Rocketry Planet

I ASKED BRUCE KELLY straight up about the new Tripoli insurance program recently, and Bruce was kind enough to agree to do an interview, for the benefit of everyone it affected. Here now is the contents of that discussion:

DM: "Hello, Bruce, and thanks for taking the time to share some information about the new Tripoli insurance program. Wow, two months into the new year and it seems we are discussing the 'Hot Potato' issue of the decade! From my take, this is being blown way out of proportion. Would you agree?"

BK: Yes, that is a fair statement. But I do see other valid points of view. It is hard to understand new policies and procedures without a point of reference. One day a person can renew their dues for $35.00 and the next day it is $60.00. People want to know "what gives?" and they have a right to know. This is why I'm happy to participate in this interview.

DM: "There are a lot of questions going on the minds of flyers everywhere, whether they are Tripoli members or not, but let's run through a few questions and see if we can't address the important issues. Let's start at the top -- this seemed to catch a lot of people by surprise. Can you give us a rundown of the timeline of events and why Tripoli had to scramble to get this resolved so quickly?"

BK: Sure. At LDRS last August Dick Embry said he had a contact who could investigate improving our insurance. The Board of Directors gave him permission to represent the association to see what, if anything, he could find. The broker sent a request for quotes to 19 companies, including our old company CHUBB. During this process we learned that CHUBB was going to drop us, or not renew our policy. We also learned they were not going to tell us before the expiration date.

Fortunately, our new broker was aware of a law which prohibits an insurance carrier from dropping coverage without giving due notice. So CHUBB was forced to renew the policy for one month or face possible litigation - which they did, continuing our coverage until the first of February.

Since we knew our broker bought us some time, Dick Embry pressed the broker really hard to get one of the other 18 companies to give us a quote. Only two companies acted like they would respond. The one we were the most interested in looked like they would quote for $20.00 per member. This would require us to raise dues $15.00, since Tripoli could absorb $5.00 to off-set that overall cost.

At the last moment, this company declined to quote. Fortunately the one company left gave us a quote just a few days before the deadline. The unfortunate part was the price - $30.00 per member. With Tripoli paying $5.00, this meant a dues increase of $25.00.

As you can see, all of this happened fast and caught all of us by surprise. Thanks to Dick Embry, we had enough of a "heads up" to avoid a day in Tripoli without some coverage.

Even though this all happened so fast, I kept all of our on-line Prefects informed throughout the process. About 85 of our 110 Prefects have e-mail addresses. I inform them often, sometimes several times a week, about Tripoli business. Members of Tripoli who have an active correspondence with their local leaders could have been informed that insurance changes were coming. It was not prudent to put out a Tripoli Report announcing something we had no details about. The next Report will have a lot of information.

DM: "I can appreciate how quickly that happened, Bruce. What was going through your mind when you found out that only one of the nineteen companies would actually quote the coverage?"

BK: Well, the night Dick Embry gave me the news about the cost of the new policy, I was personally devastated. I was prepared to sell the membership on a $15.00 dues increase. This was bad enough, but $25.00? Look at my own situation. My oldest son just got married and there are a total of six of us. I pay all the dues in our family (Hey, my kids aren't spoiled!). Only two of us are junior members, so your's truly took a big hit.

Since that day I have not gotten to bed before 2:00 AM, with one exception. One night I was up past 3:00 AM. I have spent a lot of time answering e-mails and preparing documents to ship to the insurance company and to our Prefects. We had to change all of our literature that had old dues fees. The printing costs of all of this was very high, but necessary.

But that first night was the hardest. I got Bruce Lee on the phone and we were both a little down. This was a big hit, not only for the individual member but for the whole association. Bruce and I discussed what needed to be done, so I got off the phone and began the Board voting process that would initiate the dues increase.

DM: "I'm under the impression it's illegal for an insurance company to dump you without some advance notice. Thankfully that was pointed out and we were given until February to respond. What do you think the impact would have been had we not been granted the extra time?"

BK: To understand the impact of suddenly being without insurance, you need to know why we got insurance in the first place.

