Timothy J. Taber

3175 Mulberry Dr. S.

Salem OR 97302

(503) 8971-6574 timothy@t2imaging.com February 3, 2014

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 Scott 

Taber, age 16 to be able to use an FAA Approved Child Restraint System even though he

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 Scott Taber is aboard its aircraft is 

granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Scott 

Taber 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 son Scott Taber is 16 years old, weighs 90 pounds, and is 59 inches tall. My son’s physical 

condition is spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy. Although he is very smart and can control a 

power chair with his head, can control an eye-gaze computer to speak for him, his trunk support 

is very weak and cannot sit without a restraining system supporting his trunk. Scott has traveled 

more than 10 times on airplanes to Europe for therapy and more than 10 times domestically, but 

now that he is larger, the typical FAA regulation cars seats and restraint system do not apply to 

him. As result of his size and physical condition, he needs the support and security provided by 

an FAA Approved Child Restraint. Due to his size, he is incapable of compliance with the 

regulation. I am submitting my contact information as his father: Timothy Taber 3175 

Mulberry Dr. South Salem OR 97302. (503) 871-6574. timothy@t2imaging.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 Scott Taber be allowed to occupy an FAA Approved Child Restraint (CARES, 

manufactured by AmSafe, Inc.), even though he exceeds the manufacturer’s weight limits. This 

ensures a high level of safety for Scott and a high level of safety for the other passengers and 

crew on the airplane. In fact, in Scott’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 Scott 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 him to use 

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

Restraint System, he 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 Scott Taber only sits in 

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

for a passenger seated behind Scott while he is using the CARES restraint. I also propose that all 

operations under this exemption be conducted with at least one of Scott’s parents or a caregiver 

accompanying him or her. In addition, I propose that Scott’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 from Portland OR to San Diego CA for Spring break, 

March 22-28, 2014. 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 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 him during the flight.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely, 

Timothy J. Taber

3175 Mulberry Dr. South

Salem OR 97302

timothy@t2imaging.com 503-871-6574