Quantcast

05/18/2009 Joint Statement from Trip Barber & Ken Good

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

troj

Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potent
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
13,962
Reaction score
187
Joint Statement on the BATFE Litigation
May 18, 2009

Since the U. S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms & Explosives has not appealed the decision of the Federal District Court of March 16, 2009, which ordered the agency to vacate their classification of APCP as an explosive, and the period for their ability to do so has expired as of May 16, 2009, on advice of counsel, we believe that the judgment is considered final although we have not received confirmation from BATFE. Accordingly, members may operate under the understanding that APCP rocket motors are no longer regulated as an explosive material by BATFE, and no longer require the permits formerly required by the agency to buy, sell, or possess such motors.

Members possessing a LEUP are advised that they should evaluate their individual situation based upon whether they possess (or plan to possess) and store materials that are still considered regulated by BATFE. While APCP rocket motors are now no longer regulated under the requirements of the "Orange Book" and are not subject to requiring a LEUP, other materials may be subject to these requirements.

Members are also reminded that both TRA and NAR safety codes stipulate what motors they may possess, depending on their level of flyer certification. These rules still apply to our members. We likewise strongly encourage vendors of hobby rocket motors to continue to work cooperatively with the rocketry community to only sell rocket motors to customers who possess flyer certifications commensurate with the motors they wish to purchase. Ensuring we maintain our strong level of self-regulation will be an essential element in our ability to retain this freedom from overregulation by outside agencies.

Members should immediately contact the leadership of TRA or NAR should they encounter situations where any BATFE personnel conduct themselves in a manner inconsistent with the final judgment of the Federal District Court.

Ken Good
TRA President

Trip Barber
NAR President
 

Microspeed

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
At last!

So, does "we believe that the judgment is considered final although we have not received confirmation from BATFE" mean that it's still almost official?
 
Last edited:

troj

Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potent
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
13,962
Reaction score
187
So, does "we believe that the judgment is considered final although we have not received confirmation from BATFE" mean that it's still almost official?
It means the legal team is telling us that, by law, it's official. The BATFE just hasn't admitted as much.

-Kevin
 

Ez2cDave

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,763
Reaction score
1,000
The real test is yet to come . . .

(1) Are all of the manufacturers and dealers now freely selling APCP motors and reloads without requiring the LEUP, including CESARONI (Canada) ?

(2) What will a BATFE inspector do when he comes to the house of a LEUP holder to check up on items that are still "regulated" (Commercially-produced E-Matches, like OXRAL, for example) and the LEUP holder has APCP reloads lying around, NOT in the magazine ?

Just some thoughts . . .

Dave F.
 

w9ya

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
It was "official" when the decision was handed down (over) two months ago. Since then it has been a legal-style game of chicken between whether the vendors would sell motors with 'wild abandon' and give the BATFE some new reasons for an appeal WITH a stay on the "official" ruling that is now "final". i.e. Nothing was going on so the BATFE was successfully flanked.

Anyways, that my take on things. YMMV .
 

w9ya

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
The real test is yet to come . . .

SNIPPED !!

(2) What will a BATFE inspector do when he comes to the house of a LEUP holder to check up on items that are still "regulated" (Commercially-produced E-Matches, like OXRAL, for example) and the LEUP holder has APCP reloads lying around, NOT in the magazine ?

Just some thoughts . . .

Dave F.
This is the very best reason to NOT have an LEUP. With no LEUP there is no danger of inspections on stuff you can (NOW) legally buy and own without inspection from 'da feds'. Well at least there is no danger from inspections conducted in accordance with regulations now "vacated" with the court ruling of March 16th.
 
Last edited:

Art Upton

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
1,755
Reaction score
2
This is very good news.

This is great now that this ruling will also have an huge effect on Rocketry
manufactures and vendors who now for years have seen sales lower then before the easy access scare of 2003 that became even lower with the closing of easy access in Oct 2006.

HPR kit sales slumped, as the diehards in HPR tend to scratch build and the
dabblers that bought kits no longer could get motors to fly them; so many
dabblers left the hobby.

This ruling will enhance NAR memberships, enhance the pool of hobbyists, and in course enhance the sales of manufactures and dealers; who without we would have very little of a hobby. This enhancement hopefully will also spur on new products, new motors, etc...

Easy access to fly in Model Airplanes sure enhanced the hobby and the huge
amount of new R/C products in the past 6 years.

I believe this will be the second renaissance of the HPR hobby just as the
ModRoc side of our hobby got a huge renaissance with all the additional ModRoc kit manufactures that came on board in the last 6 years.

I predict we will see more new folks at launches now that they can get H motors without jumping through all sorts of hoops
 

quickburst

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
1,681
Reaction score
23
The real test is yet to come . . .

(1) Are all of the manufacturers and dealers now freely selling APCP motors and reloads without requiring the LEUP, including CESARONI (Canada) ?

(2) What will a BATFE inspector do when he comes to the house of a LEUP holder to check up on items that are still "regulated" (Commercially-produced E-Matches, like OXRAL, for example) and the LEUP holder has APCP reloads lying around, NOT in the magazine ?

Just some thoughts . . .

Dave F.
(1) Are all of the manufacturers and dealers now freely selling APCP motors and reloads without requiring the LEUP, including CESARONI (Canada) ?

Maybe CTI will chime in, I can't speak for others, QuickBurst will sell according to the law, starting today.

(2) What will a BATFE inspector do when he comes to the house of a LEUP holder to check up on items that are still "regulated" (Commercially-produced E-Matches, like OXRAL, for example) and the LEUP holder has APCP reloads lying around, NOT in the magazine ?

He/She will inspect your magazine/records for regulated materials. They will ignore unregulated material.

Igniters and black powder are still regulated.

FYI
E-Matches are classified as igniters by DOT, I'm sure the ATF sees them as one and the same.
 

DAllen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,772
Reaction score
715
LET THE GOLDEN AGE OF ROCKETRY BEGIN.

-Dave
 

kelltym88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
6
Will this ruling affect shipping costs? Will there still be hazmat fees on motors above 62.5 grams?

Great news by the way. We should all meet in Texas to celebrate. Can you imagine, thousands of rocketeers from all over the country...
 

troj

Wielder Of the Skillet Of Harsh Discipline, Potent
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
13,962
Reaction score
187
Will this ruling affect shipping costs?
No

Will there still be hazmat fees on motors above 62.5 grams?
Yes. DOT has procedures in place that they follow -- the manufacturer ships the materials to one of a few approved labs, the labs do testing, results are submitted to DOT, and DOT classifies it for shipping, accordingly.

-Kevin
 

Reed Goodwin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
2,110
Reaction score
0
Hooray! Well, this was issued close enough, so it'll be my early birthday present. And what a present!
Reed
 

tquigg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
772
Reaction score
0
No



Yes. DOT has procedures in place that they follow -- the manufacturer ships the materials to one of a few approved labs, the labs do testing, results are submitted to DOT, and DOT classifies it for shipping, accordingly.

-Kevin
Could we see the return of "Easy Access" again? :blush:
 

MarkM

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
2,197
Reaction score
1
Could we see the return of "Easy Access" again? :blush:
There's no need. "Easy Access" allowed purchase of up to 38mm J motors (at least J350 size) withoiut a LEUP. That's moot now. There was still hazmat shipping on those motors.
 

tquigg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
772
Reaction score
0
There's no need. "Easy Access" allowed purchase of up to 38mm J motors (at least J350 size) withoiut a LEUP. That's moot now. There was still hazmat shipping on those motors.
Thanks for the clarification Mark.
 
Top