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

7513 

Vol. 86, No. 18 

Friday, January 29, 2021 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Parts 2, 21, 26, 50, 51, 52, 55, 

and 73 

[NRC–2009–0196] 

RIN 3150–AI66 

Alignment of Licensing Processes and 

Lessons Learned From New Reactor 

Licensing 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Regulatory basis; request for 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is requesting 

comments on a regulatory basis to 

support a proposed rule that would 

amend the NRC’s regulations for the 

licensing of new nuclear power reactors. 

The NRC’s goals in amending these 

regulations would be to ensure 

consistency in new reactor licensing 

reviews, provide for an efficient new 

reactor licensing process, reduce the 

need for exemptions from existing 

regulations and license amendment 

requests, address other new reactor 

licensing issues deemed relevant by the 

NRC, and support the principles of good 

regulation, specifically openness, 

clarity, and reliability. The NRC plans to 

hold a public meeting to promote a full 

understanding of the rulemaking, 

discuss the regulatory basis, and 

facilitate public participation. 

DATES: Submit comments by April 14, 

2021. Comments received after this date 

will be considered if it is practical to do 

so, but the NRC is only able to ensure 

consideration of comments received on 

or before this date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods; 

however, the NRC encourages electronic 

comment submission through the 

Federal Rulemaking Website: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2009–0196. Address 

questions about NRC dockets to Dawn 

Forder; telephone: 301–415–3407; 

email: Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions contact the 

individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• Email comments to: 

Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you 

do not receive an automatic email reply 

confirming receipt, then contact us at 

301–415–1677. 

For additional direction on obtaining 

information and submitting comments, 

see ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James G. O’Driscoll, Office of Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards; 

telephone: 301–415–1325; email: 

James.ODriscoll@nrc.gov; or Allen 

Fetter, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation; telephone: 301–415–8556; 

email: Allen.Fetter@nrc.gov. Both are 

staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2009– 

0196 when contacting the NRC about 

the availability of information for this 

action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this 

action by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2009–0196. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the 

ADAMS Public Documents collection at 

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. To begin the search, select 

‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For 

problems with ADAMS, please contact 

the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 

reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 

415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@

nrc.gov. For the convenience of the 

reader, instructions about obtaining 

materials referenced in this document 

are provided in the ‘‘Availability of 

Documents’’ section. 

• Attention: The PDR where you may 

examine and order copies of public 

documents is currently closed. You may 

submit your request to the PDR via 

email at pdr.resource@nrc.gov or call 1– 

800–397–4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 

4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

B. Submitting Comments 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2009– 

0196 in your comment submission. 

The NRC cautions you not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in your comment submission. 

The NRC will post all comment 

submissions at https://

www.regulations.gov as well as enter the 

comment submissions into ADAMS. 

The NRC does not routinely edit 

comment submissions to remove 

identifying or contact information. 

If you are requesting or aggregating 

comments from other persons for 

submission to the NRC, then you should 

inform those persons to not include 

identifying or contact information that 

they do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in their comment submission. 

Your request should state that the NRC 

does not routinely edit comment 

submissions to remove such information 

before making the comment 

submissions available to the public or 

entering the comment into ADAMS. 

Please note that the NRC will not 

provide formal written responses to 

each of the comments received on the 

regulatory basis. However, the NRC will 

consider all comments received in the 

rulemaking process. 

II. Discussion 

The NRC is requesting comments on 

a regulatory basis to support a proposed 

rule that would amend the NRC’s 

regulations for the licensing of new 

nuclear power reactors in parts 50 and 

52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR). The NRC’s goals 

in amending these regulations would be 

to ensure consistency in new reactor 

licensing reviews, provide for an 

efficient new reactor licensing process, 

reduce the need for exemptions from 

existing regulations and license 

amendment requests, address other new 

reactor licensing issues deemed relevant 

by the NRC, and support the principles 

of good regulation, specifically 

openness, clarity, and reliability. These 

rule changes would apply to any power 

reactor application submitted to the 

NRC. For example, the scope of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7514 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 18 / Friday, January 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

impacted entities includes applicants 

for designs and facilities similar to large 

light water reactors operating today, 

new, large light water reactors (e.g., 

similar to the KHNP APR–1400 and 

Westinghouse AP1000), small modular 

reactors (e.g., similar to NuScale small 

modular reactor), and non-light water 

reactors (e.g., high temperature gas 

reactor, fast reactors, and molten salt 

reactors) 

On January 15, 2019, the NRC held a 

Category 3 public meeting to obtain 

feedback from external stakeholders on 

the scope of the development of the 

regulatory basis for this proposed rule. 

