ATFE Anti-rocketry Video

Because they handle the motors? I would venture that the certification for such a situation would be different than a user/flier certification.

Joel. phx

If certification by NAR is required in "some" states but not in others, and you market, package, and distribute a product for 50 states (ie through Wal-mart) then you MUST package it in such a way that it meets the provisions of every state.

Therefore since SOME states require NAR cert per NFPA-1122, such a firm with such a marketing plan "must" NAR certify.

Same also with CA CSFM. If ONE state has an oddball reg, that state's reg must also be complied with.

All that has been done so far is adding NFPA regs that add MORE rules and restrictions than ever existed before, WITHOUT getting rid of the straggler CA. CA sits on the NFPA comittee too!!!!!!

Jerry

Huh? 27 CFR 555.141-a-8

It's not defined. It does not exist other than "fly an H", Certify Level

1, qualified to sell pallets of O's.

in NFPA adoptive states, it is not so easy

see my 2003-12-19 12:53:09 PST post in thread Re: USR vs Aerotech

beginning with "regarding the potential of circumventing TRA/NAR WRT the IBC/NFPA codes"

- iz

they are no hoax. Details have been suppressed to protect the source.

- iz

Joel Corwith wrote:

Hey, that's cool. I like the part where Bob Kaplow is crossed out and Jerry Irvine is written in.

Joel. (just failing to understand what it has to do with the thread)Phx.

The right people believe it. The others can subscribe to HPR for the details :)

Jerry

yes

no, NFPA stipulates that no MR/HPR motors be sold or used other than those motors which have been certified, and for H or higher impulse, only to users which have been certified

in adoptive states, some certifying organization recognized by the AHJ is required to perform these functions

[ see my 2003-12-19 12:53:09 PST post in thread "Re: USR vs Aerotech" ]

membership in any organization is not required, and is not pertinent

[ see my 2003-12-07 15:43:21 PST post in thread "re: NFPA and rocketry" ]

yes, this is accurate

agreed

NAR does not support EX, and the completing a NAR membership application you affirm the following

"I pledge to conduct all my sport rocketry activities in compliance with the NAR Model Rocket Safety Code and the NAR High Power Safety Code."

it is not clear how one can even participate in TRA EX launches, let alone indy launches given this statement. Unless the definition of "sport rocketry" which is inclusive of MR, LMR and HPR somehow allows for a "non-sport rocketry" class of activities which are exempt from NAR oversight. But such a class has no official definitions.

(this is reminiscent of the days when flyers using uncertified motors at indy launches jeopardized their TRA memberships by doing so)

while the Tripoli Research Safety Code states that it does not apply to individuals activities outside of TRA launches,

"1.1.3 This code shall not apply to any group or individual acting on their own, or to individuals who are not engaged in Tripoli Research activities."

in completing a TRA membership application you affirm the following

"I agree to pursue my advanced rocketry activities in conformance with the Association's By-laws and Safety Code"

so it is not clear how one can have activities under which the Safety Code does not apply. This is an inconsistency, IMO.

see my comments immediately above

references:

Tripoli Research Safety Code

TRA membership application NAR membership application

- iz

point!

vendors who require user certification as a condition of sale of HPR motors to customers in non-NFPA adoptive states are effectively blackballing nonmembers of TRA/NAR, as there is no legal basis for them to do so

blackballed

1. To shut out from social or commercial participation; ostracize or boycott.

vendors, are you listening?

- iz

baDBob wrote:

NFPA 1127, 2002 Ed. (excerpted for editorial review)

5.1 Sales Only to Certified Users. A high power rocket motor or motor reloading kit shall be sold to, shipped to, stored by, and used only by certified users.

manufacturers "sell" motors to distributors and vendors, who in turn re-sell them

sell,

1. To exchange ownership for money or its equivalent

the ownership of motors changes hands for money in the transaction between manufacturer and distributor, and distributor and vendor

manufacturers also ship to to distributors and vendors

this would require that a distributor or vendor can recieve only motors up to the level of their own user certification, i.e.; L2 vendors cannot resell M motors.

is this the practice today? Do manufacturers verify cert levels of deistributors, and distrubutors, dealers?

- iz

:)

Joel. phx

then don't "package and distribute a product" for all 50 states

canned beverages are packaged with empty container refund values specific to particular states. This would be no different.

- iz

The only way to find out is for an organization to step forward and ask for recognition as a certifying authority.

Yes, a manufacturer in a state with 1125 would need to contact the state and ask them to certify the motor. That should get the ball rolling nicely.

Of course no one is going to step up to do that, so further discussion is pointless.

Joel. phx

Shock wrote:

Which plaintiffs have you paid off?

I already do that. I am ready to increase business by promoting USR to a

50 state model and I am being excluded from the market by unconscionable acts.

Just Jerry