{"id":"F2005B00960","name":"CASA 495/98 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","slug":"casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":32367,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005B00960-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"CASA 495/98 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","content":"---\nmeta-content-style-type: text/css\nmeta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8\nmeta-generator: Aspose.Words for .NET 20.2\ntitle: \"INSTRUMENT NUMBER:CASA /97\"\n---\n\n?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\" standalone=\"no\"?>\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nINSTRUMENT NUMBER: CASA  495/98\n\n \n\nCIVIL AVIATION ACT 1988\n\n \n\nCIVIL AVIATION REGULATIONS 1988\n\n \n\nAPPROVAL UNDER SUBREGULATION 207(2)\n\n \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-ESA, VH-ESB and VH-ESD respectively  with survival radio beacons that  meet the requirements of subparagraph 6.1(a) of section 20.11 of the Civil Aviation Orders other than in respect of satisfying the standard set out in paragraph 2.4 of section 103.40 for self-activation on immersion in water.\n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n[Signed D.A. Villiers]\n\n \n\n \n\nDAVID ALAN VILLIERS\n\nActing General Manager\n\nAirworthiness\n\n18 December 1998\n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The instrument itself does not indicate any change from an earlier or original scope; it records a specific, narrow approval granted under subregulation 207(2) for three named aircraft to use beacons that otherwise meet subparagraph 6.1(a) of section 20.11 except for the self-activation standard in paragraph 2.4 of section 103.40. The approval is confined to those registrations and does not purport to amend the broader Orders or Regulations."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow, specific scope limited to three aircraft registrations (low scope complexity).","Relies on cross-references to other instruments/sections (section 20.11(6.1)(a) and section 103.40(2.4)), requiring look-up to understand full technical standards.","Involves an exercise of delegated discretion under subregulation 207(2), implicating administrative-law considerations.","Technical content (survival radio beacon self-activation) is specialised but the instrument itself is short and procedurally simple."],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does\n\n- This is an approval issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) under subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988. The approval is signed by the Acting General Manager, Airworthiness Branch, CASA (D. A. Villiers) on 18 December 1998 (Instrument: CASA 495/98).\n\n- It allows three specific Australian-registered aircraft — VH-ESA, VH-ESB and VH-ESD — to be operated with survival radio beacons that meet the requirements of subparagraph 6.1(a) of section 20.11 of the Civil Aviation Orders, except that those beacons need not satisfy the standard in paragraph 2.4 of section 103.40 for self-activation on immersion in water. In short: these three aircraft are permitted to use beacons that do not automatically activate when immersed in water (text: approval under subregulation 207(2); reference to section 20.11(6.1)(a) and section 103.40(2.4)).\n\nWho decides, who pays, and what changes in behaviour\n\n- Who decides: The approval is made by a CASA delegate — the Acting General Manager, Airworthiness Branch — exercising power under subregulation 207(2) (instrument signature block and opening sentence).\n\n- Who pays / who implements: The holders/operators of the three named aircraft are the direct parties affected. They will operate those aircraft with the specified (non-self-activating) beacons and therefore hold responsibility for ensuring those beacons meet the approved standard (the instrument names the registrations and the limited exception to the standards).\n\n- Behaviour changes required: Because the approval removes the requirement for automatic activation on immersion, the practical implication is that those beacons will not necessarily activate automatically when the aircraft or occupants are immersed in water. Operators therefore must rely on whatever alternative activation method the beacon uses (typically manual activation) and on any operational procedures they adopt to manage that difference. The instrument itself specifies only the approval and the exception; it does not prescribe operational mitigations or training (instrument text: approval and exception clauses).\n\nWhy this matters (mechanics, incentives, trade-offs and discretion)\n\n- Mechanical effect: The instrument creates a narrow regulatory exception for three registrations, removing the specific technical requirement for automatic immersion activation while leaving other requirements of subparagraph 6.1(a) of section 20.11 in place (instrument text: approval under subregulation 207(2)).\n\n- Incentives and trade-offs: The operators of those three aircraft gain the immediate benefit of operating with the specified beacon equipment despite the non‑compliance with paragraph 2.4 of section 103.40. Any costs or risks arising from the lack of automatic activation (for example the reliance on manual activation or other activation methods) fall on the operators and their decision-makers to manage. The instrument itself does not record cost-allocation, compensating measures, or operational controls; it simply records the approval and its limited scope.\n\n- Compliance burden and implementation risk: The approval reduces one compliance requirement (automatic immersion activation) for the three aircraft but implicitly transfers the operational responsibility for activation to the operator. The instrument does not set out required procedures, training, or monitoring; those would need to be established elsewhere if required.\n\n- Bureaucratic discretion and scope: The approval is an exercise of delegated regulatory discretion under subregulation 207(2). It is narrowly targeted (three registration marks) rather than a general amendment to the Orders or Regulations, which concentrates the administrative benefit on those specific operators (instrument text: lists of registrations and delegation reference).\n\nSections cited: approval under subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988; reference to subparagraph 6.1(a) of section 20.11 of the Civil Aviation Orders; exception from paragraph 2.4 of section 103.40 for self-activation on immersion in water (instrument text, signed 18 December 1998)."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":1,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a discrete, single-purpose administrative approval issued under existing regulatory powers. It has not expanded beyond its original intent; it precisely matches the scope of subregulation 207(2) which authorises CASA to approve operations that don't fully comply with equipment standards."},"complexity_factors":["Single, specific administrative decision affecting only three identified aircraft","No defined terms section — refers to external regulations (CAR 1988, Civil Aviation Orders) by reference only","No conditional logic or nested exceptions within the instrument itself","Extremely short — approximately 150 words of substantive content","Straightforward delegation structure (Act → Regulations → subregulation → delegate)","Simple binary approval: exemption granted for specific deficiency (water-activation) against specific standard (CAO 103.40 para 2.4)"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a **specific approval** issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) allowing three particular aircraft (registration marks VH-ESA, VH-ESB, and VH-ESD) to use survival radio beacons that don't fully meet normal safety standards.\n\n**What it does:**\n- Normally, survival radio beacons on aircraft must automatically activate when they hit water (this is the \"self-activation on immersion\" requirement).\n- This document gives **permission for these three specific aircraft to use beacons that don't have this water-activation feature**, provided the beacons meet other requirements in the Civil Aviation Orders.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- The operators of these three specific aircraft (VH-ESA, VH-ESB, VH-ESD)\n- CASA itself, as the regulator granting the exemption\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis is an example of **regulatory flexibility** — CASA can grant approvals that let aircraft operate even when they don't meet every technical requirement, as long as safety is still adequately managed. It's a limited, aircraft-specific exemption rather than a broad rule change."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","history":"/api/acts/casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/history","analysis":"/api/acts/casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/casa-495-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/documents"}}