AFS-13-279-E April 12, 2013

Exemption No. 10746 Regulatory Docket No.FAA-2013-0251

Mr. Terrance Flores and Ms. Dorothy Sanchez

Parent of Candice D. Flores

HC 80 Box 212 Las Vegas, NM 87701

Dear Mr. Flores and Ms. Sanchez:

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 March 6, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration FAA) on behalf of Candice D. Flores 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 Candice D. Flores 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 U.S. aircraft. In Candice’s case, because she is over 18 years of age, an exemption must also be granted from the requirement in § 121.311(b), that the individual be a “child”. However, the 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 Candice D. Flores.2

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 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 Candice D. Flores an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Candice D. Flores is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Candice D. Flores 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 Candice D. Flores’ parents or a caregiver accompanying her. Candice may only occupy a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind her. In addition, Candice’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 April 30, 2015, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John M. Allen Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosure