Members of the GA Avgas Coalition are reacting to a notice by the Oakland, Calif.-based Center for Environmental Health (CEH) that it intends to sue 50 fuel retailers and suppliers for violating California’s drinking water and toxic enforcement law, based on the suppliers’ distribution of aviation gasoline, which contains a lead additive.
The aviation members of the General Aviation Avgas Coalition, which includes the Experimental Aircraft Association, General Aviation Manufacturers Association, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, the National Air Transportation Association, and the National Business Aviation Association, said they are exploring all options for supporting the named fuel retailers and suppliers.
In its first salvo, coalition members note that because the National Airspace System belongs to the people of the United States and benefits the entire country, Congress has reserved to the federal government, through the FAA, the responsibility to regulate all aviation activities in the U.S. The threatened lawsuit in California raises the specter of a patchwork of state regulations governing fuels pilots may or may not use in their piston-powered aircraft, coalition members said in a prepared statement.
“Equally important, at the heart of the federal aviation gasoline fuel standard is safety of flight — ensuring that the engine of an aircraft in flight does not suffer a catastrophic failure,” the statement continued.
The FAA, the federal agency with oversight for general aviation, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the federal agency with oversight for environmental concerns including aircraft emissions, are working with the general aviation industry — including aircraft and engine manufacturers, fuel producers and developers, and representatives of fuel suppliers and consumers — through the FAA’s Unleaded Avgas Transition Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to address the transition to an unleaded fuel. The ARC is working through a host of factors, with safety paramount, for transitioning to an unleaded fuel, according to officials. These include certification, production, and distribution, as well as environmental and economic concerns.
“It is imperative that the issues surrounding the safe and effective transition to an unleaded fuel be addressed at the federal level, and that the FAA and EPA be the agencies that address those concerns,” the coalition’s statement said. “The potential for this type of legal action at the state level highlights the necessity of FAA leadership, EPA involvement, and industry input to continue the safe transition to a new fuel.”
The lead content of aviation gasoline has already been reduced by 50% since the federal Clean Air Act was passed, coalition officials note. “But even as the general aviation industry works toward an unleaded solution, the Avgas Coalition has taken steps to further reduce the lead content as an interim improvement, developing a Very Low Lead fuel standard that will allow for a further 20% reduction in the maximum amount of lead in the fuel without adversely affecting air safety,” officials note.
The coalition also includes several representatives of the petroleum industry, but they did not join in with the aviation industry representatives in issuing the statement, as some are named as potential litigants.
For more information: EAA.org, AOPA.org, NBAA.org, NATA.aero, GAMA.aero, FAA.gov, CEH.org
The “chicken little” mentality of this and other so called environmental groups regarding the manufactured “threat” of lead additives in aviation fuel belies the true reason for this lawsuit as indicated in a podcast one can link to and view at their website. The real reason is so that CEH can achieve political recognition at the bargaining table when the state of California decides to sit and mediate these and other issues being targeted by CEH. Lead from the compromised static storage of avgas (leaky tanks) or from the aromatic source (airplane exhaust), and it’s introduction into our environment and water supply via those avenues is less than minimal and empirically poses little or no threat to anyone’s health. CEH and other doomsday environmental groups claim harm to children and animals’ central nervous systems. Really? What scientific evidence is there to prove the same? Nothing! In fact, lead is introduced into our water supply in statistically gargantuan numbers from the lead solder and pipes in our sometimes 125 year old and crumbling water lines below our major cities and towns, not to mention leaded wheel balancing weights on almost every car and truck driving, parked or junked, not to mention the tons of lead stored, transported and used by the insatiable American gun and hunting enthusiasts. Has CEH tried to ban lead buck shot or wheel weights? It’s easy for a group like CEH to target us “rich playboy” pilots and our polluting million dollar machines. Let’s get the word out to NASCAR hunting fans (of which there are millions) and tell them they are NEXT!. We’ll see an outcry as of yet unheard of regarding the antics and politics of these so called environmental groups.
Perhaps all airspace over California should be closed so no aviation fuel will be needed in that state. This means no civilian government or military flight into, out of, or over the state and when the movie stars or government officials need to get into, out of, or somewhere within California, they will have to take a train or a bus. Finally how much of California will burn because no aircraft can be used to fight the fires and how many people will die because there is no life-flight. It will, however, solve the serious problem of non-approved fuels being sold in that state.
If the EPA and Federal policy had not removed pure Mogas for aviation use we would not be forced to use 100LL which contains more lead than necessary for proper engine operation. The majority of GA aircraft can exist very well on good old 87/93 octane low lead non ethanol fuel. Unfortunately the forces that be did not anticipate this scenario and did not push to ensure the availability to the aviation community a satisfactory fuel which already exists. Typical one size fits all mentality on all sides of the issue.
We have to get rid of the people they are polluting the planet, that seems to be the mindset of the tree huggers.