reimbursement. As the eligibility periods, for 

the most part, begin and end on days other 

than the first or last days of the month, 

quarter or year, data from already existing 

financial statements must be adjusted, on a 

pro rata basis, to reflect the eligibility 

periods. For example, the period of eligibility 

for all applicants begins on September 11, 

2001 and therefore, the only time period 

during the month of September that is 

eligible for reimbursement is September 11 

through September 30, a period of 20 days. 

Applicants should be prepared to show both 

how they apportioned such financial data 

into the reimbursement periods, and why 

they chose the apportionment approach used. 

Applicants can then use these estimates for 

the specified periods at the beginning and 

end of the eligible period to add to the 

financial amounts for 2002, 2003, and 2004 

to calculate the total amounts sought in 

Appendix A. 

12. Has the applicant or any of its 

subsidiaries or affiliates received grants, 

subsidies, incentives or similar payments 

from local, state, or Federal governmental 

entities in support of the security, 

maintenance and provision of general 

aviation services and facilities furnished in 

response to the events of September 11, 

2001? (This includes payments under the 

Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 

2001 (Public Law 107–38) and the Airport 

Improvement Program under the Airport and 

Airway Improvement Act of 1982 (Public 

Law 97–248).) 

This question requires that you disclose all 

grants, subsidies, or incentives that you 

received during the eligible reimbursement 

period, either directly or indirectly, from 

Federal, State, and local entities, to 

reimburse you for the cost of operations and 

capital improvements associated with 

implementing security programs, or 

maintaining or providing general aviation 

services and facilities. 

13. Has the applicant or any of its 

subsidiaries or affiliates incurred lobbying 

expenses, mitigating expenses, or special 

expenses (as described in the section 

captioned ‘‘What information must operators 

or providers submit in their applications for 

reimbursement?’’), or extraordinary 

adjustments? 

Check ‘‘Yes’’ if you incurred any such 

expenses or experienced any such 

adjustments. You must briefly describe the 

nature of such expenses and adjustments, 

including the amounts. Additionally, you 

must indicate whether or not such expenses 

or adjustments have been included in or 

excluded from the totals in the table at item 

number 11. 

Lobbying includes any amount paid to any 

person for influencing or attempting to 

influence an officer or employee of any 

agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or 

employee of Congress, or an employee of a 

Member of Congress. 

Mitigating expenses include the utilization 

of property, the provision of services and the 

sale of goods that were undertaken to 

mitigate losses arising from the Federal 

government’s closure of airports attendant to 

the September 11, 2001 attack. These could 

include expenses incurred for the provision 

of services and sale of goods moved from 

restricted airports to unrestricted airports or 

compensation for non-aviation oriented 

goods and services provided at restricted 

airports. Mitigating expenses may also 

include operating expenses for aviationrelated fixed assets or capital utilized outside 

of the restricted airport. 

Special expenses include, but are not 

limited to, moving expenses, additional 

security equipment and facilities, and loss on 

sales of assets that arose from the direct 

imposition of restrictions during the period 

September 11, 2001 through the applicable 

eligible date. Any item reported under 

Special Expenses shall not also be expensed 

in other expense categories that are reflected 

in the calculation of the reimbursement 

claim. Details regarding special expenses 

should be noted in footnotes. 

Extraordinary adjustments are events or 

transactions that are material to your 

business and unusual in nature and 

infrequent in occurrence. 

14. Certification. 

You must certify that all information 

contained on the Background and Eligibility 

Form and the documents submitted in 

support of your application (e.g., profit and 

loss statements, actual forecasts, after-the-fact 

forecasts, etc.) are accurate. This certification 

is made under penalty of law. Falsification 

may be grounds for monetary and/or criminal 

sanctions. This certification must be made by 

a company President, CEO, COO, or CFO. 

[FR Doc. E7–6350 Filed 4–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 101 

[Docket No. RM04–12–000] 

Accounting and Financial Reporting 

for Public Utilities Including RTOs; 

Notice of Extension of Time 

April 2, 2007. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Final rule: notice of extension of 

time. 

SUMMARY: On December 16, 2005, the 

Commission issued Order No. 668, a 

Final Rule amending the Commission’s 

regulations to update the accounting 

and reporting requirements for public 

utilities and licensees, including 

independent system operators and 

RTOs. Because the Commission has 

updated the submission software used 

to file FERC Form Nos. 1 and 1–F, the 

Commission is issuing a notice 

extending the filing deadline for the 

filing of 2006 FERC Form Nos. 1 and 1–

F. 

DATES: The filing deadline for 2006 

FERC Form Nos. 1 and 1–F is extended 

to May 18, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brenda D. Devine, Division of Financial 

Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8522. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Notice Granting Extension of Time for 

Filing FERC Form Nos. 1 and 1–F 

On December 16, 2005, the 

Commission issued Order No. 668, a 

Final Rule amending the Commission’s 

regulations to update the accounting 

and reporting requirements for public 

utilities and licensees, including 

independent system operators and 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
17394 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1Accounting and Financial Reporting for Public 

Utilities Including RTOs, Order No. 668, FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,199 (2005), reh’g denied, Order 

No. 668–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,215 (2006), 

reh’g denied, 117 FERC ¶ 61,066 (2006). 

1A large number of these form letters were 

submitted after the close of the objection period. 

Tardy objections fail to satisfy the requirements of 

21 U.S.C. 348(f)(1) and need not be considered by 

the agency (ICMAD v. HEW, 574 F.2d 553, 558 n.8 

(D.C. Cir), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 893 (1978)). 

regional transmission organizations.1

Order No. 668 amended FERC Form 

Nos. 1 and 1–F by adding new 

schedules and revising existing 

schedules in the forms. The 

Commission updated the submission 

software used to file FERC Form Nos. 1 

and 1–F to reflect the new financial 

reporting requirements of Order No. 

668. 

The annual filing date for FERC Form 

Nos. 1 and 1–F is April 18. However, in 

light of the software changes made to 

implement Order No. 668, the filing 

deadline for the 2006 FERC Form Nos. 

1 and 1–F is extended until May 18, 

2007. 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–6511 Filed 4–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 179 

[Docket No. 2003F–0088 (formerly 03F–

0088)] 

Irradiation in the Production, 

Processing and Handling of Food 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; response to 

objections and denial of requests for a 

hearing. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is responding to 

objections and is denying requests that 

it has received for a hearing on the final 

rule that amended the food additive 

regulations by establishing a new 

maximum permitted energy level of xrays for treating food of 7.5 million 

electron volts (MeV) provided that the 

x-rays are generated from machine 

sources that use tantalum or gold as the 

target material, with no change in the 

maximum permitted dose levels or uses 

currently permitted by FDA’s food 

additive regulations. After reviewing the 

objections to the final rule and the 

requests for a hearing, the agency has 

concluded that the objections do not 

raise issues of material fact that justify 

a hearing or otherwise provide a basis 

for removing the amendment to the 

regulation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andrew J. Zajac, Center for Food Safety 

and Applied Nutrition (HFS–265), Food 

and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint 

Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740–

3835, 301–436–1267. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

FDA published a notice in the Federal 

Register of March 13, 2003 (68 FR 

12087), announcing the filing of food 

additive petition, FAP 3M4745, by Ion 

Beam Applications to amend the food 

additive regulations in § 179.26 Ionizing 

radiation for the treatment of food (21 

CFR 179.26) by increasing the maximum 

permitted energy level of x-rays for 

treating food from 5 to 7.5 MeV. The 

rights to this petition were subsequently 

transferred to Sterigenics International, 

Inc. In response to this petition, FDA 

issued a final rule in the Federal 

Register of December 23, 2004 (69 FR 

76844) permitting the safe use of 7.5 

MeV x-rays for treating food provided 

that the x-rays are generated from 

machine sources that use tantalum or 

gold as the target material, with no 

change in the maximum permitted dose 

levels or uses currently permitted by 

FDA’s food additive regulations (the 7.5 

MeV x-ray final rule). The preamble to 

the final rule advised that objections to 

the final rule and requests for a hearing 

were due within 30 days of the 

publication date (i.e., by January 24, 

2005). 

II. Objections and Requests for a 

Hearing 

Section 409(f) of the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 

U.S.C. 348(f)) provides that, within 30 

days after publication of an order 

relating to a food additive regulation, 

any person adversely affected by such 

order may file objections, specifying 

with particularity the provisions of the 

order ‘‘deemed objectionable, stating 

reasonable grounds therefore, and 

requesting a public hearing upon such 

objections.’’ FDA may deny a hearing 

request if the objections to the 

regulation do not raise genuine and 

substantial issues of fact that can be 

resolved at a hearing (Community 

Nutrition Institute v. Young, 773 F.2d 

1356, 1364 (D.C. Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 

475 U.S. 1123 (1986)). 

Under the food additive regulations at 

21 CFR 171.110, objections and requests 

for a hearing are governed by part 12 (21 

CFR part 12) of FDA’s regulations. 

Under § 12.22(a), each objection must 

meet the following conditions: (1) Must 

be submitted on or before the 30th day 

after the date of publication of the final 

rule; (2) must be separately numbered; 

(3) must specify with particularity the 

provision of the regulation or proposed 

order objected to; (4) must specifically 

state each objection on which a hearing 

is requested; failure to request a hearing 

on an objection constitutes a waiver of 

the right to a hearing on that objection; 

and (5) must include a detailed 

description and analysis of the factual 

information to be presented in support 

of the objection if a hearing is requested; 

failure to include a description and 

analysis for an objection constitutes a 

waiver of the right to a hearing on that 

objection. 

Following publication of the 7.5 MeV 

x-ray final rule, FDA received about 100 

objections within the 30-day objection 

period. All but one of these submissions 

expressed general opposition to 

increasing the maximum permitted 

energy level of x-rays used to irradiate 

food and to food irradiation. Most of 

these objections were form letters, 

identically worded, urging FDA to 

conduct additional studies on the effects 

of 7.5 MeV x-rays on food and objecting 

‘‘to the agency’s decision knowing that 

some amount of radioactivity could be 

created in food treated with 7.5 MeV.’’

While most of these objections 

requested a hearing, no evidence was 

submitted in support of these objections 

that could be considered in an 

evidentiary hearing. These submissions 

expressing general opposition raise no 

factual issue for resolution and, 

therefore, do not justify a hearing.1 The 

one submission raising specific 

objections was a letter from Public 

Citizen with six objections to the 7.5 

MeV x-ray final rule. The letter 

requested a hearing on issues raised by 

each objection. These objections are 

addressed in section IV of this 

document. 

III. Standards for Granting a Hearing 

Specific criteria for deciding whether 

to grant or deny a request for a hearing 

are set out in § 12.24(b). Under that 

regulation, a hearing will be granted if 

the material submitted by the requester 

shows, among other things, the 

following: (1) There is a genuine and 

substantial factual issue for resolution at 

a hearing; a hearing will not be granted 

on issues of policy or law; (2) the factual 

issue can be resolved by available and 

specifically identified reliable evidence; 

a hearing will not be granted on the 

basis of mere allegations or denials or 

general descriptions of positions and 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES