Supporting Statement A_U.S. Agents for Service_5.16.2024

United States Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
Supporting Statement A
U.S. Agents for Service on Individuals with Foreign Addresses who Hold or Apply for
Certificates Issued under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107
OMB Control Number: XXX
1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify
any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety, such as the rules governing service that are
addressed by its proposed rulemaking, is found in title 49 of the United States Code. The FAA’s
proposed rulemaking is issued under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subparts iii,
Section 44701(a)(5). Under section 44701(a)(5), the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations
and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds
necessary for safety in air commerce and national security. The FAA’s proposed regulations and
accompanying clearance request are within the scope of that authority and are also consistent
with Subtitle VII, Part A, subpart iv.
Individuals with only a foreign mailing address of record with the FAA who hold or apply for
FAA certificates, ratings, or authorizations are not currently required to designate a U.S. agent
for service of FAA documents. However, the FAA may serve documents on a designated agent
as permitted under 49 U.S.C. 46103. The FAA therefore proposes to amend 14 CFR part 3 to add
subpart C with sections 3.301 through 3.303 to require individuals who have a foreign address
and no U.S. physical address of record on file with the FAA to designate a U.S. agent for service
if they apply for a certificate, rating, or authorization issued under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65,
67, or 107, or hold a certificate, rating, or authorization issued under any of these parts. The U.S.
agent would receive service of FAA documents on behalf of the certificate holder or applicant.
Service of certain FAA documents requires compliance with international service requirements
under multi-lateral treaties or by other means that comport with the receiving country and U.S.’s
applicable laws regulating extraterritorial service. The FAA’s proposed rule would facilitate its
ability to accomplish prompt and cost-effective service of process and service of other safetycritical or time-sensitive documents to individuals abroad through service on their U.S. agents.
This would conserve agency resources, ensure that lengthy delays in service of process do not
compromise aviation safety, and provide individuals abroad with timely notice of FAA actions
and the opportunity for timelier due process.
2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a
new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received
from the current collection.
The FAA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposed the collection of personally

