Request to Use CARES Child Restraint System for Larger/Older Persons

I am writing to request an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b) to the extent required for 

Elizabeth Melissa Dominick to be able to use an FAA Approved Child Restraint System even 

though she exceeds the weight limits for the CRS. In addition, if my petition is granted, I request 

that any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Elizabeth Melissa 

Dominick is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b) (2) (iii) (B) to 

the extent necessary to allow Elizabeth to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved 

child restraint system during use of that child restraint system aboard an aircraft. I believe the 

pertinent section from 14 CFR part 121 from which we seek relief is Section 121.311 Seats, 

safety belts, and shoulder harnesses.

My daughter is 25 year’s old, weighs 85 pounds, and is 58 inches tall. My daughter’s physical 

condition is as follows: Elizabeth has Cerebral Palsy and is a spastic quadriplegic.. As a result of 

her physical condition, she needs the support and security provided by an FAA Approved Child 

Restraint, but because of her weight is incapable of compliance with the regulation. I am also

submitting the following contact information: Rhett Dominick, 525 Phoenix Road, Phoenix

Community, Greenwood, South Carolina 29646-9742, 864-227-9046,

rhettdominick@gmail.com.

I understand that the regulation is written to create a high level of safety for each individual 

passenger by ensuring that they are securely restrained in their seats during all phases of flight. 

The regulation also ensures that an individual does not cause harm to other passengers on the 

airplane by being thrown into them during turbulent or emergency conditions.

I propose that Elizabeth Melissa Dominick be allowed to occupy an FAA Approved Child 

Restraint (CARES, manufactured by AmSafe, Inc.), even though she exceeds the manufacturer’s 

weight limits. This ensures a high level of safety for Elizabeth and a high level of safety for the 

other passengers and crew on the airplane. In fact, in Elizabeth’s case, safety is greatly enhanced 

by the extra support and security that the FAA Approved Restraint System will provide during 

the entire flight.

Enhancing safety for Elizabeth is in the public interest. In addition, the public interest is also 

served by the fact that the use of this FAA Approved Child Restraint System allows her to use 

commercial air transportation. Without the support and security of the FAA Approved Child 

Restraint System, she would be unable to fly commercially. I also believe that, with certain 

limitations established by the FAA in a grant to this petition, there can be an equivalent level of 

safety to that provided by the affected regulation. The CARES restraint has been certified by the 

manufacturer for use by children 22-44 pounds. However, the components of the CARES 
restraint are the same as those used in restraints for adults on aircraft and would maintain their 

integrity if used by someone who weighed several hundred pounds. I believe that the limit of 44 

pounds was established because, with the additional weight of the child attached to the seatback, 

the seatback would move forward more quickly in an accident scenario and this might cause a 

higher HIC load for the person seated in the seat behind the passenger using the CARES restraint 

(because the seatback moving forward more quickly would mean that it would not be there to 

attenuate the energy from the impact of the person seated behind the person using the CARES 

restraint).

In order to achieve an equivalent level of safety as that provided by the affected regulation, I 

propose that the FAA establish a limitation in a grant to this petition that Elizabeth only sits in a 

passenger seat with no passenger seated behind her. Therefore, no unsafe condition would exist 

for a passenger seated behind Elizabeth while she is using the CARES restraint. I also propose 

that all operations under this exemption be conducted with at least one of Elizabeth's parents or a 

caregiver accompanying him or her. In addition, I propose that Elizabeth's parent or caregiver 

must carry a copy of this exemption.

I also request that the processing of this petition not be delayed for publication and comment in 

the Federal Register. We want to travel September - October 2015. If you take the time to put 

this in the Federal Register, it will delay the process and we may not be able to travel in this 

timeframe.

If it is necessary to put a summary in the Federal Register, I submit the following: This is a 

request for an exemption from FAR 121.311 (b) to the extent required for a child to use an FAA 

Approved Child Restraint System on an aircraft, even though the child exceeds the weight limits 

for the CRS. Due to physical challenges, without the support and security of this FAA Approved 

Child Restraint System, this child would be unable to fly. We request that this child be allowed 

to occupy an FAA Approved Child Restraint (CARES, manufactured by AmSafe, Inc.), even 

though she exceeds the manufacturer’s weight limits of 44 pounds. In this case, the safety of this 

child is greatly enhanced by the extra support and security that the FAA Approved Restraint 

System will provide for her during the flight. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Yours very truly,

Rhett Dominick

William R. Dominick (parent)