Out here in the West, land is big and there is a lot of it. We can drive a few miles and fly rockets. I first joined Tripoli after a February 1987 Lucerne launch. That dry lake is divided between a land owner and the BLM. Neither of these parties required insurance at that time. The same was true of Black Rock. Back then, our numbers were small and we projected a small profile.

On the other hand, from almost the very beginning, the Eastern rocketeers had a problem. Land is scarce due to the dense population. Land owners were requiring insurance, which we did not have. Tom Blazanin spent a couple of years after incorporation looking for a company - any company - who would carry us. Finally, he discovered a broker who knew about CHUBB. This company was willing to write land owner liability only, and this was the only kind of policy we had until about two weeks ago.

A few years after Tom got liability coverage for land owners, the BLM found out we had insurance and began requiring it also.

So the effect of losing the policy? If we had lost a policy without another one to take its place, we would have been forced to cancel all launches "until further notice." Who would dare launch, or sponsor a launch, risking their homes and their families' security without protection? The saying come to mind that "only fools go where angels fear to tread."

DM: "For most of the connected flyers out there, the exposure some time back of an attempt by a disgruntled previous member to have the Tripoli insurance coverage cancelled is old news. But, given that it had to plant a seed somewhere, do you feel it had anything to do with CHUBB's decision to cancel Tripoli?"

BK: I'm not sure, but I think you're right. Seeds were planted. I passed this information along to our new broker, who assured us if this happens again we will not have to worry about the costs of legal action. This is a very prestigious firm with their own legal counsel. They will do it for us.

DM: "My take on this is pretty simple: Either Tripoli had to purchase insurance immediately, or it had to notify its members that they couldn't launch until the issue was brought to a member vote, resulting in untold months of no launches. We know the obvious answer to that scenario, but many members may question why not take the other approach? What's your take on waiting to discuss the issue?"

BK: Each year several Tripoli members from the rank and file step forward to serve in one of three available seats on the Board of Directors. Likewise, each of them give promises to represent the whole association, not just the people where they live. We are all connected together and we cannot think like individuals when elected by the whole body. Therefore, this whole body choses three each year from this self-nominating group to represent them. Ninety-nine percent of our members understand this concept.

To this end our Bylaws empower the Board, more particularly the executive officers, to act in the best interest of the association as a whole. The Bylaws do not outline the duties of Directors, per se, but they do outline the duties of the Executive Committee, or the officers of the corporation. My duty as president, for example, requires me to "represent the association in ALL dealings with outside organizations and agencies, and transact business and perform duties on a day-to-day basis ON BEHALF OF THE CORPORATION." (Bylaws, Article VI, Section 5)

I think this makes it pretty clear what my duties are as required by the Bylaws and by our membership. As I said, 99% of our members understand this principle. They are not fools; they know things can turn on a dime. Time is sometimes critical to perform duties for the association. We simply cannot have a vote on everything. Responsible members will not vote someone into office who is untrustworthy, at least not intentionally. Every Board member is a potential future president. I hope everyone remembers this when they vote.

If they have such confidence in their elected leaders, they will be comfortable with the decisions these leaders must necessarily make on a daily basis for them.

If we wait to discuss the insurance issue, we have no insurance. There is a possibility that, while waiting, our company who gave us the quote would become nervous at the delay and either withdraw the quote or, at a later date, raise the rates before we sign the papers. Actually, we had a two week window to respond to the quote. The offer was only good until yesterday [15th of February].

DM: "I agree, had you waited to make the decision, members would have been mad as hell that they couldn't launch. Do you ever feel like you are damned if you do and damned if you don't?"

BK: I feel this way all the time. A book that I'm reading expresses my feelings better than I can. In one chapter, the author discusses the loneliness of moral leadership. I cannot quote everything, but some points are worth repeating. The author says, "We need people... who respond to their consciences even when it is unpopular to do so - perhaps especially when it is unpopular to do so." He goes on to say, "The problem with most of us is that we are afraid to stand up for what we believe... We want to do the right thing, but we are troubled by fears. So we sit back, and the world drifts about us..." ("Standing for Something" by Gordon B. Hinckley; Foreword by Mike Wallace, Times Books, 2000)

In this case, if I had listened to my fears, we would be without insurance; people would either join other organizations or go off on their own. Renewals would have passed us by and the association would suffer a slow and agonizing decline in membership and leadership. My conscience could not that happen.

