New FAA policy on release of registration information

[Thermos]

Just got this in email, it’s a new FAA procedure that allows owners to block public release of aircraft registration info like name and address -

https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certif...ion/aircraft_registry/withhold_ownership_data

From the CARES website -

“Beginning March 28th, private aircraft owners and operators may submit a request to remove PII from aircraft record searches. Guidance on information to include in a request is found on the FAA Civil Aviation Registry website. To submit a request through CARES, Log into your CARES account, select Get Started, Aircraft Services, Submit Other Aircraft Documents, Request Type choose Other Supporting Documents, Document Type choose Other, Upload File and Continue, Complete Attestation and Submit.”

Mine is going in as soon as I can get to my laptop!

HTH

Dave

 

[Dugaru]

Just got this in email, it’s a new FAA procedure that allows owners to block public release of aircraft registration info like name and address -

https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certif...ion/aircraft_registry/withhold_ownership_data

From the CARES website -

“Beginning March 28th, private aircraft owners and operators may submit a request to remove PII from aircraft record searches. Guidance on information to include in a request is found on the FAA Civil Aviation Registry website. To submit a request through CARES, Log into your CARES account, select Get Started, Aircraft Services, Submit Other Aircraft Documents, Request Type choose Other Supporting Documents, Document Type choose Other, Upload File and Continue, Complete Attestation and Submit.”

Mine is going in as soon as I can get to my laptop!

HTH

Dave

So I just accomplished this (I think). Here's how I believe this works:

First I had to create an account on CARES, which is not an entirely trivial process, but which is probably worth doing in any event.

After that, you are basically uploading a generic document . First you write it--presumably any word processor or text editor will do. I used Word and my document just said "Here's my name and address, please don't publicly disseminate them." I also told them the N-number my name was currently associated with.

Then you make a .PDF out of that document. Then you upload that PDF on the CARES website using the menus described above. It then shows the status as "pending." Who knows whether it will update when they add you to the do-not-disclose list.

All of this seems like an improvement, but it dawns on me that my name is probably associated with my N-number all over the interwebs. Time to remove it from my Vansairforce signature.

 

[Sam Buchanan]

All of this seems like an improvement, but it dawns on me that my name is probably associated with my N-number all over the interwebs.

Yes, probably impossible to put that toothpaste back in the tube...............it might be useful for a new registration as long as no association with the N-number is ever volunteered online.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Yes, probably impossible to put that toothpaste back in the tube...............it might be useful for a new registration as long as no association with the N-number is ever volunteered online.

That's true, but as time goes on, those non-FAA databases of N-numbers will become more and more incorrect and useless as planes are built, sold, re-registered, etc. I'd have preferred that they make withholding the info the default, like auto license information, but this is a welcome start.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Also included in the 2024 reauthorization act was this:

SEC. 804. ACCOUNTABILITY FOR AIRCRAFT
REGISTRATION NUMBERS.

(a) <<NOTE: Review. Process.>> In General.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall
initiate a review of the process for reserving aircraft registration
numbers to ensure that such process offers an equal opportunity for
members of the general public to obtain specific aircraft registration
numbers.

(b) Assessment.--In conducting the review under subsection (a), the
Administrator shall assess the following:
(1) Whether the use of readily available software to prevent
computer or web-based auto-fill systems from reserving aircraft
registration numbers in bulk would improve participation in the
reservation process by the general public.
(2) Whether a limit should be imposed on the number of
consecutive years a person may reserve an aircraft registration
number.

(more after that omitted)

Perhaps this will put an end to for-profit "services" like that short n-number tool.

 

[Jaypratt]

Also included in the 2024 reauthorization act was this:


(more after that omitted)

Perhaps this will put an end to for-profit "services" like that short n-number tool.

I reserved N6YH in 1999. Finally used it on My Borrowed Horse RV8 in 2022.
I found it the old fashion way. Searching one # at a time on my first putter

 

[RV7A Flyer]

I reserved N6YH in 1999. Finally used it on My Borrowed Horse RV8 in 2022.
I found it the old fashion way. Searching one # at a time on my first putter

This doesn't have anything to do with searching for available N-numbers, nor how it was 26 years ago. This is about people reserving N-numbers, sometimes in large batches, often "short" N-numbers of 1 or 2 digits or letters, and then reselling them, without ever intending to use them.

 

[Thermos]

Yes, probably impossible to put that toothpaste back in the tube...

That's true, but as time goes on, those non-FAA databases of N-numbers will become more and more incorrect and useless as planes are built, sold, re-registered, etc.

