{"id":"F2005B00715","name":"CASA 79/98 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","slug":"casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":32184,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005B00715-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"CASA 79/98 - Approval under subregulation 207(2)","content":"INSTRUMENT NUMBER: CASA 79/98\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-TRY 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 03 litre per minute at 10,000 feet altitude, increasing by 0.1 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\n9 April 1998","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 approval for a specific aircraft to use a specific oxygen delivery device under defined conditions. There is no evidence of scope creep — it does not purport to create general rules, apply to other aircraft, or expand beyond the delegated power to approve under subregulation 207(2)."},"complexity_factors":["Single-purpose instrument: only approves one specific device on one specific aircraft","Only two operative conditions, both clearly expressed with specific numerical thresholds","No defined terms section — all terms are either common aviation parlance or explicitly described","Minimal cross-referencing: only references to subregulation 207(2) of the Civil Aviation Regulations and specific paragraphs of Civil Aviation Orders","No nested exceptions or conditional logic beyond the two straightforward requirements","Total length: approximately 150 words of operative text"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this is:** A specific approval from Australia's aviation safety regulator (CASA) allowing one particular aircraft (registration VH-TRY) to use a specific type of oxygen delivery device called an \"Oxymizer\" — a nasal cannula that delivers oxygen through small tubes inserted into the nostrils.\n\n**Who it affects:** \n- The operator of aircraft VH-TRY\n- Passengers and crew who might need supplemental oxygen during flight\n\n**What it allows:**\nNormally, aviation rules require oxygen masks that cover both nose and mouth for safety reasons. This approval grants an **exception** for VH-TRY to use lighter, more comfortable nasal cannulas instead — but only if two conditions are met:\n\n- **Flow rate requirement:** The Oxymizer must deliver at least 0.3 litres of oxygen per minute at 10,000 feet altitude, with the flow increasing 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 full-face oxygen masks that meet standard aviation safety rules for anyone who needs them\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis is a **delegated legislative instrument** — a decision made by a CASA official (not Parliament) using powers granted under aviation regulations. It shows how aviation safety rules can be adapted for specific cases while maintaining safety through strict conditions. The approval balances passenger comfort (nasal cannulas are less claustrophobic) against safety needs (ensuring adequate oxygen flow and maintaining backup full-face options)."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This instrument grants a limited, conditional approval for the specific aircraft VH-TRY to operate with a named type of nasal‑cannula oxygen device. It does not amend the Civil Aviation Regulations or the Civil Aviation Orders; it exercises a delegated power to grant a single, specific approval under subregulation 207(2). The effect is to permit a specific equipment choice for one aircraft subject to conditions, rather than to change the broader regulatory scope."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow scope: approval applies to a single aircraft registration (VH-TRY), limiting regulatory complexity.","Numeric technical requirement: explicit flow‑rate schedule (0.3 L/min at 10,000 ft, +0.1 L/min per 2,000 ft to 18,000 ft) requires technical verification.","Cross-reference to external instrument: relies on paragraph 6.1 and paragraph 5.1.2 of section 108.26 of the Civil Aviation Orders, requiring users to consult that separate material.","Delegated, case‑by‑case approval: issued under subregulation 207(2) by a named CASA delegate, which creates procedural interpretive needs about delegated approvals.","Lack of prescribed test or documentation protocols in the instrument increases implementation uncertainty for compliance demonstration."],"plain_english_summary":"A CASA delegate has conditionally authorised aircraft VH-TRY to operate with the named “Oxymizer” nasal‑cannula oxygen device, provided the device meets a specified flow‑rate schedule and that additional individual oxygen units comply with cited Civil Aviation Orders. The approval is specific to VH-TRY; the aircraft operator bears procurement, installation and compliance burdens and must be able to demonstrate the device meets the numeric and Order‑referenced requirements."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2","history":"/api/acts/casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/history","analysis":"/api/acts/casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/casa-79-98-approval-under-subregulation-207-2/documents"}}