65250 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 204 / Friday, October 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

consequences of the Fitness for Duty 

rule lies within the prescriptive 

requirements for minimum days off 

(MDO) that appear in 10 CFR 

26.205(d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(6). 

The petitioner states that the current 

requirements have created an undue 

level of complexity and inflexibility in 

managing worker fatigue, and requests 

that the NRC replace its MDO 

requirements at 10 CFR 26.205(d) with 

a performance-based objective. The 

petitioner proposes eliminating the 

MDO requirements addressed in 10 CFR 

26.205(d)(3) through (d)(6). 

The petitioner also proposes 

performing the actual hours worked 

assessment required by 10 CFR 

26.205(e) on a more frequent quarterly 

basis as opposed to annually, and to 

perform the averaging over the previous 

quarter as opposed to over a shift cycle. 

The petitioner proposes that 10 CFR 

26.205(e)(1)(i) be amended to establish a 

performance objective of an average of 

54 hours per week (when not in a site 

outage, security outage, or increased 

threat condition), and any hours 

exceeding this objective would continue 

to be entered into a corrective action 

program. 

Other changes that the petitioner 

proposes include: 

• The elimination of the definitions 

of shift cycle, and 8-, 10-, and 12-hour 

shift schedules; 

• The elimination of the outage 

duration of 60 days; 

• The elimination of the force-onforce tactical exercise exception at 10 

CFR 26.207(b); 

• The elimination of the word 

‘‘unscheduled’’ in the discussion of 

incidental duties at 10 CFR 26.205(b)(5); 

• The addition of a new exception at 

10 CFR 26.207(e) to address the 

suspension of work hours due to acts of 

nature or disasters that restrict access to 

the site by relief personnel; 

• The modification of the exception 

for plant emergencies in 10 CFR 

26.207(d) so that it applies as long as 

emergency facilities are activated in 

accordance with the licensee’s 

emergency plan or implementing 

procedures; and 

• The proposed change to the 

definition of ‘‘unit outage,’’ as submitted 

by the Professional Reactor Operator 

Society in a petition for rulemaking 

dated October 16, 2009 (PRM–26–3) (74 

FR 62257), and modified in a letter from 

NEI dated February 9, 2010. 

The petitioner believes that the 

implementation of the Fitness for Duty 

rule has resulted in a number of 

unintended consequences (numerous 

examples are cited in the petition) that 

have diminished the safety benefits of 

the rule. The petitioner believes that the 

petition addresses these consequences 

by proposing amendments that will 

make the requirements more 

performance-based, resulting in 

improved flexibility in work scheduling 

while maintaining adequate provisions 

to protect against worker fatigue. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day 

of October 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26715 Filed 10–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0936; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–AEA–23] 

Proposed Amendment of Class E 

Airspace and Revocation of Class E 

Airspace; Easton, MD 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

modify Class E surface airspace and 

airspace 700 feet above the surface, and 

remove Class E airspace designated as 

an extension to Class D airspace at 

Easton, MD. The Easton Non-Directional 

Beacon (NDB) has been 

decommissioned and new Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs) have been developed for Easton 

Airport/Newnam Field. This action 

would enhance the safety and airspace 

management of Instrument Flight Rules 

(IFR) operations at the airport. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 6, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule 

to: U. S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey, SE., Washington, DC 

20590–0001; Telephone: 1–800–647– 

5527; Fax: 202–493–2251. You must 

identify the Docket Number FAA–2010– 

0936; Airspace Docket No. 10–AEA–23, 

at the beginning of your comments. You 

may also submit and review received 

comments through the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melinda Giddens, Operations Support 

Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal 

Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 

20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; 

telephone (404) 305–5610. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

comment on this rule by submitting 

such written data, views, or arguments, 

as they may desire. Comments that 

provide the factual basis supporting the 

views and suggestions presented are 

particularly helpful in developing 

reasoned regulatory decisions on the 

proposal. Comments are specifically 

invited on the overall regulatory, 

aeronautical, economic, environmental, 

and energy-related aspects of the 

proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– 

2010–0936; Airspace Docket No. 10– 

AEA–23) and be submitted in triplicate 

to the Docket Management System (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number). You may also submit 

comments through the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Comments wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket No. FAA–2010–0936; Airspace 

Docket No. 10–AEA–23.’’ The postcard 

will be date/time stamped and returned 

to the commenter. 

All communications received before 

the specified closing date for comments 

will be considered before taking action 

on the proposed rule. The proposal 

contained in this notice may be changed 

in light of the comments received. A 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerned with this rulemaking will be 

filed in the docket. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded from and 

comments submitted through http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Recently 

published rulemaking documents can 

also be accessed through the FAA’s Web 

page at http://www.faa.gov/ 

airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/ 

publications/airspace_amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see the 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal Holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the office of the 

Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 204 / Friday, October 22, 2010 / Proposed Rules 65251 

Administration, Room 210, 1701 

Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 

30337. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRMs should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, to request a copy of 

Advisory circular No. 11–2A, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking distribution 

System, which describes the application 

procedure. 

The Proposal 

The FAA is considering an 

amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify 

Class E surface airspace and Class E 

airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface to accommodate 

new SIAPs developed for Easton 

Airport/Newnam Field, Easton, MD, as 

the Easton NDB has been 

decommissioned. This eliminates the 

need for Class E airspace designated as 

an extension to Class D surface area, 

and, therefore, would be removed for 

the continued safety and management of 

IFR operations 

Class E airspace designated as surface 

areas, Class E airspace designated as 

extensions to Class D airspace, and 

Class E airspace extending upward from 

700 feet above the surface are published 

in Paragraph 6002, 6004, and 6005 

respectively of FAA order 7400.9U, 

dated August 18, 2010, and effective 

September 15, 2010, which is 

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. It, 

therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant 

preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation 

as the anticipated impact is so minimal. 

Since this is a routine matter that will 

only affect air traffic procedures and air 

navigation, it is certified that this 

proposed rule, when promulgated, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the criteria of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. This proposed 

rulemaking is promulgated under the 

authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, 

A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This proposed regulation is 

within the scope of that authority as it 

would amend the Class E airspace area 

at Easton Airport/Newnam Field, 

Easton, MD. 

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (Air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE 

AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE 

ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for Part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9U, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 18, 2010, effective 

September 15, 2010, is amended as 

follows: 

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated 

as surface areas. 

* * * * * 

AEA MD E2 Easton, MD [AMENDED] 

Easton Airport/Newnam Field, MD 

(Lat. 38°48′15′′ N., long. 76°04′08′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from the 

surface to and including 2,600 feet MSL 

within a 4.0-mile radius of the Easton 

Airport/Newnam Field. This Class E airspace 

area is effective during the specific dates and 

times established in advance by a Notice to 

Airmen. The effective date and time will 

thereafter be continuously purblished in the 

Airport/Facility Directory. 

* * * * * 

Paragraph 6004 Class E airspace areas 

designated as an extension to a class D 

surface area. 

* * * * * 

AEA MD E4 Easton, MD [REMOVED] 

* * * * * 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

AEA MD E5 Easton, MD [AMENDED] 

Easton Airport/Newnam Field, MD 

(Lat. 38°48′15′′ N., long. 76°04′08′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface of the Earth within a 

6.5-mile radius of the Easton Airport/ 

Newnam Field. 

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 

12, 2010. 

Mark D. Ward, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern 

Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26684 Filed 10–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1010 Airspace 

Docket No. 10–AEA–24] 

Proposed Amendment of Class E 

Airspace; Charleston, WV 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

modify Class E Airspace at Charleston, 

WV, to accommodate the additional 

airspace needed for the holding pattern 

associated with the new Standard 

Instrument Approach Procedures 

(SIAPs) developed at Yeager Airport. 

This action would enhance the safety 

and airspace management of Instrument 

Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the 

airport. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 6, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule 

to: U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001; Telephone: 1–800– 

647–5527; Fax: 202–493–2251. You 

must identify the Docket Number FAA– 

2010–1010; Airspace Docket No. 10– 

AEA–24, at the beginning of your 

comments. You may also submit and 

review received comments through the 

Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melinda Giddens, Operations Support 

Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal 

Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS