FAA CARES: block ownership info on aircraft registry portal

[shawnd]

So folks have probably seen articles about random people looking up contact information on FAA aircraft registry after tracking them via ADS-B aggregators. AOPA worked with FAA to provide a way for owners to request opting out of showing the owner information on the aircraft registry.  Just went through it and submitted my request - takes about 2 weeks apparently for the review to be completed. 

Site: https://cares.faa.gov/home

The process was a bit confusing as trying to login to "Aircraft Services" takes you to the FAA MyAccess sign on page which folks may already have accounts on for their "Airmen Services" portal. I had to sign up again using the red "Don't have an account? Sign up" which then connected my previous account and verified my address. Once you are in - you may or may not see your aircraft listed. I didn't. But I followed the steps that appears on a yellow banner on the top of the site (good ux there...), here it is again broken down neatly:
 

1. To submit a request through CARES, Log into your CARES account
2. Select Get Started
3. Select Aircraft Services
4. Select Submit Other Aircraft Documents
5. For Request Type choose Other Supporting Documents
6. For Document Type choose Other
7. Upload File (see template below)
8. Select Continue
9. Complete Attestation and Submit.

I asked my AI friend to generate a template, it looks sufficient and drives the point home. I filled in the right information including the [Insert N-Number(s)] and [Insert Full Name as Registered] in the middle of the document, then saved as PDF and uploaded it to the portal where it requested to upload file in step 7.

----------

[Your Full Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State ZIP Code]
[Phone Number]
[Email Address]

[Date]

Federal Aviation Administration
Aircraft Registration Branch, AFS-750
P.O. Box 25504
Oklahoma City, OK 73125

Subject: Request for Withholding of Owner Information from Public Dissemination
Reference: 49 U.S.C. § 44114(b)

To Whom It May Concern,

I am writing to formally request that my name and address, as a registered owner of aircraft, be withheld from public dissemination in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 44114(b). I understand that the FAA permits private individuals to voluntarily opt out of having their ownership information made available to the public, and I wish to exercise this right.

Please consider this letter my official request to have my personally identifiable information—including my name and address—removed from all publicly accessible databases and records related to aircraft registration, to the fullest extent allowed under applicable law.

Aircraft Registration Number(s): [Insert N-Number(s)]
Registered Owner Name: [Insert Full Name as Registered]

If additional documentation or verification is required to process this request, please contact me at the phone number or email address provided above. I appreciate your assistance and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
[Your Signature (if mailing a hard copy)]
[Your Printed Name]

----------

I hope this helps some folks. Good luck! And yes, I am still giggling at the title...

Shawn

[76Srat]

This is perfect--what a great bit of advice.  Thanks for supplying this and sharing your process.  I still think it sucks that we have to establish multiple online accounts with the FAA (using different interfaces and even different vendors supplying the services to the FAA), just to apply for a medical or inquire/establish something with the Registry.  CAMI and Civil Aircraft Registry buildings are merely a few yards away from each other in OKC.  Why they don't use the same online portal will forever baffle me.  

[TangoTango]

I've been following this on the other forum, glad to see you posted an easy to follow guide here.

I just submitted mine, I got an "estimated review date" of 4/15/25. Curious to see what action the FAA takes at that time, as 49 USC §44114 reads to me as not requiring a procedure for compliance until 5/16/26 (two years from the enactment of this Act). Has anyone completed this and actually seen their personally identifiable information removed yet?

[76Srat]

Also curious to see how the Registry will be able to reconcile this with its own regulations governing the requirements of the registration of Aircraft generally (49 USC 44101 et seq; and 14 CFR 47 and 49).  In classic form, one reg requires that the FAA provide for methods of keeping your information private, but doesn't say how or where that information is otherwise supposed to be accessible, as required by the very regs that establish the Registry in the first place.  

