Air district reviews lead in aviation fuel near Sacramento Executive Airport; monitoring site selection draws concerns

The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District on Sept. 25 presented a white paper summarizing the status of lead in aviation gasoline (avgas), monitoring findings near Sacramento Executive Airport and state and federal actions aimed at reducing lead from small‑aircraft fuel.

Amy Roberts, division director for Engineering and Compliance at the district, told the board the paper was compiled in response to community concerns under AB 617 and recent federal and state signals about phasing out leaded avgas. "At our core, we are a public health agency," Roberts said, describing the district’s interest in ways to reduce community exposures.

Staff summarized the regulatory and technical context: the EPA issued an "endangerment finding" on leaded aviation gasoline in 2023; the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration committed in the 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act to restrict leaded avgas use by 2030; and California passed SB 1193 in 2024, which sets a statewide target date to ban sale and use of leaded avgas by Jan. 1, 2031. Staff also described industry and manufacturer efforts such as ASTM certification of some high‑octane unleaded fuels and an industry coalition (EAGLE) working to eliminate leaded avgas emissions.

Local monitoring and community concerns

Roberts and monitoring staff summarized prior ambient monitoring in the area, including long‑running samples at a Del Paso Manor monitoring station, AB 617 community air monitoring in the South Sacramento/Florin area, and a targeted campaign by a local group, United Latinos, near Mangum Park. Staff reported that those ambient monitoring data sets showed concentrations well below the federal ambient standard for lead (0.15 micrograms per cubic meter) and that the district plans to deploy a portable air monitoring laboratory for approximately one year to gather additional data.

Board members raised repeated concerns about the planned portable lab’s proposed location. Directors and community members noted the lab was sited near Mangum Park, an area with a history of soil contamination from a now‑closed gun range that the city remediated years earlier. Director Serna and others urged caution, asking whether monitoring placed over or adjacent to a former gun range could confound airborne lead data and make it difficult to separate soil‑borne contamination from aviation‑related emissions.

Janice Lem Snyder, with the district’s Monitoring, Planning and Rules Division, said ambient monitoring measures constituents in the air column and that additional analysis would be needed to apportion sources. Dr. Ayala (Air Pollution Control Officer) told the board the district would not place the portable lab without further review: "We are going to look at this, before we proceed and place the lab at a location for sampling...before we proceed with any placement of the lab, we will inform the board again," Dr. Ayala said, addressing board concerns about potential data confounding.

Technical and policy context discussed

Staff reviewed emission inventories that show airports such as Van Nuys and Reid‑Hillview at the high end of lead emissions from municipal general aviation activity, and that Sacramento Executive Airport accounts for a smaller share of statewide airport lead emissions. Board members asked about technical pathways to phase out lead — staff said most near‑term activity focuses on unleaded fuel formulations and fuel certification rather than engine retrofits, and that commercial availability of certified unleaded fuels remains limited (staff cited that one manufacturer reported availability at a handful of airports).

Next steps

District staff said they will continue community engagement under AB 617, coordinate with Sacramento County Department of Airports on transition planning and required permits, and perform additional monitoring and analysis. The board did not take formal regulatory action at the meeting; staff characterized the agenda item as informational and said they would return with follow‑up analysis and a revised monitoring plan.