[Federal Register: May 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 97)]
[Notices]
[Page 28532-28533]
[DOCID:fr21my07-85]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55768; File No. SR-NYSE-2007-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Rule 13 (Definitions of Orders)
To Establish the New Order Type Called Do Not Ship

May 15, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 20, 2007, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change. The Exchange filed Amendment
No. 1 to the proposed rule change on May 11, 2007. The proposed rule
change, as amended, is described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been substantially prepared by the NYSE. The Exchange filed the
proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon filing
with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Rule 13 (Definitions of Orders)
to establish the new order type called Do Not Ship (``DNS''). The text
of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, on the
Exchange's Web site at http://www.nyse.com, and at the Commission's

Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is amending Rule 13 to adopt a Do Not Ship, or
``DNS,'' order. A DNS order will be a limit order to buy or sell that
is to be quoted and/or executed in whole or in part only on the
Exchange. In the event the order would require routing to another
market center pursuant to Exchange rules or federal securities laws, it
would be immediately cancelled by Exchange systems.
    The proposed DNS order provides an alternative for market
participants who are seeking to have their order quoted and executed
solely on the Exchange. The Exchange states that the DNS order provides
the market participant with control over execution costs and where the
order will be handled.
    Regulation National Market System (``Reg. NMS'') requires, among
other things, that with limited exceptions, trading centers have
policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the execution of
trades at prices inferior to protected quotations displayed by other
market centers.\5\ The Exchange states that, in this context, orders
that are routed away to other market center(s) in compliance with Reg.
NMS may cause the market participant to incur multiple fees because the
customer has to pay a separate fee each time the order is routed to
other market center(s) during the course of its execution. The DNS
order enables a market participant to control the costs associated with
order execution by limiting the execution of the order in whole or in
part, to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 17 CFR 242.611. See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, a market participant who desires to have its order
executed in whole or in part solely on the Exchange will also benefit
from the DNS order which, by its terms, will immediately and
automatically cancel if it is required to be routed away to another
market center.
    Generally, a DNS order can quote and trade on the Exchange. Where
the bid or offer on the Exchange matches the bid or offer at another
market center, an incoming DNS order that is eligible to quote and
trade will do so first at the Exchange. However, if quoting the DNS
order will cause the locking or crossing

of another market center in violation of Exchange Rule 19 (Locking or
Crossing Protected Quotations in NMS Stocks), the DNS order will
cancel. If all or part of a DNS order would have been required,
pursuant to Federal securities laws, to be routed to another market
center upon entry at the Exchange, it will immediately and
automatically cancel. When a DNS order is not eligible to be traded, it
will be placed on the Display Book system at its limit price.
    The Commission has previously approved the use of order types
substantially similar to the DNS on other exchanges.\6\ The Exchange
believes that the DNS order will not only give the market participant
greater flexibility in terms of execution costs and where the order
will be handled, but it will also allow the Exchange a greater
opportunity to compete in the current market landscape.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NYSE Arca, Inc. Equities Rule 7.31 (Orders and
Modifiers) subsection (w) PNP Order (Post No Preference); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 44983 (October 25, 2001), 66 FR 55225
(November 1, 2001) (SR-PCX-00-25). See also Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, Inc. Rules of the Board of Governors Rule 185 (Orders and
Order Execution) subsection (b) (Limited Price Orders) subparagraphs
(1)(D); Securities Exchange Release No. 54538 (September 28, 2006),
71 FR 59184 (October 6, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-43).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \7\ that the
rules of an Exchange are designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Because the foregoing rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days after the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative
delay.\10\ The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest because the Commission has previously approved similar order
types for other exchanges,\11\ and waiver will allow the Exchange to
implement this order type as soon as its systems are modified to
recognize it.\12\ For this reason, the Commission designates the
proposed rule change to be effective and operative upon filing with the
Commission.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). Rule 19b-4(f)(6) also requires
the self-regulatory organization to give the Commission notice of
its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement.
    \11\ See supra at note 6.
    \12\ The Exchange represents that it seeks the requested waivers
to allow for the immediate implementation of this new order type
upon the operability of the Exchange's systems on or about May 18,
2007.
    \13\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Commission considers the 60-day abrogation period to
have commenced on May 11, 2007, the date the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2007-24 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2007-24. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NYSE-2007-24 and should be submitted on or before June
11, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-9667 Filed 5-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 4, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72836-72838]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29004]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0977; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-190-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 717-200 airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by multiple reports of cracking in the overwing frames. This
proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking in the
overwing frames, and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing
this AD to detect and correct such cracking, which could result in a
severed frame and might increase the loading of adjacent frames,
resulting in damage to the adjacent structure and consequent loss of
structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 21,
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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 (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:
562-627-5348; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2013-0977;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-190-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

