Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83617 

■ 2. Amend appendix C1 to subpart B of 

part 430 by revising the introductory 

note to read as follows: 

Appendix C1 to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Dishwashers 

Note: Manufacturers must use the results of 

testing under this appendix to determine 

compliance with the relevant standards 

provided at § 430.32(f)(1). 

Manufacturers must use the results of 

testing under appendix C2 to this subpart to 

determine compliance with the amended 

standards for dishwashers provided at 

§ 430.32(f)(2). Manufacturers may use 

appendix C2 to certify compliance with the 

standards provided at § 430.32(f)(2) prior to 

the applicable compliance date for those 

standards. 

Any representations related to energy or 

water consumption of dishwashers must be 

made in accordance with the appropriate 

appendix that applies (i.e., appendix C1 or 

appendix C2) when determining compliance 

with the relevant standards. 

The regulation at 10 CFR 429.19(b)(3) 

provides instructions regarding the 

combination of detergent and detergent 

dosing, specified in section 2.5 of this 

appendix, used for certification. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend appendix C2 to subpart B of 

part 430 by revising the introductory 

note to read as follows: 

Appendix C2 to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Dishwashers 

Note: Manufacturers must use the results of 

testing under this appendix to determine 

compliance with the relevant standards 

provided at § 430.32(f)(2). Manufacturers may 

use this appendix to certify compliance with 

the standards provided at § 430.32(f)(2) prior 

to the applicable compliance date for those 

standards. 

Any representations related to energy or 

water consumption of dishwashers must be 

made in accordance with the appropriate 

appendix that applies (i.e., appendix C1 or 

appendix C2) when determining compliance 

with the relevant standards. 

* * * * * 

Note: The following appendix will not 

appear in the Code of Federal Regulations. 

Appendix A 

June 21, 2024 

Ami Grace-Tardy 

Assistant General Counsel for Legislation, 

Regulation and Energy Efficiency 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Ami.Grace-Tardy@hq.doe.gov 

Re: Energy Conservation Standards for 

Dishwashers Docket EERE–2019–BT–STD– 

0039 

Dear Assistant General Counsel Grace-Tardy: 

I am responding to your April 24, 2024 

letter seeking the views of the Attorney 

General about the potential impact on 

competition of proposed energy conservation 

standards for dishwashers. 

Your request was submitted under Section 

325(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), 42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) and 42 U.S.C. 

6316(a), which requires the Attorney General 

to make a determination of the impact of any 

lessening of competition that is likely to 

result from the imposition of proposed 

energy conservation standards. The Attorney 

General’s responsibility for responding to 

requests from other departments about the 

effect of a program on competition has been 

delegated to the Assistant Attorney General 

for the Antitrust Division in 28 CFR 0.40(g). 

The Assistant Attorney General for the 

Antitrust Division has authorized me, as the 

Policy Director for the Antitrust Division, to 

provide the Antitrust Division’s views 

regarding the potential impact on 

competition of proposed energy conservation 

standards on his behalf. 

In conducting its analysis, the Antitrust 

Division examines whether a proposed 

standard may lessen competition, for 

example, by substantially limiting consumer 

choice or increasing industry concentration. 

A lessening of competition could result in 

higher prices to manufacturers and 

consumers. 

We have studied in detail the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking regarding dishwashers, 

as well as the Technical Support Document 

(TSD) that accompanied it, both of which you 

transmitted to us under cover of your April 

24 letter. We also have reviewed the one 

public comment and reviewed the docket. 

Based on this review, our conclusion is 

that the proposed energy conservation 

standards for dishwashers are unlikely to 

have a significant adverse impact on 

competition. 

Sincerely, 

David G.B. Lawrence, 

Policy Director. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23908 Filed 10–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2024–0988; Special 

Conditions No. 25–869–SC] 

Special Conditions: Northwest 

Aerospace Technologies, Inc (NAT), 

Boeing Model 787–9 Airplane; 

Installation of High Wall Suites 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final special conditions. 

SUMMARY: These special conditions are 

issued for the Boeing Model 787–9 

series airplanes. These airplanes, as 

modified by NAT, will have a novel or 

unusual design feature when compared 

to the state of technology envisioned in 

the airworthiness standards for 

transport category airplanes. This design 

feature is the installation of high wall 

suites in the passenger cabin. The 

applicable airworthiness regulations do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

safety standards for this design feature. 

