You seem to be in error TRA is in compliance with 1125 as regards Kosdon. According to the state Fire marshal himself Franklin Kosdon aka Kosdon TRM is not licensed for ANY consumer motors whatsoever.
Please reread what I wrote.
Furthermore the DOT listing show Kosdon has a single 1.3C approval which he has gotten a SP10996 exemption to ship as 1.4C, and ONLY from his home address in Ventura, CA. He has not shown individual article approvals for any reloads above 30g. He has not shown Substance approvals for anything other than ONE formula.
Mr. Holmes of TRA at LDRS-29 stated in a formal announcement that he took reloads from and for Kosdon to (AZ?) for TRA TMT testing.
DOT-SP 10996 permits are issued to individuals or businesses for "in commerce" transportation. Provided that the person using the permit is trained in Hazmat shipping, the permit can be used by the individual from any location.
Transportation by an individual is not "in commerce" transportation so DOT is not involved unless the quantities transported are extremely high.
He did this not only without the required CSFM permits, but without the required DOT permits or packaging. Now since I have no intention of trying to seek a resolution on these matters I will not even raise these comments to the level of an allegation, however bald. I will simply say that the principals themselves have stated this is what happened, and what permits if any that were required are up to the respective agencies to parse. I for one wish for gross lenience.
However the point I raised initially was ethics. Had these same motors been submitted to NAR S&T, they would have asked they be shipped to the test point or person, properly packaged, by whatever carrier or person might be legal.
If I ever venture into the shark infested waters of consumer motors again, that's what I will do and I will probably make sure there is HD video of it happening to assure everybody knows it happened exactly as reported.
I noted in my LDRS article how Kosdon did it. Holmes noted in his TRA listserve post how he did it.
As is sometimes said in other venues, "I report, you decide".
In any case my solution is not attacks and enforcements and dime droppage as is the Kosdon mantra, but to suggest the more respected of the two clubs take over the function by mutually agreed treaty.
It is a political solution to a sticky political problem with actual enforcement reprocussions pending as we speak. That will happen entirely independently of this internet chat.
Jerry
There are roughly 6,000 hobbyists in the US who care enough about hobby rocketry to be members of a National rocketry organization: NAR, TMT or both. (In round numbers, NAR membership is ~5,000, TRA ~3,000 and ~40% of NAR members belong to TRA.)
There isn't a great difference between the two organizations, but if I were to broadly generalize any distinctions, IMO NAR emphasizes skills and TRA emphasizes thrills. NAR has a strong model rocket program aimed at bringing youth into the hobby through skill development programs such as NARTREK, TARC and NAR Level A and B competitions. TRA emphasizes high power rocketry for adults, and amateur rocketry labeled as Research. Both organizations have a role in keeping rocketry viable as a hobby, and fully 1/3 of the serious hobbyists belong to both organizations.
The only way our hobby can survive is to have safe commercial rocket motors readily accessible to the public without undo restrictions. To insure a constant supply of safe commercial hobby rocket motors, NAR instituted S&T and TRA instituted TMT. Our hobby rocket motor certifications for performance and safety are accepted by, and meet governmental and insurance industry standards. This permits rocketry enthusiasts to have a constant supply of safe commercial rocket motors available at affordable prices.
S&T is chartered by the NAR by-laws and reports to NAR BOT, and ultimately to the NAR President. TMT is chartered by the TRA by-laws and reports to TRA BOD and ultimately to the TRA President. Both organizations are recognized by NFPA and the civil AHJ as experts in the field and perform hobby rocket motor certifications as specified in sections 7 and 8 of NFPA 1125, motor testing. In the simplest of terms, the role of S&T and TMT are to affirm that the labeling and markings on a small sample of motor submitted for certification testing are accurate, and that the instructions provided with the motors give sufficient information for safe operation.
All other aspects of compliance to NFPA 1125 is the legal responsibility of the commercial motor manufacturer, not the volunteer certifying group. The manufacturer is legally responsible to meet all local, state and federal business requirements, and to perform routine QC testing of their products so that they perform in the same manner as the motors they submitted for certification.
Certifying groups are not policemen or law enforcers. We require that a motor manufacturer affirm that they are in compliance with all the other aspects of 1125, however we lack the legal authority to inspect facilities, or the financial resources to perform detailed business investigations. If we obtain contradictory information, we investigate it within our abilities. If we fall short, the organization presidents have the ultimate authority to correct any oversights that may have been made.
Making wild speculations, accusations, and inflammatory remarks here won't resolve anything. If you have a problem with certification testing, please take the fight outside, and address your concerns directly to Trip Barber, President of NAR and Terry McCreary, President of TRA.
If you have questions concerning the legality of any hobby rocketry enterprises, please refer them to the appropriate AHJ. I'm sure they'll listen to you.
Bob
