Re: cost to certify

And that's precisely what TRA/NAR do. ARSA, on the other hand, doesn't want to compete with TRA/NAR. ARSA apparently wants to dismantle TRA/NAR so that ARSA won't have to bother doing any real work to attract members.

That's what you and the other cheapskates keep saying, that you don't want to pay membership fees. So what reason is there to believe that they'd join if we gave out certs for free?

Tough. Starting TRA was also "impractical in the near term", but we did it anyway. Same with NAR. You don't get a free ride.

It is fair. Giving a free ride to deadbeats would not be fair.

No, you have not, because you fail to acknowledge the actual costs of giving away certs to non-members.

Since you believe our corporate model does not work, why do you keep trying to "work" it instead of starting your own org using whatever framework you prefer?

Oh yeah, I forgot -- that would involve actual effort.

Is that like taking your tomcat to the vet?

-dave w

Are you saying he has no balls?

Sorry, Ferrell, but you're deluding yourself if you think that NAR or TRA won't get dragged into court when the lawsuit happens.

When Joe/Bob/Frank/Geoerge/whoever gets certified, then quits the organization, goes out and does something horrendously stupid (drunk, decided to act like an idiot, whatever) and causes serious damage, the lawyers will go after everyone they can. That includes the motor manufacturer, the vendor, the flier, and the organization whose certification allowed them to buy the motor.

In a sane world, the certifying organization won't ultimately be held liable. But they will have to expend thousands of dollars in legal fees that they will NEVER recoup.

-Kevin

YOu have this all figured out. It's time to start your own organization.

(snipped)

How does the PAD exemption have any effect on state law?

Now that you are getting into certification fees, how much of that fee goes to the person who signs as a witness to the certification requirements have been met? This person is clearly at a greater risk of getting sued, than the NAR which only issues the certificate and maintains the list. If there was any liability from fraudulent or inappropriate certification it would almost certainly be that of the witness. Since the witness is at risk of being sued, the witness should get compensation for taking that risk.

Since a certification flight is likely to occur at an NAR launch, I think it is not unreasonable to require the cert candidate to be a NAR/TRA member with insurance at the time of the cert flight. Any additional fee should be small. OTOH, there is no reason that non members could not be certified at other venues, and/or for a higher cert fee.

That depends on what *maintain* a list of certified users is taken to mean. If it is taken to mean the current address and status (e.g active, deceased) of the certified user it could be very expensive. ( just take a look at states that are required by law to maintain a list of registered sex offenders, who are even required to notify authorities of any change of address.) In the case of NAR membership, members are mailed a publication monthly (SR and MR bimonthly) and members are further required to renew with current information annually. In other words, maintaining a current address for members is done "automatically", but this may be an additional maintenance cost for non members. This maintenance cost would still be less that the cost of a junior membership. Regardless, I still think certification of non members and/or continued certification of one time members will be a good thing for sport rocketry.

Hm, well, I'd go for a $12.50 annual subscription to SR! I'm not so keen on the idea of a certificate sufficing. It is not a wallet card that enables you to purchase HPR motors. Rather it is your listing on an official list of certified users maintained by the certifying org. To carry the same authority in a certificate, it would probably at least have to be signed by an authorized NAR officer and notarized.

Alan

| >

| > Yes it does. The name of the thread is "Cost to Certify". One of the first | > things that Farrell mentioned when he started this thread is that it cost | > 62.00 to be a NAR member. So tell me this Iz, if the cost of membership is | > not a factor, then what are you guys complaining about, huh? It has | > everything to do with money. | | $30 more than covers the cost of administrating the certification | | (Ferrell suggested the equivalent of one years dues for a year's | opportunity to successfully complete the certification, which I also | find reasonable) | | there are no recurring costs for non-member certification | | $12.50 annually more than covers the cost of an optional confirmation | subscription, for those non-members who would like to be able to have | their certification confirmed by the issuing org, otherwise the | certificate itself suffices | | no membership dues, no pledge of allegiance, no policies in excess of | regulation | | - iz |

Heck, I'd pay $100 cert for each level and a $20 retest fee if I stepped on my crank during the attempt. It's just that after watching TRA/NAR flailing around the last couple of years, there's no way I'll ever see my way clear to become a member of either org.

p.s. to "Mark" (mburgga1 earthlink.net), re the "vote" thread and your comment to _Renee_ Wheeler's post as well as your multiple posts: You do tend to demonstrate a certain lack of reading comprehension prowess. Maybe every cert should include a basic language usage and comprehension test. . .

I can't speak for anyone else, as I no longer use NCSA Mosaic. Nowadays, I'm an Opera fan, myself....

That being said, I am a current senior member of NAR, high power (L2) certified, and I would continue being a member of NAR *without question*, even if they immediately declared that "from this day forward, HPR flyer certification is perpetual, and doesn't require membership". I get a *lot* of value from NAR, and the HPR certification is only one small part of that value proposition.

I get a darn nice magazine on a regular basis, on time, and filled with interesting articles, reviews, and ads I am interested in.

