Request for an Extension of a Previously Granted 

Exemption to Use CARES for Larger/Older Persons:

I am writing to request an extension of Exemption No. 11122 issued 

to Kylie Shimabukuro from certain requirements of § 121.311(b) of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This exemption 

allowed Kylie to exceed the specified weight 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.) aircraft. In addition, any air carrier operating 

under part 121 while Kylie was aboard its aircraft was also granted an 

exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b) to the extent necessary to allow 

Kylie to use an FAA-approved CRS aboard a U.S. aircraft.

My daughter is currently 9 year’s old, weighs 65 pounds, and is 48

inches tall. My daughter’s physical condition is as follows, she has 

low muscle tone with no diagnosis. She is wheelchair bound and 

needs extra help staying in her seat because of her muscles. As a 

result of her physical condition, she continues to need the support 

and security provided by an FAA-approved CRS, but because of her 

weight is incapable of compliance with the regulation. I am also 

submitting the following contact information: Brooke Shimabukuro, 

bshima03@gmail.com, 17204 Spinning Ave, Torrance CA 90504.

The original exemption allowed Kylie to occupy an FAA-approved 

CRS (CARES, manufactured by AmSafe, Inc.), even though she 

exceeded the manufacturer’s weight limits. This ensured a high level 

of safety for Kylie and a high level of safety for the other passengers 

and crew on the airplane. In fact, in Kylie’s case, safety is greatly 

enhanced by the extra support and security that the FAA-approved 

CRS provides during the entire flight.

Enhancing safety for Kylie is in the public interest. In addition, the 

public interest is also served by the fact that the use of this FAAapproved CRS allows her to use commercial air 

transportation. Without the support and security of the FAA-approved 

CRS, she would be unable to fly commercially. Since the original 

exemption was issued, there has been no change in the conditions 

and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis 

for granting the original exemption.

If it is necessary to put a summary in the Federal Register, I submit 

the following:

This is a request for an extension of an exemption from FAR 121.311 
(b) to the extent required for an individual to use an FAA-Approved 

Child Restraint System (CRS) on an aircraft, even though the 

individual exceeds the weight limits for the CRS. Due to physical 

challenges, without the support and security of this FAA-approved 

CRS, this individual would be unable to fly. We request that this 

individual be allowed to occupy an FAA-approved CRS (CARES, 

manufactured by AmSafe, Inc.), even though the individual exceeds 

the manufacturer’s weight limits of 44 pounds. In this case, the safety 

of this individual is greatly enhanced by the extra support and security 

that the FAA-approved CRS will provide for this individual during the 

flight.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.