You may not think this makes a hill of beans difference and that privacy is the key component here.  It isn't and it makes a helluva a hill of beans difference.  The very reason for Registry records in the first place is (was) to equip the enforcement agencies with the ability to find out who owns an airplane operated in US airspace***.  Circa 1999, our friends at the Aeronautical Center Counsel's office in OKC issued a letter (just a letter, not a "ruling" or "regulation", but a guidance "letter" to all Registry examiners) requiring that "physical addresses be included in all 8050-1 forms filed with the Registry".  How's that sit with you?  Why should we have to comply with that?  Nowhere in the then-regs did it require that your physical address be included in your documents filed in OKC anytime you wished to register your ownership of an aircraft once you bought it.  FAA Registry documents examiners began immediately rejecting ownership and registration documents filed that didn't comply with that unpublished requirement.  Perhaps some of us on here experienced this joy, which also caused some of us to operate unknowingly in violation of Registration requirements if such flights occurred beyond the 90 day "temporary" (pink copy) registration carried on board without having had the final registration card issued in the interim.  

Anyway, when queried about this craziness, the answer was twofold:  "the FAA has been instructed by DOT and Treasury and Dept of State to require the physical location of where each US registered aircraft is to be based" and second, "the FAA has an interest in maintaining safe flight operations of all aircraft operated in US airspace".  What???  Seriously, those were the answers.  In reality, when pushed further on the topic and at multiple seminars following this silly unpublished change in the regs, ACC finally admitted it was so drug trafficking could be tracked more accurately and then it became a firm requirement once the disaster that was 9/11 happened.  Thus, we've been required to show a physical address ever since.

So guess what this triggered?  Yes, you guess correctly:  my aircraft is "physically located" at my hangar and I don't receive mail or notices at my hangar, because, well, my hangar doesn't have a f*cking address.  The FAA hadn't thought of that.  Remember the most recent debacle about requiring the "re-registration" of the triennial registration requirements?  All of that was birthed by the ignorance of the FAA's own regulations about providing a proper address for registration purposes.  The "physical location" of the aircraft requirement caused the removal of thousands of actual mailing addresses for FAA notices and manufacturer notices to reach the aircraft-owning pilot community.  It's taken decades since to resolve.

All of this to say that you may not think that what goes on at the FAA Civil Aircraft Registry affects you nearly as often as what goes on at Aeromedical, but it does.  I argue it likely affects us more because the Registry records are one of the easiest ways to commit fraud using aircraft records.  They're all there to see, as you wish.  All of your financial data found in your loan documents on that fancy Mooney you just bought are in those FAA Registry records.  Hopefully you used a proper aircraft title company in OKC and a proper aircraft lender who knows what not to include in those filings, but if you didn't, your info is there for all to see and the bad guys to exploit.

Finally, think about this:  next time you do a pre-buy and make an offer on a plane to purchase and you run a title search (which you should, always), how does availing oneself of these new privacy regs hurt your due diligence on important matters such as who owns the aircraft and, more importantly, who holds a valid encumbrance against that collateral?  This reg is so vague and useless by its language and text that it will yet again open Pandora's box on more craziness that was never intended.  Think that you'll always be able to review the records on a plane you're looking at, like we all could in the old days?  Maybe and likely not, going forward.  

Welcome to FAA Registry Operations in the new age . . .

***Fun fact:  ever wonder about those really old tail numbers you see in those really old photos, or perhaps even on the tail of some classic aircraft today, e.g. "N31178" on the tail of a 1940 Piper J-3?  In the pre-DOT/pre-Civil Aircraft Registry days, circa 1958 and prior, the manufacturers assigned successive N numbers to the aircraft rolling out of their factories, which generally coincided with when that particular aircraft was registered with the Dept of War (the predecessor of our friendly, modern FAA Registry).  Aside from a few exceptions through the decades, next time you're strolling the vintage ramp at Airventure, which everyone should do every year, you can safely assume that those airplanes bearing those old numbers were the "x" aircraft ever built in the US.  So in 1940, N31178 (a 1940 J-3) was presumably the thirty-one thousandth and change airplane ever manufactured in the US.  Seeing that there are now ~600,000+ US registered aircraft operating daily and airworthy currently (with legion more than that manufactured throughout history), I've always thought its rather cool to see an old aircraft with an old NC tail number.     

 

 

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, 76Srat said:

 So in 1940, N31178 (a 1940 J-3) was presumably the thirty-one thousandth and change airplane ever manufactured in the US.  Seeing that there are now ~600,000+ US registered aircraft operating daily and airworthy currently (with legion more than that manufactured throughout history), I've always thought its rather cool to see an old aircraft with an old NC tail number.     