I get several local clubs that are able to get launch sites by virtue of their affiliation with a well-respected national organization that lends an air of legitimacy to our requests to use public spaces for the purpose of throwing bits of cardboard at the sky.

I get several local clubs that are able to get launch sites by virtue of their affiliation with a well-respected national organization that insures site owners against liability claims should any mishaps occur while we're busy throwing bits of cardboard at the sky.

I get a million dollars of coverage (secondary to my homeowner's coverage, but still nice to have) that insures *me* against liability claims should any mishaps occur while I'm busy throwing bits of cardboard at the sky.

I get a motor-testing service that, by virtue of its mere existence, tends to keep motor manufacturers a bit more honest about labelling their motors with designations that actually reflect the approximate total and average impulse levels of their motors.

I get a "Malfunctioning Engine Statistical Survey" program (MESS) that tracks user-reported motor malfunctions, in order to spot bad manufacturing runs, so that manufacturers can fix problems and end-users can avoid bad batches.

I get local clubs (which were able to get launch sites for the reasons I mentioned above, and which wouldn't exist without those launch sites) that are filled with helpful, friendly folks, always willing to lend a hand to anyone needing one.

I get a well-known national organization, whose name and web site address are inside (or were -- I haven't looked lately) every motor package from the largest motor manufacturer in the industry (Estes), and whose web site has a way for a complete newbie to locate a local club.

All of these benefits are just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could think of lots more if I gave it some effort. But, you can see the point -- NAR offers many benefits beyond HPR flyer certification, and I would gladly support NAR with my hard-earned dollars even if it offered HPR certification to all comers, member or not, and even if it made those certs permanent.

In fact, I think that the availability, through NAR, of a no membership required, lifetime "high power rocketry skills and knowledge certification" card would be such a *good thing* overall, in terms of increasing participation in the hobby, that I would be willing to donate, over and above my yearly membership dues, to a fund dedicated to setting up and maintaining such a program, so that NAR would never have to worry about the hypothetical costs of running such a program for non-members and members alike.

As I willingly donated $100 to the "Save Rocketry Now" fund to produce the commercial that aired during the Discovery Channel "Rocket Challenge" programs, I clearly am willing to put my money where my mouth is when it comes to supporting programs intended to increase participation in this hobby. I firmly believe that permanent user certs, irrespective of membership in NAR or TRA, would help bring in new rocketeers to the hobby, and I'm willing to donate to a fund to help promote the idea and fund running the program under the auspices of the NAR.

While I would be willing to do all of that, on top of remaining a member of NAR, my personal opinion is that it would not be necessary. I firmly believe that lowering the "barriers to entry" into high power rocketry, by making permanent certification available at low cost to all comers, regardless of affiliation, can only serve to increase participation in the hobby.

And, as the saying goes, "a rising tide raises all boats". Increasing the number of people flying rockets overall can only *help* NAR membership nmbers. True, a few "cheapskates" might not renew their NAR memberships if they didn't have to keep them to keep their HPR certifications. However, I am confident that this number would be dwarfed by the number of new members NAR would get as a direct result of growing the hobby as a whole.

As for the certification card itself, I'd make it a nice plastic card, imprinted with the person's full name and date of certification, and bearing a statement such as the following:

"This certification card shall serve as proof that the above-named individual has demonstrated, both by obtaining a passing score on a written test, and by practical skills demonstration, a level of knowledge and competence in handling, storing, and using high power solid-propellant rocket motors and high power rockets. This certification is effective as of the date listed above, and is valid for the lifetime of the person named."

"IMPORTANT NOTE: While the NAR high power certification program is intended to verify that the person certified possesses and is able to demonstrate a certain minimum level of knowledge and skill at the time of certification, it remains that individual's sole responsibility to ensure that all of his or her activities are conducted safely and in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. BY ACCEPTING THIS CARD AS PROOF OF CERTIFICATION STATUS, YOU EXPLICITLY AGREE TO INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ROCKETRY (NAR), ITS AGENTS AND ITS ASSIGNEES, FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS OF LIABILITY ARISING AS A DIRECT OR INDIRECT RESULT OF SAID ACCEPTANCE."

As you can see by my proposed wording, I'm proposing that there be only one certification "level" (or rather, no levels beyond "certified"), and that it require a written test as well as a practical skills demonstration. To insure that the person being crtified is who he or she claims to be, I'd also require that the person administering the written test (or signing off on the skills demonstration paperwork) verify the person's identity against a government-issued photo ID. I believe that these components are necessary and sufficient to meet the legal requirements for a certification program per NFPA 1127.

In line with other certification programs, such as those in the computer industry, I'd suggest charging a minimal fee for each certification attempt, to cover the administrative costs of running the program. Perhaps $20 per written test, with $5 going to the NAR section that administers the test, would suffice. The fee would cover the expense of printing and distributing test materials to the sections, and would also cover the cost of producing and mailing the certification cards. If lost or damaged, replacement cards could be purchased by a certified individual who sends a photocopy of his or her ID (drivers license, passport, or other government-issued photo ID) along with a $10 or $15 charge to cover the time and expense of making up and sending out new cards.