To put a finer point on the answer you ask for, people complained that our insurance was poor; now they complain the insurance is good. Yes, I know it is about the costs and about certain points of coverage, but a better policy comes with a price. You do not get something like this for nothing. You get what you pay for. You either enjoy the price or you pay the price. Someday someone, God forbid, is going to cause an incident who is not covered. This is the person who will PAY the price. And the day may come when someone who is insured will accidentally cause an accident. This person will ENJOY the price, as will his associates, of this new coverage.

Either way, people complain. That is why leadership is lonely. If it is not lonely, you have a fence-sitter who, trying to please everyone accomplishes nothing, going neither to the right nor to the left. He's afraid of offending so he does not move.

DM: "I know what you mean, Bruce. Let's discuss specifics if we can. Now I know a lot of individuals are going to do a line-by-line comparison of a TRA membership vs. a NAR membership to compare 'value.' Myself, I have always supported both organizations because you are both fighting for the same thing -- to expand and preserve the hobby. But what do you say to an individual out there who makes that line-by-line comparison? How do you persuade them of the 'value?'

BK: There are many different perspectives to "value" and what that means. I will try to express my point of view. To me, value means more than what you get for the dollar. To others, that's all they care about. If you are talking about organizations, specifically, I really do not like making comparisons publicly. Both organizations have a lot to offer; value for the dollar and value for like ideals. I, like you, belong to both organizations -- but I only participate in one.

In my position, of course, I'm biased. I believe Tripoli has an awesome program -- covering a wider range of rocketry activities than most other groups. My advice to the "shopping" public is to investigate both. By that, I don't mean by word alone. They will find TRA members who will tell them bad things about the NAR and vice-versa. I, for example, can give someone all the reasons and extol the virtues of buying a Ford. But my reasons for owning a Ford may be the very reasons they will buy a Chevy. Just because my Chevy left me stranded does not mean your Chevy will strand you, so beware of the disgruntled voices out there on both sides.

This is my opinion, mind you, on the major organizations. If people like model rocketry only, they should join the NAR. Tripoli does education with the youth, but high power rocketry is our specialty. If people like a mixture of both, they will feel comfortable in both organizations. If people like just high power, they should join Tripoli. If people like a mixture of commercially-made motors and experimental activities, Tripoli is the place. If people only like experimental, I tell them to join the RRS, or some other exclusive experimental organization. As far as I know, Tripoli is the only user/consumer organization involved in two programs, consumer and experimental rocketry, at this level and scope. And, as far as I know, I'm the only leader of a group who will tell you that Tripoli is not for everyone! We are not trying to be all for all. Our goal is to accommodate the needs of our members to the best of our ability. Going back to my Ford vs Chevy analogy, I do not want to sell someone a car they will be unhappy with.

One thing is for sure. The test is in the activities of the organizations. Most people will find, when they attend activities put on by the respective organizations, they will learn that most of the diatribe spoken about either of them is way out of proportion -- some of it outright untruths.

As far as comparing insurance policies for value, as one of the "line items" of comparison, I do not know everything about our own policy, let alone NAR's policy. There are a couple of things I can say, though, without impropriety.

One thing I like about the NAR's policy is that it's optional. Our new policy is not. This was forced on us; the insurance company required it of every active member. (With only one company willing to quote, we are not in a position to negotiate anything.) This is both good and bad, depending on your point of view. In a few cases, some people's home owner's policy will cover their rocketry activities, but some will not. People should be very cautious about this. Some home owner's policies that have "airplane and hang gliding" exclusions may use this broad interpretation toward rocketry activities. One of our members learned his did not mention rocketry, but his company declined to cover rocketry. He investigated getting an "umbrella attachment and found out the costs were around $350.00. That's significantly higher than our $25.00 dues increase.

Having said all this, our insurance is good from the standpoint that EVERYONE is covered, so we do not have to worry about the "care free" flyer who will risk losing something through carelessness that he did not have to pay for.

Tripoli' policy has some "firsts" I think. Just keep in mind that I do not know what is in other associations' policies. We do have member-to-member coverage, almost unheard of with group policies. In other words, if you or I cause damage to another member or his property, it is covered. Another benefit is experimental coverage.

DM: "Someone mentioned that there was no benefit for the actual flyer should they hurt themselves, but that there was coverage for other member flyers, land owners, etc. The member-to-member coverage is pretty unique within hobby coverages, but how does the plan compare against others for covering the individual themselves?"

BK: I'm not sure about "others," but let me give you a portion of a letter I received from our broker that explains the member-to-member provision:

"General Liability insurance is intended to protect the insured against legal liability for bodily injury or property damage claims from third parties. The first party is the Named Insured listed on the policy (buyer), the second party is the carrier (provides the coverage) and the third party is the one who suffers the bodily injury and/or property damage.

The policy form states that as a limited liability company, Tripoli Rocketry Association, Inc. is an insured. Tripoli's members and Prefectures are insureds, but only with respect to the conduct of Tripoli's business.

Under the conditions of the policy, "Separation of Insureds" is defined as follows:"

"Except with respect to the Limit of Insurance and any rights or duties specifically assigned in this Coverage Part to the first Named Insured, this insurance applies as if each Named Insured were the only Named Insured and Separately to each insured against whom claim is made or "suit" is brought.

The Association, each member and each prefecture will be treated as if they were the only Named Insured under Tripoli's Liability policy but the policy will only pay up to the limits of liability for all claims arising out of one accident."

"TRIPOLI'S QUESTIONS/ANSWERS

(All "yes" responses are subject to the deductible and are excess over any valid and collectible insurance)

1. If a member damages another member's property, is there coverage for that loss?

Yes, since the party suffering the loss is 3rd party to the member creating the loss.

2. If a member damages a rental vehicle rented by the member, is it covered?

No, since the claim is not considered 3rd party. The physical damage loss should be settled under their personal auto policy. (Note: Rental agencies have damage waivers. I would suggest everyone attending the launch pay the $10 or so per day to insure a rented vehicle. We have actually had a member damage his own property before, so this can and does happen.)

3. If a member damages another member's rental vehicle, is it covered?

Yes, since the claim is considered 3rd party.

4. If a member injures their own family member, can the family members claim bodily injury losses?

Yes, since the family member is considered 3rd party.

5. Is there coverage under Medical Payments?

No, limits are not provided under this coverage for medical expenses incurred at the time of accident "regardless of fault."

1. Is the loss triggered from a Tripoli-group sponsored and planned activity/event?

2. Did a current Tripoli member cause the loss?

3. Have Tripoli safety codes been followed?

4. Is there a Tripoli Range Safety officer supervising the event?

"Locations covered are defined as 'any location where a Tripoli Rocketry Association and/or Prefectures organized activity is conducted.' Activities would include 'meetings, group launches, and educational presentations but WOULD NOT include any individual member' rocket assembly, preparations or use OUTSIDE of group activities."

This caused my second near-sleepless night. I think some people who subscribe to "conspiracy theories" believe I planned it this way. I can tell you I most certainly did not. Nine years ago Tripoli and the NAR repaired our wounds caused by our differences, and we have together cultivated a wonderful relationship, between both the association's leaders and the individual rocketeer. Who would have ever believed that Tripoli and the NAR would be partners in action against the ATF?

The problem is one of education. We need to educate the insurance industry about the dynamics of the rocketry community and the delicate balance between organizations. We cannot expect them to understand our history, but they need to know we need to be able to participate in activities with each other.

I am not anxious to be the cause of any deterioration of this relationship. However, I'm sure everyone can see we did not have a choice.

There is some good news, though. Just this morning Dick Embry, at my request, has pushed our broker for some relief in this area. I sent over a copy of the Code for Model Rocketry - which will help.

I have also asked Mark Bundick, NAR president, to send a copy of NAR's policy (or a certificate of insurance) to our broker. If our broker is satisfied that NAR members have high power coverage, this rule will most likely change. (In fact, within the next day or two, we will be making an announcement about this very subject - pending, of course final action by our carrier.)