identifiable information (PII) of the certificate, rating, or authorization holder or applicant, and
the U.S. agent they choose to designate.
For the certificate, rating, or authorization holder or applicant, the FAA is requesting the
collection of the individual’s full legal name, email address, their physical location/address, and
mailing address. For airmen (holders or applicants of parts 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107 certificates,
ratings, or authorizations), the FAA also proposes to collect the airman’s date of birth, Certificate
No., FTN No., and Applicant ID No. (medical). For individuals who hold or apply for aircraft
registration certificates under part 47, the FAA also proposes to collect the following aircraft
data: Aircraft Registration No., Aircraft Make, Aircraft Model, and Aircraft Serial No.
The information requested for the certificate, rating, or authorization holder or applicant is
already collected under other existing authorized collections. The information is necessary for
this collection so that the FAA can uniquely identify the individual designating an agent based
on existing FAA identifiers. It is important to correctly identify each individual so the FAA can
correctly associate the individual with the U.S. agent they are designating.
The FAA would also collect the U.S. agent’s full legal name, the type of agent (entity or an adult
18 or older), the U.S. agent’s physical location/address, fax number, email address, and
telephone number. This information will be used to identify the U.S. designated agent and
provide various means by which the FAA can serve documents on the U.S. agent (mail, fax, or
email). The U.S. agent’s telephone number is an optional collection but, if provided, it would
assist the FAA in locating a U.S. agent if their information has changed or if there are issues with
the service of documents on the U.S. agent.
The above information will be collected as necessary. Specifically, when individuals who have a
foreign address and no U.S. physical address of record on file with the FAA apply for a
certificate, rating, or authorization under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107, they will be
required to designate a U.S. agent. Individuals who have a foreign address and no U.S. physical
address of record on file with the FAA who already hold a certificate, rating, or authorization
under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107, must comply with the proposed collection
requirements no later than six months after the date of publication of the final rule. If individuals
change their U.S. agent designation or their designated agent’s information changes, they must
notify the FAA of the new information within 30 days of the change.
The information collected is not expected to be disseminated directly to the public.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other
forms of information technology.
The FAA proposes to use an online process to facilitate the collection of the information to
reduce the burden on the applicant or certificate, rating, or authorization holder.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information
already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2
above.
The FAA has reviewed other FAA public-use reports and finds no duplication. Also, the FAA
knows of no other agency collecting the same information. There are currently no requirements
for individuals who have a foreign address and no U.S. physical address of record on file with
the FAA and who hold or apply for certificates, ratings, or authorizations issued under 14 CFR
parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107, to designate a U.S. agent for service. Accordingly, this new
proposed collection does not duplicate any existing collections.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
This collection will not involve small business or small entities. The FAA’s proposed rule and
accompanying clearance request only proposes to collect information from individuals with a
foreign address on file and no U.S. physical address registered with the FAA. Therefore, the rule
will not impact small businesses or entities.
6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not
conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to
reducing burden.
As of July 2022, there were approximately 115,000 individuals who held certificates, ratings, or
authorizations issued under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107 with a foreign address and
who did not have a U.S. physical address of record on file with the FAA. Serving certain
documents on these individuals outside of the U.S. presents a challenge for the FAA because
accomplishing valid service of process abroad requires compliance with international service
requirements under multi-lateral treaties or by other means that comport with the receiving
country and U.S.’s applicable laws regulating extraterritorial service. These international service
requirements can significantly delay service of these documents from months to over a year, and
also impose additional costs on the agency. International service requirements cannot be waived
by document recipients, or circumvented by sending documents electronically.
These delays can create a serious risk to aviation safety. For example, when the FAA is serving
emergency orders on unqualified individuals, the individual may attempt to continue exercising
the privileges of their FAA certificates until the FAA serves them in accordance with
international service requirements. Service delays may also impact when individuals receive
notice of the FAA’s action and their opportunity to timely respond.
Additionally, international service requirements impose costs on the FAA in the form of fees
from receiving countries’ central authorities that process the FAA’s service requests and
document translation costs. If the FAA could serve its documents domestically on U.S. agents,
then international service treaties and their requirements would not apply. The FAA could save
the costs of countries’ central authority service fees and translation costs, as the FAA could serve
the documents in English directly on individuals’ U.S. agents.

Further, most countries are not parties to the Hague Service Convention or the Inter-American
Service Convention and Additional Protocol (IACAP). Service of process to individuals in these
countries must comport with the receiving country’s laws and U.S. law regulating extraterritorial
service of process. There is no central repository specifying what the service requirements are in
each of these countries. Accordingly, at minimum, service to these countries requires the FAA to
consult with the Department of State, Department of Justice, or local counsel in the receiving
country to determine what constitutes effective and legally permissible service in that country. If
a country objects to postal service, letters rogatory are likely the only available and recognized
means of service. Letters rogatory through diplomatic channels take eighteen months or more.
In sum, these international service requirements cause tremendous delays to service, with safety
implications, and they impose significant costs on the agency. By requiring individual certificate,
rating, or authorization holders abroad to designate a U.S. agent for service, the FAA’s proposed
rulemaking would enable prompt and cost-effective service of documents to individuals abroad
through service on their U.S. agents. This would conserve agency resources, ensure that lengthy
delays in service of process do not compromise aviation safety, and provide individuals abroad
with timely notice of FAA actions. For consistency, and to streamline service on U.S. agents, the
agency is also proposing to serve other time-sensitive or safety-critical documents in its
discretion on U.S. agents even when international service requirements are not triggered.
7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be
conducted in a manner:
•

requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

•

requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in
fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

•

requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any
document; requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical,
government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records, for more than three years;

•

in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and reliable
results that can be generalized to the universe of study;

•

requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and
approved by OMB;

•

that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established
in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies
that are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data
with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

•

requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other confidential
information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to
protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

None of the above methods of collection apply to this collection. This information collection is
consistent with the guidelines in Title 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)(i)-(viii).
8. Provide information on the PRA Federal Register Notice that solicited public comments
on the information collection prior to this submission. Summarize the public comments
received in response to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in response
to those comments. Describe the efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain
their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions
and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be
recorded, disclosed, or reported.
The FAA has provided this new information collection for public comment in the U.S. Agents
for Service Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, published on June 12, 2023 (88 Fed Reg 3801). The
public had an opportunity to provide input concerning the proposed information collections as
outlined in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The public comments are publicly available on
Regs.gov (https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FAA-2023-1194/comments).
In summary, the FAA received a total of 14 comments, two of which were duplicates. All
comments were from individual anonymous commenters. Seven of the comments were outside
the scope of the rule. Five of the commenters opposed the rule. Three of these commenters
suggested changes, as did one additional commenter who neither supported nor opposed the
proposed rule. One of the commenters proposing a change noted that we defined the term “U.S.
agent address” but did not use it in the proposed regulations, so FAA is incorporating the
definition into the proposed regulation without any substantive change to the regulation. Of the
other three commenters that suggested changes, two commenters requested full exemption from
the rule for certain certificate holders, and one commenter requested an alternative to the rule
that would only apply to pilots. As discussed below, neither the exemption nor the alternatives
requested were viable options. Accordingly, the FAA is adopting the rule as proposed, without
adopting the requested exemptions or proposed alternatives.
1. Exemption Request: Request for exemption from the U.S. agent for service requirement
for U.S. government employees, military members, and special purpose pilot
authorization (SPPA) holders
Two commenters requested full exemption from the rule for certain certificate holders.
Specifically, the commenters suggested that U.S. government employees, military members, and
special purpose pilot authorization (SPPA) holders should be exempt from the rule because the
FAA should easily be able to find and contact them through their employers (such as the U.S.
government, military, or private companies). The FAA notes the purpose of the rule is not to
locate certificate holders abroad, but rather to provide service of documents to individuals whose
location abroad is already known. More importantly, service on an employer does not satisfy
service of process requirements under 49 U.S.C. § 46103. The rule, however, does not preclude
an individual from designating their employer as their US agent for service if the employer
agrees and meets the requirements provided by this rule in 14 CFR Part 3, Subpart C.
Accordingly, the FAA is adopting the rule as proposed, without the requested exemptions.

2. Alternatives Request: Request for pilots to have alternatives to a U.S. agent for service
such as email or voluntary and temporary certificate surrender when pilots go abroad
One commenter requested that FAA consider alternatives to the rule that would only apply to
pilots. Specifically, the commenter requested that FAA consider email service for pilots or allow
pilots to temporarily and voluntarily surrender their certificate(s) to the FAA for the time they
are abroad. The FAA notes that alternatives to the rule that would only apply to pilots, as
proposed by the commenter, rather than all the applicable certificate, rating, and authorization
holders and applicants impacted by this rule would be unequal and inappropriate. Nevertheless,
the FAA considered the proposed alternatives, in case they could be viable options for all
individuals impacted by the rule. The FAA determined that neither option is a viable alternative
to a U.S. agent.
The NPRM already addressed why email service is not a viable alternative to the proposed rule.
Specifically, the NPRM explained that international service conventions do not expressly
authorize email service of process abroad, and that email service abroad could violate the
internal law of the receiving state and potentially result in judgments that are unenforceable in
foreign courts. Additionally, 49 U.S.C. 46103, which governs the FAA’s service of process, does
not provide for email service. Accordingly, the FAA cannot adopt the commenter’s proposed
email alternative to a U.S. agent.
The commenter’s second proposed alternative of temporary and voluntary certificate surrender to
the FAA does not remedy the issue the rule is addressing. The purpose of the rule is to assist the
FAA with efficient and effective service of documents to individuals abroad. An individual’s
temporary and voluntary certificate surrender for the time they are abroad does nothing to assist
the FAA with serving a document to the individual once they are outside the United States. For
example, if an individual violates the Federal Aviation Regulations before going to live abroad
for a year, the FAA may need to take enforcement action and serve the individual with a notice
or order for that violation when they are abroad. This would be true regardless of whether the
individual decides to put their certificate on hold with the FAA temporarily and voluntarily for
the time they are abroad. As a separate matter, for policy and cost reasons, FAA’s regulations do
not provide for temporary and voluntary certificate surrenders where the FAA is essentially
asked to temporarily store certificates for an individual’s self-serving purposes. The FAA,
therefore, has not adopted the commenter’s proposed alternative of temporary and voluntary
certificate surrender to the FAA.
3. General Opposition with No Proposed Changes
Two commenters generally opposed the rule, without proposing any changes, based on a
misunderstanding of current requirements or the rule. Both commenters asserted that an
individual with a U.S. address of record with the FAA does not have to designate a U.S. agent or
be reachable at their U.S. address, and, therefore, questioned why an individual abroad, with no
U.S. postal address, would need to establish more reliable postal communication with the FAA
by designating a U.S. agent. The underlying assumption that certificate, rating, and authorization
holders do not have to be reachable at their address of record with the FAA, whether in the U.S.
or abroad, is incorrect. The FAA’s responsibility of ensuring a safe National Airspace System

requires that the agency be able to reach certificate, rating, and authorization holders. Individuals
are expected to be reachable at their address of record on file with the FAA.
However, the purpose of this rule is not about the reliability of individuals’ addresses, regardless
of location. Rather, this rule is intended to provide FAA with a means to provide timely and costeffective service abroad in light of international service requirements. The FAA can more
effectively and efficiently send mail to a U.S. address than abroad due to international service
requirements that are discussed in the NPRM. This distinction justifies the requirement of U.S.
agents for individuals who have a foreign address of record on file with the FAA and no U.S.
physical address of record on file with the FAA.
The second commenter also misunderstood the proposed rule as requiring individuals to
designate two U.S. agents in the event their U.S. agent is on vacation. The rule does not require
individuals to designate two U.S. agents. Rather, the NPRM explained the importance of
ensuring reachability in the event a designated U.S. agent for service is temporarily unable to
accept service and offered a proposed solution that did not require the designation of a back-up
U.S. agent. U.S. agents could have a friend or associate collect the mail and notify the individual
of the service. Therefore, the FAA is not making any changes to the rule as a result of the
comments.
4. Out-of-Scope Comments
The FAA received seven out-of-scope comments. Three asked about the public availability of the
Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), which was addressed by reopening the comment period when
the PIA became publicly available on the website of the Department of Transportation. Another
comment, received after the comment period was reopened, stated that 15 days was not enough
time to comment on the PIA. The FAA considered 15 days to be sufficient time to comment on
the PIA. The document was publicly available since August 23, 2023, almost two months before
the reopening of the comment period and is not a document that requires public comment.
The other out of scope comments were about CARES requirements and availability as it
pertained to use of that system for U.S. agent designation. These comments are out of scope and
premature. The PIA simply identified CARES as one potential system FAA could use to collect
U.S. agent information at some point in the future. These comments have not resulted in any
changes to the rule.
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.
Respondents are provided no payment or gift in connection with this information collection.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
There are no assurances of confidentiality other than those provided under the following noted
applicable SORNs.

The information collected from individuals who hold or apply for certificates, ratings, or
authorizations under 14 CFR parts 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107 will become part of the Privacy Act
system of records DOT/FAA 847, General Aviation Records on Individuals, and afforded the
protection offered under the Privacy Act and that particular system.
The information collected from individuals who hold or apply for a certificate under 14 CFR part
47 will become part of the Privacy Act system of records DOT/FAA 801, and afforded the
protection offered under that particular system.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual
behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered
private.
No information of a sensitive nature is requested or required to designate a U.S. Agent for
service.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.
The FAA is proposing to require individuals who hold or apply for certificates, ratings, or
authorizations issued under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107 and who have a foreign
address and no U.S. physical address of record on file with the FAA to designate a U.S. agent.
Use: The information collected and maintained in FAA databases would be used to serve various
documents to the designated U.S. agents of individuals with a foreign address.
Respondents: As of July 2022, there were approximately 115,000 individuals who held
certificates, ratings, or authorizations issued under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, or 107 with a
foreign address and who did not have a U.S. physical address of record on file with the FAA.
After the implementation of the proposed rule in Year 1, the FAA expects that the number of
new applicants who would be required to submit a U.S. agent designation would be 4,362. In
addition, the FAA estimates that annually approximately 4,606 respondents might process a
change of U.S. agent designation or an update to their U.S. agents’ contact information.
Frequency: All 115,000 individuals with a foreign address, with no U.S. physical address, who
currently hold certificates, ratings, or authorizations issued under 14 CFR parts 47, 61, 63, 65,
67, or 107 will be required to submit a U.S. agent designation once during the implementation of
the rule in Year 1. After all current individuals impacted by this rule submit their U.S. agent
designation, the FAA estimates that 4,362 respondents identified as new applicants would submit
a U.S. agent designation at the time of their application after Year 1. Additionally, the FAA
estimates that 4,606 respondents might need to change their U.S. agent or update the information
for their current U.S. agent in subsequent years.

Summary
(Annual
numbers)
# of
Respondents
# of
Responses
per
respondent
Time per
Response
Total # of
responses
Total
burden
(hours)

Year 1
Disclosure

After
Year 1
Reporting

After Year 1
Recordkeeping

After
Year 1
Disclosure

N/A

N/A

8,968

N/A

N/A

1

N/A

N/A

1

N/A

N/A

10
minutes

N/A

N/A

10
minutes

N/A

N/A

115,132

N/A

N/A

8,968

N/A

N/A

19,189

N/A

N/A

1,495

N/A

N/A

Year 1
Reporting

Year 1
Recordkeeping

115,132

13. Provide an estimate for the total annual cost burden to respondents or record keepers
resulting from the collection of information.
Using the burden hours provided in the section above, the FAA estimates that it would take an
individual 10 minutes to submit a U.S. agent designation. In Year 1, the estimated number of
annual burden hours would be 19,189 hours (115,132 individuals x 10 minutes), and 1,495 hours
each year afterwards (=[(4,362 new applicants + 4,606 applicants modifying U.S. agent
designation) x 10 minutes]). The estimated annual cost to individuals would be $1,195,761 1 in
Year 1 and $93,130 ($45,300 + $23,915 + $23,915), each year afterwards.
14. Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal government. Also, provide a
description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of
hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff),
and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of
information.
The collection of the U.S. agent designation will be fully automated. Therefore, there will be no
new cost to the government. While the FAA would incur implementation costs to update its
systems and collect the agent information, the initial implementation costs will be offset by
saving the baseline foreign service process costs and avoiding the costs of translation services
(required by contracting parties to the Hague Service Convention).
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
The FAA proposes to collect this information in accordance with a proposed rule to require
certificate, rating, and authorization holders with a foreign address and no U.S. physical address
to designate a U.S. Agent for service. No current rule or program that collects such information
currently exists.
16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for
tabulation and publication. Address any complex analytical techniques that will be used.
Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of
the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other actions.
No requirement exists that would obligate the FAA to publish for statistical use any information
collected in accordance with this collection. The FAA does not intend to publish the information
collected on any public forum.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate.
The FAA does not seek approval to refrain from displaying the expiration date of OMB approval
Using a loaded wage rate of $62.32 and $10 a minute (=10/60 or 0.167 hour) estimated to submit a U.S. agent
designation, the FAA calculates that these individuals would incur $1,195,761, (= 115,132 x $62/hour x 0.167 hour).
This estimate assumes that all U.S. agent designations will be made electronically without mailing costs to
individuals.

1

of this proposed information collection.
18. Explain each exception to the topics of the certification statement identified in
“Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions.”
The FAA has not identified any exceptions that apply to this proposed collection.