These 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: Effective October 17, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Artiom Kostiouk, Cabin Safety, AIR– 

624, Technical Policy Branch, Policy 

and Standards Division, Aircraft 

Certification Service, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence Ave. 

SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone 

and fax (202) 267–5446; email 

artiom.m.kostiouk@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

NAT has applied for an amended 

supplemental type certificate for the 

installation of suites in the passenger 

cabin in Boeing Model 787–9 series 

airplanes. The Boeing Model 787–9 

airplane, currently approved under 

Type Certificate No. T00021SE, is a 

twin-engine transport category airplane, 

with a maximum seating capacity for 

420 passengers, and a maximum take-off 

weight of 553,000 pounds. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of 14 CFR 

21.101, NAT must show that the Boeing 

Model 787–9 airplane, as changed, 

continues to meet the applicable 

provisions of the regulations listed in 

Type Certificate No. T00021SE or the 

applicable regulations in effect on the 

date of application for the change, 

except for earlier amendments as agreed 

upon by the FAA. 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

(i.e.,14 CFR part 25) do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards 

for the Boeing Model 787–9 airplane 

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 applicant apply 

for a supplemental type certificate to 

modify any other model included on the 

same type certificate to incorporate the 

same novel or unusual design feature, 

these special conditions would also 

apply to the other model under § 21.101. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
83618 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

conditions, the Boeing Model 787–9 

airplane must comply with the exhaustemission requirements of 14 CFR part 

34, and the noise-certification 

requirements of 14 CFR part 36. 

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 

§ 21.101. 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The Boeing Model 787–9 airplane will 

incorporate the following novel or 

unusual design feature: 

Single-passenger suites with high 

walls that diminish occupant’s 

awareness of their surroundings in 

emergency situations. These suites are 

considered a novel design for transport 

category airplanes and were not 

considered when applicable 

airworthiness standards were created. 

Discussion 

For the Model 787–9 airplane, NAT 

has proposed a customer option for the 

installation of six high wall suites 

(HWS) arranged in two rows of three 

suites each in a 1–1–1 configuration. 

The characteristics of this HWS design 

are unique such that the suite walls are 

higher than conventional mini-suites 

with partial height surroundings. While 

the walls for these suites do not extend 

fully up from the floor to the ceiling, 

such as those found in traditional ‘‘high 

wall’’ suites, their wall height of 60 

inches is greater than the eye level of a 

5th percentile female, impeding visual 

awareness and egress. These suites are 

also not remote from the main cabin 

(such as overhead crew rests). 

Additionally, the design of these suites 

is novel in the inclusion of berths that 

are accessible to the occupant of the 

suite during flight, unlike previous high 

wall suite designs. 

Part 25 in its current form does not 

have regulations that address suite 

installations in the cabin with walls of 

height that reduce occupant visibility 

and situational awareness. 

Due to the novel design features of 

these HWS, suitable passenger alerting, 

supplemental oxygen, and firefighting 

equipment and procedures are needed 

for this configuration to ensure 

occupant awareness in emergency 

situations. Furthermore, the proposed 

suite design necessitates the 

development of additional special 

conditions, including, but not limited to 

crew procedures for managing hazards 

and suite occupants, as well as 

maintaining cabin-egress route 

dimensions after deformation of the 

walls and seats. 

The 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. 

Discussion of Comments 

The FAA issued Notice of Proposed 

Special Conditions No. 25–24–03–SC 

for the Boeing Model 787–9 series 

airplane, which was published in the 

Federal Register on August 6, 2024 (89 

FR 63845). 

The FAA received three comments 

from Boeing. 

Boeing requests to change the 

description of the suites to remove the 

single criterion of impending visual 

awareness and egress of a 5th percentile 

female. Instead, Boeing requests FAA to 

use multifaceted criteria (i.e., oxygen 

masks, smoke detection, and 

firefighting), which would categorize 

the suites as mini-suites instead of high 

wall suites. Boeing further asserts that a 

height of 60 inches to demarcate 

between high wall suites and minisuites is not consistent with industry, 

FAA, or European Union Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA) practice. The 