There is some good news as it relates to one group of non-TRA member we often see at our launches. It has been determined that kids under the age of 18 may continue to participate in modeling activities under our educational provisions at our launches. If they are over 18, as it now stands, they must join Tripoli to participate in any launching activity - unless, of course, they are scout leaders participating with their troop.

To sum this up, it is our goal to educate the insurance company to allow "insured" NAR members at Tripoli events. Also, it is our goal to have the insurance company insure our members at ANY activity following the Safety Code regardless who puts on the launch. This will address "joint" TRA/NAR activities, and will allow our members to have coverage at NAR-exclusive activities.

DM: "I know that you are working to correct these issues as quickly as possible, are there any things that could stand in the way of you actually resolving this issue?"

BK: Yes. If NAR's president decides not to send a copy of the NAR policy or certificate of insurance to our broker, or if NAR insurance is found not to cover high power rocketry activities, this issue will not be resolved to anyone's satisfaction. Our insurance company has made it clear that only people with insurance can participate. They are unwilling to insure, like auto insurance companies who insure "uninsured motorist," the "uninsured rocketeer." It has also been made clear to me that an uninsured rocketeer who causes an incident that requires them to pay out will cause the company to cancel our coverage. Since this was the only company who would carry us, that would be an unwise thing to allow. We have to protect our assets, and this coverage is definitely an asset. Without it, we don't fly.

DM: "I actually heard one individual who queried why there wasn't a joint proposal made to cover both organization's members, given that it would benefit from a larger base of members to share the cost. What's your take on this idea?"

BK: There were two attempts to do this from the beginning. First, the insurance company who covers the NAR declined to give us a quote without a clear reason. Secondly, as far as adding the NAR to our insurance pool... the NAR was invited to do so but declined the invitation.

DM: "Given that a solution to this is being worked on as we speak, what do you see as the unique feature set of this policy compared to the old one?"

BK: There is hardly anything in the old policy worth comparing! The old policy covered the land owner only, for $1,000,000.00 total aggregate. This new policy covers the Tripoli Rocketry Association, its members and Prefectures, and the land owner as an additional insured. It protects member-to-member as far as personal and property liability. The policy has a $3,000,000.00 aggregate limit and protects against faulty products. Also, if Tripoli decides to get involved with aircraft, that activity is covered as well. We can even do rocket cars.

The old policy, being strictly limited to land owner permitted use, did not cover activities other than those involved at a launch site. This policy covers you at all Tripoli and Prefecture activities. Are you building a large project in your garage? You will erect it in your driveway before going to a launch. If it falls over and hits the neighbor's property, the neighbor's property is covered!

Let's not forget the experimental coverage.

DM: "So this policy actually covers experimental activities as well? That's great. But, does it add any additional expense to the price of the coverage to be able to cover experimental?"

BK: No, it does not cost any extra -- not one penny more to insure experimental activities. If we decided to delete the experimental activity from Tripoli the cost of the coverage would not change. Our broker asked us for copies of our safety code. We told them we had two codes and submitted them both. The broker took the High Power Safety Code (for commercially-manufactured motors) and combined that with our Tripoli Research Rules (experimental motors) and obtained a quote including both. This was really an unexpected bonus.

DM: "You know, Bruce, some have said experimental activities are outside the scope of the Tripoli Articles of Corporation. But in previous conversations, you have indicated that this is just not the truth. Can you share you inside knowledge on this issue, to put the experimental issue to bed once and for all?"

BK: Ironic you should ask this question. A couple of days ago I sent the following memo to our Prefectures. I apologize for its length, but this states our policy concerning experimental activities and also explains why we do not need to amend our AOC to provide for our current activities:

"15 February 2000

To All Prefects:

There are some conversations going on about the legality of some Tripoli activities, more specifically experimental rocketry. TRA Articles of Incorporation (AOC) are being used to justify some positions that are not accurate - because only select portions are being used and not the context of the whole document.

Reprinted below are the stated "purposes" of Tripoli as found in the AOC under Article III. Each of you should have a copy of this. It is the green booklet in your Handbook binder. I will make comments on each of these as they apply, entitled "note":

ARTICLE III - PURPOSES

The purposes for which this corporation is organized are:

(a) To promote, encourage and advance research, competition, technology and recreational activities related to advanced nonprofessional rocketry in a safe and legal manner.

