WORLD WIDE WEB — Tripoli & NAR released the following joint statement:

fTomorrow, we expect that S. 724, the bill introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, will be voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. We expect the bill to be amended before being voted out, and that the bill as voted out will contain a weight limit that is higher than the current weight limit of 62.5 grams, but considerably lower than what many rocket hobbyists may have wanted or been led to expect.

At this time we expect the weight limit to be .9 pounds of propellant per motor for unpermitted purchases and possession of up to 25 pounds of propellant without a storage requirement.

There will be many claims, assertions and stories, and lots of finger-pointing, about what might have been by those who were not directly involved in the process on a daily basis. We want to outline some of the hard political reality that NAR and TRA have faced in attempting to push S.724 into law.

1. Once S 724 was introduced in the Senate, referral to the Judiciary Committee was automatic. Such referral was not a part of any strategy, or an option — it was automatic. The Senate sends legislation to committees based on their oversight responsibilities, and BATFE is within the Department of Justice. Once referred there, control of the bill shifted largely to the Senators who control that Committee, and who also happen to be the ones who passed the legislation S. 724 was seeking to amend.
2. TRA and NAR were told early and often by Senate and House staffers that S 724 as introduced was a "non-starter". This is Congressional language for "unless you're prepared to compromise, we're not going to get anywhere." A blanket exemption for all rocket propellants never had any chance of passing the Judiciary Committee in either the Senate or House. Assertions to the contrary were wrong and misleading. 
3. TRA and NAR never introduced the idea of specific weight limit compromises on S. 724. But we did realize that unless we were willing to discuss compromise, no discussions would take place at all. The legislation simply would not move onto the Committee's formal agenda. There was no other choice but to be willing to discuss options if we 1) wanted to have the views of majority of the hobby rocket community represented in the debate, and 2) had any hope of trying to counter the extensive "education" campaign waged by BATFE in the Senate. Even through today, TRA and NAR have not agreed to anything specific regarding weight limits.
4. Much of the progress made to date can be attributed to the hard work of TRA and NAR members in the field. Since March 27, NAR and TRA members have done the following work in support of the legislation:
   (a) Assembled and delivered information packets to all 100 Senators. The materials came from rocketeers across the country and were well received.
   (b) Organized and spearheaded the letter-writing campaign on the NPRM proposed by ATFE which has now resulted in more than 1,200 letters being received by BATFE in opposition to the rulemaking. Thanks to you that fight is not over, and it was noticed in the Senate.
   (c ) Delivered the vast majority of letters to Senators encouraging support for the Enzi bill. Those letters, and the personal efforts of individual TRA and NAR members to contact Senators, generated additional cosponsors for the bill.
   (d) Delivered to Senate staffers extensive scientific, technical and general information on rocketry and propellants and, when requested, possible legislative options that were put forth by TRA and NAR members and officials. All options were considered, and without the technical support provided by members, we would not have been able to have those discussions.
   (e) Met regularly, often daily or several times daily, with Senate and House staffers and Senators to discuss process and activity and provide information. This daily, personal contact is critical to getting our case heard and our positions articulated to key staff. No other organization had or maintained such contact.
   (f) Delivered to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee hundreds of letters during the past few days.
   
   NAR and TRA members should be justifiably proud of the excellent work they've done to date, and we thank you for that considerable and excellent effort.
5. The political process recognizes facts and scientific opinions, but often neither relies nor rests on them. On complicated issues such as rocket science and propellant, and especially when taking on an agency such as BATFE, Congress often defers to the expertise of the agency involved so as to be sure to err on the side of caution. This is particularly so when the issue involves materials or issues that are perceived as being
   potentially dangerous.
6. S. 724 was scheduled for mark-up with just 12 hours notice. This severely shortened the time available for continuing discussions. TRA and NAR met extensively with the staffs of Sens. Enzi, Hatch and Kohl, including the ATF special agent who is on detail to Sen. Kohl's staff, and provided even more extensive technical and scientific information on rockets and propellants. Despite extensive efforts, some key Senate staffers remain convinced that APCP is an explosive material in need of significant regulation.
7. The BATFE "Views" letter delivered to the Senate late last week is rife with factual errors and false assertions, as we all know, but it also represents the official position of the Administration on S 724 as introduced. As such, it is given high credibility in the Senate, especially in the post 9-11 mindset that exists in Washington. Turning this position around will take significant time, more than is available before the Senate Judiciary Committee will act.
8. The situation faced by Sen. Enzi became simple — either work with the Judiciary Committee on a compromise so the bill could pass through the Committee and remain alive for continued fighting in the Senate and House, or let the bill be voted on as introduced, but without the support necessary for passage. Allowing the bill to be defeated would have killed it permanently in the Senate for this session, and almost certainly would have severely damaged, or killed, on-going efforts to get a bill introduced in the House of Representatives. Sen. Enzi ultimately chose to live to fight another day.
9. While no one within the sport rocketry community is happy with the end result of the Judiciary Committee action, the issue remains alive and some progress has been made in raising the existing propellant weight limit of 62.5 grams.
10. Sen. Enzi worked incredibly hard, against staggering odds, in his fight to protect hobby rocketry in America. He deserves the praise and support of all TRA and NAR members.  

After tomorrow, our focus will shift to the full Senate and the House. We welcome your comments and suggestions. As we have further information, we'll pass it along to members.

Dick Embry, TRA President
Mark B. Bundick, NAR President