7516 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 18 / Friday, January 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
The NRC may post additional 
materials related to this rulemaking 
activity to the Federal rulemaking website at www.regulations.gov under 
Docket ID NRC–2009–0196. These documents will inform the public of the current status of this activity and/or provide additional material for use at future public meetings. 
The Federal rulemaking website 
allows you to receive alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1) Navigate to the docket folder (NRC–2009–0196); (2) click the ‘‘Sign up for Email Alerts’’ link; and (3) enter your email address and select how frequently you would like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or monthly). 
Dated: January 19, 2021. 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 
John R. Tappert, Director, Division of Rulemaking, 
Environmental and Financial Support, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. 
[FR Doc. 2021–01860 Filed 1–28–21; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 
Federal Aviation Administration 
14 CFR Part 29 
[Docket No. FAA–2021–0065; Notice No. 29– 
054–SC] 
Special Conditions: Bell Textron Inc., 
Model 525 Helicopter; Fly-By-Wire (FBW) Flight Control System (FCS) 
AGENCY : Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), DOT. 
ACTION : Notice of proposed special 
conditions. 
SUMMARY : This action proposes special 
conditions for the Bell Textron Inc. (Bell) Model 525 helicopter. This helicopter will have a novel or unusual design feature associated with a fly-by- wire (FBW) flight control system (FCS). The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These proposed special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards. 
DATES : Send comments on or before 
March 15, 2021. 
ADDRESSES : Send comments identified 
by Docket No. FAA–2021–0065 using any of the following methods: 
•Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 
http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending your 
comments electronically. 
•Mail: Send comments to Docket 
Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590–0001. 
•Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 
comments to Docket Operations in Room W12–140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 
•Fax: Fax comments to Docket 
Operations at 202–493–2251. 
Privacy: Except for Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments it receives, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any 
personal information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 
11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478). 
Confidential Business Information: 
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to these proposed special conditions contain commercial or financial information that is 
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to these proposed special conditions, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of these proposed special conditions. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to John VanHoudt, FAA, Dynamic Systems Section, AIR–627, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177–98198; telephone and fax 817–222–5193; email John.G.Van.Houdt@FAA.Gov. Any 
commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking. 
Docket: Background documents or 
comments received may be read at http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. 
Follow the online instructions for accessing the docket or go to Docket Operations in Room W12–140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : John 
VanHoudt, FAA, Dynamic Systems Section, AIR–627, Technical Innovation Policy Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177–98198; telephone and fax 817–222–5193; email John.G.Van.Houdt@FAA.Gov. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
Comments Invited 
The FAA invites you to send any 
written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under 
ADDRESSES . Include ‘‘Docket No. 
FAA–2021–0065; Notice No. 29–054– SC’’ at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend these proposed special conditions because of those comments. 
Background 
On December 15, 2011, Bell applied 
for a type certificate for a new 14 CFR 
part 29 transport category helicopter designated as the Model 525. Bell applied for multiple extensions, with the most recent occurring on November 12, 2020. The date of the updated type certification basis is December 31, 2016, based upon the applicant’s proposed type certificate issuance date of December 31, 2021. The Model 525 is a medium twin-engine rotorcraft. The design maximum takeoff weight is 20,500 pounds, with a maximum capacity of 19 passengers and a crew of 2. 
The Bell Model 525 helicopter will be 
equipped with a four axis full authority digital FBW FCS that provides for aircraft control through pilot input and coupled flight director modes. The design of the Bell Model 525 FBW controls, which provides no direct hydro-mechanical linkage between the primary cockpit flight controls or inceptors and the main and tail rotor 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Jan 28, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS7517 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 18 / Friday, January 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
actuators, is a first for commercial 
rotorcraft use. Therefore, the regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this new design feature. 
The rotorcraft industry is producing 
new generations of helicopters, and gradually increasing size, speed, load capacity, and technical sophistication. In recent years, an accelerated trend has occurred using rotorcraft for a wide range of commercial and industrial applications. This has resulted in increased complexity of modern control systems and increased use of automation in flight control systems, including the implementation of advanced flight control systems such as FBW FCS. 
Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR), § 29.671(c), which provides requirements for transport category rotorcraft control systems, does not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this new design feature. 14 CFR 29.671(c) requires, in part, a means to allow the pilot to determine that full control authority is available prior to flight. This command control authority is typically achieved by verifying movement of the control quadrant through an unassisted mechanical pilot- initiated manipulation of the primary flight controls prior to flight. Although this approach does not guarantee that 100% maximum control movement of the flight controls has been achieved prior to flight, it has been deemed appropriate for mechanical flight control systems. 
