AFS-11-419-E 

August 31, 2011 

 Exemption No. 10349 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0857 

Mr. Richard Fredericks 

Parent of Robert Alexander Fredericks 

384 Harcourt Drive 

Oshawa ON L1H-6V6 

Canada 

Dear Mr. Fredericks: 

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

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter received August 8, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Robert Alexander Fredericks for an exemption from § 121.311(b) of Title 14, 

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

Mr. Fredericks 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 an aircraft. 

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 Robert Alexander Fredericks. 

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. 10056 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that the petitioner also required relief from § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). This states, in part, 

“The child must be properly secured in the restraint system and must not exceed the specific 

weight limit for the restraint system.” The FAA recognized that compliance with this specific 

requirement was the responsibility of the certificate holder, not the individual. However, in 
2 

that unique situation, the FAA believed that the public interest was not served by requiring 

the petitioner to ask air carriers to petition the FAA on his/her behalf every time the petitioner 

wished to travel on a commercial air carrier. 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 are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant 

of Exemption No. 10056; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 10056 

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 Robert Alexander Fredericks an exemption from 

14 CFR § 121.311(b) and 14 CFR § 135.128 (a) to the extent required for Robert Alexander 

Fredericks to be able to use an FAA-approved CRS even though he exceeds the weight limits 

for the CRS. In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 or 

part 135 while Robert Alexander Fredericks is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption 

from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) and 14 CFR 

§ 135.128(a)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Robert Alexander Fredericks to 

exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved CRS during use of that CRS aboard 

an aircraft. 

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

Fredericks’ parents or a caregiver accompanying him. Robert Alexander Fredericks may only 

occupy a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind him. In addition, Robert Alexander 

Fredericks’ parent or caregiver must carry a copy of this exemption. 

This exemption terminates on August 31, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

 /s/ 

John W. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Services 

Enclosure