    We received multiple reports of cracking in the overwing frames on
Boeing Model 717 airplanes. The airplanes had accumulated between
18,235 and 36,208 total flight hours, and between 11,991 and 45,091
total flight cycles. The cracks, caused by fatigue, originated in the
upper radius of the frame inboard tab just below the floor. This
condition, if not corrected, could result in a severed frame, which
might increase the loading of adjacent frames and result in damage to
the adjacent structure and consequent loss of structural integrity of
the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated August
12, 2013. For information on the procedures and compliance times, see
this service information at http://regulations.gov by searching for
Docket No. FAA-2013-0977.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service
Information.''
    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directives Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee,
to enhance the AD system. One enhancement was a new process for
annotating which steps in the service information are required

for compliance with an AD. Differentiating these steps from other tasks
in the service information is expected to improve an owner's/operator's
understanding of crucial AD requirements and help provide consistent
judgment in AD compliance. The actions specified in the service
information described previously include steps that are labeled as RC
(required for compliance) because these steps have a direct effect on
detecting, preventing, resolving, or eliminating an identified unsafe
condition.
    As noted in the specified service information, steps labeled as RC
must be done to comply with the proposed AD. However, steps that are
not labeled as RC are recommended. Those steps that are not labeled as
RC may be deviated from, done as part of other actions, or done using
accepted methods different from those identified in the service
information without obtaining approval of an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC), provided the steps labeled as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in a serviceable condition. Any substitutions
or changes to steps labeled as RC will require approval of an AMOC.
    The phrase ``corrective actions'' is used in this proposed AD.
``Corrective actions'' are actions that correct or address any
condition found. Corrective actions in an AD could include, for
example, repairs.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     In accordance with a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have
authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 129 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                     Labor cost           Parts cost     Cost per product       operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections....................  22 work-hours x $85 per              $0   $1,870 per          $241,230 per
                                  hour = $1,870 per                         inspection cycle.   inspection
                                  inspection cycle.                                             cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the proposed
inspections. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of a frame station...............  126 work-hours x $85 per hour =         $83,060          $93,770
                                                $10,710.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, for the on-condition repairs specified in this
proposed AD, we have received no definitive data that would enable us
to provide cost estimates.

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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2013-0977; Directorate Identifier
2013-NM-190-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 21, 2014.

(b) Affected Ads

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 717-200
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by multiple reports of cracking in the
overwing frames. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct such
cracking, which could result in a severed frame and might increase
the loading of adjacent frames, resulting in damage to the adjacent
structure and consequent loss of structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Inspections and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)
of this AD, do a general visual inspection and a high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) inspection for cracking of the left-side and right-
side overwing frames at station 737, and do all applicable
corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated
August 12, 2013, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD.
Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. Except
as required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, repeat the inspections
thereafter at the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated
August 12, 2013.
    (1) For Group 1, Configuration 1 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated August 12, 2013: At the
time specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated August 12, 2013,
except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.
    (2) For Group 1, Configuration 2 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated August 12, 2013: At the
applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (g)(2)(ii) of
this AD.
    (i) For airplanes on which the overwing frame has not been
replaced: Within 9,300 flight cycles after accomplishing the
inspections specified in Boeing Multi Operator Message (MOM) MOM-
MOM-13-0375-01B, dated May 9, 2013.
    (ii) For airplanes on which the overwing frame has been
replaced: Within 12,000 flight cycles after replacing the frame.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated
August 12, 2013, specifies a compliance time ``after the original
issue date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance
within the specified compliance time after the effective date of
this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated
August 12, 2013, specifies to contact Boeing for the compliance time
of an inspection repetitive interval, this AD requires a compliance
time approved by the FAA in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (j) of this AD.
    (3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 717-53A0036, dated
August 12, 2013, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions, this AD requires repair before further flight using a
method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for only the initial general
visual inspection, HFEC inspection, and frame replacement required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Boeing Multi Operator Message
(MOM) MOM-MOM-13-0375-01B, dated May 9, 2013.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571,
Amendment 45, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) If the service information contains steps that are labeled
as RC (Required for Compliance), those steps must be done to comply
with this AD; any steps that are not labeled as RC are recommended.
Those steps that are not labeled as RC may be deviated from, done as
part of other actions, or done using accepted methods different from
those identified in the specified service information without
obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the steps labeled as RC can
be done and the airplane can be put back in a serviceable condition.
Any substitutions or changes to steps labeled as RC require approval
of an AMOC.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact: Eric Schrieber,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, Los Angeles ACO, FAA,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5348; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 26, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-29004 Filed 12-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P