Before I write this up as an email to Mark Bundick for consideration as a proposal at the next NAR BOT meeting, I'd appreciate hearing any constructive feedback.

Thanks,

- Rick "Rock the boat" Dickinson

What you're saying may be true, Kevin. If and when a lawsuit happens, NAR may be dragged into it. Hasn't happened yet, but it might -- I'll certainly grant you that.

However, what I'm failing to see is any evidence that this would be any different than the *current* situation. Currently, a person can join NAR, get certified, quit NAR, and do those same stupid things. Or, he could join NAR, get certified, stay a member of NAR, and do those same stupid things.

Either way, NAR might conceivably be named in a suit arising out of the user's negligent actions. However, in *all* cases, NAR would be able to show the exact same defenses:

They didn't owe a duty of care to the plaintiff. Their duty of care is limited to establishing certification requirements that are acceptable to the AHJ, ensuring the identity of the person attempting certification, and ensuring that the person certifying actually passes the tests asked of him.

They didn't breach the duty of care that they did have. Their certification program *is* acceptable to the AHJ. People taking certification tests are expected to show ID or be personally known to the people giving the tests. Tests are administered with the test-taked isolated from others, without outside assistance, and graded according to standard criteria.

Allow me to make an analogy.

In the computer industry, there are various certification programs. I happen to hold a number of certifications showing that I have demonstrated competent levels of knowledge and skills relating to Lotus Notes and Domino programming and administration.

If I go into a client site, and make a total dog's breakfast of their Notes infrastructure, they can sue me for negligence. I owed them a duty of care, I breached that duty, they suffered damages, and those damages were caused by my breach of my duty. It's a textbook negligence case, and they'd be well within their rights to come after me, and they'd very likely win their suit.

Now, assume they knew of my certification status, and relied on it to decide to hire me. So, they decide to include Lotus Development Corp. and Sylvan Prometric (the testing org) in the suit as well.

Both Lotus and Sylvan will be able to (successfully) argue that their duty of care extends only to establishing testing standards that are acceptable within the industry, ensuring that the person who is issued a certification based on passing the tests is actually the person who took the tests, and that they take reasonable precautions to prevent cheating on the tests.

The fact that most job postings within the industry ask for certifications is evidence that the certification testing standards are acceptable within the industry. If they weren't considered acceptable, they wouldn't be required.

The fact that Sylvan checks ID of all test-takers, and forces them to take the tests without outside materials, and isolated from other people, is evidence that they met their duties of identity verification and cheating prevention.

So, without a breach of duty, they are not negligent. End of story, and end of lawsuit.

Same goes for NAR.

And *none* of this would be any different if NAR certifications were good for the lifetime of the person certified. Everything I've said is applicable to the situation *now*, and to the situation where NAR offers lifetime certs.

I am not a lawyer, and this is not intended as legal advice. However, I can reason things through and see that the situation now is *exactly the same* as it would be if NAR issued lifetime certs.

There's nothing to prevent frivolous suits now, and there wouldn't be then. NAR is not likely to be dragged into a frivolous suit now, and would be no more or less likely to be dragged into a frivolous suit then. NAR has a good defense now, and the defense would be the same (and just as good) then.

- Rick "IANAL" Dickinson

you make excellent points, Rick

- iz

again, excellent points!

- iz

Sad to say, it rarely works out that way in real life. McD's doesn't have a duty to keep idiots from spilling hot coffee in their laps, yet McD gets sued. Gun manufacturers and dealers don't have a duty to prevent guns from being used by criminals to commit crimes, yet they get sued. Tobacco companies have fullfilled their duty to warn smokers of the health hazards associated with smoking, yet they still get sued. When there's an airliner crash, anyone who ever had anything to do with that plane or airline gets sued regardless of whether their product or service had anything to do with the crash.

Reason and logic have very little to do with it.

True, but members contribute annually to the cost of providing insurance to protect against frivolous suits. Non-members contribute nothing.

I don't believe that's accurate. Currently you have an amount of risk proportionate to the number of members. Adding in non-members would increase the risk proportionate to the number of certified non-members, at the very least.

And that's just considering the risk of frivolous suits. Who knows what additional risks there might be from non-members who get certed and then go off and do something stupid and/or illegal?

Which brings up another problem: If certs are permanent, what mechanism would there be to decertify someone who engages in illegal, dangerous activities? Currently, if someone is doing something stupid/illegal, the orgs at least have the option of suspending them or expelling them.

If there were no such mechanism in place, the individual would be able to continue doing anything they wanted until they get busted -- possibly causing property damage, injury or death along the way and jeopardizing the org and the hobby to boot.

Increasing the size of the overall pie should be the goal. Membership will necessarily follow.

Clueless.

\\PC_MODE=OFF Excuse me, you want to kiss my what, "Magpie King"?

I read stupid crap too quickly.... guilty. Life's too short. Trust me. An' byte me if ya don't like it.

But don't change the rules cert rules on my account...

Oh, wait.... reading comprehension, ciphering, and 'memberin' is what the Level II cert is ALL about!!!

(Or didn't ya know). \\PC_MODE=ON

Er... in your case... "Bibo ergo sum".