FAA’s Privacy Decision: Throwing Out the Baby with the Bath Water

Thismay well turn out to be AVweb's most controversial editorial since I co-foundedthis publication three years ago. It's about the FAA's sudden decision to stop makingairman mailing addresses available to the public, reversing the Agency's decades-oldpolicy. I first caught wind of this decision a couple of weeks ago, and have discussed itprivately with dozens of pilots since then. Many reacted with delight, saying that the FAAdecision is a good thing and long overdue. I expect that many of you reading this willreact the same way. (I've braced myself for a torrent of email nastygrams.)

I disagree. I'm convinced that this decision is a terrible one, both for the aviationindustry and for the individual airmen whose privacy it purports to protect. I hope you'llconsider my analysis with an open mind and — if by some miracle you wind up agreeing withme — I hope you'll join me in asking the Powers That Be at the FAA and DOT to reconsidertheir decision.

The FAA maintains many aviation related databases at its computer centers in OklahomaCity. These include (among others) numerous navigational databases (airports, navaids,fixes, airways, obstructions, etc.) as well as lists of certificate holders (airlines,flight schools, charter operators, etc.), U.S.-registered aircraft and aircraft owners,mechanics, and airmen (pilots, flight instructors, flight engineers, control toweroperators, etc.)

For as long as anybody can remember, the FAA has treated most of this data as publicdomain information, and made what it deemed to be "non-sensitive" data availableto anybody that wanted it for a nominal fee (basically, the cost of copying). For manyyears, the FAA distributed this data itself, but more recently it has hired outsidecontractors to handle the distribution.

Since 1990, the FAA's contractor foraircraft registration and airman certificate data has been Aerodata, Inc. of Boulder, Colorado. The FAA furnishesthe data to Aerodata, who then resells it at nominal cost to thousands of aviationassociations, organizations and companies who use it for many different purposes, mostlyinvolving direct mail.

Until not long ago, if you wanted this data, you'd have to take it either on 9-trackreel-to-reel tape or in the form of pressure-sensitive mailing labels. But in the last fewyears, the data has become available on CDROM, making it much less expensive and easier touse. And in recent years, most of these databases have become accessible online (and free)via the Internet.

As every aviator knows only too well, technology often outpaces government's ability torespond to it. So it should be no surprise that easier access to data has generated someproblems. In a recent meeting with industry representatives at 800 Independence Avenue,FAA lawyers cited several reasons for their decision to reclassify airman mailing addressdata as "sensitive" and no longer make it available to non-government users.

Last year, as many of you will recall, some sensitive Social Security Administrationdata was inadvertently made available on the Internet. The data was quickly removed withina matter of days, but the media picked up the story and a huge flap ensued, prompting theClinton Administration to order a government-wide review to ensure that each Departmentand Agency of the Federal Government was fully and scrupulously in compliance with thePrivacy Act.

The Privacy Act (5 USC 522A) was enacted in 1974 as a companion act to the Freedom OfInformation Act (5 USC 522), and was intended to protect individuals against misuse ofpersonal information collected by agencies of the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government,particularly data whose misuse could threaten employment, insurance, and creditopportunities. Whereas the FOIA says that the government must disclose most non-classifiedinformation upon request by a citizen, the Privacy Act sets limits on the disclosure ofpersonal information. (In fact, the Privacy Act is often cited by agencies when they denya FOIA request.)

The Privacy Act is a very complex law, but in a nutshell, it requires each federalagency to:

The FAA attorneys claim that the new decision to withhold airman address information isnecessary to comply with the Privacy Act. In addition, they have pointed out a couple ofspecific cases of misuse of airman address information that they found troubling and whichclearly contributed to their decision. In one case, a parole officer (who also happened tobe a private pilot) was harassed at home by a parolee who had obtained the officer's homeaddress by looking up his airman record over the Internet. In another case, an FAAinspector was harassed at home by a pilot against whom the inspector was prosecuting anFAR violation, after the pilot obtained the inspector's home address over the Internet.(Some wags might be tempted to dismiss the second case as poetic justice, but it clearlywas exactly the sort of misuse of personal information that the Privacy Act is supposed toprotect against.)

Well, to make a long story short, FAAChief Counsel Nicholas G. Garaufis has now decreed that the FAA will no longer makeairman mailing address information available to non-government users. An attorney at theAirman Records Branch in OKC advised AVweb that such data will no longer bedistributed to Aerodata Inc., the FAA's exclusive contractor for disseminating this data.So unless the FAA changes its mind, the May 1998 update of the airman file will be thelast one that contains mailing address information.

The most obvious immediate casualties of this policy change are the thousandsof aviation associations and businesses that do direct mailings based on the FAA airmanfile. Local airport associations will have a much harder time reaching local pilots.Sponsors of pilot safety seminars will have difficulty notifying pilots in the area of theevent. When Phil Boyer holds his Pilot Town Meetings, notices may wind up being sent onlyto those pilots in the area who are AOPA members. Ultimately, pilots may stop receiving alot of pilot-oriented catalogs and direct-mail pieces that many of them enjoy getting.

Of course, this doesn't mean that none of us are going to get our Sporty's catalog nextmonth. The airman mailing list won't suddenly vanish into thin air, nor will it bewithdrawn from the Internet. What the decision does mean is that the data will nolonger be updated, so it'll gradually get stale.

The biggest impact, therefore, will fall squarely on precisely that very special groupof airmen on whose collective shoulders our nation's aviation future rests: newpilots! It's those folks who might well not get their catalogs from Sporty's andKingSchools, or their invitation to join AOPA andEAA, or their direct mail solicitations to subscribe toAviation Safety or FLYING, or theircomplimentary subscription to Flight Training. It'sthose folks who may well not get notified when a pilot safety seminar is coming to town,or when their local airport is under attack by the local politicos. Likewise, pilots whoearn their instrument rating may no longer receive a special introductory subscriptionoffer from IFR magazine.

Personally, I think that would be a crying shame.

Good question! The existing database of 670,000 airmen will continue to exist, and willcontinue to be accessible online. The home addresses of the FAA inspectors and paroleofficers that are in that database today will continue to be available next month or nextyear, accessible by anyone who might be interested, whether their intent is admirable ormalicious. Unless I'm missing something, the only beneficiaries will be newly-hired FAAinspectors and parole officers, and those that relocate to a different address.

Wait. I lied! There is one other very important beneficiary of this decision: theFederal Aviation Administration itself. You see, next time someone harasses a paroleofficer or FAA inspector at home, the FAA will be able to say, "don't look at us, wedon't make home addresses available to non-government users!"

I'm not a lawyer. (I don't even play one on TV.) But it's hard for me tobelieve that this is what the Congress had in mind when it enacted the Privacy Act intolaw. According to my (admittedly lay) understanding of the Act, its purpose was notto compel agencies to stop disseminating personal information, but rather to compel thoseagencies to disclose what information they want to collect and why, and then leteach individual choose what personal information they wish to disclose to thegovernment and how that information should be used.

Shouldn't each individual airman have the right to decide for himself or herselfwhat mailing address goes into his or her record in the airman file that the FAA makesavailable to the public: home address, business address, a post office box...or even noaddress at all if the airman so chooses? If given the choice, for example, I bet manyFAA inspectors and aviating parole officers might opt to list their work address insteadof their home address. Why shouldn't they have that option?

Ironically, they do! Just as the Privacy Act requires, any airman may contact theAirman Records Branch (AFS-760) in Oklahoma City (phone 1-405-954-3261, FAX1-405-954-4105) and request that their mailing address information be changed to analternative permanent mailing address (such as a business address or even a post officebox), or even unlist themselves altogether.

What? You say you didn't know that?

Well, don't feel alone. The FAA has never publicized the existence of this importantremedy, and 9 out of 10 pilots have no idea that it exists. Think about the last time youfilled out an FAA form that asked for your mailing address — probably the last time youapplied for a new certificate or rating, a renewal, or a medical certificate. Did the formsay anything about the fact that your mailing address would be made public? Or that youhad the option to provide an address other than your home address? Or that you could evenchoose to keep your address confidential?

If the FAA had publicized these options the way the spirit (if not the letter) of thePrivacy Act requires them to do, don't you suppose that a lot of FAA inspectors and paroleofficers would take advantage of that provision, and opt to receive their Sporty's catalogat work instead of at home? Just a thought.

Here's something else you might want to consider. Now that you know about youraddress-change and opt-out options at the FAA Airman Records Branch, some of you might betempted to pick up the phone or send a FAX to Oke City and request that your address inthe FAA airman file be changed to something other than your home address.

Don't bother.

You see, the FAA has decided that it won't be making updates to that file available anymore. As a result, the currently-available database has been "frozen" as far asnon-government users are concerned. That same old database will be in use for years tocome — not unlike that old Kitty Hawk phone book that Orville Wright purloined when hestayed there a few years ago — and because there will be no more FAA-supplied updates,you'll effectively have lost your option to change your address or opt out altogether. Soif you don't want folks to have access to your home address, you'd better start lookingfor another place to live.

By the way, the FAA made this decision that affects all of us without bothering to askany of us what we think about it. There was no NPRM, no public comment period, noconsultation with alphabet groups...just a unilateral decision by the FAA lawyers, andthat was that. So much for our new, improved, client-oriented FAA!

Those who have readthis far (and you know who you are) are probably asking yourself, "What's Busch'sangle? Has AVweb's ox been gored by this decision? What axe is he grinding bywriting this rant?"

It's a fair question, and I've given it quite a bit of thought. But no matter how hardI try, I can't see how the FAA's decision hurts me or AVweb. It doesn't hurt mepersonally because:

Oddly enough, it strikes me that the FAA's decision — however misguided — is actuallybeneficial for AVweb. Here's why. As you know, AVweb is free to readers likeyou. Our only source of revenue comes from the aviation companies and organizations thatchoose to advertise on AVweb (God bless 'em). Therefore, AVweb's"competition" consists of all the other vehicles that aviation companies andorganizations use to promote their products and services — primarily traditional paperaviation publications and direct mail. (We jokingly refer to them as "treekillers.")

The FAA's decision to withhold airman mailing addresses hurts the ability of many ofthose aviation companies and organizations to reach pilots by direct mail. Consequently,it benefits AVweb. By the same token, every time the U.S. Postal Service hikes itsrates (as it now wants to do again), it hurts the "tree killers" and helps AVweb.

Nevertheless, in my oh-so-humble opinion, the FAA's decision is abad one. It's bad for aviation, bad for personal privacy, bad for individual freedom, andfraught with unintended consequences (like effectively nullifying the present opt-outprovisions). I believe top FAA management should reconsider the decision of their lawyers,and reverse this misguided change to what has been a long-standing and well-accepted FAApolicy that has served its customers (you and me) well for so many years.

I know plenty of you will disagree with me, and I know that you know my email address (nastygrams@avweb.com) and even where I live. (Ifyou don't, you can look it up!) But if there are any of you who think I might be ontosomething here, you might consider making your feelings known to the FAA Powers-That-Beand urge them to change their mind and rescind this ill-conceived move.

To that end, here are some names and email addresses you might find handy:

When you write to these fine folks, be sure to "cc" me, will you? Thanks!