The finger pointing continues...

I agree, Woody

- iz

a bit more history ...

JW called on rocketeers everywhere to support the initiative, from the time of the "Dear Colleague" letter from Sen. Enzi to all Senators (call for action on Feb 28th, 2003). The purpose was to show the Senators the level of interest the issue carried, and to encourage them to sign on as cosponsors or at a minimum, support the bills passage with their vote

TRA/NAR were alarmed that their members might actually support a legislative effort that they hadn't initiated, and railed about a lack of communication

yet when they were approached, they insisted on steering the bill through the senate. Kyte letter to Sen. Enzi citing their willingness to compromise his position on weight limits was a very good indication of just how that "steering" would proceed ... directly to Kohl's office, which they in the end saw to that it did

but as a courtesy to the TRA/NAR leaderships, John had agreed to give notice prior to calling for actions. In John Wickman's words, this is how that worked out:

"As for letting TRA/NAR know in advance on letter campaigns. That came out of a phone conversation with Ken Good. I agreed to let them know 24 hours in advance and DID on the next letter campaign. All I can say is that I sent the 24 hour email notice to Ken Good. If he did not get it that is not my fault. He claims he didn't get it. I have no way of knowing if he did or did not. I do know that within a few hours of the phone conversation with him, where he acted all nice, he went on the TRA list server and launched a personal attack against me. Still, I gave the 24 hour notice on the next letter campaign. I did not after that."

"Secondly, some[one] was trying to make the point the TRA/NAR letter response was only delayed a few hours. That is wrong. In some cases, it was days. What the TRA/NAR apologists want you to forget is that the legislative process is very time sensitive. Delays are not acceptable."

it became increasingly clear that TRA/NAR leadership had no concern for anyone but themselves, not the vendors, not the public, not even their own members for whom for whatever reason LEUPS were anavailable. For a so-called 'professional' lobbyist, Kyte showed no acumen or sensitivity to the situation

again, in JW's words:

"In order to justify the delay, NAR/TRA took the line, we have to check with Senator Enzi's staff before we tell you to write. Candice Cotton had made it clear that you do not publicly say, 'Senator Enzi wants to you write', because it is against Senate policy to have letter campaigns started and organized by other Senators. Everybody knows it happens, but YOU DO NOT PUBLICLY ADMIT IT!. Another Senator's staffer happened to see a news release from Mark Bundick posted on ROL telling people to write as it had been cleared by Senator Enzi's office. The Senator went ballistic and raised hell with Senator Enzi. The result was Candice Cotton getting called into her boss's office and getting reprimanded for letting it out that Enzi was encouraging this sort of thing. Give another point to Bundick for incompetence.

"What is truly unfortunate is that this shot to Candice was the direct result of the NAR/TRA campaign to portray themselves in the loop and myself out of it. I was just the loose cannon. Thanks to Bundick's ego, a young staffer gets a black mark on her record. Give another point to Bundick for screwing an innocent person."

in retrospect JW's instincts about the TRA/NAR were correct

their meddling was fatal

- iz

from John Wickman

--

experience is not necessarily a measure of competency

from "What Really Happened With S724?" at

I knew we were in serious trouble when NAR and TRA hired John Kyte. He had a personal agenda of getting money out of TRA and NAR. He made it clear to me in a phone call that he was upset that he had provided "free" public relation services to TRA and NAR on the lawsuit. This time he intended to be paid. As Kyte and Bundick are friends, Bundick arranged to have Kyte paid a total of $30,000 for his services for helping the legislative effort. He was paid by the month.

TRA, NAR and Kyte could not have come into the picture at a worse time. Myself and Senator Enzi's staff were working on the final wording of the bill and he was lining up cosponsors. We were extremely busy and Kyte was chomping at the bit to get involved in the bill. Finally, he just burst into Candice Cotton's office without an appointment and informed her he represented the two largest hobby rocketry organizations. They were going to be involved in the legislative effort whether Enzi liked it or not. Candice was Senator Enzi's lead staffer on the bill. She was polite, gave Kyte a copy of the current draft of the bill and told him Enzi would listen to their comments. Kyte, TRA and NAR immediately had the draft bill posted to the ROL news page.

JW's use of the phrases

"a dubious proposition" "thrown into doubt" "is likely to happen"

does not equate to "doomed"

but with TRA/NARS meddling, in retrospect it seems that way

you have no idea what you are talking about

I will leave it at that

- iz

and the lack of a list of certificating organizations ;)

and therefor, no tithes to the false gods of rocketry

- iz

the timing was critical

the anology that comes to mind is a condutor in an orchestra. The eyes willbe on him so when he emphatically drops his baton all sections respond without hestitation and the impact resounds throughout the hall

what was needed was responsiveness, immediate action

not the cacophony of fax - no! don't fax! - ok, fax

exactly

- iz

and that justifies TRA/NAR sabotage of the effort how?

- iz

S.724 as a bill was not intended to be under the radar. That was the stealth bill we had hoped to do with Lott or Frist (a technical corrections bill to the SEA)

it was the wording of S.724 that was not to be disclosed to anyone but "friendlies" prematurely, but John Kyte provided a draft to Mark Bundick, who in turn posted it to ROL, a public site.

such tipping of our hand to the opposition was not something one would expect from an "experienced lobbyist"

from "What Really Happened With S724?" at

While the wording of the bill was not publicly disclosed, the goal was clearly stated on our web site and known to all. No one in the hobby to my knowledge had any problem with the goals. As a matter of Senate protocol, you do not publicly disclose the wording of a bill before introduction except to members of your own political party and select members of the other party. TRA and NAR were felt to be a risk with respect to the text of the bill being disclosed prior to introduction. This was latter proven to be a well founded fear.

We did solicited suggestions on changing the SEA bill. I received many emails from people with helpful suggestions that eventually found their way into the bill. I did not receive one single suggestion from TRA or NAR except get out and turn it over to us. I knew we were in serious trouble when NAR and TRA hired John Kyte. He had a personal agenda of getting money out of TRA and NAR. He made it clear to me in a phone call that he was upset that he had provided "free" public relation services to TRA and NAR on the lawsuit. This time he intended to be paid. As Kyte and Bundick are friends, Bundick arranged to have Kyte paid a total of $30,000 for his services for helping the legislative effort. He was paid by the month.

TRA, NAR and Kyte could not have come into the picture at a worse time. Myself and Senator Enzi's staff were working on the final wording of the bill and he was lining up cosponsors. We were extremely busy and Kyte was chomping at the bit to get involved in the bill. Finally, he just burst into Candice Cotton's office without an appointment and informed her he represented the two largest hobby rocketry organizations. They were going to be involved in the legislative effort whether Enzi liked it or not. Candice was Senator Enzi's lead staffer on the bill. She was polite, gave Kyte a copy of the current draft of the bill and told him Enzi would listen to their comments. Kyte, TRA and NAR immediately had the draft bill posted to the ROL news page.

John asked for the support of *rocketeers*

those who had a vested interest in the passage of a broac exemption for rocketry

- iz

this should be in the FAQ

- iz

a fact TRA/NAR's "experienced lobbyist" apparently hadn't come across in his travels

- iz

Sorry, I thought I had said (or at least implied) that I haven't been in radio for 30 years. So of course I'm not up on all the petitions before the FCC. Since you brought up an ARRL example, I tried to reply to it. Too bad about 73; when I was involved I thought they were an interseting foil for ARRL. But I guess that sidetracked us. But you never replied to the topic under discussion. We were talking about rockets, no? And you indicated that you would be suspicious of anyone who said they were doing something that would benefit you too but asked you to stay out of it. So would NAR/TRA. Why? Wickman/Enzi had started a legislative effort to exempt APCP sport rocketry propellant. If it had succeeded, it would have had a positive and very welcome result for many NAR/TRA members (me too :). I belong to both NAR and TRA and when I heard about the Enzi attempt to help us, I was ecstatic and did what Wickman asked us to do. But suppose for a minute NAR/TRA was suspicious that this legislative effort might somehow end up having a more negative effect on their members than the present regulations do. Then instead of flip-flopping as they did, they could have told their members what Enzi/Wickman were doing, they could have told their members they weren't sure if this was a good thing (it could be a good thing not to ardently encourage support of something you don't know anything about), and they could have remained neutral by advising their members to use their own discretion in this matter. But we all know what they did and didn't do. They didn't help. Instead they tried to take it over, and that doomed any positive legislation. Again, it makes no sense (at least to me) to not aid a fellow rocketeer who is trying to help. Sure, the proposed legislation would have helped Wickman, maybe even commercially, but so what? It would have helped NAR/TRA members too, so why be suspicious and sabotage it? Larry [Government (Smart) + Rocketeer (Dumb) = Happy ATFE] Lobdell Jr.

The only people that win in court.... are the lawyers.

Randy

I was referring to the legislative consultant.

NAR received a judgement on the obvious in the ATF lawsuit. They even failed to drop the first cause of action AFTER it was obvious they could not prevail!

Jerry

For two decades only ONE vendor has been fully advocating the ATF exemption that has been in place for rocket motors continuously throughout that time. U.S. Rockets.

A Federal judge recently affirmed this obvious position at a cost of only $300,000.00 to NAR and TRA members and interested non-member supporters.

The clubs NAR and TRA refused for years to recognize the obvious language in the law:

Code of Federal Regulations:

27 CFR 555.141 exemptions (a) (8) "Gasoline, fertilizers, propellant actuated devices, or propellant actuated industrial tools manufactured, imported, or distributed for their intended purposes."

Propellant actuated devices are defined in that code thusly:

27 CFR 555.11, "Propellant Actuated Device. Any tool or special mechanized device or gas generator system which is actuated by a propellant or which releases and directs work through a propellant charge."

Even the "Orange Book", the ATF's "crib notes" is clear on the point:

page 10 (page 62 of the "Orange Book")

1. Who must meet storage requirements? All persons who store explosive materials must store them in conformity with the provisions of Subpart K of the regulations, unless the person or the materials are exempt from regulation. [18 U.S.C. 842(j), 845; 27 CFR 55.29, 55.141, 55.164,

55.201(a)]

The most notable passage from the recent court order is as follows:

"In addition, the Court finds that the ATF's pronouncement that sport rocket motors are not PADs is invalid because it was made without compliance with the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures of the OCCA and the APA."

-Civil Action No. 00-273 (RBW) SO ORDERED this 19th day of March, 2004. REGGIE B. WALTON United States District Judge

You will note that NAR and TRA both STILL demand ATF permits as a prerequisite for motor certifications, a provision they illegally added about 1994. ATF has given them a POLICE ORDER to cease and desist enforcing for them, which NAR and TRA have ignored. ALL vendors of TRA/NAR HPR certified motors demand ATF permits for the sale of motors to end users in direct violation of the law.

Therefore since NAR and TRA refused to comply with the law prior to the filing of their own lawsuit asking for a ruling on the obvious, and since the judge ruled "in their favor", they STILL continue to illegally DEMAND ATF permits to transact EXEMPT goods.

Please never wonder again why there is a shortage of motors and motor vendors. There are at least 20 motor vendors in the wings ready to rock and roll as soon as NAR and TRA and their vendors rescind their illegal demands. U.S. Rockets motors were the first certified by TRA and they were arbitrarily decertified without notice or any ramp-down time in late 1997.

U.S. Rockets was the original proposer of LMR and the original proposer of HPR,both of which were adopted by NAR. U.S. Rockets principals founded the HPR industry itself by offering the FIRST industry magazine, the first distribution system for the vendors and of course the first motors.

U.S. Rockets and its Founder Jerry Irvine was AeroTech's first customer and their largest dealer for three years.

U.S. Rockets nationally promoted LDRS-1, 2, and 3 thus making it the national launch that it is. Thank you founding host Chris Pearson.

U.S. Rockets has the ONLY comprehensive website of rocket laws on the internet.

that was all we could ask for; the members use of their own discretion

an accurate portrayal

- iz

Why should Wickman have had to play second dog? He was the one who initiated the Enzi legislative effort. It was "his" baby, and it would have helped ALL HPR rocketeers. Don't forget: He "asked" NAR/TRA to play "second dog" and THEY refused. If Wickman has ego trouble, the leaders of NAR/TRA certainly do too. THEY chose to begin the "turf war" that doomed us to the proposed 0.9 pound limit. Why did they? Larry Lobdell, Jr.

Neither do I. What amkes any one think that we'll get a better result from the house than we got from the senate. Or that the jerks who put in the senate weight limits will compromise with anything better from the house.

I maintain that as long as either the NPRM or the lawsuit has a chance, that even allowing a .9# limit to become a possibility is worse than where we are now. If the Hatchet-Coleslaw bill ever comes up for a vote, I will lobby my senators to vote AGAINST it, rather than risk forcing a new limit on our hobby. And one of those senators was the only Democrat sponsor of the original bill.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!