Yes, it’s too late for the data that’s already out there. But this will at least make it a little harder to someone to look up current PII on N-numbers from tracking websites.

It’s a late start, but it’s definitely going in the right direction.

ds

 

[lr172]

Also included in the 2024 reauthorization act was this:


(more after that omitted)

Perhaps this will put an end to for-profit "services" like that short n-number tool.

Just too bad the government has to make something like this difficult. Thr only inequity is the number hoarder that sell them. Very simple here - a new reg making it unlawful to sell reserved numbers and ocassionally look for websites selling them. They should still allow transfers, just make it illegal to do so with monetary incentives. Pretty much ends all of the issues creating inequity for the rest of us.

 

[Fly2KiteSurf]

It says, "The FAA is seeking comments on the impacts of removing certain aircraft registration data from public display on the FAA website..."

 

[RV7A Flyer]

It says, "The FAA is seeking comments on the impacts of removing certain aircraft registration data from public display on the FAA website..."

Yes, and the actual law says

§44114. Privacy​

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 552(b)(3) of title 5, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish and update as necessary a process by which, upon request of a private aircraft owner or operator, the Administrator withholds the registration number and other similar identifiable data or information, except for physical markings required by law, of the aircraft of the owner or operator from any broad dissemination or display (except in furnished data or information made available to or from a Government agency pursuant to a government contract, subcontract, or agreement, including for traffic management purposes) for the noncommercial flights of the owner or operator.

(b) Withholding Personally Identifiable Information on the Aircraft Registry.—Not later than 2 years after the enactment of this Act and notwithstanding any other provision of law, including section 552(b)(3) of title 5, the Administrator shall establish a procedure by which, upon request of a private aircraft owner or operator, the Administrator shall withhold from broad dissemination or display by the FAA (except in furnished data or information made available to or from a Government agency pursuant to a government contract, subcontract, or agreement, including for traffic management purposes) the personally identifiable information of such individual, including on a publicly available website of the FAA.

(Emphasis added). So the currently available process of requesting the data to be withheld may, for the time being, simply prevent it from being shown using a search in CARES from the web, but by next year (per the law) they should be withholding it from other means of dissemination (such as if someone is accessing the database using some automation via an API with the database or something...I don't even know if that's possible right now, but that's how I read this).

 

[Thermos]

Yes, and the actual law says

(Emphasis added). So the currently available process of requesting the data to be withheld may, for the time being, simply prevent it from being shown using a search in CARES from the web, but by next year (per the law) they should be withholding it from other means of dissemination (such as if someone is accessing the database using some automation via an API with the database or something...I don't even know if that's possible right now, but that's how I read this).

As far as I can tell, there's no API per se - just links to download the entire database - https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certif...ircraft_registry/releasable_aircraft_download.

There are back versions of the database available for the last ten years. I *hope* that pulling my PII from online access means that it'll be removed from the historical data as well.

ds

 

[ve0kog]

someone was able to pull the bill of sale info for my RV and see what i paid (probably disappointed because it was $1 + OVC) and the name and address. I’m not sure how they did it. i guess the new law may not be totally effective if it restricts only the registration database

 

[CF86301]

The FAA seems to have processed my registration application about a week ago, and ADS-B Exchange already associates the aircraft make and model number with the N-number.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

someone was able to pull the bill of sale info for my RV and see what i paid (probably disappointed because it was $1 + OVC) and the name and address. I’m not sure how they did it. i guess the new law may not be totally effective if it restricts only the registration database

They did it by getting your aircraft documentation in CARES. It's in
Aircraft Services > Request Aircraft Records

From there, you can download any documents associated with the aircraft, as PDF files.

I would think that would fit squarely within the new law and its definition of PII.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

The comment period on this is open now, through May 5. Now's your chance to make your opinion heard.

Regulations.gov

www.regulations.gov

 

[skirting_virga]

Does anyone have a sample document for submitting a request for privacy through the website?

 

[Draker]

Just too bad the government has to make something like this difficult. Thr only inequity is the number hoarder that sell them. Very simple here - a new reg making it unlawful to sell reserved numbers and ocassionally look for websites selling them. They should still allow transfers, just make it illegal to do so with monetary incentives. Pretty much ends all of the issues creating inequity for the rest of us.

It's just like ticket scalping. It's going to be hard to write rules to get rid of it entirely. The price of concert tickets is typically way below what the some people are willing willing to pay for them, so we have scalping. And both parties of the transaction are willing to do legwork to avoid rules against it. Same with the price of N-numbers.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Except N-numbers are controlled by the government, not some private concert promoter.

As for creating a legal structure to prevent this, and the analogy to concert tickets? Of course it can be done. Ever wonder why you can't get tickets through StubHub in France, e.g.?

 

[roadrunner20]

I just submitted my request for non-disclosure. It's reporting as "pending" as others have stated.
My email confirmation of the submitted request stated it will be reviewed approximately by 5/21/25
I'll update this thread once I receive an update.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Why would you want to prevent it or even care? I'm glad Sean gave me the opportunity to get short N numbers for my builds, I think they are fun and disinguished. Many (many) mega-millionairs have been made with premium internet domain names, which are also companies that I have purchased from, dramatically increasing my ability to build brands. These entreprenuers take the risk, let them enjoy the rewards. I see no benefit in legally stopping such practices... as far as discussing whether or not the government should control something, we're starting to drift into politics so I'll just bail here.

A lot of us think they are fun and distinguished, but don't want to pay 100s to 1000s of dollars to get them, when the government (who assigns them) charges $10.

Would you feel the same if someone had enough money to buy up ALL short n-numbers, and then charge exorbitant fees to let you get one?

ICANN is a private organization. And it has a process for domain name disputes. Not the same thing.

 

[bkervaski]

A lot of us think they are fun and distinguished, but don't want to pay 100s to 1000s of dollars to get them, when the government (who assigns them) charges $10.

Would you feel the same if someone had enough money to buy up ALL short n-numbers, and then charge exorbitant fees to let you get one?

ICANN is a private organization. And it has a process for domain name disputes. Not the same thing.

(I removed my other posts since I clouded the topic we should move this somewhere else probably)

Yea, that's basically what's happened with domain names, you can't find one and when you do it's thousands of dollars. They are literally all gone, but yet I can still get them if I'm willing to pay the piper.

However, I don't see the distinction between who assigns it, private or gov. All the businesses mentioned are totally legal and legit but you want to punish them for having a good idea? I mean, if the FAA suddenly made it illegal, or somehow ICANN made the domain name "hoarding" illegal, all of these businesses are dead, the employees are fired, they are bankrupt, the person who followed the rules but just had a good idea is ruined.

 

[rocketman1988]

(I removed my other posts since I clouded the topic we should move this somewhere else probably)

Yea, that's basically what's happened with domain names, you can't find one and when you do it's thousands of dollars. They are literally all gone, but yet I can still get them if I'm willing to pay the piper.

However, I don't see the distinction between who assigns it, private or gov. All the businesses mentioned are totally legal and legit but you want to punish them for having a good idea? I mean, if the FAA suddenly made it illegal, or somehow ICANN made the domain name "hoarding" illegal, all of these businesses are dead, the employees are fired, they are bankrupt, the person who followed the rules but just had a good idea is ruined.

The solution really is very simple; if you want the short number bad enough to pay ridiculous amounts of cash for it, then buy it. If not, walk on by.

It only remains a good idea if people continue to buy them. Of course at $10 a reservation, there isn’t a lot of downside. You’d only have to sell a couple to cover the investment.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Suppose some very rich person could buy ALL the available N-numbers, and charge whatever they wanted...maybe $100,000 per N number. It's not illegal, as you noted. You want to register your RV? Gotta pay the piper. Would you still think it's perfectly ok?

 

[bkervaski]

Suppose some very rich person could buy ALL the available N-numbers, and charge whatever they wanted...maybe $100,000 per N number. It's not illegal, as you noted. You want to register your RV? Gotta pay the piper. Would you still think it's perfectly ok?

No company would risk it knowing that the FAA would simply change the rules, this isn't the same as some dude collecting some vanity N numbers and selling them ... like domain names ... or vanity telephone numbers, etc.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

No company would risk it knowing that the FAA would simply change the rules, this isn't the same as some dude collecting some vanity N numbers and selling them ... like domain names ... or vanity telephone numbers, etc.

Avoiding the hypothetical instead of answering. IF some megarich bro decided to just F with the aviation community and do this, would you still think it's a-okay?

Whether or not any person or company *would* isn't the question here.

 

[bkervaski]

Avoiding the hypothetical instead of answering. IF some megarich bro decided to just F with the aviation community and do this, would you still think it's a-okay?

Whether or not any person or company *would* isn't the question here.

Your scenerio would never happen, if it did the FAA would just reclaim the numbers, change the rules, and that would be that. Still different that some dude collecting vanity N numbers and selling them ... like domain names ... or vanity telephone numbers, etc.