My 46 C-140’s NC number is 77121, a neighbor has a 140 only a couple of numbers from mine, I had always assumed Cessna had reserved a block of numbers from the CAA, CAA came into being in 1934 I think?

I don’t think Military aircraft were issued numbers?

Edited April 4 by A64Pilot

[76Srat]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

My 46 C-140’s NC number is 77121, a neighbor has a 140 only a couple of numbers from mine, I had always assumed Cessna had reserved a block of numbers from the CAA, CAA came into being in 1934 I think?

I don’t think Military aircraft were issued numbers?

Correct that military aircraft weren't issued civilian registrations, though many civilian aircraft were used militarily (L-birds being the easiest to mention).

And to clarify my earlier statement, the CAA would issue successive numbers to each manufacturer, so for example Taylorcraft would have its allotted numbers, as would Cessna/Beech/Piper, etc.  So your C140 being a couple of numbers away from your neighbor's likely would have rolled out of Wichita one or two ships away from his.  Either way, the earliest of registration numbers (N numbers, for the US) were successive and not vanity or custom like we can do today.  

 

[shawnd]

Quick update: although I didn't receive any email from FAA, I decided to randomly check this evening and my aircraft ownership information was hidden on the FAA N-Number registry site.  Small victory.

[Nico1]

Same! 

[Hank]

5 hours ago, shawnd said:

Quick update: although I didn't receive any email from FAA, I decided to randomly check this evening and my aircraft ownership information was hidden on the FAA N-Number registry site.  Small victory.

But does it still show up if you put your N number into Google? That's what most people will do first, looking deeply into the FAA website is not a natural thought nor an intuitive process. 

[varlajo]

53 minutes ago, Hank said:

But does it still show up if you put your N number into Google?

Only the city and State. 

[TangoTango]

Mine was also removed with the same message as @Nico1.

Flightaware still has my ownership data shown, but not everywhere. The main page says "Unknown Owner" but the flight history page still shows my name. I assume it takes some time for the FAA change to propagate out.

[Nico1]

if it was online already, will probably be posted somewhere for ever -- just like anything online.

[Schllc]

An opt out will still show up on adsb exchange. 
the main difference there is it only tracks live flights. 
but I’m pretty sure the info is available regardless of what you opt out of. 

[shawnd]

There’s separate legislation that is supposedly being worked on to limit that as well. I will have to look up the article in one of the aviation magazines. Like I said, small victory 

[varlajo]

39 minutes ago, Schllc said:

the main difference there is it only tracks live flights

ADSB exchange has history function. Goes back years and years. 

 

Edited May 9 by varlajo

[shawnd]

My hope is legislation will dictate that these sites can’t expose the data so they will have to scrub historical data. 

[varlajo]

8 minutes ago, shawnd said:

My hope is legislation will dictate that these sites can’t expose the data so they will have to scrub historical data. 

I personally don't see much of a problem with public ADSB tracking or tracking history per se, as long as it is not abused Vector-style and doesn't contain personal information

[shawnd]

I agree, tracking flights is not a problem. My beef is with folks using the owner data to send warning “notices” incorrectly to pilots. A thing that has magnified recently here in the Pacific Northwest. 

[Vance Harral]

43 minutes ago, shawnd said:

I agree, tracking flights is not a problem. My beef is with folks using the owner data to send warning “notices” incorrectly to pilots.

About 18 months ago, some nut job in the town where our airport is located used a flight tracking site to identify our airplane as the one that was "shooting energy beams into his house".  He drove to the airport and started yelling threats at my partner while he was filling up the airplane at the self-serve pump, which can be seen through the fence of the public parking lot outside the FBO.  Cops were called, but they let everyone go due to complexities I won't go into here.  The guy took photos of our airplane and my partner, and subsequently began a campaign of social media ire in which he offered a cash reward for identifying information about the pilot(s).  His social media acquaintances dug into the ownership info, and it eventually led to pictures of my airplane partner, as well as pictures of my house, being posted on his Facebook page, with accompanying threatening commentary.  My partner never actually flew over his house, but of course that didn't matter.

