Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative Future Unleaded Aviation Gasoline National Warbird Operator Conference New Orleans, LA February 27, 2015

Presenter Doug Macnair Vice President Government Relations Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)

Why Are We Discussing This? Tetra-Ethyl Lead NWOC 2011 – Pensacola , FL EAA presented the challenges to long-term leaded fuel availability Petitions and suits by environmental organizations Pending EPA regulation Reduced ambient air quality standards Endangerment finding Market forces Single source of Tetra-ethyl lead Lead phased out of most every other product

2011 Summation of Challenges Significant barriers exit to development and transition Low production volume/broad geographic distribution Low incentive for investment No market for fuel without recertification of existing fleet No one to invest in fleet-wide recertification effort No drop-in replacement for 100LL (20+ year search) Unleaded fuel properties and chemistry will be dramatically different than 100LL Impact on fleet unknown in absence of proposed fuels and means of evaluation Octane only one of many necessary properties Production ability and affordability as important as fuel properties

Research, Development, Implementation and Transition Must Be a Collaborative Effort No one can do this alone Consensus and the marketplace must drive the solution and yet the marketplace is broken/constrained Fuel must be affordable and satisfy the existing fleet to the greatest degree possible

2011 Punchline – “This is Not a Crisis” But it is an urgent and top priority issue that demands ongoing attention, resources, funding and management “Fuel is one of our top advocacy initiatives and is one of the key aviation issues of our time.” Rod Hightower, Former EAA President

Since NWOC 2011? EAA stood by its word and has taken a leadership role coordinating and collaborating with a host of aviation/petroleum stakeholders and government to turn endless questions into a pathway for finding answers

Funded by congress, FAA and industry in-kind support The Result? The industry/government collaborative effort known as the Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative (PAFI) Funded by congress, FAA and industry in-kind support

Path To Unleaded Avgas 2011 2012 2010 Jan 31 2011- ARC Charter Signed by FAA Administrator July 2010– Oshkosh, GA Coalition Asks FAA to take Leadership Role to Form Public-Private Partnership Feb 2012- UAT ARC Final Report & Recommendations Released ARC Deliberations Implementation of ARC Recommendations 2013 2014 2012 FAA Fuels Prog Office AIR-20 2012 PAFI Steering Group (PSG) June 2013 FAA SIR Released 2014 PAFI TEC & TAC Implemented July 2014 Industry SIR Proposals for UL AVGAS 2012 FAA Central Cert AIR-21 Sept 2014 Phase I Test Program PAFI Work Begins

PAFI Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative Where are we? Where are we going? How we will get there?

Key Takeaways Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative (PAFI) Implemented, funded and in process Fleet-wide approval is the primary goal 9 fuels from 5 offerors entered the program July 2014 FAA identified 4 fuels from 3 offerors to enter Phase 1 Sept. 2014 Phase 2 to begin Jan. 2016 Completion of PAFI - 2018 Supported and funded by Congress and FAA PAFI is not “picking” a fuel but rather qualifying the best fuels for use Supply of current leaded avgas remains stable

PAFI Mission “The mission of PAFI is to evaluate candidate unleaded replacement fuels and identify those fuels best able to technically satisfy the needs of the existing aircraft fleet while also considering the production, distribution, cost, availability, environmental and health impacts of those fuels.”

PAFI Mission Continued “PAFI was conceived and established to overcome the barriers to entry into the aviation fuel marketplace by creating a process that would evaluate all of the properties and conditions necessary for broad production, distribution and usage of a new unleaded aviation fuel, and expeditiously develop data necessary to support FAA approval of the majority of the existing fleet of piston aircraft to operate on that fuel.”

PAFI Overview PAFI is a robust joint government/industry initiative established at the request of a broad cross section of the aviation and petroleum industries and consumer representatives Formed pursuant to the recommendations of the UAT ARC Final Report Path forward for the identification, evaluation and deployment of the most promising unleaded replacements for 100LL avgas technically satisfy the needs of the existing aircraft fleet considers production, distribution, cost, availability, environmental and health impacts Goal is data to support FAA fleetwide approval and ASTM specification

PAFI Funding President’s Budget Request Shows Full Funding for Unleaded Avgas Program through 2018 Annual FY Budget Request Approximately $6 million Congress has authorized $6 million in fiscal year 2015 Funding supports the PAFI test program at the FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center and outside contractors Industry In-Kind Support Fuel development and supply for testing program Technical expertise for qualification and testing methods Equipment and services for test program Program oversight and management

