When are motors to be de-certified?

ACS is no longer the manufacture and owner of the business and Jerry never accomplished a legal transfer of the ex #, with DOT. Now if you know something I don't, spit it out Fud Meister...

Fred

yo iz: so you think NFPA 1125 is fundamentally flawed on this point? what languague would you propose be entered here to remove this flaw? There are 4 DOT approved testing agencies that JI can send his propellant to and get it classified as a Flammable solid: these include the following: Agencies Authorized to Examine and Test Explosives

In accordance with the provisions of § 173.56(b)(1), the agencies

listed below are authorized to examine and test explosives in

accordance with §§ 173.52, 173.57 and 173.58 and to recommend a

shipping description, division and compatibility group. In

addition, the agencies listed may assign tentative

classifications for samples of materials to authorize their

shipment to designated test sites.

Agencies Contact Person Address and Phone

Explosives Bureau

Dr. W. S. Chang

Short Hills, NJ 07078

Phone: 973-467-3237

Fax: 973-467-4648

Safety Consulting Engineers, Inc.

Mr. C. James Dahn 2131 Hammond Drive

Schaumburg, IL 60173

Phone: 847-925-8100

Fax: 847-925-8120

Safety Management Services, Inc

Mr. Thaddeus C. Speed

Suite 205

West Jordan, UT 84088

Phone: 801-567-0456

Fax: 801-567-0457

Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center (EMRTC)

Mr. Marvin Banks

email: snipped-for-privacy@emrtc.nmt.edu

EMRTC

New Mexico Tech,

Campus Station

Socorro, NM 87801

Phone: 505 835 5729

Fax: 505 835 5630

shockie B)

so he says.....I'm not even convinced that he can legally sell rocket motors in California...... the Only license he says he has or will admit to having is a California Class 2 Pyro license which allows you to use High Power rocket motors but doesn't say anything about allowing you to sell them, In California if you make rocket motors ans you wish to sell outside the state and or instate you need a California CSFM Importers/Exporters License like AeroTech has which allows them to "import" their engine sinto California and sell them. he has No CSFM Wholesalers license so he can't sell to other California dealers or individuals....SO if Jerry is shipping and selling rocket motors outside or instate the state Of California hes probably violating the California State laws..... I'm almost positive that Jerry motors have no CSFM "Stamp" of approval on them, which means they have not been classified nor certed for use in California by CSFM....

shockie B)

provisions should exist to either exempt motors made from unregulated materials from certfication, or to allow certification of same

according to this, no motors made from unregulated materials are certifiable

they have the impulse to qualify as HPR motors, but are not energetic enough to be considered a hazardous material to DOT.

so they are not dangerous enough to certify, yet uncertified motors may not be used?

that doesn't make any sense at all!

if a "compentent authority" is qualified to classify a material which is hazardous, why is not that same authority qualified to classify it as less hazardous (merely flammable)?

again., this does not make sense. It's as if no one read this through before finalizing it.

- iz

I do believe Dr. W. S. Chang has already tested Jerry's material.

~ Duane Phillips.

Just because you "make up" a scenario and apply it to ARSA in your mind (and unfortunately on rmr) in no way means ARSA does it, might do it, ever has done it, or ever will do it.

It is an imaginary construct by George Gassaway. Like asking for bylaws and meeting minutes and 501-c-3 papers and whatever else you asked for knowing full well it does not exist because you were told so in no uncertain terms.

Your psychological breaks are not our problem.

As for NAR:

1. Stop asking manufacturers for LEMP unless specifically required by law.
2. Stop asking vendors and consumers to get LEDP/LEUP.
3. Start accepting 1.3C approved motors for cert based on the FACE OF THE CA/EX DOCUMENT.
4. Apologize to ACS-Reaction Labs for stating their motors were DOT 1.1 class (detonable high explosive) perthe 8-03 Board minutes of the meeting YOU attended.

And before you say something wacky like "I am not on the board" or "that is not my job function", you ARE a confidant of the board members generally. You are a "trusted member"of the NAR heirarchy. Fine. Do something positive with that and gain my strong kudos and support. Start with the short list above. I will be glad to help and cooperate any way I can.

Jerry

Same minutes asked Miller to work with me on NFPA. Have not heard a peep from him. Have him email me. (please)

Approximately.

We are suspect of each other right now. The reason is an entity we both assume to be trustworthy - the DOT - has acted unusually in front of both of us WRT each other.