Representatives of the commercial 

nuclear power industry presented 18 

suggested changes at the meeting and 

submitted a list of 20 additional 

suggested changes. 

On September 20, 2019, the NRC met 

with individual members of the 

Regulatory Policies and Practices 

Subcommittee of the Advisory 

Committee on Reactor Safeguards 

(ACRS). The purpose of the meeting was 

to receive the ACRS members’ 

observations on the implementation of 

the 10 CFR part 52 process based on 

their individual perspectives from their 

reviews of early site permit (ESP), 

design certification (DC), and combined 

license applications. 

On November 21, 2019, and April 29, 

2020, the NRC held Category 3 public 

meetings with members of the public to 

provide updates on the agency’s efforts 

since the January 15, 2019, public 

meeting. In these meetings, the NRC 

provided updates on progress including 

an overview of the scope of the 

regulatory basis. At both meetings, the 

NRC conducted question and answer 

sessions. Consistent with the NRC’s 

rulemaking process, the NRC has 

prepared a regulatory basis to describe 

and document the results of assessments 

performed by the NRC in support of the 

proposed rule. This regulatory basis and 

the meeting summaries, including 

transcripts, are listed in the 

‘‘Availability of Documents’’ section of 

this document. 

In the regulatory basis, the NRC 

concludes that there is sufficient basis 

to proceed with rulemaking to address 

the alignment of regulatory 

requirements associated with 10 CFR 

parts 50 and 52 and the incorporation of 

lessons learned from new reactor 

licensing reviews. However, through 

development of its regulatory basis, the 

NRC has determined that some areas 

within the scope previously discussed 

could be addressed using other 

regulatory alternatives. 

The Commission has not approved 

any specific recommendation in the 

regulatory basis at this time, and as 

such, any conclusions regarding the 

elements of the alignment of licensing 

processes and lessons learned from new 

reactor licensing process rulemaking are 

subject to change. 

III. Specific Requests for Comments 

The NRC is requesting comment on 

the regulatory basis titled ‘‘Alignment of 

Licensing Processes and Lessons 

Learned from New Reactor Licensing.’’ 

As you prepare your comments, 

consider the following general 

questions: 

1. Is the NRC considering appropriate 

options for each regulatory area 

described in the regulatory basis? 

2. Are there additional factors that the 

NRC should consider in each regulatory 

area? What are these factors? 

3. Are there any additional options 

that the NRC should consider during 

development of the proposed rule? 

4. Is there additional information 

concerning regulatory impacts that the 

NRC should include in its regulatory 

analysis for this rulemaking? 

Specific Regulatory Issues 

In addition to the general questions, 

the NRC has identified additional areas 

of consideration that could either be 

included in the scope of the alignment 

of licensing processes and lessons 

learned from new reactor licensing 

rulemaking or addressed through other 

actions. The NRC may include 

additional discussion of these issues in 

the proposed rule, and if included, will 

use any public comments received 

regarding these issues to inform the 

development of the proposed rule. The 

NRC requests that members of the 

public answer the following specific 

questions regarding these additional 

regulatory issues. 

Emergency Planning 

Significant Impediments to 

Development of Emergency Plans 

As required by § 52.17(b)(1), the site 

safety analysis report for an ESP 

application must include an evaluation 

of the physical characteristics of the 

proposed site, such as egress limitations 

from the area surrounding the site, that 

could pose a significant impediment to 

the development of emergency plans. 

