# Incident 19990116013049I: Amtr WAGARO2+2, January 16, 1999 - Type: FAA incident report (Accident/Incident Data System), as reported - Date: January 16, 1999, 10:00 local time - Phase of flight: Forced/Precautionary Landing - Operating rules: General operating rules (Part 91) - Aircraft: N6272A, registered now (https://openairdocs.org/aircraft/N6272A) (OpenAirDocs) - Registry model: Mader William J WAG-AERO 2+2 (registry code 056029X, https://openairdocs.org/model/mader-william-j-wag-aero-2-plus-2) (OpenAirDocs) - Registry engine: Lycoming 0-320 series (registry code 41508, https://openairdocs.org/engine/lycoming-0-320-series) (OpenAirDocs) - Reported make and model: AMTR WAGARO2+2 - People aboard: 1 - Fatal injuries: 0 - FAA source: FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal (https://asip.faa.gov/) - Page: https://openairdocs.org/incident/19990116013049I ## Narrative As the FAA filed it, in capitals; the FAA replaces private details with ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^. ONE OF THREE AIRCRAFT IS LISTED IN THE REPORT THE OTHER TWO ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1.N9267Y-RV-6A, 2.N1576J-PIPER CHEROKEE THREE AIRCRAFT WERE FUELED, ONE AFTER THE OTHER, ON 01/16/99 AT THE ST. GEORGE, UT AIRPORT BY WESTERN AIR SERVICES. ALL THREE AIRCRAFT EXPERIENCED ENGINE PROBLEMS RANGING FROM ROUGH RUNNING OPERATION TO COMPLETE ENGINE FAILURE. AFTER THIS WAS REPORTED TO THIS OFFICE CHEVRON PRODUCT ENGINEERING, AVIATION DIVISION, WAS CONTACTED IN SAN FRANCISCO. ALSO, AT THE DIRECTION OF CHEVRON, WESTERN AIR SERVICES STOPPED SELLING FUEL UNTIL TEST'S OF THE PRODUCT COULD BE CONDUCTED. CHEVRON CONDUCTED GAS CHRONOLOGY TESTS ON THE DEALERS STORAGE TANK, FUEL TRUCK, DISTRIBUTOR'S DELIVERY SAMPLE AND DISTRIBUTOR'S SOURCE TANK. CHEVRON INDICATED THAT THEIR TESTS FOUND THE PRODUCT TO BE NORMAL AND THEY ALLOWED WESTERN AIR SERVICES TO RESUME FUEL SALES AS OF 01/21/99. WESTERN AIR SERVICES HAD FUELD 7 AIRCRAFT, INCLUDING THE THREE THAT EXPERIENCED PROBLEMS BEFORE STOPPING SALES. CHEVRON IS FOLLOWING UP ON THE THREE AIRCRAFT THAT EXPERIENCED PROBLEMS. THIS OFFICE HAS OBTAINED TWO FUEL SAMPLES. ONE WAS FROM AN AIRCRAFT THAT WAS FUELED SHORTLY AFTER THE THREE AIRCRAFT AND THE OTHER WAS FROM ONE OF THE AIRCRAFT IN QUESTION. CHEVRON AGREED TO ANALYZE ONLY ONE OF THE SAMPLES. ONE SAMPLE WAS TAKEN IN A FRUIT JAR AND THE OTHER IN A EMPTY QUART OIL CONTAINER. CHEVRON EXPLAINED "THE ONE IN THE EMPTY QUART OIL CONTAINER IS UNACCEPTABLE BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN CONTAMINATED BY THE OIL CONTAINER". THE SAMPLE IN THE GLASS FRUIT JAR WAS TAKEN TO THE CHEVRON REFINERY IN SALT LAKE CITY, UT, ON 02/12/99. THE TEST WAS ACCOMPLISHED USING A 5890 SERIES 2 GAS CHROMATOGRAPH. THE TEST RESULTS INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A CONTAMINATE IN THE FUEL, BUT IT WAS TOO SMALL FOR THE LAB TO ANALYZE. THE LAB TECHNICIAN SAID THE CONTAMINATES COULD BE MO-GAS, JET FUEL, OR ENGINE OIL. THE CONTAMINATE DID NOT SHOW UP ON THE TEST UNTIL 97% OF THE FUEL SAMPLE WAS TESTED. A SAMPLE WAS ALSO TAKEN FROM A CONTROLLED DISTRIBUTOR'S DELIVERY SAMPLE, AT THE SALT LAKE CITY CHEVRON REFINERY OF A RECENT BATCH OF 100 LOW LEAD, THOSE RESULTS WERE VERY SIMILAR TO THE SAMPLE IN QUESTION. ON 02/11/99 INSPECTOR FLOYED LANDON, FROM THE SALT LAKE CITY FSDO, REVIEWED THE FUELING DOCUMENTS OF WESTERN AIR SERVICES. THE FINDINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE AVGAS FUEL TRUCK WAS INSPECTED ON 01/16/99 THE DAY OF THE OCCURRENCE. THE FUEL SHIPMENT IN ICES HOLDING TANK. THERE WAS A SERVICEABLE HYDROMETER (USED FOR CHECKING SEPECIFIC GRAVITY OF FUEL BEING DELIVERED) AT THE COMPANY. FILTERS ON THE AVGAS FUEL FARM WERE CHANGED ON 04/25/98. THE JET FUEL TRUCK HAS THE REQUIRED DUCK BILL NOZZLE ON THE SERVING HOSE TO PREVENT SERVICING GASOLINE ENGINES WITH JET FUEL.THE FUEL FARM IS NOT SET UP FOR BOTTOM LOADING OF FUEL INTO THE TRUCKS. THE FUEL IS TRANSFERRED FROM THE FUEL FARM TO THE TRUCK BY MEANS OF A HOSE AND THE TRUCK IS FILLED FROM THE TOP. THE FUEL FARM IS NOT CHECKED ON A DAILY BASIS BUT ONLY WHEN FUEL IS TRANSFERED FROM THE FARM TO THE TRUCK. THE FUEL FARM ALONG WITH THE TRUCK WERE IN SERVICEABLE CONDITION. THERE ARE TWO TRUCKS AT THE FBO ONE LARGE (JET TRUCK) AND A SMALL (100 LOW LEAD TRUCK) I SPOKE TO ALL PARTIES, BY TELEPHONE, AND ASKED THEM TO DESCRIBE THE TRUCK THAT FUELED THEIR AIRCRAFT. MR. MEYERS AND MR. HALVERSON DESCRIBED THE TRUCK AS BEING SMALL AND TYPICAL OF AN FBO. MR. MADER WAS NOT SURE OF THE SIZE OR WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE. N6272A AND N9626Y WERE BOTH REFUELED AT APPROXIMATELY 1230. N9267Y DEPARTED ST. GEORGE AND EXPERIENCED A COMPLETE ENGINE FAILURE AND WAS ABLE TO RETURN TO THE FIELD. AFTER N9267Y LANDED FUEL SAMPLE WAS TAKEN. A FUEL SAMPLE WAS ALSO TAKEN AT THE SAME TIME FROM N9267Y.ACCORDING TO PILOTS STATEMENT OF N6272A "WE NOTICED WHAT APPEARED TO BE A FINE "OILY" FILM IN THE CONTAINER INTO WHICH WE HAD PUT THE GAS, FROM EACH AIRCRAFT. A LIST OF THE OTHER AIRCRAFT THAT WERE FUELED ON THE SAME DAY WAS OBTAINED FROM WESTERN AIR SERVICES. ALL THE AIRCRAFT THAT WERE FUELED ON 01/16/99 WERE FUELED BETWEEN 1000 AND 1645. AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO CONTACT THE OWNERS OF THE OTHER AIRCRAFT. ONLY TWO COULD BE CONTACTED. THE RESULTS OF MY INTERVIEWS ARE AS FOLLOWS: N1422E AIRCRAFT WAS REFUELED AT 1355. OWNER EXPLAINED THAT HE ALWAYS SUMPS HIS AIRCRAFT AFTER EACH REFUEL. HE WENT ON TO EXPLAIN THAT THE FUEL, THAT HE DRAINED FROM THE AIRCRAFT SUMPS, SMELLED LIKE OIL. FURTHERMORE, THE PILOT EXPLAINED THAT HE HAS FLOWN APPROXIMATELY 3 HOURS SINCE THE AIRCRAFT WAS REFUELED, WITH NO PROBLEMS. N5090B AIRCRAFT WAS REFUELED AT 1405. THE PILOT EXPLAINED THAT HE HAS HAD NO PROBLEMS SINCE HIS AIRCRAFT WAS REFUELED. THE INVESTIGATION HAS REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: ALL INSPECTION RECORDS AT WESTERN AIR SERVICES WERE IN ORDER. CONTAMINANTS WERE FOUND IN A FUEL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM AN AIRCRAFT THAT WAS FUELED AFTER THE THREE AIRCRAFT IN QUESTION. HOWEVER, THE CONTAMINANTS WERE TOO SMALL FOR LAB ANALYSIS. ## Other reports on N6272A (1) Matched to the same aircraft by N-number and date. - [Accident 19980524010779A](https://openairdocs.org/incident/19980524010779A), May 24, 1998: Amtr WAGARO2+2 (N6272A), Hurricane, UT, Substantial damage. Engine quit on downwind. Nosed over landing off airport. Damaged vertical stablizer. (.4)the pilot was practicing touch-and-go landings. While on downwind, the… From the FAA Accident/Incident Data System. Reports are matched to registry aircraft by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry's history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model. For accidents, the NTSB's own investigation is the fuller record. --- OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.