Unlike traditional mechanical flight 
control systems, the FBW FCS reduces the opportunity for jamming of the flight controls due to mechanical bind, improper servo adjustment resulting from faulty maintenance, or presence of a foreign object in the control mechanism that will impair safety. This reduced exposure for jams is due to the replacement of the mechanical linkages between the primary cockpit flight controls or inceptors and the main and 
tail rotor actuators with digital signal processing wiring. However, the FBW FCS does increase the potential for latent failures or faults that could impair full control authority, unless a means exists to ensure the FBW FCS is fully functional and free of control authority impairment prior to flight. A FBW system may have the ability to verify full control authority without having to move the primary flight controls. 
Although part 29 does not contain 
adequate or appropriate safety standards for this novel or unusual design feature, 14 CFR 25.671, amendment 25–23, provides these requirements for transport category airplanes. Accordingly, these proposed special conditions are based on § 25.671 to provide requirements for a FBW FCS on the Bell Model 525 helicopter. 14 CFR 25.671(c) provides the same level of safety as that intended by § 29.671(c) when employing a FBW FCS by including requirements for jamming and failure analysis. The proposed special conditions would require a comprehensive safety analysis of the aircraft’s FBW FCS to include failures due to command logic (software), mechanical and electronic interfaces to other systems, jamming and maintenance. Therefore, in conjunction with § 29.671(a) and (b), the proposed special conditions incorporate provisions from § 25.671(c) to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established in the regulations. 
Type Certification Basis 
Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, 
Bell must show that the Model 525 
helicopter meets the applicable provisions of part 29, as amended by Amendments 29 through 55 thereto. The Bell Model 525 certification basis date is December 31, 2016. 
If the Administrator finds that the 
applicable airworthiness regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 29) do not contain 
adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Bell Model 525 because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16. 
Special conditions are initially 
applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model under § 21.101. 
In addition to the applicable 
airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Bell Model 525 helicopter must comply with the the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy under § 611 of Public Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 1972.’’. 
The FAA issues special conditions, as 
defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance with § 11.38, and they become part of the type-certification basis under § 21.17(a)(2). 
Novel or Unusual Design Features 
The Bell Model 525 helicopter will 
incorporate the following novel or 
unusual design features: A FBW FCS. 
This new design feature has no direct 
hydro-mechanical linkage between the primary cockpit flight controls or inceptors and the main and tail rotor actuators, thereby eliminating the more complex elements of either a manual movement of the controls by the pilot, or another manual means. 
Discussion 
The proposed special conditions 
would require that a means be available 
to show full control authority for all powered control systems. 
The proposed special conditions 
contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards. 
Applicability 
As discussed above, these special 
conditions are applicable to the Bell 
Model 525 helicopter. Should Bell apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include aother model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply to that model as well. 
Conclusion 
This action affects only a certain 
novel or unusual design feature on the 
Bell Model 525 helicopter. It is not a rule of general applicability. 
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 29 
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements. Authority Citation 
The authority citation for these 
special conditions is as follows: 
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 
44701–44702, 44704. 
The Proposed Special Conditions 
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) proposes the 
following special conditions in lieu of § 29.671(c) as part of the type certification basis for the Bell Textron Inc. Model 525 helicopter: 
The rotorcraft must be shown by 
analysis, tests, or both, to be capable of continued safe flight and landing after any of the following failures or jamming in the flight control system within the normal flight envelope, without requiring exceptional piloting skill or strength. Probable failures must have only minor effects. 
(1) Any single failure not shown to be 
extremely improbable, excluding jamming. 
(2) Any combination of failures not 
shown to be extremely improbable, excluding jamming. 
(3) Any jam in a control position 
normally encountered during hover, takeoff, climb, cruise, normal turns, 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Jan 28, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS7518 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 18 / Friday, January 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
116 U.S.C. 824o. 
218 CFR 39.3(c). 316 U.S.C. 824o; (on July 20, 2006, the 
Commission certified NERC as the ERO for the 
continental United States under FPA section 215(c)). North American Electric Reliability Corp., 
116 FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g and compliance, 117 FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), order on compliance, 118 FERC ¶ 61,030, order on compliance, 118 FERC ¶ 61,190, order on reh’g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,046 (2007), 
aff’d sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 
(D.C. Cir. 2009). 
4Id. section 824o(c). 
5Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric 
Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, 71 FR 8662 (Feb. 17, 2006), 114 FERC ¶ 61,104, at P 186, order on reh’g, Order No. 672–A, 114 FERC ¶ 61,328 (2006). descent, and landing, unless the jam is 
shown to be extremely improbable or can be alleviated. 
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas. 
Jorge Castillo, 
Manager, Strategic Policy Rotorcraft Section, 
Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 
[FR Doc. 2021–01958 Filed 1–28–21; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 
Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission 
18 CFR Part 39 
[Docket No. RM21–12–000] 
Revisions to Regulations on Electric 
Reliability Organization Performance Assessments 
AGENCY : Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, Department of Energy. 
ACTION : Notice of proposed rulemaking. 
SUMMARY : The Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to amend the Commission’s regulations to require the Commission- certified Electric Reliability Organization to submit assessments of its performance every three years instead of the current period of every five years. The Commission also proposes to add to the Commission’s regulations a requirement for the Electric Reliability Organization to include in its performance assessment a detailed discussion of any areas of the Electric Reliability Organization’s responsibilities and activities, or a Regional Entity’s delegated functions, beyond those required by the Commission’s regulations, that the Commission has identified at least 90 days prior to the expected performance assessment submission date. Finally, the Commission proposes formalizing the method for the Electric Reliability Organization and Regional Entities to receive and respond to recommendations by the users, owners, and operators of the Bulk-Power System, and other interested parties for improvement of the Electric Reliability Organization’s operations, activities, oversight and procedures. 
DATES : Comments are due March 1, 
2021. 
ADDRESSES : Comments, identified by 
docket number, may be filed electronically at http://www.ferc.gov in 
acceptable native applications and print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or picture format. For those unable to file electronically, comments may be filed 
by mail to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand-delivered comments must be delivered to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The Comment Procedures Section of this document contains more detailed filing procedures. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : 
Leigh Anne Faugust (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: (202) 502–6396. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the 
Federal Power Act (FPA),1the 
Commission proposes to amend § 39.3(c) of the Commission’s regulations to require the Commission- certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to submit assessments of its performance every three years instead of the current period of every five years.
2We believe that the 
proposed amendment will provide better continuity in our review of the ERO’s operations, activities, oversight, procedures, and evaluation of the effectiveness of each Regional Entity in the performance of delegated functions. We also believe the proposed shorter performance assessment cycle will provide an opportunity to identify potential improvements with regards to ERO performance in a more timely fashion, allow for changes to be made in a more timely manner, and improve the efficiency of the overall performance assessment process. 
2. Also, pursuant to section 215 of the 
FPA, we propose to add paragraph (iv) to § 39.3(c)(1) of the Commission’s regulations to require the Commission- certified ERO to include in its performance assessments a detailed discussion of any areas of the ERO’s responsibilities and activities, or the Regional Entities’ delegated functions, beyond those required by § 39.3(c)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii), that the Commission identifies for inclusion at least 90 days prior to the expected performance assessment submission date. 
3. Finally, we propose to amend 
§ 39.3(c)(1)(ii) of the Commission’s regulations to require the ERO to solicit via a formal public comment period recommendations by the users, owners, and operators of the Bulk-Power System, and other interested parties for improvement of the ERO’s operations, activities, oversight and procedures. I. Background 
A. Section 215 of the FPA 
4. Section 215 of the FPA requires the 
Commission to issue regulations that, 
among other things, provide for the certification of an entity as the ERO if it meets certain criteria.
3Specifically, 
FPA section 215(c) establishes that an ERO candidate must have the ability to develop and enforce mandatory 
Reliability Standards that provide for an adequate level of reliability of the Bulk- Power System.
4The statute also 
requires that an ERO candidate have established rules that: (1) Assure independence, while assuring fair stakeholder representation and balanced decision-making; (2) equitably allocate reasonable dues, fees, and other charges; (3) provide fair and impartial procedures for enforcing Reliability Standards through imposition of penalties; (4) provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public comment, due process, and balance in developing Reliability Standards and otherwise exercising its duties; and (5) provide appropriate steps to gain recognition in Canada and Mexico. 
5. FPA section 215(e)(4) provides that 
the ERO may delegate authority to a Regional Entity for the purpose of proposing regional Reliability Standards and enforcing Reliability Standards. Regional Entities must meet the same statutory criteria as those required for Commission certification of an ERO, except that more flexibility is allowed in the composition of a Regional Entity board of directors. The Commission must approve a delegation agreement between the ERO and a Regional Entity, and the Commission is authorized to modify such delegation. 
B. Order No. 672 
6. On February 3, 2006, the 
Commission issued Order No. 672, 
which amended the Commission’s regulations to implement the requirements of FPA section 215.
5In 
Order No. 672, the Commission 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Jan 28, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\29JAP1.SGM 29JAP1khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS