This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

71368 

Vol. 75, No. 225 

Tuesday, November 23, 2010 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 26 

[Docket No. PRM–26–6; NRC–2010–0310] 

Erik Erb; Notice of Receipt of Petition 

for Rulemaking 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; Notice 

of receipt. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) has received a 

petition for rulemaking (PRM) dated 

August 17, 2010, submitted by Erik Erb 

(the Petitioner) and 91 co-signers. The 

petition was docketed by the NRC on 

September 17, 2010, and has been 

assigned PRM–26–6. The petitioner 

requests that the NRC amend its 

regulations to decrease the minimum 

days off (MDO) requirement for security 

officers working 12-hour shifts from an 

average of 3 days per week to 2.5 or 2 

days per week. The NRC is also 

requesting public comments on the 

PRM. 

DATES: Submit comments by February 7, 

2011. Comments received after this date 

will be considered if it is practical to do 

so, but the NRC is able to assure 

consideration only for comments 

received on or before this date. 

ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID 

NRC–2010–0310 in the subject line of 

your comments. For instructions on 

submitting comments and accessing 

documents related to this action, see 

‘‘Submitting Comments and Accessing 

Information’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

You may submit comments by any one 

of the following methods. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for documents filed under Docket ID 

NRC–2010–0310. Address questions 

about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, 

telephone: 301–492–3668; e-mail: 

Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. 

Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: 

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. 

E-mail comments to: 

Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you 

do not receive a reply e-mail confirming 

that we have received your comments, 

contact us directly at 301–415–1966. 

Hand deliver comments to: 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 

20852 between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 

during Federal workdays (telephone: 

301–415–1966). 

Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301– 

415–1101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, 

Announcements, and Directives Branch, 

Division of Administrative Services, 

Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–492– 

3667, toll free: 800–368–5642, e-mail: 

Cindy.Bladey@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Submitting Comments and Accessing 

Information 

Comments submitted in writing or in 

electronic form will be posted on the 

NRC Web site and on the Federal 

Rulemaking Web site, http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Because your 

comments will not be edited to remove 

any identifying or contact information, 

the NRC cautions you against including 

any information in your submission that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed. The NRC requests that any 

party soliciting or aggregating comments 

received from other persons for 

submission to the NRC inform those 

persons that the NRC will not edit their 

comments to remove any identifying or 

contact information, and therefore, they 

should not include any information in 

their comments that they do not want 

publicly disclosed. 

You can access publicly available 

documents related to this document 

using the following methods: 

NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): 

The public may examine and have 

copied for a fee publicly available 

documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room 

O–1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access 

and Management System (ADAMS): 

Publicly available documents created or 

received at the NRC are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, 

the public can gain entry into ADAMS, 

which provides text and image files of 

NRC’s public documents. If you do not 

have access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, then contact the 

NRC’s PDR reference staff at 800–397– 

4209, or 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to 

PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS 

accession number for the petition is 

ML102630127. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public 

comments and supporting materials 

related to this action, including the 

petition for rulemaking, can be found at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

on Docket ID NRC–2010–0310. 

Petitioner 

The petitioner is Erik Erb, a nuclear 

security officer at Constellation’s Nine 

Mile Point Nuclear Station in Oswego, 

New York. Mr. Erb has held this 

position since April 2004. The petition 

has 91 co-signers; most co-signers have 

identified their position as nuclear 

security officer or guard. 

Background 

Grounds for Action Requested 

The Petitioner proposes that the NRC 

amend its regulations in Title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 

part 26, subpart I, to decrease the MDO 

requirement for security officers 

working 12-hour shifts from an average 

of 3 days per week to 2.5 or 2 days per 

week. Specifically, the Petitioner claims 

that the MDO requirement of 3 days per 

week has led to unintended detrimental 

consequences at the Nine Mile Point 

facility. 

The Petitioner states that the MDO 

requirement has reduced the amount of 

overtime available to security officers at 

Nine Mile Point. The Petitioner states 

that this may provide the impetus for 

security officers to seek additional parttime employment. The Petitioner claims 

that hours worked at another place of 

employment would most likely be 

unrecorded, unmonitored, and 

unreported to the licensee. The 

Petitioner states that security officers 

working additional part-time hours to 

supplement lost income would ‘‘seem to 

be counterproductive to the aim of the 

MDO requirement.’’ 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 71369 

The Petitioner states that officers who 

previously did not work much overtime 

must now ‘‘pick up the slack,’’ 

sometimes to the point of being forced 

to work overtime. The Petitioner also 

states that training sometimes has to be 

rescheduled or canceled, because the 

officers facilitating the training have 

reached their MDO mandate. 

The Petitioner states that nonmanagement/non-supervisor security 

chiefs have been impacted by the use of 

the fatigue software, EmpCenter, at the 

Nine Mile Point facility. The Petitioner 

claims that when an employee is asked 

to work overtime, the chiefs must use 

the software to determine whether that 

employee will exceed the MDO 

requirement. The petitioner describes 

this extra step as a burden on the chiefs. 

According to the petition, the attention/ 

focus of the chiefs is diverted by the 

need to coordinate with their 

supervisors in order to ensure 

compliance with the MDO requirement. 

The Petitioner also claims that 

licensees have had to increase their 

staffing across affected departments, in 

part due to the MDO requirement, thus 

increasing their costs. The Petitioner 

claims that licensees may be required to 

pass these extra costs onto the rate 

payer. Alternatively, the Petitioner 

claims that licensees may explore the 

option of contract security as a costsaving measure. 

The Petition 

The Petitioner requests that the NRC 

amend its regulations in 10 CFR part 26, 

Subpart I, to decrease the MDO 

requirement for security officers 

working 12-hour shifts from an average 

of 3 days per week to 2.5 or 2 days per 

week. The Petitioner claims that such a 

decrease in MDO would (1) bring the 

requirement in line with MDO 

requirements for Operations, 

Maintenance, and other personnel 

subject to the MDO requirements; and 

(2) have a sizeable impact on alleviating 

some of the issues the MDO 

requirements have caused or may cause 

in the future. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day 

of November 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette L. Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29480 Filed 11–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1157; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–137–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Model DHC–8–102, –103, –106, 

–201, –202, –301, –311, –315, –401, and 

–402 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

There have been several in-service reports 

of finding trapped water on the bottom of the 

cockpit windshield frames (or lower 

windshield frames) that resulted in either 

corrosion or water ingress into the cockpit. In 

one occurrence, the trapped water caused 

severe corrosion of numerous anchor nuts 

that secure the windshield to the lower 

windshield frame, such that the intended 

fastening function was seriously 

compromised. 

Corrosion of the lower windshield frames, 

including the anchor nuts that secure the 

windshield to the aircraft structure, can 

result in a serious structural degradation 

possibly leading to the loss of the windshield 

during flight. Also, water could leak into the 

cockpit and cause either a malfunction or 

failure of the electrical and electronics 

systems in the area of the cockpit instrument 

panels. 

* * * * * 

The proposed AD would require 

actions that are intended to address the 

unsafe condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by January 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–40, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, 

Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 

Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario 

M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416–375– 

4000; fax 416–375–4539; e-mail 

thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; 

Internet http://www.bombardier.com. 

You may review copies of the 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Craig Yates, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 

7355; fax (516) 794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2010–1157; Directorate Identifier 

2010–NM–137–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1