PAFI Steering Group (PSG) Purpose Facilitates, coordinates, expedites, promotes, and oversees the PAFI program based upon the recommendations of the UAT ARC Final Report Coordinates resources and support necessary to execute the program Engages industry stakeholders for allocation of manpower and resources to support working groups and the PAFI test program Members AOPA – Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association API – American Petroleum Institute EAA – Experimental Aircraft Association GAMA – General Aviation Manufacturers Association NATA – National Air Transportation Association NBAA – National Business Aircraft Association FAA - Federal Aviation Administration

PAFI Steering Group Cont. Management FAA and Industry Co-Leads FAA Co-Lead (Peter White) Manager of FAA Fuels Program Office AIR 20 Serves as FAA program manager Monitors, directs, and coordinates overall government related PAFI activities Industry Co-Lead (Ron Wilkinson) Reports to and compensated by the PSG Serves as the industry Program Manager Interfaces with Industry, FAA, and fuel developers See following link for further information on PAFI http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/avgas/org_info/

PAFI Support Groups Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Reports to PAFI Steering Group (PSG) Membership represents aviation product and fuel manufacturers Venue to provide industry “in-kind” support – technical and equipment Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) Reports to FAA – FAA consultants and employees vetted for conflict of interest with areas of expertise to evaluate fuels to selection criteria Evaluates fuel proposals furnished in response to the SIR Responsible for Phase I fuel selection Responsible for Phase II fuel selection Distinct and Separate Support Groups with NO interconnections

Path To Unleaded Avgas 2018 2017 PAFI Phase I 2016 PAFI Phase II 2015 Select Phase I Fuels 2014 PAFI Phase I Phase I Test Program ASTM Lab & Rig Tests 2015 2016 Select Phase II Fuels PAFI Phase II 2017 Phase II Engine & Aircraft Test Program Final Reports / FAA Certification 2018 ASTM Research Report - Production Fuel Specification PAFI Program July 28, 2014

PAFI SIR and Prescreening Phase FAA Technical Evaluation Committee 2014 Pre-Screening SIR Phase - 2013 Offeror Pre-Screening Data Unleaded AVGAS proposals received July 1, 2014 (11 formulations/6 offerors) Afton Chemical Company Avgas LLC Consortium of BP, TOTAL, & Hjelmco Shell Swift Fuels TOTAL

Candidate Fuel Evaluation – Phase I Selection FAA Technical Evaluation Committee 2014 Pre-Screening SIR Phase - 2013 Offeror PASS Pre-Screening Data Rejected OTA Four formulations selected by the TEC - September 1, 2014 Shell – 1 formulation Swift Fuels – 2 formulations TOTAL – 1 formulation

PAFI Phase I Test Program 390 gals of fuel each FAA Technical Evaluation Committee 2014 Pre-Screening SIR Phase - 2013 Phase 1 (Fuel Testing) Testing at FAA Tech Center And Contract Sites Selected Offerors Offeror PASS Pre-Screening Data Rejected OTA Cooperative Research Agreements/International Research Contract – December 2014 Delivery of Phase 1 Worst Case Formulations to FAA Tech Center – January 2015

Think This Is Just About Octane? Octane requirement is just the tip of the iceberg Avgas has many qualities necessary to control adverse outcomes in our aircraft and engines Evaluating the impact of completely new fuel chemistry on the full history of aircraft production is an immensely complicated undertaking

PAFI Test Program Phase I – Lab Tests, Emissions & Toxicology Assessments Work Product – Evaluation of candidate fuels for potentially show- stopping issues Chemical makeup Performance properties Establish credible and peer-reviewed test protocols for ascertaining necessary fit-for-purpose data Fit for purpose testing across the various ranges allowed by the fuel formulations (worse case formulations) Evaluate emissions and toxicology properties Baseline detonation testing Data from Phase 1 will be used to evaluate the business case for candidate fuel production, distribution and availability to consumers

What Does 390 Gallons of Test Fuel Do? EXAMPLE ONLY Overall Fuel Quantity (gals.) GCxGC MS Fuel Quantity (ml) FAA TC Lab Testing Fuel Qantity (gals) Dixie Services Lab Testing Fuel Quantity (gals) Rig Testing Fuel Quantity (gals) Material Comp Lab Fuel Quantity (gals) Detonation/ Emissions [emissions to be performed on worse case detonation fuel] Formulation # 50 10 ml 45 5   Materials Compatibility [corrosion impacts from soak tests using elastomers, sealants, and metals] 130 Rig No. 1 Low Temp Fuel Flow Ability (1 rig) [e.g. waxy buildup, viscosity changes, pumpability effects, and atomization impacts] 35 25 Rig No. 2 Carburetor Icing (1 rig) [maximize heat of vaporization and density] 30 10 20 Rig No. 3 Dynamic Fuel Sys (5 rigs) 100 Rig No. 4 Storage Stability (5 rigs) Rig No. 5 Cold Storage (5 rigs) Rig No. 6 Hot Surface Ignition (5 rigs) Overall Fuel Quantity 390 Final lists of laboratory tests per sample being finalized.

Fuel Property Laboratory Testing Final agreed-to laboratory test methods for specific fuel property measurements Dixie Services Inc., Galena, Texas awarded two-year contract with FAA WJHTC for laboratory services Identify traditional fuel properties for each candidate fuel Density Vapor Pressure Freeze Point Distillation Curve Corrosivity Flash point And many others

Fit-for-Purpose Rig Testing PEGASAS FAA Center of Excellence Contract Awarded to Purdue University, Sept. 02, 2014 Stage 1, Rig Design/Build – December 2014 Stage 2, Rig Testing – March 2015 Rig #1, Low Temperature Flow Ability Rig #2, Carburetor Icing Rig #3, Dynamic Fuel System Rig #4, Storage Stability Rig #5, Cold Storage Rig #6, Hot Surface

Rig #1, Low Temperature Flow Ability Evaluate performance changes in hardware due to cooling of the fuel.

Rig #2, Carburetor Icing Evaluate any significant difference between a baseline 100 LL fuel and the candidate fuels regarding the formation of carburetor ice. Purdue University test stand. Test Method Development sponsored by the Coordinating Research Council Project No. AV-17-13

Rig #3, Dynamic Fuel System Assessing that there is no unexpected or premature wear, a rig capable of flowing fuel in a cyclical manner through typical aircraft hardware.

Rig #4, Storage Stability Evaluate the behavior of fuel in a tank over time. Storage in a 43 °C oven and storage in a tank under ambient conditions will be conducted.

Rig #5, Cold Storage Determine how the fuel will behave, especially with respect to separation as the fuel is cooled.

Rig #6, Hot Surface Evaluate any propensity of the fuel to create build-up, for example on the engine manifold during shut down, due to fuel dropping on hot surfaces and to develop an understanding of the subset of hot surface ignition within the auto ignition regime.

Materials Compatibility Testing Baere Aerospace via subcontractor to FAA WJHTC Test procedures and materials lists being finalized Nonmetallics Metallics Fabric Composites Coatings Distribution network materials Industry in-kind support for donation of materials and components for materials compatibility and fuel system test rigs Textron Lycoming Continental Cirrus

Initial Engine Detonation Testing Limited in scope To be used for Phase 2 entrance evaluation Two power settings: Takeoff and 75% power Baseline 100LL included Lycoming IO-540-K Engine Engine model used in extensive CRC engine testing 6 cylinder 300 BHP Critical engine

Engine Out Emissions/Ecological Assessment FAA WJH Technical Center exhaust engine-out emissions console. Total Hydrocarbons (THC) Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Oxygen (O2) Particulates Limited engine cycle: Low power, full-rich fuel mixture (e.g. idle and taxi) Mid power, full-rich and lean fuel mixture (e.g. approach) High Power, full-rich mixture (e.g. takeoff) Emissions/Toxicology Literature Search – An additional assessment identifying any issues in available literature and references for each of the major fuel components that differ from the community experience with 100LL, along with the experience regarding the use of components in additional modal transportation fuels will be summarized in a final white paper. Literature Search/ White Paper is similar to previous work presented at the 2013 North American Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Annual Meeting, November 17-21, 2013

GCxGC - Mass Spectrometer Evaluate and verify the exact chemical makeup of each candidate fuel Used to validate and establish baseline for all Phase I test results GCxGC testing is being performed in addition to the ASTM D6733 High Resolution GC, to evaluate the validity of the high resolution GC analysis Pictures were accessed from SHIMADZU.com on 12/5/14.

Evaluation of PAFI Phase I Test Data 390 gals of fuel each FAA Technical Evaluation Committee 2014 Phase 1 Data Pre-Screening SIR Phase - 2013 Phase 1 (Fuel Testing) Testing at FAA Tech Center and Contract Sites Offeror FAA Tech Evaluation Committee 1/2016 PASS Pre-Screening Data Rejected OTA

PAFI Phase II Test Program 390 gals of fuel each OTA FAA Technical Evaluation Committee 2014 Phase 1 Data Pre-Screening SIR Phase - 2013 Phase 1 (Fuel Testing) Phase 2 (Full-Scale Testing) Testing at FAA Tech Center and Contract Sites Offeror Selected Offerors 10,000 gals of fuel each PASS Pre-Screening Data Rejected FAA Tech Evaluation Committee 1/2016

PAFI Test Program Phase II – Full Scale Engine & Aircraft Testing Work Product – Data packages from full scale engine & aircraft testing to support ASTM Research Reports and Standards & FAA Fleet Wide Approval Fuels will be tested at the engine and aircraft level to evaluate their suitability across as much of the existing fleet as possible Consists of an integrated engine and aircraft test program testing multiple fuels in multiple engines and multiple aircraft Data collected from this testing will generate data that can be used to support the fleet wide approval of aircraft and engines including the orphaned fleet no longer supported by a manufacturer. This program is the most viable path to a fleet wide approval of new fuel formulations Data from the Phase I and Phase II testing will also be submitted for ASTM Production Specification, enabling the fuels to be accepted in the marketplace. FAA involvement in this step will ensure acceptance and adoption of the fuel by consumers and across the petroleum and aviation industry.

PAFI Phase II Completion – Approval Data 390 gals of fuel each OTA FAA Technical Evaluation Committee 2014 Phase 1 Data Phase 2 Data Pre-Screening SIR Phase - 2013 Phase 1 (Fuel Testing) Phase 2 (Equipment Testing) Testing at FAA Tech Center and Contract Sites Offeror Selected Offerors 10,000 gals of fuel each PASS Pre-Screening Data Rejected FAA Tech Evaluation Committee 1/2016

“Fleet-Wide” Approval Fleet-wide authorization is the PRIMARY GOAL OF PAFI Approach will not result in classic engine/airframe specific approvals, as there will be no applicant, and no certificate issued Plan to determine and publish eligibility lists of engines/aircraft that can utilize the new unleaded AVGAS formulation(s) FAA and industry are currently working with Congress to expand or creating new statutory authorization for fleet wide transition Approach and implementation is fuel dependent Fuel properties & composition Impact on engine and aircraft models Plan to publish eligibility lists in the Federal Register

Key Takeaways FAA/Industry Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative (PAFI) Purpose: Facilitate transition to unleaded replacement Avgas with least impact on existing fleet Primary objective is FAA determination of aircraft and engine eligibility for replacement unleaded fuels Status & Milestones: 5-Year Program Under Way and Funded by Congress & Industry Contributions July 2014: 11 candidate fuels from 6 offerors entered the program Sept. 2014: 4 fuels from 3 offerors accepted into Phase 1 December 2014 - November 2015 – Phase 1 test program Jan. 2016: Qualified fuels to enter Phase 2 evaluation Dec. 2018: Final fuel(s) complete PAFI testing to support fleet-wide “approval” PAFI is a robust industry-government collaborative initiative Crucial to establishing viable marketplace for unleaded fuel Program is on schedule and anticipated to stay that way

Next Few Years PAFI working an aggressive and ambitious timeline EPA timing it’s regulatory actions in harmony with PAFI timelines Endangerment Finding – NPRM 2017, Final Rule 2018 Aircraft Lead Emissions Standard – 2018 or thereafter FAA to implement EPA emissions standard requiring use of unleaded fuel Anticipated 2019 or thereafter Availability of leaded avgas remains stable and is projected to be so through the transition Industry working closely with existing lead supplier and fuel industry to coordinate orderly transition from leaded to unleaded fuel

Questions?

