Avgas Suit Could Shut Down Cali GA

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name

Display name:
Tom-D
NATA: Avgas Suit Could Shut Down Cali GA
Email this article |Print this article

By Glenn Pew, Contributing Editor, Video Editor



A notice of intended lawsuit targets California FBOs saying that supplying and using leaded aviation gasoline violates the California Safe Drinking Water & Toxic Enforcement Act (Prop 65), and Friday the FBOs fought back. The suit is being brought by the Center for Environmental Health and the Attorney General of the State of California. The coalition has won the support of NATA and Friday filed a response asking a judge to issue an injunction that would stop the imposition of civil penalties. According to NATA, elements of the suit "would shut down the entire piston-engine aircraft fleet in California and end all flight training at the named airports." There are, of course, potential local and federal complications.

The FAA has exclusive oversight of aviation safety and the EPA oversees environmental regulation of aircraft emissions. According to NATA, the litigation "threatens to interfere with obvious federal interests in aviation safety and aircraft engine emissions policy." Those issues are currently being addressed at the federal level, NATA said, with cooperation between the FAA and EPA, along with general aviation advocacy groups like GAMA, EAA and AOPA and NATA, itself. The suit follows a notice of violation that claims FBOs failed to inform residents near airports that aircraft emissions contain lead. It proposes "remedies" that range from banning the sale of leaded avgas to forcing cleanup of allegedly contaminated drinking water to imposing civil penalties. Affecting the sale of leaded aviation fuel in California would in turn affect operations at 254 public-use airports in the state, the 99,594 pilots who call it home, and 37,128 general aviation aircraft that fly on leaded avgas, according to NATA.
 
Hasn't their been lawsuits and issues like this previously where the FAA has slapped down the EPA and state EPA's. Any precendent out there?
 
If this is a state's rights issue, the FAA might end up in second place, to an activist attorney general and environmental cabal. The we'll see how the interstate commerce clause is dragged out yet again to tell states what they can and can't do for themselves.

It's a touchy balance. When a small, well funded and politically correct group hijacks an entire state, by using activist judges to promote a single issue cause, everybody loses.
 
If this is a state's rights issue, the FAA might end up in second place, to an activist attorney general and environmental cabal. The we'll see how the interstate commerce clause is dragged out yet again to tell states what they can and can't do for themselves.

It's a touchy balance. When a small, well funded and politically correct group hijacks an entire state, by using activist judges to promote a single issue cause, everybody loses.

It will be interesting to see if the state government is thinking of the aviation industry jobs or not.
 
It will be interesting to see if the state government is thinking of the aviation industry jobs or not.

Jerry Brown is no stranger to this rodeo. He was Governor from 75-83 when all this was hot and heavy last time. He probably has a good idea of all the consequences.
 
It's not the same Jerry Brown, is it?


Yeah, it is. Californians will never learn. Governor Moonbeam to the rescue! I think insterstate transportation is one of the few things actually intended by the Commerce Clause.
 
In terms of strict legalities, there are a variety of challenges to this law. Everything from preemption to an unconstitutional infringement on interstate commerce. Not sure about the chances of success those arguments would stand in this situation, but they certainly seem like possibilities.
 
Yep, he's the real Terminator... "I AM back....":rofl::rofl::rofl: No Linda Ronstat for First Lady though.... "I've been Cheated... Been mistreated... When will I beeee loved...."
Why not?
 

Attachments

  • Linda Ronstadt before.jpg
    Linda Ronstadt before.jpg
    126.7 KB · Views: 43
  • linda_ronstadt1 now.jpg
    linda_ronstadt1 now.jpg
    45.2 KB · Views: 44
I think this will become more prevalent as time goes on and we do absolutely nothing about the 100LL issue. People, it's not gonna disappear, the vast majority of the country does not care if those little piston planes disappear forever.

I realize there are challenges to making a fully unleaded Avgas, but in the mean time, what about reducing the lead in half by mixing it with 92 octane Premium Unleaded? At least appear as if we are trying rather than stonewalling. I know we are not stonewalling, but that is not the perception the environmentalist side is selling, and if they can point to "They haven't done anything...", juries go "them baaaadddd industrialists". If we can go forward and point to the problems with making a usable gasoline blend for aircraft use and say "Look, we halved the amount of lead that we had a few years ago, and we're trying hard to get rid of more", then you get a lot more public sympathy. People want to see an effort. They know that things aren't easy, but as long as you're trying and achieving some result....
 
Hey, she's lost some weight...;)
He's lost something else...

Jerry-BrownThen.jpg


Jerry-BrownNow.JPG
 
Yeah, it is. Californians will never learn. Governor Moonbeam to the rescue!
Well, since then there have been 20 million or so mostly uneducated new voters added to the rolls. Seriously, those who actually know of Moonbeam are in the minority. To most of those voters who could actually identify his past accomplishments he was the most recent AG.
 
Last edited:
Yep. His hair, his youth, his hot first lady and more of his mind.

Ehhh, it would have to have been a very small piece.... Actually, he's an alright guy. 20 years ago he used to come sailing with us on the SF bay, he was a friend of the owner. He really is concerned for CA, that's one thing about him. I couldn't imagine wanting to take on the mess that California is right now... that's just masochistic. They need to bring back Duke....
 
Dukemejian or John Wayne? The former started office fairly well. The people were really ecstatic about him. But by the end the inglorious bastard had done some raiding of his own. And he was none too elegant about it. A wanna be Daley.
 
This suit has Jerry Brown stink all over it. His MO hasn't changed: a high profile case ostensibly for the people. He's ambitious.
 
Dukemejian or John Wayne? The former started office fairly well. The people were really ecstatic about him. But by the end the inglorious bastard had done some raiding of his own. And he was none too elegant about it. A wanna be Daley.

John Wayne was a drunk and a mean one at that is what I heard from his neighbors, and he hated horses, they scared him to death...:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Thing I liked best about Dukemejian was he refused to sign the helmet law, even sent back the budget when it was attached and basically told them "what part of "no" aren't you understanding." He was a civil liberties guy. Of course he was a crook, you can't have everything....
 
I realize there are challenges to making a fully unleaded Avgas, but in the mean time, what about reducing the lead in half by mixing it with 92 octane Premium Unleaded? At least appear as if we are trying rather than stonewalling. I know we are not stonewalling, but that is not the perception the environmentalist side is selling, and if they can point to "They haven't done anything...", juries go "them baaaadddd industrialists". If we can go forward and point to the problems with making a usable gasoline blend for aircraft use and say "Look, we halved the amount of lead that we had a few years ago, and we're trying hard to get rid of more", then you get a lot more public sympathy. People want to see an effort. They know that things aren't easy, but as long as you're trying and achieving some result....

The last time I checked I was not allowed to use mogas of any kind in my Tiger. In fact there is a placard on my plane saying 100LL. In addition, most auto fuel has ethanol in it.

If you can get the FAA to approve mogas for my Tiger, I'd gladly mix it, but only if we could get ethanol free mogas, and my airport provided it. I don't see me hauling around 5 gallon jerry cans of gas in my Jeep anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
The last time I checked I was not allowed to you mogas of any kind in my Tiger. In fact there is a placard on my plane saying 100LL. In addition, most auto fuel has ethanol in it.

If you can get the FAA to approve mogas for my Tiger, I'd gladly mix it, but only if we could get ethanol free mogas, and my airport provided it. I don't see me hauling around 5 gallon jerry cans of gas in my Jeep anytime soon.

I'm not talking about garage mix, I'm talking about refinery mix. I'm talking about an approved fuel to reduce lead emissions by half in the interim while we get the diesels online over the next decade. Planes that can get an Autogas STC are fine and won't have to convert.
 
Our P-Baron would certainly be affected by any change. It needs the higher octane to work with the high power settings. It's not a short airfield bird now; it's hate to see how it would do with lower HP.

Best.

Dave
 
If I thought it wouldn't have adverse affects on the rest of us I'd say let em go for it. They can reap what they sow.
 
