Banning mogas at the airport...

For years, now, I've read that it's illegal for an FBO or airport to
forbid aircraft owners from fueling their own planes. In another
group, I simply parroted that information -- and now one of the group
members wants to know WHICH law expressly prohibits an FBO from
inhibiting an owner's ability to fuel his plane.

Is there such a law? If so, what's it called?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
For years, now, I've read that it's illegal for an FBO or airport to
forbid aircraft owners from fueling their own planes. In another
group, I simply parroted that information -- and now one of the group
members wants to know WHICH law expressly prohibits an FBO from
inhibiting an owner's ability to fuel his plane.

Is there such a law? If so, what's it called?

I'm not aware of any such law, but at my airport we couldn't refuel
inside the hangar due to insurance requirements. However, it was never
a problem on the ramp.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:


I'm not aware of any such law, but at my airport we couldn't refuel
inside the hangar due to insurance requirements. However, it was never
a problem on the ramp.


Fueling and defueling operations in hangars are really dangerous. I
personally know of a few airplanes and structrures lost this way.

Ron Natalie wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:


I'm not aware of any such law, but at my airport we couldn't refuel
inside the hangar due to insurance requirements. However, it was
never a problem on the ramp.


Fueling and defueling operations in hangars are really dangerous. I
personally know of a few airplanes and structrures lost this way.

So is fueling outside in the rain. I know more airplanes that came to
grief from water in the fuel than from a hangar fire.

I certainly don't advocate fueling in the hangar in general, but it is
is raining or 20 below and snowing, it makes sense.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:


I certainly don't advocate fueling in the hangar in general, but it is
is raining or 20 below and snowing, it makes sense.

Get an umbrella :-)

Frankly, I'm skeptical. The amount of water introduced in the open
cap is not likely to be substantial. Most water problems come from
ill-fitting fuel caps when exposed to rain for extended periods.

For 25 years I've fueled and parked aircraft outside (no hangar
available) and never had an issue with picking up water that way
(mushroom caps).
..

Ron Natalie wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:


I certainly don't advocate fueling in the hangar in general, but it is
is raining or 20 below and snowing, it makes sense.

Get an umbrella :-)

Frankly, I'm skeptical. The amount of water introduced in the open
cap is not likely to be substantial. Most water problems come from
ill-fitting fuel caps when exposed to rain for extended periods.

For 25 years I've fueled and parked aircraft outside (no hangar
available) and never had an issue with picking up water that way
(mushroom caps).

And I know a lot of people who have refueled airplanes in their hangars
and have never had a fire. Sounds like worrying about either isn't
justified.


Matt

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
For years, now, I've read that it's illegal for an FBO
or airport to forbid aircraft owners from fueling their
own planes. In another group, I simply parroted that
information -- and now one of the group members wants to
know WHICH law expressly prohibits an FBO from inhibiting
an owner's ability to fuel his plane.


Its probably not the FBO forbiding it, but the airport owner.

This is rule for our county airports.

"No person may conduct self-fueling activity on the airport without securing
a permit from the Airport Authority."

Read the rules, and the 10 page permit, at
http://www.countyairports.org/documents.htm in the Regulatory section. Let
us know if the Grape would pass muster for self-fueling.

When an airport accepts federal funds, the contract has the
provisions that require fair use. These may be the links
you need.
[PDF] FAA Facts
.... and becomes a legal binding contract between the sponsor
and ... available for public
use on fair and reasonable terms ... not granting an
exclusive right to any ...
http://www.agl.faa.gov/AGLNews/HowDo...rk/pdf/AIP.pdf - Text
Version

[PDF] Department of Transportation
.... owned and subject to the revenue-use requirement. The
private operator is providing
these services under some form of contract with the public
owner. These ...
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...on_final99.pdf
- 1999-02-16 - Text Version

[PDF] 1700 - Post Grant Obligations
.... be incurred by contract or by restrictive ...
Prohibition on Exclusive Rights ? Utilization
of ... Compatible Land Use ? Availability of Fair and
Reasonable ...
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...media/1700.pdf
- 1995-01-01 - Text Version


....

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
| For years, now, I've read that it's illegal for an FBO or
airport to
| forbid aircraft owners from fueling their own planes. In
another
| group, I simply parroted that information -- and now one
of the group
| members wants to know WHICH law expressly prohibits an FBO
from
| inhibiting an owner's ability to fuel his plane.
|
| Is there such a law? If so, what's it called?
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

http://www.faa.gov/arp/aal/Sponsor%20Guide/append4e.doc
f. It will not exercise or grant any right or
privilege which operates to prevent any person, firm, or
corporation operating aircraft on the airport from
performing any services on its own aircraft with its own
employees [including, but not limited to maintenance,
repair, and fueling] that it may choose to perform.


...



23. Exclusive Rights. It will permit no exclusive right
for the use of the airport by any person providing, or
intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public.
For purposes of this paragraph, the providing of the
services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator
shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the
following apply:

a.. It would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or
impractical for more than one fixed-based operator to
provide such services, and
b.. If allowing more than one fixed-based operator to
provide such services would require the reduction of space
leased pursuant to an existing agreement between such single
fixed-based operator and such airport.
It further agrees that it will not, either directly or
indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or
corporation, the exclusive right at the airport to conduct
any aeronautical activities, including, but not limited to
charter flights, pilot training, aircraft rental and
sightseeing, aerial photography, crop dusting, aerial
advertising and surveying, air carrier operations, aircraft
sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products
whether or not conducted in conjunction with other
aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft,
sale of aircraft parts, and any other activities which
because of their direct relationship to the operation of
aircraft can be regarded as an aeronautical activity, and
that it will terminate any exclusive right to conduct an
aeronautical activity now existing at such an airport before
the grant of any assistance under Title 49, United States
Code.


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
| For years, now, I've read that it's illegal for an FBO or
airport to
| forbid aircraft owners from fueling their own planes. In
another
| group, I simply parroted that information -- and now one
of the group
| members wants to know WHICH law expressly prohibits an FBO
from
| inhibiting an owner's ability to fuel his plane.
|
| Is there such a law? If so, what's it called?
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

23. Exclusive Rights. It will permit no exclusive right
for the use of the airport by any person providing, or
intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public.
For purposes of this paragraph, the providing of the
services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator
shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the
following apply:

That's the rule Jay is looking for!