Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12737 

considerations in establishing such a fee 

structure? 

Q.6. Are there other factors that 

should be considered in determining the 

annual fee for power reactors? 

There will be another opportunity for 

additional public comment in 

connection with any proposed rule that 

may be developed by the Commission. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 171 

Annual charges, Byproduct material, 

Holders of certificates, Registrations, 

Approvals, Intergovernmental relations, 

Non-payment penalties, Nuclear 

materials, Nuclear power plants and 

reactors, Source material, Special 

nuclear material. 

The authority citation for this 

document is: 42 U.S.C. 2201; 42 U.S.C. 

5841. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day 

of March, 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

J.E. Dyer, 

Chief Financial Officer. 

[FR Doc. E9–6554 Filed 3–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0261; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–CE–017–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Dornier 

Luftfahrt GmbH Models Dornier 228– 

100, Dornier 228–101, Dornier 228–200, 

Dornier 228–201, Dornier 228–202, and 

Dornier 228–212 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (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: 

Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power 

lever has been detected during inspections. 

The total loss of the pin could cause loss of 

the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent 

activation of the beta mode in flight. The 

inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight 

can result in loss of control of the airplane. 

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 April 24, 2009. 

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 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility 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 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: Greg 

Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; fax: (816) 

329–4090. 

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–2009–0261; Directorate Identifier 

2009–CE–017–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 because of 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. 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued AD No.: 2009– 

0031, dated February 18, 2009 (referred 

to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power 

lever has been detected during inspections. 

The total loss of the pin could cause loss of 

the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent 

activation of the beta mode in flight. The 

inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight 

can result in loss of control of the airplane. 

For the reasons described above, this new 

EASA Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

introduces a repetitive detailed inspection of 

the guide pins of the power and condition 

levers and requires the replacement of the 

pins that exceed the allowable wear-limits. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology 

has issued Dornier 228 Alert Service 

Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated December 

19, 2008. The actions described in this 

service information are intended to 

correct the unsafe condition identified 

in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
12738 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a NOTE within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 17 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 20 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $10 per product. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $27,370, or $1,610 per 

product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. 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. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH: Docket No. FAA– 

2009–0261; Directorate Identifier 2009– 

CE–017–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by April 24, 

2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Models Dornier 228– 

100, Dornier 228–101, Dornier 228–200, 

Dornier 228–201, Dornier 228–202, and 

Dornier 228–212 airplanes, all serial 

numbers, certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 76: Engine Controls. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power 

lever has been detected during inspections. 

The total loss of the pin could cause loss of 

the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent 

activation of the beta mode in flight. The 

inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight 

can result in loss of control of the airplane. 

For the reasons described above, this new 

EASA Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

introduces a repetitive detailed inspection of 

the guide pins of the power and condition 

levers and requires the replacement of the 

pins that exceed the allowable wear-limits. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) For throttle box assemblies with less 

than 12,000 hours time-in-service (TIS) since 

new as of the effective date of this AD: 

inspect the guide pins of the power and 

condition levers following RUAG Aerospace 

Defence Technology Dornier 228 Alert 

Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated 

December 19, 2008, at the following times: 

(i) Initially within 9,600 hours TIS since 

new or within the next 1,200 hours TIS, 

whichever occurs later; and 

(ii) Repetitively thereafter within 1,200 

hours TIS since any previous inspection in 

which the power and condition levers guide 

pins were not replaced or within 9,600 hours 

TIS since the previous inspection in which 

the power and condition levers guide pins 

were replaced. 

Note 1: If the hours TIS of the throttle box 

assembly is unknown, use the hours TIS of 

the airplane to determine the compliance 

time for the inspection. 

(2) For throttle box assemblies with 12,000 

hours TIS or more and less than 13,200 hours 

TIS since new as of the effective date of this 

AD: inspect the guide pins of the power and 

condition levers following RUAG Aerospace 

Defence Technology Dornier 228 Alert 

Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated 

December 19, 2008, at the following times: 

(i) Initially within 13,200 hours TIS since 

new or within the next 100 hours TIS, 

whichever occurs later; and 

(ii) Repetitively thereafter within 1,200 

hours TIS since any previous inspection in 

which the power and condition levers guide 

pins were not replaced or within 9,600 hours 

TIS since the previous inspection in which 

the power and condition levers guide pins 

were replaced. 

(3) For throttle box assemblies with 13,200 

hours TIS or more since new as of the 

effective date of this AD: inspect the guide 

pins of the power and condition levers 

following RUAG Aerospace Defence 

Technology Dornier 228 Alert Service 

Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated December 19, 

2008, at the following times: 

(i) Initially within the next 100 hours TIS; 

and 

(ii) Repetitively thereafter within 1,200 

hours TIS since any previous inspection in 

which the power and condition levers guide 

pins were not replaced or within 9,600 hours 

TIS since the previous inspection in which 

the power and condition levers guide pins 

were replaced. 

(4) For all throttle box assemblies: before 

further flight after any inspection required in 

paragraph (f)(1), (f)(2), or (f)(3) of this AD, 

replace any guide pin that exceeds the 

acceptable wear-limits as defined in RUAG 

Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 

Alert Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated 

December 19, 2008. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; fax: (816) 329– 

4090. Before using any approved AMOC on 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12739 

1 16 U.S.C. 791a, et seq. 

2Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order 

No. 676, 71 FR 26,199 (May 4, 2006), FERC Stats. 

& Regs., Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,216 (Apr. 25, 

2006), reh’g denied, Order No. 676–A, 116 FERC 

¶ 61,255 (2006), Order No. 676–B, 72 FR 21,095 

(Apr. 30, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations 

Preambles ¶ 31,246 (Apr. 19, 2007), Order No. 676– 

C, 73 FR 43,848 (July 29, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,274 (July 21, 2008), 

Order No. 676–D, granting clarification and denying 

reh’g, 124 FERC ¶ 61,317 (2008); Standards for 

Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas 

Pipelines, Order No. 698, 72 FR 38,757 (July 16, 

2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 

¶ 31,251 (June 25, 2007), order on clarification and 

reh’g, Order No. 698–A, 121 FERC ¶ 61,264 (2007). 

3Preventing Undue Discrimination and 

Preference in Transmission Service, Order No. 890, 

72 FR 12,266 (March 15 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,241 (2007) (Order No. 

890); order on reh’g, Order No. 890–A, 73 FR 2984 

(Jan. 16, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations 

Preambles ¶ 31,261 (2007) (Order No. 890–A); order 

on reh’g and clarification, Order No. 890–B, 123 

FERC ¶ 61,299 (2008). 

4See Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 8318 (Feb. 

27, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., Proposed Regs. 

¶ 32,612 at P 3 (Feb. 20, 2007). 

5 Id. 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI EASA AD No.: 2009– 

0031, dated February 18, 2009; and RUAG 

Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 

Alert Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated 

December 19, 2008, for related information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 

19, 2009. 

John R. Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–6558 Filed 3–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 38 

[Docket No. RM05–5–013] 

Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public 

Utilities 

March 19, 2009. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) 

proposes to incorporate by reference in 

its regulations the latest version 

(Version 002.1) of certain business 

practice standards adopted by the 

Wholesale Electric Quadrant of the 

North American Energy Standards 

Board (NAESB). NAESB’s Version 002.1 

Standards mainly modify NAESB’s 

Version 001 Standards in response to 

Order Nos. 890, 890–A, and 890–B. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

are due April 24, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Docket No. RM05–5–013, 

by one of the following methods: 

• Agency Web Site: http://ferc.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments via the eFiling link found in 

the Comment Procedures Section of the 

preamble. 

• Mail: Commenters unable to file 

comments electronically must mail or 

hand deliver an original and 14 copies 

of their comments to the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. Please refer to 

the Comment Procedures Section of the 

preamble for additional information on 

how to file paper comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ryan M. Irwin (technical issues), Office 

of Energy Market Regulation, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–6454. 

Valerie Roth (technical issues), Office of 

Energy Market Regulation, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–8538. 

Gary D. Cohen (legal issues), Office of 

the General Counsel, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

(202) 502–8321. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. In this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NOPR), the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) 

proposes to amend its regulations at 18 

CFR 38.2 under the Federal Power Act 1

to incorporate by reference the latest 

version (Version 002.1) of certain 

business practice standards adopted by 

the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ) 

of the North American Energy Standards 

Board (NAESB). These revised 

standards update earlier versions that 

the Commission previously 

incorporated by reference into its 

regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 in Order Nos. 

676, 676–B, 698, and 676–C,2 as well as 

the Version 002.0 standards that NAESB 

filed with the Commission on 

September 2, 2008. The new and revised 

standards that NAESB adopted in its 

Version 002.0 and 002.1 standards 

implement requirements of Order Nos. 

890, 890–A, and 890–B.3 In addition, 

NAESB developed standards to support 

the Commission’s eTariff program, 

modified the Commercial Timing Table 

(WEQ–004 Appendix D) and 

Transmission Loading Relief Standards 

(WEQ–008) to provide clarity and align 

NAESB’s business practice standards 

with the reliability standards adopted 

by the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation (NERC), revised 

the Manual Time Error Correction 

Standards (WEQ–006) to maintain 

consistency with revised NERC 

Standard BAL–004, and amended 

certain ancillary services definitions 

appearing in the Open Access SameTime Information Systems (OASIS) 

Standards (WEQ–001) relating to the 

inclusion of demand resources as part of 

ancillary services. 

I. Background 

2. NAESB is a non-profit standards 

development organization established in 

January 2002 that serves as an industry 

forum for the development of business 

practice standards. These standards 

promote a seamless marketplace for 

wholesale and retail natural gas and 

electricity.4 Since 1995, NAESB and its 

predecessor, the Gas Industry Standards 

Board, have been accredited members of 

the American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI), complying with ANSI’s 

requirements that its standards reflect a 

consensus of the affected industries.5

3. NAESB’s standards include 

business practices that streamline the 

transactional processes of the natural 

gas and electric industries, as well as 

communication protocols and related 

standards designed to improve the 

efficiency of communication within 

each industry. NAESB supports all four 

quadrants of the gas and electric 

industries—wholesale gas, wholesale 

electric, retail gas, and retail electric. All 

participants in the gas and electric 

industries are eligible to join NAESB 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS