AFS-11-452-E 

October 3, 2011 

 Exemption No. 10372 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2011-0985 

Ms. Kimberly Masitti 

Parent of Nolan Thornton 

2375 South Birch Street 

Denver, CO 80222 

Dear Ms. Masitti: 

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 limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated September 1, 2011, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Nolan Thornton for an exemption from §§ 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) and 

135.128(a)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if 

granted, would allow Mr. Thornton to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA-approved 

child restraint system (CAReS, manufactured by AmSafe Corporation) during use of that 

child restraint system (CRS) aboard an aircraft. 

In your petition, you also requested relief from 14 CFR § 135.128(a)(2)(iii)(B). However, 

based on your correspondence regarding the type of air carriers your son will be using for his 

air travel (which operate under the regulations contained in 14 CFR part 121), the FAA has 

determined that relief from 14 CFR § 135.128(a)(2)(iii)(B) is unnecessary. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Nolan Thornton. 

The FAA has issued grants of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 10056 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that the petitioner also required relief from § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). This states, in part, 
2 

“The child must be properly secured in the restraint system and must not exceed the specific 

weight limit for the restraint system.” The FAA recognized that compliance with this specific 

requirement was the responsibility of the certificate holder, not the individual. However, in 

that unique situation, the FAA believed that the public interest was not served by requiring 

the petitioner to ask air carriers to petition the FAA on his/her behalf every time the petitioner 

wished to travel on a commercial air carrier. The FAA further found that the petition, if 

granted, 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 do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed grant 

of exemption; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed exemption 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. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Mr. Nolan Thornton an exemption from 

14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B). In addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating 

under part 121 while Mr. Thornton is aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 

14 CFR § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) to the extent necessary to allow Mr. Thornton to exceed the 

specified weight limit for an FAA-approved CRS during use of that CRS aboard an aircraft. 

All operations under this exemption must be conducted with at least one of Mr. Thornton’s 

parents or a caregiver accompanying him. Mr. Thornton may only occupy a passenger seat 

with no passenger seated behind him. In addition, Mr. Thornton’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 of each flight. 

This exemption terminates on September 30, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John W. McGraw 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service 

Enclosure