Congress Reinstates Barr Program

 - January 4, 2012, 1:10 AM

The lawsuit over the Transportation Department’s plan to dismantle the Block Aircraft Registration Request (Barr) program became moot when President Obama signed an appropriations bill (H.R. 2112) on November 18 that contained language reinstating the program through at least the end of Fiscal Year 2012 (Sept. 30, 2012).

Two weeks later on December 2–the day a federal court was to begin hearing oral arguments in the legal action brought by NBAA, AOPA and the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) against the agency–the FAA announced that general aviation aircraft owners and operators no longer needed to submit a “valid security concern” to the FAA to keep their aircraft’s registration number from being displayed over public data systems during flight. The FAA had moved to impose the restriction on August 2.

“As a result of language in the Fiscal Year 2012 appropriations bill, the FAA is withdrawing its June 3, 2011, policy…of requiring aircraft owners or operators to submit a Certified Security Concern in order to have their aircraft tail number blocked from view on the FAA’s Aircraft Situation Display to Industry (ASDI) or National Airspace System Status Information (NASSI),” the FAA press release stated.

The FAA said that owners and operators seeking to have their aircraft tail numbers blocked from these data feeds can now submit a blocking request directly to the agency without stating a reason for the request. The agency immediately began processing requests under the new law.

Earlier this year, NBAA and AOPA filed a court challenge to the government’s curtailment of the program, and the EAA filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the suit. Following a hearing the morning of December 2, a government attorney conceded that the FAA would no longer defend its August policy.

The FAA said in a letter to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that it has adopted an interim policy, consistent with the appropriations bill, which will allow aircraft owners and operators to submit block requests while a permanent policy is being developed.

“That new permanent policy will be consistent with the appropriations rider and will remain in effect even after the end of the fiscal year covered by the appropriations rider,” the agency wrote to the court. The permanent policy will be posted in the Federal Register for public comment early this year.

Lobby Groups Applaud Barr Reinstatement

NBAA and its members thank the leaders of Congress for taking action to address our industry’s long-standing concern that curtailment of the Barr program represents an invasion of privacy, a competitive threat to businesses and a potential security risk,” said NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen. “We commend the [Obama] Administration for working with our industry to implement this change.”

“On behalf of our AOPA members, we thank those in Congress and the Administration who recognize the importance of assuring a measure of privacy protection to individuals operating their own aircraft,” said AOPA president and CEO Craig Fuller. “We are pleased to have the Barr program back in operation.”

“We appreciate the efforts of those in Congress who acted to preserve the privacy rights of aviators within the Barr program,” said EAA president and CEO Rod Hightower. “We also applaud the efforts of those within the aviation community who worked together on this important issue.”


Once again big business has won over the little guy. The fat cats can now travel without worrying that those pesky shareholders will know what they are really up to. I can understand NBAA supporting this but for Fuller of AOPA to come out on the side of the fat cats is wrong. The shareholders and other interested citizens will just have to hang out at the airport fence or listen to the scanners remoted on the internet to know what the misusers of business aircraft are up to.

Yep. AOPA is just a lobby for big business. They try to make it sound like they are fighting for the "little guy" by calling it "General Aviation", but what they really mean is "Corporate Flying". Now there will be no accountability for Corporate Flying and shareholders will not know how the aircraft are being used (in other words, not for business).

I refused to renew my AOPA membership for this and several other reasons. They are not for the little guy of general aviation. They are basically nothing but lobbyists for corporate aviation. Shame on you AOPA. You will begin to lose more members as soon as they find out what you are REALLY about, and it's not what you say.

I join those commenting before me in condemning the actions of Craig Fuller, AOPA, and the EAA in their concerted effort undermine government and business transparency--the latter of which lead to the Great Recession from which we are only now recovering. I am a pilot, an air traffic controller, and--at least until my membership expires this year--an AOPA member, and I have yet to see even a half-way decent reason why someone without a valid security concern would need (or want) to hide their tail number from the public. There is no privacy issue here, as tracking a tail number only tells one where an airplane is located (airplanes do not have privacy rights), but indicates nothing as to who is on board.

These comments crack me can't be serious. I am just your average private pilot, and a small business owner. I enjoy aviation and the freedom that comes with it. To me this is just one more government infringment on us. If in fact you are members and pilots then you know there are several sites where you can get this information all ready. If you are a shareholder of a corporation and are concerned about use of aviation within your corporation, then go through the company to find out the facts. If you are still dissatisfied, sell your shares. Lighten up. Do we really want another government program that by the way, we have to PAY for?

Show comments (5)