{"id":"F2005B00974","name":"CASA 285/97 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","slug":"casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":32380,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005B00974-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"CASA 285/97 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","content":"INSTRUMENT NUMBER: CASA 285/97\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-FHM 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\n13 November 1997","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a narrow, specific administrative approval (a 'delegate's instrument') made under existing regulation 207(2). It does not alter the scope of the Civil Aviation Regulations themselves; it merely exercises a discretion already provided by those regulations to approve an alternative compliance method for one specific aircraft."},"complexity_factors":["Single, specific approval applying to one aircraft only (VH-FHM)","Only two operational conditions to satisfy","References to external technical standards (Civil Aviation Orders section 108.26) but does not reproduce them","No defined terms section","No conditional logic or nested exceptions","Very short document (under 200 words)"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a specific approval from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) allowing a particular aircraft (registration VH-FHM) to use a specific type of oxygen delivery device called an \"Oxymizer\" — a nasal cannula that delivers oxygen through tubes inserted into the nostrils.\n\n**What it does:**\nNormally, aviation rules require oxygen masks that cover both nose and mouth for safety reasons. This document grants an exception for aircraft VH-FHM to use the lighter, more comfortable nasal cannula style units instead — but only under strict conditions.\n\n**The conditions:**\n*   **Flow rate requirements:** The Oxymizer units must deliver at least 0.3 litres of oxygen per minute when flying at 10,000 feet, and this flow must 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 traditional oxygen masks (the kind covering nose and mouth) that meet specific technical standards set out in the Civil Aviation Orders, and these must be available as required by those rules.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n*   The operator of aircraft VH-FHM\n*   Pilots and passengers on that specific aircraft\n*   CASA inspectors monitoring compliance\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis is a practical safety accommodation. Nasal cannulas are more comfortable for passengers and crew during long flights, but they don't work as well at very high altitudes or if someone breathes through their mouth. The approval balances comfort with safety by requiring backup full-face masks and ensuring adequate oxygen flow rates."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The instrument is an approval under subregulation 207(2) that authorises the use of a named nasal-cannula oxygen device on one specific aircraft registration (VH-FHM), subject to defined conditions (clauses (a) and (b)). The text contains no statement that it repeals, enlarges or otherwise alters the regulatory framework beyond granting this specific approval, so there is no indication in the instrument itself that the broader regulatory scope has changed."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow, single-aircraft scope reduces procedural complexity (instrument applies only to VH-FHM).","Technical specificity of the flow-rate requirement (0.3 L/min at 10,000 ft; +0.1 L/min per 2,000 ft up to 18,000 ft) creates a measurable compliance obligation (clause (a)).","Cross-reference to external standards (Civil Aviation Orders, section 108.26, paragraphs 5.1.2 and 6.1) requires operators to consult and apply another instrument, increasing practical complexity (clause (b)).","Delegated administrative action (CASA delegate signature) concentrates decision-making in an individual delegate but creates limited statutory discretion visible in the instrument header.","Operational verification and record-keeping (demonstrating device performance and provisioning of alternative masks) introduce modest compliance and administrative tasks."],"plain_english_summary":"This instrument is a CASA approval authorising aircraft VH-FHM to operate using Oxymizer nasal‑cannula oxygen units, subject to a specified altitude‑dependent minimum flow performance and the carriage/provision of alternative nose‑and‑mouth masks that meet CAO 108.26 standards. \n\nIt primarily affects the aircraft operator (who must ensure device performance, maintenance and provisioning), with secondary impacts on Oxymizer and mask suppliers and on crew/passengers relying on those units; it was signed by a CASA delegate and imposes compliance costs on the operator."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","history":"/api/acts/casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/history","analysis":"/api/acts/casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/casa-285-97-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/documents"}}