**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 Madalyn Jacobsen to be able to use an FAA Approved Chil d 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 Madalyn Jacobsen is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2) (iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Madalyn Jacobsen 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 is 6 year’s old, weighs 55 pounds, and is 48 inches tall. My **daughters**’s physica l condition is as follows seizures, hyperactivity, impulsivity, non

-verbal d ue to Angelman Syndrome. As a result of her physical condition, she needs the support and security provided by an FAA Approved C hild Restraint, but because of her weight is incapable of compliance with the regulation. **I am also submitting the following co**  **ntact information: Gina Jacobsen** **, 510 Chapel Court Eagan Mn 55121 and**  **gfkj1211@gmail.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 Madalyn Jacobsen be allowed to occupy an FAA Approved Child Restraint (CARES, manufactured by AmSafe, Inc.), even though she exceeds the manufacturer’s weight limits. This ensu res a high level of safety for Madalyn Jacobsen and a high level of safety for the other passengers and cre w on the airp lane. In fact, in Madalyn ’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 Madalyn is in the public interest. In addition, the public int erest 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 Ap proved 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 pass enger 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 equiva lent 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 Madalyn only sits in a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind her. Therefore, no unsafe condition would exist for a passenger seated behind Madalyn while she is using the CARES restraint. I also propose that all operations under this exemption be conducted with at least one of Madalyn’s parents or a caregiver accompanying him or he r. In addition, I propose that Madayln’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 Feder al Register. We want to travel February 11

- 19, 2016 . 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 Sys tem, 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 exceeds the manufacturer’s weight limits of 44 pounds. In this case, the safety o f this child is greatly enhanced by the extra support and security that the FAA Approved Restraint System w ill provide for her during the flight. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Gina Jacobsen Madalyn’s Mother 510 Chapel Court Eagan, Mn 5 5121
651

-442

- 1084 Gfkj1211@gmail.com