1. The NRC is considering revising the 

guidance in Regulatory Guide 4.7, 

‘‘General Site Suitability Criteria for 

Nuclear Power Stations,’’ and NUREG– 

0800, ‘‘Standard Review Plan for the 

Review of Safety Analysis Reports for 

Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition,’’ 

Chapter 13, ‘‘Conduct of Operations,’’ 

on how to meet the requirements of 

§ 52.17(b)(1) and the siting criteria in 10 

CFR part 100, ‘‘Reactor site criteria,’’ as 

it relates to siting and emergency 

planning for ESP reviews. The NRC is 

seeking comment on the appropriate 

distance within which to perform the 

analysis to demonstrate compliance 

with the siting criteria for identifying 

site characteristics that could pose 

significant impediments to the 

development of emergency plans. Please 

provide a basis for your response. 

Part 52 Process 

Standard Design Approvals Duration, 

Manufacturing License Renewal and 

Manufacturing License Expiration Date 

As described in § 52.147, standard 

design approvals (SDAs) are valid for 15 

years from the date of issuance and may 

not be renewed. For manufacturing 

licenses (MLs), § 52.173 specifies that a 

license authorizing manufacture of 

nuclear power reactors is valid for no 

more than 15 years from the date of 

issuance. As part of this rulemaking, the 

NRC is considering the removal of the 

15-year duration for DCs established in 

§ 52.55 and DC renewal requirements in 

§§ 52.57, 52.59, and 52.61 and 10 CFR 

part 52 DC appendices. This would 

result in DCs that never expire and, 

therefore, do not need to be renewed 

every 15 years. The 2007 10 CFR part 52 

final rule provided the term of an SDA 

to be for 15 years and the term of an ML 

to be for no less than 5, or no more than 

15 years from the date of issuance. The 

Commission established the 15-year 

maximum term for SDAs and MLs to be 

consistent with the maximum term for 

a standard design certification. The 5- 

year minimum term was established by 

the Commission to encourage the use of 

an ML for the manufacture of more than 

one nuclear power reactor. 

2. If the NRC eliminates the renewal 

requirements for DCs, should the NRC 

consider eliminating or changing 

duration requirements for MLs? 

3. If the NRC eliminates the renewal 

requirements for DCs, should the NRC 

consider eliminating or changing the 

duration requirements for SDAs? 

Expired Design Certifications in 10 CFR 

Part 52 

As part of the proposed rule, the NRC 

is considering the removal of the 15- 

year duration for DCs established in 

§ 52.55 and DC renewal requirements in 

§§ 52.57, 52.59, and 52.61 and 10 CFR 

part 52 DC appendices. This would 

result in DCs that never expire and, 

therefore, do not need to be renewed 

every 15 years. However, there are 

presently two DCs contained in the 

appendices to 10 CFR part 52 (AP600 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 18 / Friday, January 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules 7515 

and System 80+) that have already 

expired. 

4. Should the NRC remove expired DC 

rules from the appendices to 10 CFR 

part 52 in the proposed rule? 

Relationship to Advanced Reactors 

The current regulations in 10 CFR 

parts 50 and 52 were largely written 

during a period when the NRC was 

licensing light-water-reactors. Today, 

significant stakeholder interest exists in 

licensing new advanced non-light-water 

reactor designs. As such, in the 

proposed rule and in subsequent 

rulemakings addressing new licensing 

regulations for advanced reactors, the 

NRC wants to ensure that it considers 

stakeholder feedback on how regulatory 

changes would impact potential nonlight-water reactor applicants. 

For example, the NRC recommends 

revising § 50.34(f) so that the TMI 

requirements in § 50.34(f) apply to new 

power reactor applications submitted 

under 10 CFR part 50, with the same 

exceptions given for 10 CFR part 52 

applicants. Section 50.34(f) requires 10 

CFR part 52 applicants to provide 

information necessary to demonstrate 

compliance with any ‘‘technically 

relevant’’ positions of the requirements 

in § 50.34(f)(1) through (3) with the 

exception of § 50.34(f)(1)(xii), (f)(2)(ix), 

and (f)(3)(v). The NRC is still 

considering whether and how these 

regulations would apply to non-light 

water reactors. 

5. Please provide feedback on impacts 

of the TMI requirements on non-LWR 

applicants the NRC should consider in 

the scope of the proposed rule. Please 

provide the basis for your answer. 

IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation 

The cumulative effects of regulation 

(CER) describes the challenges that 

licensees or other impacted entities 

(such as State agency partners) may face 

while implementing new regulatory 

positions, programs, and requirements 

(e.g., rules, generic letters, backfits, 

inspections). The CER is an 

organizational effectiveness challenge 

that results from a licensee or impacted 

entity implementing a number of 

complex positions, programs, or 

requirements within a limited 

implementation period and with 

available resources (which may include 

limited available expertise to address a 

specific issue). The NRC has 

implemented CER enhancements to the 

rulemaking process to facilitate public 

involvement throughout the rulemaking 

process. Therefore, the NRC is 

specifically requesting comment on the 

cumulative effects that may result from 

this proposed rulemaking. In developing 

comments on the regulatory basis, 

consider the following questions: 

1. In light of any current or projected 

CER challenges, what should be a 

reasonable effective date, compliance 

date, or submittal date(s) from the time 

the final rule is published to the actual 

implementation of any new proposed 

requirements, including changes to 

programs, procedures, or the facility? 

2. If CER challenges currently exist or 

are expected, what should be done to 

address them? For example, if more 

time is required for implementation of 

the new requirements, what period of 

time is sufficient? 

3. Do other regulatory actions (e.g., 

orders, generic communications, license 

amendment requests, and inspection 

findings of a generic nature) by the NRC 

or other agencies influence the 

implementation of the potential 

proposed requirements? 

4. Are there unintended 

consequences? Does the potential 

proposed action create conditions that 

would be contrary to the potential 

proposed action’s purpose and 

objectives? If so, what are the 

consequences and how should they be 

addressed? 

5. Please comment on NRC’s costs and 

benefits estimate of the potential 

proposed action. This information will 

be used to support additional regulatory 

analysis by the NRC. 

V. Plain Writing 

The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. 

L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to 

write documents in a clear, concise, 

well-organized manner. The NRC has 

written this document to be consistent 

with the Plain Writing Act as well as the 

Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing,’’ 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). The NRC 

requests comment on this document 

with respect to the clarity and 

effectiveness of the language used. 

VI. Availability of Documents 

The documents identified in the 

following table are available to 

interested persons through one or more 

of the methods, as indicated. 

Document 

ADAMS accession number/ 

web link/Federal Register 

citation 

Regulatory Basis for Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes and Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing.ML20149K680. 

SECY–15–0002, ‘‘Proposed Updates of Licensing Policies, Rules and Guidance for Future New Reactor Applications,’’ January 8, 2015.ML13277A420 (package). 

SRM–SECY–15–0002, ‘‘Staff Requirements—SECY–15–0002—Proposed Updates of Licensing Policies, Rules 

and Guidance for Future New Reactor Applications,’’ September 22, 2015.

ML15266A023. 

Public Meeting Summary, ‘‘Summary of January 15, 2019, Public Meeting to Discuss the Proposed Rulemaking to Align the Regulations in Parts 50 and 52 to Address Updates to the Licensing Processes and Lessons Learned for Future New Reactor Applications,’’ January 30, 2019.ML19023A046. 

SECY–19–0084, ‘‘Status of Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes and Lessons Learned from New Reactor 

Licensing (RIN 3150–AI66),’’ August 27, 2019.

ML19161A169 (package). 

Transcript of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Regulatory Policies & Practices—Part 50 52 

Meeting—September 20, 2019.

ML19294A009. 

Summary of November 21, 2019, Category 3 Public Meeting RE: Regulatory Basis: Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes and Apply Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing (NRC–2009–0196).ML19344C768. 

Summary of April 29, 2020, Public Meeting to Discuss the Status of Rulemaking to Align Licensing Processes 

and Apply Lessons Learned from New Reactor Licensing [NRC–2009–0196; RIN 3150–AI66].

ML20141L609. 

SECY–19–0034, ‘‘Improving Design Certification Content,’’ April 24, 2019 ............................................................ ML19080A032. 

NUREG–0800, ‘‘Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: 

LWR Edition,’’ with updates through 2007.

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

doc-collections/nuregs/staff/ 

sr0800/. 

Regulatory Guide 4.7, Revision 3, ‘‘General Site Suitability Criteria for Nuclear Power Stations’’ ......................... ML12188A053. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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-bywire (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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS