U.S

.Deportment of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Aprill , 20 15

Ms. Carrie Crombie Parent of Casey Crombie Baylis 12 Lynden Avenue Dundas , Ontario CANADA L9H 

### 418
Dear Ms. Crombie: Exemption No. 11248 600 Independence Ave

. . S W Washington

. DC 20591

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-20 15-0749

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. 

### It transmits our decision , explains its basis , and gives you the conditions and limitatio n s of the exemption, including the date it ends . 

### The Basis for Our Decision By letter posted to the docket on March 25 , 20 15 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of your daughter Casey Crombie Baylis for an exemption from 

### § l21.3ll(b) ofTitle 14 , Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption , if granted, would allow Cas ey to exceed the specified weight and/or height limit for an FAAapproved child restraint system (CAReS , manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that child restraint system (CRS) aboard a United States (U.S).-registered aircraft.
In Casey's case, since she is an ad ult, an exemption must also be granted from the requ irement in 

### § 121.31 I (b) that the individual be a "child

. " However, the reasons for requesting this exemption do not differ materially from those presented by other petitioners, and the reason s stated by the FAA for granting other exemptions also apply to th e si tu ation you present. The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Registe r, because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any de lay in acting on this pe tition would be detrimental to Casey. AFS-15 -92 5-E2 The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to those presented in your petition. In Grants of Exemption Nos. 7831 and 8264 (copies enclosed) , the FAA found that numerous persons with physical challenges had previously completed flights using restraint systems. The use ofthese restraint systems 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 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 are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant of Exemption Nos. 7831 and 8264; • the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption Nos. 7831 and 8264 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. §§ 106(t), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me , I hereby grant Casey Crombie Baylis an exemption from § 121.311 (b). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Casey is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR 

### § 121.311 (b) to the extent necessary to allow her to exceed the specified weight and/or height limit for an FAAapproved CRS, during use aboard a U.S.-registered aircraft.
All operations under this exemption must be conducted with Casey ' s parent or caregiver accompanying her. Casey Crombie Baylis may only occupy a passenger seat with no passenger seated behind her. In addition, Casey'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 ofeach flight. This ex emption terminates on April 30, 2020, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. Since rely ,

John S. Duncan Director, Flight Standards Service

Enclosures