The folllowing is an excerpt form the June 1995 issue of Model Rocketeer by Mark Bundick:
Current Regulations: The following items are considered exempt from BATF regulation:
- black powder motors with less than or equal to 62.5 grams propellant,
- Amonnium perchlorate (aka "composite" or "AP") single use motors of less than 80 Newton-seconds total impulse (i.e., F motors), which also contain less than or equal to 62.5 grams propellant.
- AP reload modules where individual reload modules are less than 62.5 grams each, total propellant weight in the assembled motor less than or equal to
If your flying activities are confined to these motors, you are completely exempt from any BATF storage or use regulations.
All other motor usage requires you to obtain a Low Explosives Users Permit (LEUP) and comply with applicable storage regulations. In particular, the following conditions require a BATF Low Explosives Users Permit and proper explosives storage:
- AP single use motors with more than 62.5 grams propellant;
- AP reload modules which are equal to or more than 62.5 grams each;
- AP reload modules which are less than 62.5 grams each but where the total assembled motor propellant weight is greater than or equal to 62.5 grams and total impule.
Am I imiagining things ? or is this exactly the regulation that became law on 10/10/06 ?
So lets review, what the BATfe said was law in june 95 is the law that was passed in oct 2006. And wasn't there a lawsuit going on for at least 6 of these years?
From what I can tell from the NAR Financials, approx $219K has been donated since 1999; $269K has been spent on the lawsuit; I'm not sure where the approx $50K difference between these 2 figures came from: I assume its the NAR dues increase as these figures do not differentiate between legal expenses between the lawsuit and the 1 time legislative charges we had. I might add that we are paying our lawyers $400 per hour for 150 hrs work per year. Since this is a joint NAR/TRA lawsuit, and the NAR is paying 50% of the costs, then I also assume that between the TRA and the NAR, approx $500K plus has been spent so far between both entities. And what do we have to show for it? The BATFe regulations in effect in June 1995 are exactly the regulations that are in effect in October 2006.
So what exactly are we getting for our money? A $500K investment in determining that APCP is not an explosive? Folks if we, and by we, I mean the NAR/TRA doesn't get APCP off the explosives listing, then we will have spent over 1/2 million dollars for nothing! Think about that for a moment. I think the $500K would have been better spent on a National Model Rocketry Museum.....
terry dean nar 16158