Discussion \n\n\n\tThe EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0210, dated August 26, 2019 (''EASA AD 2019-0210'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ''the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. \n\tThe FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2019 (84 FR 58060). The NPRM was prompted by a report indicating that during inspection of the installation of oxygen containers on the production line, certain fasteners of oxygen containers and adjacent panels in the PSCs were found damaged or unlocked; unlocked fasteners could \n\n((Page 6758)) \n\nmove on the rails, which could result in insufficient clearance between the oxygen container and adjacent panels. The NPRM proposed to require a one-time inspection of the oxygen containers and adjacent panels and applicable corrective actions. The FAA is issuing this AD to address this condition, which could prevent the opening of the oxygen containers and result in failure of the oxygen masks to deploy and provide supplemental oxygen in case of an in-flight decompression, possibly resulting in injury to cabin occupants. See the MCAI for additional background information. \n\nComments \n\n\n\tThe FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to that comment. \n\nRequest To Extend Compliance Time \n\n\n\tDelta Air Lines, Inc., (Delta) asked that the compliance time for the inspection specified in the proposed AD be extended to 5, 6, or 7 months, in lieu of 4 months, in order to align with the 5-month compliance time specified in Airbus Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A35P015-19, Revision 01, dated June 19, 2019. Delta stated that this would allow extra planning time to properly schedule the inspection for the affected fleet at suitable maintenance stations, and to obtain the correct amount of contingency parts (locking fasteners) to correct any discrepancies found. Delta also stated that Airbus or its supplier may be unable to provide all the required parts in such a short compliance time; but the actual fallout rate remains unknown. Delta added that the quantity of parts required is critical for accomplishing any necessary corrective action. Delta noted that if the corrective action cannot be accomplished before further flight, as required by EASA AD 2019-0210, operators could be forced to ground airplanes until the parts are available, causing an undue burden on customers. \n\tThe FAA does not agree with the commenter's request to extend the compliance time. The FAA has determined that the 4-month compliance time identified inEASA AD 2019-0210 addresses the identified unsafe condition in a timely manner. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this AD, the FAA considered the degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe condition, the average utilization of the affected fleet, and the time necessary to perform the inspection. In light of all of these factors, the FAA finds the compliance times specified in EASA AD 2019-0210, represents an appropriate interval of time for affected airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. However, under the provisions of paragraph (j) of this AD, the FAA will consider requests for approval of an extension of the compliance time if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the new compliance time would provide an acceptable level of safety. The AD has not been changed in this regard. \n\nConclusion \n\n\n\tThe FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes: \n\tAre consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and \n\tDo not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM. \n\nRelated IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51 \n\n\n\tEASA AD 2019-0210 describes procedures for inspecting the oxygen containers and the installation of adjacent panels located in all PSCs, to check that each fastener of each panel/component is locked and to measure the clearance between the oxygen container door lid and the adjacent panel/component. EASA AD 2019-0210 also describes procedures for applicable corrective actions, including attaining minimum clearance, locking any unlocked fasteners, and replacing damaged parts. \n\tThis material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section. \n\nCosts of Compliance \n\n\n\tThe FAA estimates that this AD affects 11 airplanes of U.S. registry. The agency estimates the following costs to comply with this AD: \n\n\n\tEstimated Costs for Required Actions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\tCost per Cost on U.S. \n\tLabor cost Parts cost product operators ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 work-hours x $85 per hour = $340........................... $0 $340 $3,740 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \n\n\n\tThe FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary corrective action that would be required based on the results of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this corrective action: \n\n\n\tEstimated Costs of On-Condition Actions ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \n\tCost per \n\tLabor cost Parts cost product ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85...... $0 $85 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ \n\nAuthority for This Rulemaking \n\n\n\tTitle 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. \n\tThe FAA is 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 promotingsafe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and \n\n((Page 6759)) \n\nprocedures 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. \n\nRegulatory Findings \n\n\n\tThis AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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. \n\tFor the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: \n\t(1) Is not a ''significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, \n\t(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and \n\t(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. \n\nList of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 \n\n\n\tAir transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.