FAA disagrees that the proposed suites 

are mini-suites. These suites are 

described as high wall suites because 

the height of the walls, in this case 60 

inches, exceeds the eye height of shorter 

stature occupants such that they are 

unable to see the emergency exits from 

within the suites, which increases safety 

risk associated with actions expected of 

the occupants in an emergency. This 

description is consistent with the FAA 

Grant of Exemption 17635B, issued to 

The Boeing Company for high wall 

suites installed on Model 777 airplanes 

which states, ‘‘In most previous 

approvals, the low-wall mini-suite door 

did not obscure the passenger’s view of 

the airplane’s emergency exit. However, 

in this case, the high walls create long 

corridors that could obscure view of the 

emergency exits, and impede the overall 

egress capability of the cabin, creating a 

new safety risk.’’ This description is 

also consistent with discussion of high 

wall suites at industry meetings where 

the FAA has maintained the position 

discussed in the noted exemption. 

Boeing also proposes to change the 

discussion section regarding part 25 

which states that part 25 does not 

specifically address suites with walls 

that reduce occupant visibility and 

situational awareness. Boeing asserts 

that commercial aircraft commonly 

include architectural elements that are 

addressed by existing regulations that 

may also potentially reduce visibility 

and situational awareness. The FAA 

infers that Boeing is maintaining that 

existing regulations already address 

suites with high walls, and the FAA 

disagrees with Boeing’s comment. While 

current regulations are sufficient to 

address a high wall architectural 

element such as a partition, they do not 

address the safety risk posed by 

surrounding an occupant with high 

walls. The discussion section is 

intended to convey that part 25 did not 

previously consider safety factors 

associated with high walls surrounding 

seats that were previously installed in 

an open seating environment. Among 

these factors is the safety risk associated 

with walls that diminish visibility of 

emergency exits and awareness of 

emergency conditions, which must be 

addressed by special conditions. 

Finally, Boeing proposes to remove 

conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7, which are 

associated with high wall suites, and 

place condition 5 which relates to 

berths, in an exemption regarding minisuites. The FAA disagrees with Boeing’s 

proposal since the suites in question are 

not mini-suites but high wall suites. 

Furthermore, incorporating beds into 

the suites requires conditions specific to 

decompression alerting and maintaining 

availability of supplemental oxygen for 

bed occupants to mitigate the safety risk 

associated with diminished situational 

awareness. 

The special conditions are adopted as 

proposed. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the Boeing 

Model 787–9 airplane. Should 

Northwest Aerospace Technologies, Inc 

apply at a later date for a supplemental 

type certificate to modify any other 

model included on Type Certificate No. 

T00021SE to incorporate the same novel 

or unusual design feature, these special 

conditions would apply to that model as 

well. 

Under standard practice, the effective 

date of final special conditions would 

be 30 days after the date of publication 

in the Federal Register. However, as the 

certification date for the Boeing Model 

787–9, as modified by Northwest 

Aerospace Technologies, Inc., is 

imminent, the FAA finds that good 

cause exists to make these special 

conditions effective upon publication. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only a certain 

novel or unusual design feature on one 

model of airplane. It is not a rule of 

general applicability and affects only 

the applicant who applied to the FAA 

for approval of these features on the 

airplane. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 201 / Thursday, October 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 83619 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

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 Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the following special 

conditions are issued as part of the type 

certification basis for Boeing Model 

787–9 series airplanes, as modified by 

NAT. 

The suites must have the following 

features: 

1. A supplemental oxygen system 

with the following: 

a. Oxygen masks for each seat and 

berth installed in the suite that meet the 

same 14 CFR part 25 regulations as the 

supplemental oxygen system for the 

main passenger-cabin occupants. 

b. An aural and visual alert system to 

warn occupants and to indicate the need 

to don oxygen masks in the event of 

decompression. The aural alert must 

activate concurrently with the 

deployment of the oxygen masks in the 

main passenger cabin and must be loud 

enough to be heard and clearly 

understood from each suite berth and 

seat location. 

c. When an occupant needs to locate 

and don a deployed oxygen mask, 

sufficient levels of lighting to perform 

this task must be automatically 

activated within the suite. 

d. Automatic presentation of oxygen 

for occupants lying in the berth. 

e. If a chemical oxygen generator is 

used as the oxygen supply source, the 

suite oxygen installation must meet 

§§ 25.795(d) and 25.1450 at amendment 

25–138 or higher. 

