{"id":"F2005B00660","name":"CASA 225/99 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","slug":"casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":32134,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005B00660-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"CASA 225/99 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","content":"INSTRUMENT NUMBER: CASA 225/99\n\nCIVIL AVIATION ACT 1988\n\nCIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988\n\nAPPROVAL UNDER SUBREGULATION 207 (2)\n\nI, DAVID ALAN VILLIERS, Acting General Manager, Airworthiness Branch, CASA, a delegate of CASA, under subregulation 207 (2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 approve the operation of the aircraft bearing the nationality and registration marks VH-NTO with nasal cannula type individual oxygen dispensing units manufactured under the name “Oxymizer”, providing that:\n\n(a) the units have a flow rate of not less than 3 litre per minute at 10,000 feet altitude, increasing by .1 litre per minute for every 2,000 feet up to 18,000 feet altitude; and\n\n(b) other individual oxygen dispensing units for use in the aircraft, that are designed to cover the nose and mouth, meet the requirements of paragraph 6.1 of section 108.26 of the Civil Aviation Orders and are provided in accordance with paragraph 5.1.2 of that section.\n\n\\[Signed D.A. Villiers\\]\n\nDavid Alan Villiers\n\nActing General Manager\n\nAirworthiness\n\n18 May 1999","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This instrument remains tightly scoped to its original purpose: granting a specific exemption for one aircraft to use a specific oxygen delivery device. There is no scope creep; it is a classic single-case delegated approval."},"complexity_factors":["Single purpose instrument with only two operative conditions","No defined terms section","Minimal cross-referencing (only to Civil Aviation Orders section 108.26 and Civil Aviation Regulations subregulation 207(2))","Straightforward conditional logic (two simple 'and' conditions)","Very short (under 200 words operative text)","Single aircraft registration specified (VH-NTO)","Single product specified (Oxymizer nasal cannula)"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a very specific approval from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) allowing a particular aircraft (registration VH-NTO) to use a specific type of oxygen delivery device called an \"Oxymizer\" nasal cannula.\n\n**What it does:**\nNormally, aviation oxygen equipment must cover both nose and mouth. This approval creates an exception for aircraft VH-NTO, permitting nasal cannulas (tubes that sit in the nose only) instead.\n\n**Conditions attached:**\n*   **Flow rate requirement:** The Oxymizer units must deliver at least 0.3 litres of oxygen per minute at 10,000 feet altitude, and increase by 0.1 litres per minute for every 2,000 feet of additional altitude up to 18,000 feet.\n*   **Backup requirement:** The aircraft must still carry standard oxygen masks that cover nose and mouth for other passengers/crew, and these must meet specific technical standards set out in the Civil Aviation Orders (section 108.26).\n\n**Who it affects:**\n*   The operator/owner of aircraft VH-NTO\n*   Pilots and passengers on this specific aircraft\n*   CASA inspectors ensuring compliance\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis is a **delegated legislative instrument**—an official permission slip from a CASA delegate using powers granted by the Civil Aviation Regulations. It shows how aviation safety rules can be adapted for specific aircraft when strict compliance with standard rules isn't practical, provided alternative safety measures are in place. The nasal cannula is likely more comfortable for passengers but requires strict flow monitoring to ensure adequate oxygen delivery at altitude."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This instrument grants a specific conditional approval under subregulation 207(2) for the operation of the aircraft VH‑NTO with Oxymizer nasal cannula oxygen units. It does not broaden the general regulatory standards; it authorises a specific device/aircraft combination subject to stated performance and cross‑referenced Civil Aviation Orders. It therefore changes the authorised equipment for that aircraft only and does not alter the underlying scope of the regulations or the referenced Civil Aviation Orders."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow, single‑aircraft applicability (VH‑NTO) which reduces scope but increases need to track applicability","Technical, altitude‑dependent flow‑rate requirement (.3 L/min at 10,000 ft increasing .1 L/min per 2,000 ft to 18,000 ft) requiring measurement/verification","Cross‑references to external Civil Aviation Orders (section 108.26 paragraphs 6.1 and 5.1.2) that require consulting another instrument to establish full compliance","Delegated authority element (approval under subregulation 207(2) by a CASA delegate) requiring understanding of delegation power and its limits","Lack of procedural detail on testing, documentation and enforcement in the instrument itself — reliance on administrative practice or other instruments"],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does\n\n- This is a written approval, made under subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 by a CASA delegate, that permits a single aircraft (registration VH‑NTO) to operate with a specified nasal‑cannula oxygen device sold under the name “Oxymizer”. (Instrument header; signed approval.)