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 Canyon Leisinger

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 Canyon Leisinger is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR §

121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Canyon Leisinger to exceed the specified weight limit

for an FAA­approved 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 is 17 year’s old, weighs 53 pounds, and is 49 inches tall. My ​son’s physical condition is as follows.

He is globally developmentally delayed, 100% complete care required for his personal needs. Canyon

cannot walk. As a result of his physical condition, he needs the support and security provided by an FAA

Approved Child Restraint, but because of his weight is incapable of compliance with the regulation.

I am also submitting the following contact information: David and Heidi Leisinger, 20775

Parkwood Lane, Strongsville Ohio, 44149. Phone 440­532­9334 and email

dh_leisinger@hotmail.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 Canyon Leisinger 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 Canyon and a high level of safety for the other passengers and crew on the airplane.

In fact, in Canyon’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 Canyon 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 Canyon only sits in a passenger seat with no

passenger seated behind him. Therefore, no unsafe condition would exist for a passenger seated behind

Canyon while he is using the CARES restraint. I also propose that all operations under this exemption be

conducted with at least one of Canyon’s parents or a caregiver accompanying him or her. In addition, I

propose that Canyon’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 May 30th 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

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.