Our P-Baron would certainly be affected by any change. It needs the higher octane to work with the high power settings. It's not a short airfield bird now; it's hate to see how it would do with lower HP.

Best.

Dave

Think 350hp TDI engine.....
 
Oh! I sure wish you hadn't of posted those pics. I'm getting ill.

Best,

Dave
She is one of us now (those who have put on a few pounds in middle age). Carrie Fisher and Kirstie Alley have also joined the club.
 
She is one of us now (those who have put on a few pounds in middle age). Carrie Fisher and Kirstie Alley have also joined the club.
Debbie Harry... Once they come off that 20 year coke/tweek binge their metabolism is shot to hell...
 
Debbie Harry... Once they come off that 20 year coke/tweek binge their metabolism is shot to hell...


Ain't that the truth! But, she's like 63 now I think.
 
I'm not talking about garage mix, I'm talking about refinery mix. I'm talking about an approved fuel to reduce lead emissions by half in the interim while we get the diesels online over the next decade. Planes that can get an Autogas STC are fine and won't have to convert.


Ha! Good luck with the FAA approval on that one. I'd love to see it, or approval of ethanol free 92 unleaded for the fleet.

You can get toxic, mercury laden flourescent bulbs mandated for use here, but a common sense alternative to 100LL is a pipe dream. Welcome to Amerika!
 
>> what about reducing the lead in half by mixing it with 92 octane Premium Unleaded

a 92 octane PUL has an aviation octane of about 87. Avgas without lead has an aviation octane in the 91 - 94 range. So PUL really isn't part of the solution.

Beyond that, California has 91 octane PUL, AFTER mixing with ethanol. So if you grab the BOB (blend stock for oxygenate blending) coming out of the refinery, it's only got about an 84 aviation octane...

Paul
 
You can get toxic, mercury laden flourescent bulbs mandated for use here, but a common sense alternative to 100LL is a pipe dream. Welcome to Amerika!
There's not enough demand to make it profitable for companies to come up with a solution, unfortunately, either that or not enough political clout. Probably both.

On the other hand...

http://biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2...on-biofuel-spec-clears-runways-for-new-fuels/

In Washington, ASTM formally approved the Bio-SPK aviation biofuels specification, which will allow up to 50 percent blends of hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel made from feedstocks such as camelina, jatropha and microalgae.
 
There's not enough demand to make it profitable for companies to come up with a solution, unfortunately, either that or not enough political clout. Probably both.

On the other hand...

http://biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2...on-biofuel-spec-clears-runways-for-new-fuels/
This would be great if it can be produced at a reasonable cost in great enough quantities to supply the GA fleet. I doubt that GA can support the infrastructure needed to have a dual fuel supply system. If they can produce enough to meet the needs of GA in California it might be a good place to start.
 
Another great opportunity for a few lawyers to fatten their wallets. This has so many far reaching implications should it become a reality, it could end GA for the whole country except for the few pilots who could afford aircraft that use other types of fuel.

It is not only a direct assault on just about all privately owned FBOs, but what about all the people who have ever had a small plane fly overhead? They will be able to sue for just about any ailment that could possibly be associated with leaded gasoline.

The impending litigation costs could effectively close every FBO in the state, making it next to impossible to purchase any type of fuel on an airport.

Should people start winning such lawsuits, you can bet people in other states will soon join in. Free money can make people do all sorts of things, regardless of the outcome.

If you think Federal Law trumps State law in California, consider all the marijuana dispensaries we have in this state.

No matter what the outcome, just the legal costs alone could put the price of avgas through the roof, effectively ending GA in California, if not all over the country.

I don't see much any of us could do about it, there is a lot of money to be made by a few people, even if it does put thousands out of work.

It is not about public safety at all. It's about who can think up the next hair brained idea to rape the public and get themselves rich. The more people who can jump on their litigation bandwagons, the more they will rake in.

John
 
Re-wording your sentence, a few people could make money by taking money away from thousands.

Those thousands had better get organized for a fight. If they care.
 
Back
Top