\n\nHow it works, mechanically\n\n- The approval allows the Oxymizer nasal cannula oxygen units to be carried and used on VH‑NTO provided two conditions are met: (a) the units must deliver at least 0.3 litres per minute at 10,000 feet and the flow must increase by 0.1 litres per minute for each additional 2,000 feet up to 18,000 feet; and (b) any other individual oxygen units provided for use in the aircraft that are designed to cover nose and mouth must comply with paragraph 6.1 of section 108.26 of the Civil Aviation Orders and be supplied in accordance with paragraph 5.1.2 of that same section. (Conditions (a) and (b).)\n\nWho decides\n\n- The decision maker is a CASA delegate exercising authority under subregulation 207(2) (David Alan Villiers signed the instrument). The operator cannot rely on this approval unless those conditions are met.\n\nWho pays and who bears the burden\n\n- The aircraft operator (the owner/operator of VH‑NTO) bears the direct costs of complying: acquiring or maintaining Oxymizer units that meet the flow‑rate schedule, and providing the alternative nose‑and‑mouth oxygen units that meet the referenced Civil Aviation Orders. (Conditions (a) and (b).)\n\nIncentives and behavioural effects\n\n- The instrument permits the operator to use a specific nasal‑cannula device (Oxymizer) instead of, or alongside, other oxygen delivery devices subject to the condition in (a). That creates an incentive for the operator to install and rely on Oxymizer units where the specified flow performance can be achieved. The operator must also provide other compliant nose‑and‑mouth oxygen units as required by the referenced Civil Aviation Orders, so there is a continuing supply and maintenance obligation. (Conditions (a) and (b).)\n\nCompliance burden and verification\n\n- Compliance requires ensuring the device meets a specified, altitude‑dependent flow profile (technical measurement across altitudes in (a)). Compliance with (b) requires conformity with external Civil Aviation Orders (paragraphs 6.1 and 5.1.2 of section 108.26), which creates a cross‑reference compliance task: operators must check and demonstrate conformity to those parts of the Orders.\n\nDiscretion and implementation risk\n\n- The instrument is narrow and specific: it applies only to one aircraft registration and one named device. Implementation depends on the operator or inspectors being able to verify the device performance and the provision of the alternative units. The CASA delegate used delegated regulatory power under subregulation 207(2) to make a conditional approval (instrument header and signature). The text does not set out test, inspection or enforcement procedures, so verification methods and enforcement are left to existing regulatory practice rather than this instrument.\n\nTrade‑offs, opportunity costs and substitution effects\n\n- Mechanically, the approval substitutes the named nasal cannula device into the allowed equipment for VH‑NTO subject to performance conditions. The operator trades compliance costs (testing, procurement, maintenance, and providing additional compliant devices) for the operational flexibility of using the Oxymizer. Because the approval is narrowly framed to one aircraft and one device name, it changes authorised equipment for that aircraft without amending the general regulatory standard (the Civil Aviation Orders remain the reference point for other devices). (Conditions (a) and (b).)\n\nConcentration of effect\n\n- The approval is concentrated in effect: it directly authorises a single aircraft and a specifically named device. The compliance costs are borne by the operator of VH‑NTO; operational benefit (ability to use Oxymizer devices under the stated conditions) is concentrated to that operator and, practically, to any supplier of the named device.\n\nReference points in the instrument\n\n- Approval basis: subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (instrument header).\n- Conditions: paragraph (a) (flow‑rate schedule) and paragraph (b) (cross‑reference to Civil Aviation Orders section 108.26 paragraphs 6.1 and 5.1.2).\n- Signed and dated by the CASA delegate (David Alan Villiers, Acting General Manager, Airworthiness; 18 May 1999)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","history":"/api/acts/casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/history","analysis":"/api/acts/casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/casa-225-99-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/documents"}}