NFPA 112? Questions

I guess ads in HPR Magazine don't count then...

they only count if you actually get a issue of HPR.....heheheheh

shockie B)

If you snip all of the opinon and speculation you get useful info:

Jerry

I have a genuine concern (with both NAR and TRA) if they are overstepping their boundaries and acting as law-enforcement agencies..

other than Jerry, what examples can you provide that they are acting as a law enforcement agency? Now please don't jump down my throat here David, I too have some concerns that the NAR/TRA may be acting as a quasi-enforcemnet agency in some of their decisions....Lets get out into the open what we as NAR members perceive they are doing in this area?

shockie B)

In brief:

My interest in this started a couple of days ago when I got my NAR renewal (research previous threads) where you are REQUIRED to sign a pledge that ALL sport rocketry that you conduct will be conducted under NAR rules. As one simple example, this would mean you could be kicked out of NAR for firing an A10-0T after January 1st.

In regards to that specific issue, I've been in contact with NAR board members, and am satisfied that the issue is being discussed and will be corrected. If this does not occur, rest assured I will raise the subject again.

The above item led me to 'comment' upon other areas that TRA/NAR 'may' be overstepping what I perceive to be their boundaries of enforcement. But, I'm asking questions for clarification. I don't know if TRA/NAR are, in fact, overstepping their bounds in these regards, but in areas where it seems to me that they MAY be, I'd like to find out.

David Erbas-White

shockwaveriderz wrote:

PADS are exempt to you...the BATFE position is that PADS aren't exempt.. actually the BATFE position is that even if it is a PAD, the APCP propellant in the PAD is explosive and therefore not exempt...

shockie b)

Fuck "them" (who you cannot point to with specifics).

The LAW and the COURTS are all that matter.

Jerry

Phil Stein

I said 3 things for brevity but also menttioned where to look for the details. Jerry doesn't get special treatment it can be any 3 out of the list of 9.

Phil Stein

Phil Stein

well let me see if I can compose my thoughts on this subject..

As I stated before, the NAR is in a unique position within our hobby. They sit on the NFPA Pyro committee that create the NFPA codes that are then subsequently adopted into law by the states. How did this come about? Well you need to thank G.Harry Stine.....Mr. Stine realized back in the late 1960's that unless some way was found to get a "model" model rocket code/law into each state, we would end up with 50 different state laws regarding model rocketry. And you can imagine what a mess that would be today.... Take a look at the State specific laws regarding model rocketry in California, Rhode island and New Jersey as a sample......

Some can argue and will argue that in this same time frame, when Model Rocketry and the Manned Space program was at its zenith, that perhaps Mr. Stine should have pushed for a Federal Law...but that's all lost to history and moot now....

So Mr. Stine realized that the NFPA codes would become adopted by the various state legislatures which was a "back door" means to get a common model rocket law into all the states. Hence in 1968 NFPA 41-L Code for Model Rockets was born.

The question before us is what, if any enforcement powers does the NAR have over individual members, dealers and or manufactories? Well the only "enforcement power" that the NFPA codes provide to the NAR, the TRA or any other AHJ, that I can find, is that they can certify rocket motors per the NFPA 1125 codes.

The only enforcement powers that the NAR has are those written into its bylaws and they concern individual member actions....for example, violating the model rocket safety code .......

The better question might be, "Why did the NAR/TRA write NFPA 1125 in the

1st place?" Because they wanted to codify a set of rules,regulations and requirements for potential motor manufacturers to follow, IF, said manufacturer wanted to have their product, i.e. rocket motors, certified for use by their respective organizations.

I look at the NAR/TRA/CAR certification of rocket motors as being akin to either the Good Housekeeping seal of approval or the Underwriters Laboratory seal.... They basically certify minimum requirements to ensure a safe product for the end users of such products. And if you don't meat the minimum standards as described in NFPA 1125 you will not get the coveted NAR certification designation.

Alot of people think incorrectly(from my POV) that the NFPA codes, especially NFPA 1125 only apply to the potential motor manufacturers...My interpretation of NFPA 1125 is that it also applies to the NAR/TRA in how they must behave and deal with manufacturers per motor certification. In other words, I see no language in NFPA 1125 that allows the NAR/TRA to add or subtract or modify any of the motor certification requirements in NFPA

1125. If they were allowed to do so, then they would themselves be in violation of NFPA 1125. They are as bound to follow NFPA 1125 as any motor manufacturer is bound to follow NFPA 1125. This, in essence, is why NFPA 1125 was originally written: to provide a level playing field for both the NAR and the motor manufacturer to interact with one another in the motor certification area. I also do not see any language within NFPA 1125 that's provides for the NAR/TRA to "certify" that a potential motor manufacturer is in compliance with NFPA 1125. If the NAR/TRA does not think a motor manufacturer is not adhering to the requirements of NFPA 1125 and NFPA 1125 is State Law, then the NAR/TRA should contact said state and allow them to determine what if any enforcement actions need to be taken. Once NFPA 1125 becomes a state law in a specific state, it is not up to the NAR/TRA any longer to determine if a motor manufacturer is in compliance, it is the states responsibility. I don't see any language where states have given the NAR/TRA any authority to enforce any state laws........

Imagine the chaos that would result if motor manufacturer A was allowed to adhere to some of NFPA 1125, while manufacturer B was forced to adhere to NFPA 1125 and addition requirements not in code? These additional requirements could then be construed appropriately as "arbitrary" and designed to present insurmountable obstacles for manufacturer B to scale in order for him/her to get his motors certified properly. In other words, the NAR must have a common set of requirements for the potential motor manufacturer to adhere to.

shockie B)

quasi-enforcemnet

Yes. The TMT documents take precedence over Ray.

Phil

Phil Stein

Thanks for your reply.

In my opinion, no organization is inclined to answer to non members. If you want to have a voice in an organization, you must join it.

I've asked many of the questions we are discussing here. The answer I got to the legal authority statement is that if TRA knowingly allowed members to do something illegal, then they could be held criminally liable. Also, as far as EX Numbers go, I've been told that is something is shiped improperly, both the sender & receiver can be held liable.

Again - this is what I've been told these are not my policies or descisions.

Phil Stein

Phil Stein

Of course. I try to keep my ears open and an open mind, but that doesn't mean I'm spokesman for any group. The only possible answer is to write the TMT and get your "official form" which would only be obtainable from,.... them. Anything posted here by anyone could only be considered 'questionable'.

Joel. phx

Actually the best Gov document that I've seen was a commented version of the DO178B. For each requirement, there was a paragraph or 2 of supporting statement. Why it was felt necessary. Wish that was required of ALL documentation,...

At least SOMEONE got it!

Joel. phx

God rest his soul.

This should be in the FAQ.

I discovered that having more than 3 disqualified me as well.

Jerry

Bend over.

The only way to assure this is to never receive shipments from new vendors as you would be running a risk a new supplier might do something wrong.

Also a discharged member vendor might do revenge on you by shipping you something illegal on purpose (in total disregard for his own consequences of course).

So this way the irrational among the TRA board and TMT committee can justify never even considering a submission from "some vendors" even if they have seen a valid EX paper that never expires and is designed specifically to be recognized and accepted ON ITS FACE.

The clear and obvious violation of NFPA-1125 is of course to be ignored.

Jerry

Now be fair. Someone has posted the list of magazines they've received and it's considerably more than one would have expected last year.

Joel. phx

Dave W. wrote: