[TRA motor certs] USR

Jerry Irvine · 2004-01-09T16:31:07+00:00

As you all know there has been an ongoing discussion of TRA motor cert policy as it relates to USR (branded motors).On the issue of DOT paperwork several "speculations" have been offered as to what TRA actually says after rejecting the paper work. Everything from fraud papers, to OEM name not matching the USR brand, challenges of ownership despite written proof and even law cites supporting it.To date the only efforts TRA has engaged in has been direct contacts with DOT in an active effort to get the paperwork INVALIDATED so they will be able to claim it is in some way not valid. This disregards the fact that if it is "invalidated" that would mean it was VALID prior to the invalidation.The strategy of TRA to intentionally invalidate any government document is disturbing.Then on the issue of ATF permits, we all now know they are NOT required by law, by NFPA since it does NOT override law, and is ONLY required by arbitrary club rule by people who cannot read and understand the law. Even when explained to them in detail by their own attorneys in writing in minute detail.Furthermore a submission was made with a proper LEMP and even that submission was refused.DEMAND (public notice)TRA (and each agent, assign, member or representative) is hereby notified to cease and desist all contacts with DOT as I have no pending application for motors to be certified with TRA. Disclose all such DOT contacts to date to Jerry Irvine personally.TRA, State when you consider the MOST RECENT application for motor certifications to have occured, whether or not successful.TRA has gone on the record of regularly following these threads without replying to them "in public". Great reply to me in private.Jerry

R

RayDunakin 22 years ago

I'm reading the minutes of meeting, dipstick! Were you there? No. So you can't claim to have any better source of information than that. And if you believe anything that comes out of Jerry's mouth, you're a fool.

Just look at what he wrote: He said it was a "regional launch", and that Chuck just "called a meeting". It was LDRS, where the annual board meeting always takes place. Do you really believe that all this time there was some other meeting at some other site, and everyone was fooled into thinking they were at LDRS???

Get your nose out of Jerry's backside and come up for air before it's too late!

Vote

J

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

I was referring to the meeting that happened at the FEST LAUNCH. NOT SOME OTHER MEETING.

And if you believe anything that comes out of Ray's mouth, you're a fool.

Jerry

Vote

J

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

That means 5. A certain mathematical number.

Jerry

Vote

J

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

Tindell was removed for approving a $500 launcher expense (while he was President with properly that authority) and since that time Kelly and Rogers have allegedly bilked the association for tens of thousands of dollars.

-PER YEAR- !!

Jerry

Vote

B

Bob Kaplow 22 years ago

Vote

B

Bob Kaplow 22 years ago

manual some place

You've got me beat. I've only seen one. And yes, it's a bat out of hell off the tower. But with a 4" diameter and a full length core a 2 second burn is less than 1" per second burn rate. Not that out of line compared to the burn rate of our motors.

What does your data say on handling of the motor? Can it be dropped a few feet, or is that a good way to have them wiping your parts up off the road?

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

Vote

D

David Erbas-White 22 years ago

Pardon my ignorance, but what is DMM (other than digital multimeter)?

David Erbas-White

Vote

D

David Erbas-White 22 years ago

I have been shown what is purportedly the latest edition of the bylaws. The statements regarding changes claimed that they were mainly changes that pertained to 501(c)3 incorporation (phrases required by the IRS). Although I find it unlikely that the proxy issue has been amended since the original by-laws, you could conceivably be correct -- I can only go by the by-laws that I have seen.

If anyone has a copy of earlier by-laws, please feel free to send me a copy, or post the pertinent passages here.

David Erbas-White

Vote

D

David Erbas-White 22 years ago

And as I outlined earlier, the entire point of having such meetings face-to-face (or at the very least, telephonically), is to allow for argument/discussion about issues.

BTW, in the one corporation that I was involved in that DID allow telephonic board meetings, this was explicitly spelled out in the by-laws.

David Erbas-White

Vote

D

David Erbas-White 22 years ago

Yes, it is. Since there is specific enumeration of the members being able to use proxies, especially. I have reconfirmed this this evening with a lawyer who deals in this type of work.

Ray, please read what I wrote. I was expounding upon how a meeting is called and what must be done in order to have a legal meeting, and specifically stated that I DON'T know whether or not this took place. I was simply stating that there are additional items that must be properly performed in order for a meeting to be 'legal'.

I don't have the minutes of the meeting, I never said that I did, I'm responding to the (so far undisputed statements) that the meeting occurred through the use of proxies. My complaint is and has been that TRA is simply not properly running the business of TRA. It's that simple.

David Erbas-White

Vote

D

David Weinshenker 22 years ago

"Domestic Mailing Manual", I believe...

-davew

Vote

I

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed 22 years ago

o happy day! o happy day!

- iz

Vote

I

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed 22 years ago

the request to Tripoli is enroute via certified mail

no doubt they will provide the 'doctored' minutes Jerry referred to

- iz

P.S.: those who would like to do some advance reading for extra credit can visit

formatting link

for information on mandatory non-profit disclosures

Vote

I

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed 22 years ago

the minutes do not accurately reflect the events that took place

you have heard one eyewitness account here. There are others

- iz

Vote

I

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed 22 years ago

the minutes were *doctored*, Ray ... you understand the concept?

how many eye witness' direct testimony or notarized affadavits will it take to refute your version of the minutes?

that would not be the first 'spontaneous' meeting where such shennanigans took place. One 1994 meeting in New Orleans comes to mind where there was a discussion about the AOIC and By Laws ...

- iz

Vote

I

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed 22 years ago

those who would like to do some advance reading on the financial aspects of the organization can get some free information by registering at

formatting link

and search on "Tripoli Rocketry". After reviewing the 2002 disclosure, click on "Form 990" in the left pain for years 1997 through 2001

also see:

"About Form 990 : The Value of Form 990" at

formatting link

and "Form 990 Questions of Particular Interest"

formatting link

esp. regarding Line 77,

"Were any changes made in the organizing or governing documents, but no reported to the IRS? If yes, include a conformed copy of the changed document." If you updated your articles, constitution or by-laws since your last Form 990 filing, be sure to answer this question Yes and attach the appropriate copies."

additional information is available at

"Being Transparent: What Forms 990 on the Web Means For Nonprofits" at

formatting link

"IRS Form 990: New Rules Improve Public Access to Charity Financial Information" at

formatting link

if you haven't already

- iz

Vote

J

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

Check your email.

Vote

J

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

Domestic Mail Manual, I think. It is the USPS bible.

Vote

J

Jerry Irvine 22 years ago

I believe they are also 1.3C and as such are as safe in handling as an AT or USR motor.

Jerry

Vote

N

NaCl 22 years ago

I've stayed out of this so far because I have zero knowledge of any person or activity involved.

But I'm a little concerned with this statement:

snip:

"Just because Jerry wasn't convicted in a court of law, does not mean, in _any_ country, that he didn't commit an illegal act. Innocence is irrelevant in this case."

I guess what you meant to say is just because Jerry wasn't formally accused with anything, the legal system didn't have to decide (while presuming him innocent) whether he was guilty or not.

In my country (the good ole USA) we are all innocent until we are proven otherwise.

If I misunderstood your comment, I'm sure you'll let me know...

convicted in a court of

act. Innocence is

he _commited_ an

Vote