AFS-12-507-E 

September 13, 2012 

 Exemption No. 10628 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2012-0898 

Ms. Kari Gracie 

Parent of Matthew Pepe 

181 Park Avenue, Suite 12 

West Springfield, MA 01089 

Dear Ms. Gracie: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and lists the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter received August 20, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Matthew Pepe for an exemption from § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow Matthew 

Pepe to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved child restraint system 

(CARES, manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that child restraint system 

(CRS) aboard a United States (U.S.) aircraft. In Matthew Pepe’s case, only his height 

exceeds manufacturer’s limits, but reasons for requesting this exemption do not differ 

materially from those presented by the other petitioners and the reasons stated by the FAA for 

granting other exemptions also apply to the situation you present. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Matthew Pepe. 

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9834 (copy enclosed), the FAA 
2 

found that numerous people with physical challenges had previously completed flights using 

restraint systems that addressed unique physical needs regarding safety, support, and security 

in the same manner of operations as described in this petition. The FAA further found that the 

petition, if granted, would not set any new precedents regarding the use of restraint systems 

by persons with disabilities. 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant. 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption also apply to the 

situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Matthew Pepe exemption from 

14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating 

under part 121 while Matthew Pepe is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 

14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Matthew Pepe to exceed the 

specified weight limit for an FAA-approved CRS during use of that CRS aboard a U.S. 

aircraft. 

All operations under this exemption must be conducted with at least one of 

Matthew Pepe parents or a caregiver accompanying him. Matthew Pepe may only occupy a 

passenger seat with no passenger seated behind him. In addition, Matthew Pepe’s parent or 

caregiver must carry a copy of this exemption and advise the air carrier about the contents of 

the exemption at least 48 hours before the date of each flight. 

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John M. Allen 

Director, Flight Standards Service 

Enclosure