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 Ethan Jose 

Chappell Fonseca 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 Ethan Fonseca is aboard its aircraft is granted an 

exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Ethan 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 is 12 year’s old, weighs 80 pounds, and is 58 inches tall. My son’s physical condition is as 

follows: Cerebral Palsy, he requires trunk support for seating in his wheelchair. 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: Emanuel Jose Amador Fonseca, 139 Simcoe Ave, PO Box 290, Komoka, ON,

N0L 1R0, CANADA and (culexcanid@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 Ethan 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 (Ethan Jose Chappell Fonseca) and a high level of safety for the other passengers and crew on 

the airplane. In fact, in Ethan’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 Ethan 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 Ethan only sits in a passenger seat with no 

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

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

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

propose that Ethan’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 July 24th, 2014 and August 18th, 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.