Narrative:

While on the arrival procedure north of waypoint; we noticed 'engine #1 fuel' annunciator. We flew the aircraft and conducted the manufacturer's checklist. Engine #1 remained at a reduced power setting with annunciator extinguished and no engine malfunctions. While established on the localizer for runway 6 at ZZZ1; we noticed 'engine #2 fuel' annunciator. We flew the aircraft and immediately declared an emergency to receive the assistance of ATC and rescue/recovery vehicles. Approach control directed us to runway 4L at ZZZ. We made an uneventful landing on runway 4L at ZZZ. We made the safest; logical; educated; conservative decision to land at ZZZ for the following reasons: 1) closest airport. 2) length of runway and elimination of low altitude circling procedure. 3) amount of safety; rescue; recovery vehicles. Contributing factors (problem): taking a verbal affirmative from FBO to the effect that their dispensing fuel has been tested following hurricane. Suggestions: educating FBO staff on the importance of clean fuel (especially AVGAS) and making crew members an integral part of the FBO/truck fuel sample testing. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the 'fuel' warning annunciation is triggered by either excessive fuel temperature or a fuel filter bypass condition caused by a blockage in the filter. He had a fuel sample and the fuel filters tested. The findings were an unacceptable level of rust in both. The likely source of the rust was from oxidized steel fuel storage containers; either truck tanks or undergnd fuel farm tanks. The testers were unable to speculate as to a specific source. Reporter advised that flight in question originated a day or so after a hurricane impacted the area and had been fueled there prior to departure.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ON DSCNT TO ZZZ1; PLT OF HS125 RECEIVES FUEL FILTER BYPASS WARNINGS ON BOTH ENGS. DIVERTS TO ZZZ DUE TO SUSPECTED FUEL CONTAMINATION.

Narrative: WHILE ON THE ARR PROC N OF WAYPOINT; WE NOTICED 'ENG #1 FUEL' ANNUNCIATOR. WE FLEW THE ACFT AND CONDUCTED THE MANUFACTURER'S CHKLIST. ENG #1 REMAINED AT A REDUCED PWR SETTING WITH ANNUNCIATOR EXTINGUISHED AND NO ENG MALFUNCTIONS. WHILE ESTABLISHED ON THE LOC FOR RWY 6 AT ZZZ1; WE NOTICED 'ENG #2 FUEL' ANNUNCIATOR. WE FLEW THE ACFT AND IMMEDIATELY DECLARED AN EMER TO RECEIVE THE ASSISTANCE OF ATC AND RESCUE/RECOVERY VEHICLES. APCH CTL DIRECTED US TO RWY 4L AT ZZZ. WE MADE AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG ON RWY 4L AT ZZZ. WE MADE THE SAFEST; LOGICAL; EDUCATED; CONSERVATIVE DECISION TO LAND AT ZZZ FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) CLOSEST ARPT. 2) LENGTH OF RWY AND ELIMINATION OF LOW ALT CIRCLING PROC. 3) AMOUNT OF SAFETY; RESCUE; RECOVERY VEHICLES. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS (PROB): TAKING A VERBAL AFFIRMATIVE FROM FBO TO THE EFFECT THAT THEIR DISPENSING FUEL HAS BEEN TESTED FOLLOWING HURRICANE. SUGGESTIONS: EDUCATING FBO STAFF ON THE IMPORTANCE OF CLEAN FUEL (ESPECIALLY AVGAS) AND MAKING CREW MEMBERS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE FBO/TRUCK FUEL SAMPLE TESTING. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE 'FUEL' WARNING ANNUNCIATION IS TRIGGERED BY EITHER EXCESSIVE FUEL TEMP OR A FUEL FILTER BYPASS CONDITION CAUSED BY A BLOCKAGE IN THE FILTER. HE HAD A FUEL SAMPLE AND THE FUEL FILTERS TESTED. THE FINDINGS WERE AN UNACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF RUST IN BOTH. THE LIKELY SOURCE OF THE RUST WAS FROM OXIDIZED STEEL FUEL STORAGE CONTAINERS; EITHER TRUCK TANKS OR UNDERGND FUEL FARM TANKS. THE TESTERS WERE UNABLE TO SPECULATE AS TO A SPECIFIC SOURCE. RPTR ADVISED THAT FLT IN QUESTION ORIGINATED A DAY OR SO AFTER A HURRICANE IMPACTED THE AREA AND HAD BEEN FUELED THERE PRIOR TO DEP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.