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 

Kyle Leanza 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 Kyle Leanza is 

aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the 

extent necessary to allow Kyle Leanza 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 8 year’s old, weighs 55 pounds, and is 46 inches tall. My son’s physical 

condition is as follows Obstructive Hydrocephalus, Cerebral Palsy. 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: Janice and 

Russell Leanza, 18554 Heritage Trail Strongsville OH 44136 and rjleanza@att.net.

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 Kyle Leanza 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 Kyle and a high level of safety for 

the other passengers and crew on the airplane. In fact, in Kyle’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 Kyle Leanza 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 

Kyle Leanza only sits in a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind him. 

Therefore, no unsafe condition would exist for a passenger seated behind Kyle while he 

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

conducted with at least one of Kyle’s parents or a caregiver accompanying him or her. In 

addition, I propose that Kyle’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 February 5-12, 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 Kyle Leanza 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.