{"id":"F2005B00978","name":"CASA 267/97 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","slug":"casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":32384,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005B00978-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"CASA 267/97 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","content":"INSTRUMENT NUMBER: CASA 267/97\n\nCIVIL AVIATION ACT 1988\n\nCIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS\n\nAPPROVAL UNDER SUBREGULATION 207 (2)\n\nI, FRANK RICHARD HAMILTON GRIMSHAW, General Manager, Airworthiness Branch, CASA, a delegate of CASA, under subregulation 207 (2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations approve the operation of the aircraft bearing the nationality and registration marks VH-PZP 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 Frank Richard Hamilton Grimshaw\\]\n\nFRANK RICHARD HAMILTON GRIMSHAW\n\nGeneral Manager\n\nAirworthiness Branch\n\n28 October 1997","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a standard delegated legislative instrument exercising a specific approval power under subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations. It does exactly what that provision allows: grants a specific approval for a specific aircraft with specific conditions. No scope creep is evident."},"complexity_factors":["Single purpose instrument — approves one specific device on one specific aircraft","Only two operative conditions (paragraphs a and b)","No defined terms section — all terms are ordinary English or technical aviation terms","One cross-reference to Civil Aviation Orders (section 108.26)","No nested exceptions or conditional logic beyond the two straightforward requirements","Length: approximately 150 words of operative text"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a specific approval from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) allowing a particular aircraft (registration VH-PZP) to use a specific type of oxygen delivery device called an \"Oxymizer\" — a nasal cannula that delivers oxygen through tubes inserted into the nose.\n\nNormally, aviation rules require oxygen masks that cover both nose and mouth for safety reasons. This approval creates an exception for this specific aircraft, but with strict conditions:\n\n- **The Oxymizer units must deliver minimum oxygen flow rates** that increase with altitude — starting at 0.3 litres per minute at 10,000 feet, and going up by 0.1 litres per minute for every 2,000 feet climbed, up to 18,000 feet.\n- **Backup protection required**: The aircraft must still carry traditional oxygen masks (the kind covering nose and mouth) that meet specific technical standards set out in the Civil Aviation Orders.\n\n**Who it affects**: The operator of aircraft VH-PZP, and potentially sets a precedent for similar approvals.\n\n**Why it matters**: This allows more flexible (and likely more comfortable) oxygen equipment for passengers and crew, but only where CASA is satisfied the safety risks are managed through technical specifications and backup requirements."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This instrument is a narrow, aircraft-specific approval that authorises the use of a named nasal-cannula oxygen product on the aircraft VH-PZP subject to specified flow-rate conditions and cross-references to Civil Aviation Orders (approval text). It does not purport to broaden or generalise regulatory scope beyond granting that specific approval, so it does not change the broader regulatory scope beyond the single-aircraft, conditional approval recorded here."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow, single-aircraft scope reduces breadth of legal analysis (approval applies only to VH-PZP).","Technical performance schedule for equipment (flow-rate table: 0.3 L/min at 10,000 ft, +0.1 L/min per 2,000 ft to 18,000 ft) requires technical verification rather than legal interpretation (approval text, condition (a)).","Cross-reference to other regulatory material (Civil Aviation Orders section 108.26, paragraphs 6.1 and 5.1.2) adds dependency on external provisions not reproduced in the instrument (approval text, condition (b)).","Delegated administrative action (approval by CASA delegate under subregulation 207(2)) concentrates decision authority in an administrative officer, which affects how challenges or variations are handled (signature block).","Conditional approval structure (named product plus alternative permitted if meeting CAO criteria) introduces two compliance paths that must be checked in practice (approval text, product name and condition (b))."],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does (mechanics)\n\n- It is an approval, made under subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations, that allows the specific aircraft with registration VH-PZP to operate with nasal-cannula oxygen dispensing units sold under the name “Oxymizer” (approval text, first paragraph).\n- The approval is conditional. Condition (a) requires those Oxymizer units to deliver at least 0.3 litres per minute at 10,000 feet and to increase by 0.1 litres per minute for every 2,000 feet up to 18,000 feet. Condition (b) requires that any other individual oxygen units provided for use in the aircraft which cover the nose and mouth must meet paragraph 6.1 of section 108.26 of the Civil Aviation Orders and be supplied in accordance with paragraph 5.1.2 of that section (approval text, conditions (a) and (b)).\n\nWho it affects\n\n- The approval directly affects the operator/owner of the aircraft registered VH-PZP because it sets what specific oxygen equipment that aircraft may carry and use (approval text, first paragraph).\n- It also identifies a particular product name (“Oxymizer”), so the named manufacturer or supplier would be able to supply that product for use on this aircraft under this approval (approval text, product name).\n\nWhy the approval exists (as stated) and the practical implications\n\n- The instrument explicitly authorises use of a named nasal-cannula oxygen unit on a particular aircraft (approval text). That is the stated purpose-claim: to permit VH-PZP to operate with Oxymizer units subject to specified flow requirements and cross-referenced Civil Aviation Order requirements.\n\nCosts, incentives and trade-offs (source-grounded)\n\n- Who pays: The aircraft operator must obtain and provide the Oxymizer units that meet the flow-rate schedule and must provide any other individual oxygen units that comply with the cited Civil Aviation Orders (approval text, conditions (a) and (b)).\n- Incentives: By naming a particular product and setting minimum flow rates, the approval creates an operational incentive for the VH-PZP operator to acquire and install Oxymizer units that meet the stated technical thresholds (approval text).\n- Opportunity cost and substitution: The operator can use Oxymizer units that meet the conditions or other individual units that both cover nose and mouth and meet the CAO references; the approval therefore permits substitution only if alternative units meet the referenced CAO requirements (approval text, condition (b)).\n- Compliance burden: The operator must ensure equipment meets the numeric flow-rate schedule and the requirements in section 108.26 (approval text). The instrument does not itself specify inspection, recordkeeping, or enforcement procedures; compliance mechanics would come from the Regulations and Civil Aviation Orders referenced.\n- Implementation risk: Because the instrument ties permission to a specific performance schedule (flow rates at set altitudes), incorrect equipment or improper flow performance could fail to meet the stated conditions; ensuring the equipment delivers the specified flow rates is a technical compliance task for the operator/supplier (approval text, condition (a)).\n- Bureaucratic discretion: The approval is made by a CASA delegate (the General Manager, Airworthiness Branch) exercising authority under subregulation 207(2). That shows the decision-maker is a CASA delegate rather than a court or agency-wide rule (approval text, signature block).\n- Effects on private choice and competition: The approval authorises a named product for a named aircraft. That is a narrow commercial permission for the operator to source Oxymizer units; alternative suppliers remain usable only if their products meet the CAO requirements referenced (approval text, product name and condition (b)).\n\nConcrete behavioural change mandated\n\n- The operator of VH-PZP may fit and operate Oxymizer nasal-cannula units provided those units meet the flow-rate schedule (approval text, condition (a)).\n- If other individual oxygen units are used that cover nose and mouth, they must comply with paragraph 6.1 and be provided in accordance with paragraph 5.1.2 of section 108.26 of the Civil Aviation Orders (approval text, condition (b)).\n\nSource citations\n\n- The approval is issued under subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations (opening line).\n- Conditions (a) and (b) set the technical and cross-referenced requirements (approval text, conditions (a) and (b)).\n- The instrument is signed by the CASA delegate, General Manager, Airworthiness Branch (signature block)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","history":"/api/acts/casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/history","analysis":"/api/acts/casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/casa-267-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/documents"}}