If you read the law it says that the issued EX numbers are valid for the issuant (the person/organization issued to) and to any assignees (persons/organization that may acquire the original). DOT's states that they DO NOT issue name corrections. They simply rely on the documentation that the assignee legal acquired the EX number.
How is Jerry expected to get the EX document updated if DOT does not perform that function?
Bob
Assuming the lawsuite is sucessful, you are correct. (I know - as usual) Meanwhile, TRA & NAR aren't abuot to stick their necks out.
Phil
Phil Stein
Someone the insurance company can sue when the motor fails. Is that hard to get? If I'm living in a van down by the river, they would have a difficult time locating me.
What other "cottage industry" vendors under go a certification with an insured organization?
We're back to "do you feel I should be able to make motors in a van, down by the river and be able to certify them?". If you do, what is the point of certification?
ANYONE completing the proper paperwork can be certified. Individuals not wanting to be certified try to make it sound more difficult than it really is.
Joel. phx
Got me. Ask TMT. I also know that Fred Wallace is familiar with this. Maybe he can clarify this.
Phil Stein
Phil Stein
I even tried to appease TRA by asking for such a thing from DOT 3 times. Ignored. No we all know why.
But then TRA also refused to accept the original DOT papers, the county statement a business license is not required, the ATF allowing me to NOT log propellants into a magazine or permit (which at the time I actually got to appease TRA), and even the CSFM permit!
They made VERBAL REPRESENTATIONS why each was somehow invalid. I asked for it in writing of course (because each excuse was soo weak), which they refused.
Jerry
Jerry,
Are you saying that no one said this or what they said is false? Google can prove it's been said.
Phil
I already replied to this in a prior thread. This is a proven non issue.
David,
Are you a TRA member? If so, post this question to the TRA Listserv & a BoD member will address it.
I can tell you that they claim there is no conspiracy against Jerry & if he complies with the same rules as everyone else, he will be certified.
Phil Ste>
Phil Stein
I said something entirely different. I know it is a menu. I provided proof a license was not needed as my license and provided a copy of a hazmat permit as the "alleged proof of address".
Nothing I submitted was ever approved. Not one single element, much less
4 of the 6 or so I submitted. Don't you get it? They had NO INTENTION of processing this application fairly.Jerry
submitted
submitted
submitted
I forget if I submitted this, but it existed
I submitted and it specifically allowed motors
submitted
You left out ATF submitted State permit submitted DOT submitted
:)
You are correct. This one of the you need 3 out of 9 requirements listed in TMT 2-2.1. I don't think Jerry has a problem with this.
Phil Stein
Despite this? :
I said something entirely different. I know it is a menu. I provided proof a license was not needed as my license and provided a copy of a hazmat permit as the "alleged proof of address".
Nothing I submitted was ever approved. Not one single element, much less
4 of the 6 or so I submitted. Don't you get it? They had NO INTENTION of processing this application fairly.Jerry
submitted
submitted
submitted
I forget if I submitted this, but it existed
I submitted and it specifically allowed motors
submitted
You left out ATF submitted State permit submitted DOT submitted
:)
Post this in FULL on the TRA listserv.
Perfect. So he can create a folder, put all the appropriate documentation (including evidence of who actually owns what) for the world to see and submit a motor to TMT. If they refuse then there should be a letter in said folder requesting the precise reason for certification denial and a draft from the lawer indicating that action will be taken. Would it take 5 years to do that if it were you? Hmmmm.
Joel. phx
Not if it is registered with any state DMV.
This post is so disingenuous as to be silly.
USR (or its OEM) had more compliance than errortech at the time. It was actually following the ATF regs (as now proven in a NAR/TRA lawsuit) and actually had a hazmat emergency plan in place and filed with the county that it never had to implement!
That is not a van on the river. It was the most investigated and inspected motor facility on the planet (according to FD, Hazmat, ATF, DOT).
It seems they kept getting calls from members and leaders and vendors of some silly little club that refused to list the motors and decerrtified the ones that were PROPERLY LISTED.
"Assuming the lawsuite is sucessful, you are correct. (I know - as usual)"
- Phil Stein
I not only did that, I put it on the internet!!! TRA received pressure from members to read and process it which was promptly ignored. I even went to Phoenix to meet with Mark Clark, fired motors on a test stand andin rockets right in front of him and asked if he would accept the motors for certification in light of the internet submission of all documents and the obvious proper function of the motors. He said no.
That ended that as far as I am concerned. The answer was VERY clear.
It is fair to say nobody on the planet has put even 1/10 as much effort into getting certified by TRA as Jerry Irvine. TRA012
That is precisely what they refused to do to avoid accountability for their actions.
We all know how accountable TRA is !!! :)
AP is not on the list of regulated explosives. Nor aluminum and I can't imagine the binders would be,..
Joel. phx
Why do you keep asking that here? Write the TMT and ask.
Joel. phx
Yes, it is. It sounds like pure FUD to me.
Was this "requirement to have certification policies that give them someone to sue" made a specific condition by the insurance companies when NAR/TRA applied for insurance? Can you point to any assertion of this situation (in official form), or is this just conjecture?
-dave w
Ray,
This thread has gotten to long for me too bother tracing back, but it wasn't Jerry who claimed it. Someone said "Jerry, you just need to do these three things", with one of them being having a business license. A later poster pointed out what you have pointed out here, and I agreed that I have no problem with this concept.
David Erbas-White
RayDunak>David E-W. wrote:
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.