Edit: I think you're asking me that if the FAA somehow allowed your scenerio would I be okay with paying $100,000 for an N number, of course not, that's silly. But I'm perfectly okay with smacking down a few bucks for a cool and fun N number that I would otherwise never have access to, kind of an apples to vinegar comparisson though.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

Your scenerio would never happen, if it did the FAA would just reclaim the numbers, change the rules, and that would be that. Still different that some dude collecting vanity N numbers and selling them ... like domain names ... or vanity telephone numbers, etc.

Do you understand what a hypothetical is? ASSUME the circumstances the question posits, then respond to that, instead of saying "yeah, but that won't happen". It's a fallacy in reasoning.

Not that we're arguing law here (well, not directly), but even freshmen speech and debate teams know this tactic. So does the Supreme Court .

If a Justice poses a hypothetical question, you should respond to that question on the facts given therein. In the past, several attorneys have responded: “But those aren’t the facts in this case!” The Justice posing the question is aware that there are different facts in your case, but wants and expects your answer to the hypothetical question.

 

[lr172]

Your scenerio would never happen, if it did the FAA would just reclaim the numbers, change the rules, and that would be that. Still different that some dude collecting vanity N numbers and selling them ... like domain names ... or vanity telephone numbers, etc.

Edit: I think you're asking me that if the FAA somehow allowed your scenerio would I be okay with paying $100,000 for an N number, of course not, that's silly. But I'm perfectly okay with smacking down a few bucks for a cool and fun N number that I would otherwise never have access to, kind of an apples to vinegar comparisson though.

Why do you think the FAA would change the rules. As you mentioned, all the domain names are now held by profiteers and no one has changed any rules. The faa already allows these organizations to hold 100’s of numbers in reserve.

It is ok to think this is just smart folks making money, but i am confident you will think differently when they start buying up water rights and the govt sits on the sidelines saying its just capitalism. Imho, this is the wests next great crisis.

 

[bkervaski]

It is ok to think this is just smart folks making money, but i am confident you will think differently when they start buying up water rights and the govt sits on the sidelines saying its just capitalism. Imho, this is the wests next great crisis.

I don’t think we can effectively have this discussion without violating the “no politics” rule, maybe I’ll see you guys at KOSH and we can have an interesting debate at the beer social.

 

[aoj4328]

Just got this in email, it’s a new FAA procedure that allows owners to block public release of aircraft registration info like name and address -

https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certif...ion/aircraft_registry/withhold_ownership_data

From the CARES website -

“Beginning March 28th, private aircraft owners and operators may submit a request to remove PII from aircraft record searches. Guidance on information to include in a request is found on the FAA Civil Aviation Registry website. To submit a request through CARES, Log into your CARES account, select Get Started, Aircraft Services, Submit Other Aircraft Documents, Request Type choose Other Supporting Documents, Document Type choose Other, Upload File and Continue, Complete Attestation and Submit.”

Mine is going in as soon as I can get to my laptop!

HTH

Dave

Thank you, Thermos, for posting this — I had no idea. I’ve never been a fan of having my personal information publicly available. As soon as I saw your post, I submitted the paperwork to withhold mine. After seeing the reply mentioning that people could even dig into financial details like the purchase price — that just validated my decision even more.


My financial affairs are my business, and no one else’s.


Thanks again for helping keep all of us informed about important issues like this.

 

[Carlos151]

I just submitted my request for non-disclosure. It's reporting as "pending" as others have stated.
My email confirmation of the submitted request stated it will be reviewed approximately by 5/21/25
I'll update this thread once I receive an update.

Submitted my privacy request on 4/11. Promptly got an email from the FAA saying it would be reviewed on 4/26. A week past that date and my information is still public. I'm guessing with the recent reduction in staffing at most federal agencies this may take longer than what they advertise. The other issue I'm assuming is happening is a large volume of privacy requests flooding the FAA. Who in their right mind wants their private information public? Privacy should be the default setting of our aircraft registration. I'm old enough to remember when the default number on our pilot certificates was our SS number. You could request a different random number if you desired but that was not the default. The wheels of the FAA turn sloooooooowly.

 

[rocketman1988]

Submitted my privacy request on 4/11. Promptly got an email from the FAA saying it would be reviewed on 4/26. A week past that date and my information is still public. I'm guessing with the recent reduction in staffing at most federal agencies this may take longer than what they advertise. The other issue I'm assuming is happening is a large volume of privacy requests flooding the FAA. Who in their right mind wants their private information public? Privacy should be the default setting of our aircraft registration. I'm old enough to remember when the default number on our pilot certificates was our SS number. You could request a different random number if you desired but that was not the default. The wheels of the FAA turn sloooooooowly.

Slowly? I think you are giving them too much credit. Glacial, at best.

 

[rv12is]

I submitted mine on 3/29, and it still shows pending.

However, I noticed when looking up my plane on registry.faa.gov, the registered owner section is now blank.

 

[ve0kog]

However, I noticed when looking up my plane on registry.faa.gov, the registered owner section is now blank.

Just checked mine and the owner part is blanked as well (requested on Mar 29th). Sites like flightaware still have the "cached" info. not sure if/when they will pickup the updates.

They did it by getting your aircraft documentation in CARES. It's in
Aircraft Services > Request Aircraft Records

I don't see the option to pull up someone else's documents anymore (even my own). May be it moved or this is a new way of handling PII

 

[RV7A Flyer]

I submitted mine on 3/29, and it still shows pending.

However, I noticed when looking up my plane on registry.faa.gov, the registered owner section is now blank.
View attachment 87068

Same here. Submitted 3/29, after the estimated review date passed by a couple of weeks, I emailed and got a response "Processing to withhold PII just started on 4/23/25 and will take some time complete." The estimated review date kept slipping day for day from 2 weeks after 3/29, ultimately hitting 4/23 and holding , which it still says today, but like you, I see that the Registered Owner fields are all blank. No red text at the top, though, which is...okay, I guess .

So they are getting to them, it seems.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

I don't see the option to pull up someone else's documents anymore (even my own). May be it moved or this is a new way of handling PII

Yeah, when I went back in later I couldn't find it either. I just know that I was able to pull up a couple at random to assure myself I wasn't mis-speaking about the ability to do that. So with luck, all of the PII is scrubbed.

I do hope they make that the default, like auto license plate info/owner info.

 

[bkervaski]

I'm having login issues with CARES, I reset my password a couple times and even get emails saying I was logged in but the website just says "can't sign you in" (or similar). Anyone else experiencing this today?

 

[Thermos]

Thank you, Thermos, for posting this — I had no idea.

You're welcome! Thank you for recentering the thread.

Dave

 

[Majorpayne317641]

I'm having login issues with CARES, I reset my password a couple times and even get emails saying I was logged in but the website just says "can't sign you in" (or similar). Anyone else experiencing this today?

Yes it was a huge pain but if you call the tech support line they actually are receptive and can help. They are not some off shore call center either it sounds like FAA employees. My problem was an old email address and I got someone on the phone that helped after hours. Very good service surprisingly.

 

[Majorpayne317641]

I also just checked mine and it says I opted out of sharing owner info.

 

[Dugaru]

My info still appears on the FAA registry website, even though my request was scheduled for “review” weeks ago. Sigh.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

No header on mine...

 

[eavila1]

If you/I/someone is getting ready to register new soon like in my case.....is it an option up front to keep info private? Making the request in CARES on initial registration?

 

[bkervaski]

Just filed mine, let's go!

 

[skirting_virga]

Just filed mine, let's go!

What did your submission document look like?

 

[Majorpayne317641]

What did your submission document look like?

I made a “Memorandum for record” and stated that I didn’t want my data public using the verbatim words they use in the press release “request to remove PII from aircraft record searches” dated it and signed it.

 

[alcladrv]

I referenced my n-number on my document and requested that the registration be withheld from public view. Then I took a screenshot of the FAA registration info, pasted that onto the document, saved it as a pdf, uploaded the document and submitted the document. My submission was accepted and stated it would be reviewed by 5/21/25. Hopefully, that meets their requirements.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

29 March 2025

I am voluntarily requesting the withholding of the names and addresses of the owners of the aircraft N_____ from public dissemination.

Aircraft information:
N_____
Serial #001
Manufacturer: Joe Schmoe
Model: RV-7A

[Insert digital signature here]
Name and address


Save and upload as a PDF. That seemed to do the trick!

 

[rv12is]

Below is an edited version of what I sent in.

Aircraft: [_N-NUMBER_]
S.N.: [_SERIAL NUMBER_]
Man.: [_MANUFACTURER_]
Model: [_MODEL_]

[_NAME_]
[_ADDRESS_]
[_ADDRESS_]

[_DATE_]

FAA Aircraft Registry

Subject: Request for Removal of Personal Information from Public Dissemination [_N-NUMBER_]

Hello,

I would like to keep my registered owner information private under 49 U.S.C. § 44114(b). As such, I am writing to formally request the removal of my name and address from public dissemination. This information is associated with registration of aircraft [_N-NUMBER_].

Your assistance in this matter is much appreciated.

Thank you,

[_NAME_]

Generated by AI, saved as a PDF, and submitted to FAA CARES. Still shows as pending on CARES, but name and address have been removed from registry.faa.gov. So, presumably, this was acceptable.