ARSA Legislative Update

07/07/03 00:00:00    

By Michael Mealling

from the ARSA news

July 5, 2003 - MSNBC and Fox News have written stories for their web sites on the current situation of rocketry in America. The MSNBC story combined its coverage of how the Safe Explosives Act affected rocketry with its affect on fireworks. Their story further documented the financial ruin facing small businesses due to ATFE regulations. Both news organizations pointed out the inadequacy of the Hatch-Kohl amendment to Senate bill S724. Fox News reported on how ridiculous the ATFE claims were of using rockets as terrorists weapons.

Terror fallout dims rocketsÂ’ red glare

at MSNBC

By The Rockets' Red Glare..

at FOX news

from the ARSA congress page:

July, 4 2003 - Senator Hatch and Senator Kohl amended S724 in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The effects of the amendment are discussed in the preceding section. It is important to note that this amendment was written with the approval and participation of the ATFE. That should tell you a lot. There are three land mines buried in the amendment. The first is that the exemption only applies if the APCP is used in model rocket motors. Nowhere are “model rocket motors” defined in the bill. Guess who defines them? The ATFE. Will it be defined as “rocket motors made of cardboard tubes and clay nozzles” or “with an impulse not to exceed 160 Newton-seconds” or “single use applications only”. We don't know. The second land mine is the term “recreational model rockets”. Again, it is not defined in the bill and will be defined by the ATFE. Will that definition be “made of cardboard tubes, wood fins and plastic nosecones” or “not to exceed a lift off weight of 3 lbs” or “not to exceed a diameter of 3 inches and length of 48 inches”? We do not know. However, no one expects the ATFE to write definitions that will be favorable to the future of rocketry.

The last land mine in the amendment is that the 0.9 lb of propellant applies to both non-detonable 1.3 APCP and detonable 1.1 APCP as the phrase “ammonium perchlorate composite propellant” is used with no distinction between classes. You will notice that the same phrase is used in the ATFE proposed rocketry regulation with no distinction in classes. So what is the big deal? Why is it important in one and not the other? The difference is that in one case the phrase is used in a federal regulation and in the other United States Code. The federal regulation can be changed at will by the ATFE, but only Congress can change the United States Code. If a distinction between classes of APCP in the US code is not made and 1.1 class APCP 0.9 lb motors start floating around out there, the ATFE can only revoke the exemption by going to Congress and having the law changed, which is a time consuming process. This land mine was placed in the amendment for Senator Kohl to point out should the amendment come to the Senate floor for a vote. The purpose was to sink it on a floor vote.

The amended S724 is an empty bag and political ploy to make it look like the Judiciary committee did something for rocketry. It is a political illusion and a cruel hoax on the rocketry community that sought legitimate legislative relief.