Background Slides History and background of avgas and avgas regulation

A Brief History of Gasoline Used for Aviation in the U.S. 100 Years in 200 Seconds

S 1903 – Wright Brothers fly using unleaded autogas (40-70 Octane estimated) 1917 – U.S. Army adopts first avgas specification unleaded “Fighting Grade” 1921 – Tetra-Ethyl Lead (TEL) discovered by General Motors to be perfect anti-knock compound 1927 – Dark side learned with death of 17 refinery workers 1930 – US Army Air Corps adopts first leaded avgas (3 ml/gal max TEL) 1944 – avgas development peaks with Grade 115/145 Highest octane aviation gasoline in large-scale production

1950’s – Six grades of avgas is production 73 (No Lead) 80/87 (0.5 gr/gal TEL)* 91/96 (2.0 gr/gal TEL)* 100/130 (3.0 gr/gal TEL)* 108/135 (4.0 gr/gal TEL)* 115/145 (4.6 gr/gal TEL)* *All lead contents reflect maximum TEL permissible under the specification 1960’s – Demand for high octane avgas plummets with proliferation of turbine engines in commercial service

1970 – Clean Air Act signed into law 1960’s – GA engine manufacturers begin issuing service instructions limiting use of highest lead fuels in low-compression engines due to lead fouling and valve sticking/wear 1970 – Clean Air Act signed into law Lead is one of the first targets 1971 – Consolidation of multiple high octane grades to a single avgas – 100 Low Lead (2.0 gr/gal TEL) 50% reduction Over time eliminates grades: 91/96 100/130 108/135 115/145

1990 – EPA Clean Air Act Amendments Watershed Moment… Perceived to threaten elimination of lead in avgas by 1995 (non-road vehicles) Avgas found not to apply to 1995 deadline on a technicality found in Congressional Record (aircraft are not “non-road” vehicles) But…EPA found to hold authority to regulate lead in avgas at any time since 1970

1991 – “Fuel Crisis Conference” held in Washington, DC Brings together all concerned parties on the lead issue for the first time Owners Associations and Type Clubs Petroleum Producers and Resellers Engine manufacturers Airframe manufacturers Begins 20 years of research to understand the technical complexities and limitations of trying to replace lead in high-octane aviation gasoline

What is the difference between avgas and other gasolines? Everything! Only the name is the same… In simple terms: Autogas is a distillate From a barrel of oil one can distill different products in various ratios depending on the oil, refinery and temperature (heavy & light ends) Autogas is a relatively simple distillate which is why we can make so much of it so cheaply

What is the difference between avgas and gasoline? Avgas is NOT a distillate; it is a specialty chemical blend Napthas made into iso-octane/iso-pentane or reformate Hydrocracking, alkylation processes Toluene Tetra-Ethyl Lead (TEL) Benzene (lead scavenger)

Factors Affecting Long-Term Availability of 100LL Economic There is no assurance of long-term supply of leaded avgas Shrinking number of producers (7 refineries in North America) Currently a single producer of tetra-ethyl lead (TEL) Innospec has indicated that they will continue to supply TEL as long as there is a market but that still leaves the fate of the industry hinging on a sole supplier

Factors Affecting Long-Term Availability of 100LL Avgas Avgas is specialty chemical or niche fuel Very low volume - accounts for 0.1% of all transportation fuel U.S. Fuel Production 2008 Barrels Per Day

Factors Affecting Long-Term Availability of 100LL U.S. Aviation Gasoline Retail Deliveries by Refiners(Thousand Gallons per Day) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9   1980's 418.5 316.5 281.3 251.7 193.0 225.9 206.8   1990's 207.0 204.8 210.6 207.8 222.9 212.4 169.3 167.6 154.0 148.1   2000's 166.1 122.7 110.1 121.8 98.5 106.1 88.6 103.5 144.3 150.9

Environmental Significant lead reductions by all other sources Aviation is now largest source (over 45%) 2006 and 2014 petition by Friends of the Earth to regulate GA lead emissions under the Clean Air Act EPA regulatory actions on lead

EPA Regulatory Actions on Lead Currently: National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Lead 10-fold reduction in allowable lead limit in 2010 Requires monitoring near major sources (airports) and populated areas States must meet new NAAQS for lead by 2017 This is not a ban on 100LL Monitoring to date has not exceeded the new standards with two exceptions

EPA Regulatory Actions on Lead Next Steps: Endangerment Finding on Lead from GA 2010 Advance NPRM marked the beginning of the “endangerment finding process” EAA and a coalition of aviation and petroleum interests filed comments EPA plans NPRM in 2017 and final rule in 2018 An endangerment finding does not ban 100LL Additional rulemaking would be required to implement EPA would set new emissions standards for lead FAA would have to implement the change to the fuel