Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Uploaded on Jul 28, 2010
FAA administrator Randy Babbitt answered a question at an AirVenture Oshkosh press conference, Wednesday, July 28, 2010, that appears to directly contradict a statement the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued earlier this week. He was not immediately available for followup. Regarding the future of 100LL, Babbitt said, in part, "We have some pretty good studies undergoing ... . ATSM process is developing the standards for new unleaded fuel and we've had some pretty good discussions with the EPA. They've been cooperative and helpful. The EPA of course has the ability and they have the statutory authority, in fact, to say there will be no more lead in fuel. We have asked them to please don't get ahead of us. Let us develop the standards so that we will have an easily deliverable safe efficient fuel that performs just like 100 leaded fuel does today and let us get that in place and, the timetrack that we're both on, I'm very comfortable that we will have a suitable deliverable alternative fuel long before the EPA says no more ... ." The EPA earlier this week offered a different understanding of its role.
Earlier this week the EPA responded to a request for clarification on its position on the future of lead regulation and clean air standards. The Environmental Protection Agency told GA's Avgas Coalition that the agency "has not established or proposed any date by which lead emissions from aircraft operating on leaded avgas would need to be reduced. In fact, the EPA does not have authority to control aviation fuels."