Note: This is the paragraph that those arguing AGAINST experimental activities always leave out. I see the words "encourage and advance research" and "technology" being used here. You obviously cannot have something certified or commercial in the future if it does not exist, or if research is not conducted. There is nothing prohibitive in this statement about anything, except the activity must be legal and safe.

(b) To conduct, as a licensed business, research and testing of rockets, rocket motors, and rocket components and parts.

Note: This allows us to even conduct research as a business, commercial if you will, notwithstanding we are non-profit. Nothing prohibitive here. Some of our detractors may claim that our organization does not have the right to do these things, but clearly that is the very thing we have the right to do. All of this was established according to corporate law in the state of Alaska. Tripoli has the same right as any business, to conduct research and testing. And this statement does not limit that testing to commercial products either.

(c) To educate the membership in the proper and safe use and storage of commercially available rocket motors and materials.

Note: This is the item those against Tripoli's experimental activities focus on to the exclusion of everything else. Taken as a whole, item (a) allows for research and technology while item (c) allows use and storage of commercial motors. Neither paragraph excludes the other paragraph. You can do (a) if you want to and you can do (b) if you want to, as long as the activity is safe and legal - which it is in most places.

(d) To establish regulations and procedures for testing, training, and authorizing members of the corporation to acquire and use commercially available Class "B" solid propellant rocket motors in a safe and legal manner.

Note: See comments on item (c). The same reasoning applies. There is not a prohibitive statement here either, except the activity must be safe and legal. So this item does not cancel out the research and technology concepts of paragraph (a) nor does (a) cancel out the concepts of paragraphs (c) and (d). It is interesting to note also that for research AND commercial activities, the provision for BOTH is that they be safe and legal.

(e) To publish a journal, at regular intervals, to facilitate the business of the corporation.

(Does not have anything to do with the subject being discussed.)

(f) To continue the tradition and history of the Tripoli Rocket Club, founded December 1, 1964, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which subsequently evolved into the Tripoli Rocketry Association on May 18, 1985, in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Note: Here is the real thing everyone overlooks. If anything, this statement could be interpreted to EXCLUDE commercial motors - if you use the logic of others. Why? Because the "the tradition and history of the Tripoli Rocket Club" as "founded [on] December 1, 1964" was almost TOTALLY experimental! How clever of the authors of the AOC! Nothing is excluded here. Paragraphs (a) and (f) allow for non-commercial motors and paragraphs (c) and (d) allow for commercial motors. Not one of these paragraphs excludes the other.

Unfortunately, most of you do not know about the history of the early organization. That history involved projects both solid and liquid. Someday we will publish this from the old newsletters, dating back to 1968, some early members still have.

(g) This organization is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

(Also, this is not relevant to the current discussion, but is printed here so you can see ALL of the AOC and not just the parts others would quote to support their point of view.)

"ARTICLE VII, SECTION 3 - COMMITTEE DUTIES

(c) Safety and Motor Listing:

The committee shall develop and maintain a safety code for advanced nonprofessional rocketry. The committee may recommend to the board such other safety codes as it deems appropriate. The committee shall develop and maintain a rocket motor listing program for the purpose of determining actual performance, reliability, and safety of commercially available motors that meet the requirements of the program but in no way certify or guarantee any motor or propellant product in any manner."

Note: This paragraphs outlines the duties of the Motor Testing Committee as presently constituted. It does not prohibit non-commercial motors either. However, it does say something else interesting. It allows the board of directors to have "...other safety codes as it deems appropriate." To this end, the TripoliRocketry Association as adopted a safety code for experimental rocketry activities called the Tripoli Research Rules.

It should be remembered that the insurance company has copies of BOTH safety codes, the Tripoli Safety Code (NFPA 1127 for commercial activities) and the Tripoli Research Rules (our code for experimental activities). Both activities are covered regardless of what others may tell you. It is our organization, it is our insurance. Therefore, we should know.

I hope you will print this out and keep it in your Handbook binder. You may find it useful someday.

Bruce E. Kelly, President
Tripoli Rocketry Association"

Well, there you have it readers. Solid information. Thanks for reading and enjoy the information.