anyone see this? ATF trying to say motorsa are not PADs

saw this in a listserv, was wondering if this is new or not.....
From the ATF web site:
formatting link

(on page 19 of 45)
1892. COMMERCE IN EXPLOSIVES - AMENDED DEFINITION OF PROPELLANT ACTUATED
DEVICE
Priority: Other
Significant Legal Authority: 18 USC 847
CFR Citation: 27 CFR 555
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Justice is proposing to amend the regulations of
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to clarify
that the term "propellant
actuated device" does not include hobby rocket motors or rocket-motor reload
kits consisting of or containing ammonium perchlorate composite propellant
(APCP), black powder, or other similar low explosives. Timetable: Action
Date FR Cite NPRM 05/00/05"
Reply to
tater schuld
Loading thread data ...
The first word of this was in the BATFE's November status filing with the court. They claim to have submitted this NRPM for internal review by the Department of Justice and Office of Management and Budget last April.
I am very curious to see how they word this to exclude our favorite rocket motors but include the rocket motors in emergency parachute systems.
tater schuld wrote:
Reply to
David Schultz
Simple, they could word it like this: ----------------------- ----------------------- ----------------------- bullocks, I just censored my post due to the effect it might have, what was I thinking, I must be a mad mun.
back to my bitters.
Reply to
AlMax
Remember all those many times I said ATF will conform the regulations to the actions of TRA and ATF WRT requiring ATF permits for sport rocket motors?
I told you so.
Jerry
1892. COMMERCE IN EXPLOSIVES? AMENDED DEFINITION OF PROPELLANT ACTUATED DEVICE Priority: Other Significant Legal Authority: 18 USC 847 CFR Citation: 27 CFR 555 Legal Deadline: None Abstract: The Department of Justice is proposing to amend the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to clarify that the term ??propellant actuated device¹¹ does not include hobby rocket motors or rocket-motor reload kits consisting of or containing ammonium perchlorate composite propellant (APCP), black powder, or other similar low explosives. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 05/00/05 Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Government Levels Affected: None Agency Contact: James P. Ficaretta, Program Manager, Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 650 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20226 Phone: 202 927­8203 RIN: 1140­AA24
1894. COMMERCE IN EXPLOSIVES? EXPLOSIVE PEST CONTROL DEVICES Priority: Substantive, Nonsignificant Legal Authority: 18 USC 847 CFR Citation: 27 CFR 555 Legal Deadline: None Abstract: ATF is proposing to amend the explosive regulations to provide a limited exemption from the requirements of part 555 for wildlife pest control devices that are used for agricultural and other pest control operations. Timetable: Action Date FR Cite NPRM 01/29/03 68 FR 4402 NPRM Comment Period End 02/28/03 Final Action 04/00/05 Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No Small Entities Affected: No Government Levels Affected: None Additional Information: Transferred from RIN 1512-AC80 Agency Contact: James Ficaretta, Program Manager, Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 650 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20226 Phone: 202 927­8203 RIN: 1140­AA03
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Questes could care less of course as their BP rocket motors will all be below the ATF's 62.5 gram PAD definition limit.....This PAD redefinition is just another tightening of the ATF noose, with regards to anything that is not a model rocket motor.... in NPRM 968 the ATF also redefined the TPD definition Toy Propellant Devices..... to exclude the original model rocket motors definition..... Its clear what they seek and were they are headed: model rocket motors will be those as defined already in NFPA, CSPC,DOT,etc........We screwed ourselves royally with the new DOT model rocket definitions circa 94-96? If only the NAR/TRA had the foresight to also define large and high power rocket motors then and there too... I'm curious to see how long it will be before the ATF lights a fire under the FAA and they get into the ACT of redefining(defining?) what a model rocket motor is and is not....of cousre while the FAA does its NPRM, it will restrict flights to model rocket ONLY.....for safety considerations.....then of course all the federal regulations regarding model rocket motorss will be in sync....anything greater than 62.5 SU will require a leup.....but thats what the NAR/TRA has been telling us to get anyway......
shockie B)
Reply to
shockwaveriderz
formatting link
case number 00-273
"In addition, ATF has commenced rulemaking with respect to the regulatory definition of the term ?propellant actuated device? (?PAD?). ATF forwarded a draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (?NPRM?) regarding the PAD definition to the Department of Justice on or about April 16, 2004. ATF estimates that this NPRM should be published in the Federal Registered on or around May 2005."
The only names on the document are lawyers:
I am trying to post this document to al.binaries.models.rockets but I am running into my old problems with earthlink block attachments. Custumer support is being non-supportive. :-)
Reply to
David Schultz
I told them so!!!!!!!
Conforming to general practice.
I told you so!!!
Care to listen to, and implement, my specific club rule change proposals now??????
Just Jerry
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
I only sell inert products now. I surrendered the 95% of lone rangers TRA and AT and Magnum and NAR royally screwed.
I do "other things" now.
I got a life.
Jerry TRA #00012
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
I am perfectly willing to lead (dictate) a joint TRA/NAR "tiger team" to change internal club rules as a tactic of defense (in addition to legal manuvers).
What are my chances? I did pioneer HPR AND LMR itself.
Jerry
Ego prevails over logic in rocketry, hence my tag line on EVERY post I EVER make.
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
blather.
How was the earthquake at the epicenter Brian?
How is the flood?
Still have people at Lytle Creek? 19 inches rain in 2 days and stuck for 13 days?
They need a friggin' bridge.
Jerry
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
All the other BS aside. All of you, good luck and take care of yourselves. Mother nature seems to be reminding us again how small and insignificant we and our endeavors are, in the overall scheme of things.
Fred
Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace
No doubt. Feel for you folks that got flooded out on the left coast. Happened to me big time in '87. Lost 99% of everything I owned including my complete rocket collection. Motors(FSI and Crown) too ;/
Ironicly here in MN I haven't had to shovel the driveway yet and I up until today still was seeing grass.
Things will dry up eventually.....
Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75
Reply to
the notorious t-e-d

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.