I say the cause is the DOT itself, and you seem to be willing to say it is me.

But I cite the most obvious thing I can. I sent a fax to you and them about the same time (and a duplicate copy to them after you said they did not get it, from a 100% proven fax machine BTW). They told you they did not get it, until YOU sent it to them as well. But then what? No DOT-E-10996 listing magically appeared.

If you would simply promise NOT to call the DOT upon arrival of an order from me I would cheerfully send you one. But additional hassle I do not need, especially when there is an apparant sting mentality pervasive to this whole industry and situation.

Jerry

Correct.

(formerly CHIEF, Bureau of Explosives)

It was the NFPA-1125 version of Jerry-mandering because I brought up the fact of the unregulated propellants before this language was drafted by Rosenfield, Stine and Miller (three Jerry-haters).

See above. These are VERY detail oriented folks.

Jerry

I am willing to disclose them to a "special master". Someone everybody trusts and agrees to keep them secret, and I am comfortable disclosing them to.

So I suppose you have a code cite for this as well? I posted that ownership is assigned and transferred seamlessly. I posted there is continuity of the original business.

Bulk sale means the WHOLE THING was purchased as a RUNNING entity.

Jerry

And you cannot say I didn't try :)

Huh - all I know is what Jerry represented here: are you trying to imply that the propellant in the "US Rockets" motors is _not_ the stuff that the ACS test report applies to? He says ACS is who he gets it from... are you saying you know different? That's the only concrete information _anyone_ has posted so far, and you'd think Jerry would be in a position to know where he had the motors made if anyone did!

Sounds like you're the one with the "extra background information", in that case

- are you saying that's not the propellant that was used, but rather some other material, one that has not been properly examined and classified for shipment?

Jerry has claimed one thing. You talk like you're sure it's not so, but you've yet to present an alternative statement of any substance. I mean what's your bottom line here? Jerry made the propellant in his bathroom and tried to pass it off as the stuff that had already been tested and classified for ACS?

Is that really what you're saying? You seem to be implying something of the sort, but you seem to be dancing around coming out and making a direct statement, and I would hate to jump to too many premature conclusions about your actual position when you don't seem to be explaining it very clearly.

-dave w

You get a temporary reprieve out of killfile hell for this one.

Now, prove that you have those ~50 valid EX numbers. And some blurry scan of a retouched photocopy with scribbles on it DOES NOT count as proof.

While we are at it, what company name has the DOT-EX numbers? Who owns said company? What is Jerry's involvement with said company?

Because that has been the big sticking point all along, but I wager you know that. Word on the street is that a DOT-EX number runs a cool 10 grand per...so if you have ~50 of them...well, either you are a complete dunderhead for sitting on such an investment when all you have to do is submit those motors to the NAR for testing, or you don't have .5 million tied up in EX numbers and are once again entertaining us with creative works of fiction. I ain't buying the whole "the NAR hates me and won't cert my motors", either, as it's more a case of "George Gassaway knows the truth and is not afraid to use it" every time Jerry starts whining.

Why do I waste my time?

credibility?

Once and for all, I want to know what is wrong with the EX number he currently has access to?

It seems to hinge on these questions:

2) Can EX number ownership be transferred without any DOT supporting docs, or re-issue of docs?

If the answers are "Yes" to both questions, then what is wrong with the document he currently uses?

Is it not true that the one who originally did that testing is still one of the DOT authorized testors? (Dr. Chang).

What is wrong with the document he has? This has not been clearly spelled out, and I have read every post to this group for nearly the last month, and most prior to that when this conversation came up.

Is is because DOT refuses to honor their document because it was pre-computer era?

This seems to be the primary and critical stop/go document for Jerry. It is my understanding that these points as held by Jerry are true, and I have not seen any substantial arguments to the contrary. Lets have the facts.

~ Duane Phillips.

So are you saying DOT refuses to acknowlege a prior document, that supposedly cannot expire? Is there any chance of Dr. Chang (who appears to still be a valid DOT tester) vindicating his former test results, which he (Dr. Chang) performed?

~ Duane Phillips.

Maybe so...but you wouldn't be any different from a member of the NAR Board who is in the minority on an issue. We all travel to Board meetings at our own expense. Always have. So long as I have anything to say about it, always will.

Mark Johnson NAR Trustee

That is correct. It also applies to ATFE. Self certification and self-interpretation of regulations is generally frowned upon by the regulators.