The person in question is not what you'd call a model citizen, a cursory search turned up a conviction for menacing with a firearm.  Needless to say, this was disconcerting.

We filed for a TRO, which was promptly granted, but it required time off work and paying the county sheriff to serve the notice.  Making that TRO permanent required we actually meet the SOB in a courtroom.  A protective order doesn't provide any actual protection, of course, just justification to arrest and try someone for violating it.  I had to explain all this to my wife and daughter, which they understandably weren't thrilled about, and we didn't allow anyone to be home by themselves for several months.  I purchased security cameras for my home, informed my town police, etc.  A few months later, the guy called the flight school where I give instruction, and although he was only calling by coincidence rather than to harass me personally, it met the letter of the law with respect to violating the order.  So I reported it, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.  But after one attempt to pick him up (the cops knocked on his door, he didn't answer), nothing further was done.  I understand why - there are tons of outstanding warrants on various individuals in any given locality, and the cops have to prioritize their time and effort.  They're not going to carry out a Waco-style raid on one crazy guy who violated a PRO on a couple of other grown-ass men.  Nothing is going to happen to this guy until/unless he gets pulled over for speeding or whatever.

It's been long enough without incident that I don't spend time worrying about this any more.  The guy has moved on to other craziness (in some cases other pilots in other airplanes).  But it's been an ordeal I wouldn't wish on others, and illustrates why making aircraft data completely public is problematic, even if you think "tracking flights is not a problem."

When I tell this story to people who aren't pilots, I ask them to think how they'd feel if anyone they happened to drive by in their car on a public street could look up their name and address from their license plate number.  Sometimes the light bulb clicks on in their head, but in most cases I think they still believe aircraft movement and ownership information should be public.

[N201MKTurbo]

The energy beam must have scrambled his brain.

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, varlajo said:

ADSB exchange has history function. Goes back years and years. 

 

Correct,  it you have to look at the dates, I don’t think you can just search by tail. 
if you can I haven’t figured out how!

[Ragsf15e]

23 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

The energy beam must have scrambled his brain.

He wasn’t wearing his tin foil hat properly.

 

[EricJ]

12 hours ago, shawnd said:

Quick update: although I didn't receive any email from FAA, I decided to randomly check this evening and my aircraft ownership information was hidden on the FAA N-Number registry site.  Small victory.

I noticed that a while back, too, so it's not super-new.  Seems to have been done sort of quietly.

 

28 minutes ago, Vance Harral said:

...

When I tell this story to people who aren't pilots, I ask them to think how they'd feel if anyone they happened to drive by in their car on a public street could look up their name and address from their license plate number.  Sometimes the light bulb clicks on in their head, but in most cases I think they still believe aircraft movement and ownership information should be public.

A few years ago somebody a bit north of where I live would hire a lawyer to send a "strongly worded letter" to anyone who flew below a certain altitude over a particular open area to discourage aircraft from disturbing the wildlife there.   It was along a route that is handy to use to avoid the Phoenix bravo airspace and some of the high-density traffic areas sometimes, so I cruised through there once and got one of those letters.   Enough people were getting them that the AZ Pilot's Association looked into it enough to include a bit in their newsletter that they're just lawyer letters and could be ignored, but please be considerate about altitudes when you overfly things.
 

[N201MKTurbo]

36 minutes ago, EricJ said:

I noticed that a while back, too, so it's not super-new.  Seems to have been done sort of quietly.

 

A few years ago somebody a bit north of where I live would hire a lawyer to send a "strongly worded letter" to anyone who flew below a certain altitude over a particular open area to discourage aircraft from disturbing the wildlife there.   It was along a route that is handy to use to avoid the Phoenix bravo airspace and some of the high-density traffic areas sometimes, so I cruised through there once and got one of those letters.   Enough people were getting them that the AZ Pilot's Association looked into it enough to include a bit in their newsletter that they're just lawyer letters and could be ignored, but please be considerate about altitudes when you overfly things.
 

Was that over the Verde River?

[Justin Schmidt]

1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said:

The energy beam must have scrambled his brain.

Where can i get that stc