ROL NEWS--AeroTech Announces Certification of Three New Reload Kits

If he has the required permits to be legal, he *is* a manufacturer and would have what's needed to satisfy TRA or NAR.

Tom

Dave W. replied:

In one of the joint NAR/TRA statements about the judge's ruling, it was said that ATF expressed their disagreement with us as to the meaning of the judge's ruling.

What is the point of even talking to you?

Dave W. wrote:

Jerry wrote:

Jerry, are you suggesting that Thiokol and Aerojet are not legal manufacturers because they don't have their motors certified by TRA/NAR???

Jerry dodged:

So fill us in, Jerry. How is someone making and selling motors without any local, state and federal permits "legal"?

Where do you get us winning an important point. I assume you are refering to the PAD designation. If so, we did not win that point. The ATF lost if by not doing the NPRM as they should have. We gained the benefit. The judge said if they do the NPRM properly, they can declare them as not being PADs. That is not my definition of a win and it is not necessarily a situation that will exist forever.

But he's his biggest fan. 8-)

It exists now and has for decades. That is the point.

It escapes you.

Your reply is to spew more crap.

Your reply is to spew more crap.

More non-answers from jerry.

I understand your point. I do not agree. I don't want Ray calling me Big Fine Stein.

The judge ruledthat the PAD exemption applies under the rules as they are and have been all along. Any rulemaking otherwise is strictly hypothetical at this point (and would take a long time even if they posted it for comment in the near future). For comparison, the EPA recently (this past spring) published a final rule that was originally posted for comment in 1998, and I don't think that rule (extending certain refrigerant handling requirements to the new non-ozone-depleting "substitute" refrigerants) was especially controversial.

The judge gave us a window (at least) of regulatory opportunity: let's use it, not disregard it because of hypothetical future rulemakings which have yet to be even written and posted for public comment.

-dave w

"Your reply is so telling Jerry". To answer truthfully, would cause you to openly and knowingly admit your past criminal activity, involving manufacture and distribution of 1.3c, unclassified hazmat...

Fred