Request to Use CARES for Larger/Older Persons

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

extent required for Jamie Mcelearney 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 Jamie Mcelearney is 

aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 

121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Jamie Mcelearney 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's physical condition is as follows: Jamie is a 13 year old 

quadripalegic with no head or trunk control. She weighs about 70 pounds. 

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 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 Jamie Mcelearney be allowed to occupy an FAA Approved 

Child Restraint (CARES, manufactured by AmSafe Corporation), even 

though she exceeds the manufacturer’s weight limits. This ensures a high 
level of safety for Jamie Mcelearney and a high level of safety for the other 

passengers and crew on the airplane. In fact, in Jamie'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 Jamie Mcelearney 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 Jamie Mcelearney only sits in a passenger seat with no 

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

for a passenger seated behind Jamie Mcelearney while she is using the 

CARES restraint. I also propose that all operations under this exemption be 

conducted with at least one of Jamie Mcelearney's parents or a caregiver 

accompanying him or her. In addition, I propose that Jamie Mcelearney'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 

December 26, 2011 - January 1, 2012. 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/he)

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/him) during 

the flight.