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