2. The design approval holder must 

provide operating procedures to move 

suite occupants when smoke is present, 

or firefighting is occurring near or in the 

suites, for incorporation into the 

operator’s training programs and 

appropriate operational manuals: 

a. A limitation must be included in 

the airplane flight manual (AFM) 

requiring that crewmembers be trained 

in the operating procedures related to 

the suites. 

3. The design of each suite, and the 

location of the firefighting equipment 

where suites are installed, must allow 

the crewmembers to conduct effective 

firefighting in the suite. For a manual, 

hand-held extinguishing system 

(designed as the sole means to fight a 

fire) for the suite: 

a. A limitation must be included in 

the AFM requiring that crewmembers be 

trained in the firefighting procedures. 

b. Each suite design must allow 

crewmembers equipped for firefighting 

to have unrestricted access to all parts 

of the suite compartment. 

4. Approved procedures describing 

the methods for searching the suite 

compartment for fire sources must be 

established. These procedures should 

include a drawing or photo clearly 

indicating the location of the stowage 

drawer and other potential sources of 

smoke (e.g., the monitor). They must be 

transmitted to the operator for 

incorporation into their training 

programs and appropriate operations 

manuals. 

5. If a berth is installed, occupancy of 

each suite is limited to a single 

passenger. 

a. Each berth installed in the suite 

must incorporate a safety belt that meets 

§ 25.785(f). 

b. Each berth must be placarded to 

indicate the appropriate orientation of 

the occupant’s head direction. 

c. Each berth cushion must meet 

§ 25.853(c). 

6. If waste-disposal receptacles are 

fitted in the suite, the suite must be 

equipped with an automatic fireextinguishing system that meets the 

performance requirements of 

§ 25.854(b). 

7. The design of each suite must: 

a. Maintain minimum main aisle(s), 

cross aisle(s), and passageway(s) 

required by 14 CFR part 25 

requirements when subjected to the 

ultimate inertia forces listed in 

§ 25.561(d). 

b. Prevent structural failure or 

deformation of components that could 

block access to the available evacuation 

routes (e.g., seats, doors, contents of 

stowage compartments, etc.). 

8. In addition to the requirements of 

§ 25.562 for seat systems, which are 

occupiable during taxi, takeoff, and 

landing, the suite structure must be 

designed for the additional loads 

imposed by the seats as a result of the 

conditions specified in § 25.562(b). 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

October 11, 2024. 

Patrick R. Mullen, 

Manager, Technical Policy Branch, Policy and 

Standards Division, Aircraft Certification 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23936 Filed 10–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 764 

[Docket No. 240911–0236] 

RIN 0694–AJ84 

Administrative and Enforcement 

Provisions; Correction 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: On September 16, 2024, the 

Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) 

published a final rule amending 

administrative and enforcement 

provisions in the Export Administration 

Regulations (EAR). The rule contained 

an error in an amendatory instruction. 

This document corrects that error. 

DATES: This correction is effective 

October 17, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general questions, contact Tracy Martin, 

Office of Export Enforcement, Bureau of 

Industry and Security, U.S. Department 

of Commerce at (202) 482–1208 or by 

email: Tracy.Martin@bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BIS 

published a final rule entitled 

‘‘Administrative and Enforcement 

Provisions’’ in the Federal Register on 

September 16, 2024, at 89 FR 75477, 

which contained an error in instruction 

number 2 amending 15 CFR 764.5. The 

instruction cited revisions to paragraphs 

(a) and (b) through (f), as well as adding 

paragraph (g). However, the intended 

revisions should have been to 

paragraphs (a) and (c) through (f) and 

adding a paragraph (g). Paragraph (b) 

was not intended to be revised. This 

document corrects instruction 2 for the 

record. 

Correction 

In FR Doc. No. 2024–21013, appearing 

on page 75477 in the Federal Register 

of Friday, September 16, 2024, make the 

following correction: 

§ 764.5 [Corrected] 

■ 1. On page 75482, in the third column, 

instruction 2 reading ‘‘2. Section 764.5 

is amended by revising paragraphs (a) 

and (b) through (f) and adding 

paragraph (g) to read as follows:’’ is 

corrected to read ‘‘2. Section 764.5 is 

amended by revising paragraphs (a) and 

(c) through (f) and adding paragraph (g) 

to read as follows:’’. 

Karen H. Nies-Vogel, 

Director, Office of Exporter Services. 

[FR Doc. 2024–23887 Filed 10–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1