Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Enroute; Supervisor / CIC
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airspace Structure; Weather; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was flying VFR to [destination] at 6;500 feet and needed to be radar identified as I believe approach had only started a VFR plan but did not complete radar identification. I was just starting my shift for the day and was to be the radar controller. However; the approach was limited ATC and we had acquired their airspace. Aircraft X checked on and was radar identified; at which time he informed ZAU that he wanted to stay VFR/045. Between other communications with other aircraft Aircraft X was trying to get in touch with ATC; I made 3 attempts to contact him to see what his intentions were as his altitude was descending and he was making a turn. Aircraft X responded; however; I could not make out the complete transmission besides cancel VFR and asked him to repeat. He then informed us that he was canceling VFR flight following as the weather was too low to continue and he was going to return to his airport. I verified he requested to cancel and return to his airport when he was descending below the MIA. VFR was canceled and 1200 was squawked as my D-side rerouted the aircraft back to its departure point and the datablock was dropped. It was not until several hours later was I informed there was an ALNOT out for this aircraft as the flight plan still transmitted to [original destination] and overdue. After informing the supervisors the aircraft had correctly canceled due to weather and stayed in VFR conditions; and they saw on the FALCON [replay computer] that the flight plan had changed that the search had stopped. I was also informed they had listened to the tapes to check on his whereabouts. Even with this happening they did not realize the VFR cancelation.First recommendation would be to check the ERAM system on why the flight plan did not drop from [original destination tower flight data]. Second would be to separate the approach control to its own sector as this is rarely worked by most controllers in the area and extremely rare circumstance at ZAU. Third would be extra diligence in checking the tapes as the aircraft had canceled and seems to have said ZZZ1 on the tapes as return airport. As well the flight plan was entered through approach.


Second narrative: The pilot was receiving VFR flight following while going to fly to ZZZ at 045; but he encountered clouds. He chose to turn around and land at the closest airport until the storm passed over. The controller rerouted the aircraft to his departure airport. When the pilot cancelled flight following; the controller never removed strips on the flight. They only dropped the data block.Three hours later ZZZ called to find out where the aircraft was because he was overdue. When the flight plan was changed; a removed strips message should have been sent to all affected sectors. An ALNOT was issued because the new controller did not know anything about the aircraft (since everything happened 3 hours earlier). I tried doing an aircraft search of CEDAR; but it was not operational. I did a SPIRT and found enough information to find the aircraft on FALCON. It showed the pilot did a quick descent and a 180 degree turn right by the coast line. I notified the OMIC and tried to continue to find the aircraft. I called three airports where the pilot could have landed at. The new D-side called Flight Service and they had no flight plan on file for the flight.Once the controller who worked the aircraft returned from their break and heard about everyone trying to find the aircraft; she mentioned that she had worked him; that he returned to his departure airport; and cancelled flight following.By the time I walked up to the Watch Desk to inform the OM about the new information; they were listening to the recording and heard the pilot cancel flight following. The ALNOT was cancelled and the two Operations Managers; Executive Officer; and QC Support Manager stopped attempts to find the aircraft. I continued to search for the aircraft because I believed he might have been in distress. The two controllers who worked the aircraft listened to the recording and made out that the pilot said he was going to [a different] airport. I called that airport manager; she had someone look around; and the plane was found. This gave relieve to me and the two controllers. I then notified the OMIC that the aircraft was safely on the ground.A search of the aircraft's phone number and registry showed only a company and address. There was no phone number to be found to contact the company or the pilot. This added to the frustration of trying to find the aircraft. The controllers were coached about the importance of removing strips versus dropping track.The major issue was why the automation did not send the remove strips message downstream (based on the original route of flight). If the automation did its job correctly; an ALNOT would not have been needed and all of the manpower would not have been wasted on hunting down an aircraft that was no longer under ATC services.The pilot and/or company should file his/her phone number so we can help find them in case of an emergency. The pilot might want to add a photo of his aircraft on Airliners.net so we can know what color the aircraft is when trying to look for him/her.Research needs to be done to find out why the remove strips message was not sent downstream to all of the facilities that had the flight plan reflecting ZZZ as the destination. If ZZZ had received the remove strips message then the ALNOT would not have been issued and everyone would have treated it like a pilot who cancelled flight following.I'm sad to say that there should be some type of training designed to train management and controllers about a moral obligation to find aircraft that reverse course and descend out of radar quickly. This is especially true of aircraft doing this procedure on the edge of large bodies of water and mountains. Although we might not be 'on the hook' anymore; we should be diligent in making sure these pilots are safe. There is an ever-growing disregard towards VFR pilots and these are the pilots who need our assistance the most. These are mostly the pilots who don't have much flight time and have a small knowledge base of how to avoid and/or escape hazardous situations. I'm just so glad this pilot made the right decision to put the aircraft on the ground and wait until the storm blew over.


Synopsis: An aircraft on a VFR Flight Plan cancelled flight following and advised Center they were turning around for weather to land. The ARTCC controllers amended the flight plan to route the aircraft flight plan back to its departure airport. The destination Tower did not notice the revision or the software did not process the revision to the destination Tower. They correctly assumed the aircraft was overdue. An ALNOT was issued and search procedures for the aircraft were initiated. ARTCC Supervisors and controllers who worked the aircraft at the ARTCC researched sector recordings and radar display replays. They discovered the aircraft had cancelled on the ARTCC frequency and returned to an airport other than its original departure airport.