tbrogan

Isn't this the same basic direction Tim Lehr was trying to go with the ATF? I thought his focus was on the premise that the club had to be incorporated, but I am old and could have misread his documents. It seems now, on the basis of this material, club incorporation is not necessary.

The document shown with the article is.........?




I guess its something.........

T

rstaff3

Thanks for the post Darryl. The thing that caught my eye was:


So would this mean that a similar letter from an individual LEUP holder should allow unlicensed buddies to buy regulated motors? I'm not sure why a corporation would be any more reliable than an individual in this regard. I'd assume the shipping address would be that of the LEUP holder and the LEUP holder would have to keep control of the motor.

ksaves2

I guess it's a start but one must remember that it's only for 50lbs. of propellant.
Get a large club and it might be difficult to provide for all the members.

It's an alternative in case we lose in court. Might be another year before we see
a ruling. No matter if we have all our ducks in a row, we still can end up on the short end of the stick. I laud Burl for making the effort. Wonder what the Tripoli hierarchy
will comment.

ddmobley

Tom, this is a similar direction to what Tim was working on, but Burl took it the extra mile and will end up getting the hobby more in the end. For starters, the accurate point that an incorporated club is no longer need, an association works just fine. Couple that with the item about separate magazines no longer being needed will really help a lot of folks.

Dick, your observations are correct that it doesn't have to be a club performing these roles. If you as a licensed individual want to take the role, you can do so as long as you make sure you are not dealing with prohibited persons. As long as the person is under your supervision and not prohibited, you are good to go. Some vendors already do this.

Kurt, the 50 pound limit only applies to indoor storage variances. If your club has outdoor storage approved, you can go 500 pounds easily.

People, this is an alternative that works RIGHT NOW, not in a year, not if we lose the lawsuit, this works today. Use these scenarios to grow the hobby, not sit around and watch it whither waiting on some judge to make up his mind.

Steve_Shannon

You might not even have to supervise that person if they are listed on your LEUP as a "Responsible Person". By listing a person as such their background is checked and they are cleared by the ATF. It is like having multiple people share the duties and responsibilities of single LEUP, being able to order and supervise others. The magazine would remain with the actual licensee, but a "responsible person" has nearly as much authority as the LEUP licensee. As an LEUP licensee you probably would be liable for actions performed by someone you listed as a "responsible person" though, so choose wisely.

rstaff3

Darryl - thanks for the affirmation of what I was thinking.
Steve - your extended comments make a lot of sense.

It would be nice if the BATFE would make one statement of how this should work and distribute it to all field offices. I hear of a lot of people flying off other people's LEUPS, but I also know of two cases where this hasn't worked out in the BATFE's eyes. I have to admit that the devil is probably in the details and that I don't know all the specifics in either case. The club route hopefully will be better documented and I know of one local club who is actively moving towards club storage.

tbrogan

Thank you Burl!!



Darrell -

Are you saying this is something we are able to run with now? If so, this is exactly what our club has been waiting for! The incorporation hurdle was a high one for a small club like ours and now that it is gone we will definitely move forward with this. Time to get the officers of CATO together and start the wheels moving! This could be one of the better winter rocketry projects yet! When you start talking to new people about federal permits, fees, background checks, storage magazines, you can see their eyes rolling and they have that "what am I getting myself into look?"

Working out some logistics and, crap, finding someone responsible in our club could be a problem Just kidding, time to start the ball rolling and the club growing again. Of course this news has to come about two weeks after we lost our high power field! Should be a motivating factor to find another one, eh?!

Thanks again for all the accurate information on THIS forum!

Tom

ddmobley

YES! Wait no longer! This is ready to use NOW.

tquigg

Darrell and RP "Gang":

I guess I'm still a bit fuzzy on this (haven't had enough coffee this morning!) Since Sections are already "chartered" as part of the National Association of Rocketry, and since the NAR is an "Association", aren't NAR Sections already an "Association" by association?

So all we'd have to do as NAR Sections is change the wording in our individual Constitution and Bylaws to show we are an "association" instead of a "club", and add a section regarding "LEUP Permits" stating..."The Association intends to obtain a Federal Low Explosives Users Permit..." I know as an association it wouuld save my club corporate fees with the Washington State Secretary.

Patiently waiting for enlightenment...

Best Regards
Tim Quigg NAR 62887 L2 TSO
Section Advisor
Blue Mt Rocketeers NAR # 615
www.bmr615.org

ddmobley

Tim, no need to be confused any longer. You are exactly correct. Modify your club's bylaws to include the necessary wording indicating one of your purposes is to procure regulated items for your members, secure storage that will pass federal approval, submit an application for a federal permit listing who the responsible parties will be, and start enjoying the expanded benefit of allowing users to join who don't need to worry about explosives licensing requirements.

This arrangement should also prove very beneficial for those Tripoli prefectures that participate in experimental research activities as well. Under the Safe Explosives Act (SEA) of 2002, while individuals are allowed to manufacture propellant for their own personal use without a federal explosives permit, once mixed, the propellant could not be transported by the individual over local roads or highways to a launch site, even within the individual's state of residence. For this reason, since the implementation of SEA in March of 2003, home-made propellants would have had to be mixed "on-site" so that no transportation occurred if the individual making the propellant did not have a federal explosives permit. Using the above arrangement, a club's "responsible persons" could accept for transport the research propellant for the individual participating in research activities and then transport it to the launch site along with the rest of the club's regulated materials.

tquigg

I get it now. Thanks Darrell!

Just one more question however...perhaps someone here can shed some light on this for me as well...

How can the "responsible" members of the club determine that a non-licensed person purchasing motors under this procedure is not a convicted felon or a person otherwise ineligable to possess motors? Working in law enforcement as I do, I know the only way to truly confirm that a person is not a convicted felon is through the submission of fingerprints, hence the LEUP licensing process currently in use. I understand that the new procedure as outlined here allows for folks without a LEUP to leagally purchase and use restricted motors under a club that has filed as an "association". But how does the "association" confirm that they are not providing motors through this program to people who legally cannot possess them? In a perfect world, everyone tells the truth. We don't live in a perfect world however.

How would we handle an ineligable person obtaining a motor through this program? How do we insure we aren't providing motors to ineligable people?

Not trying to stir the pot, just looking to set my mind at ease here.

Tim Quigg

ddmobley

You aren't stirring the pot, Tim, you are asking good questions and seeking informed advice. That's a good strategy to make sure you cover all of your bases.

The law only asks that the club do a reasonable inquiry to ascertain that the member is not a prohibited person per ATF rules. That is all they ask. Having the club members sign a statement that they are none of the classes of prohibited persons is more than adequate. If they are they are guilty of perjury, the club has done their part.

Playing the devils advocate here, suppose that happens and a prohibited person slips through your safety net. What would be the result? The motors never leave the field. The motors are used for supervised rocket activities in a remote area. If a person lied about being prohibited, at the worst they flew a rocket.

The lying person is subject to criminal penalties if in the event they are caught for something else and all the wrong doings they ever did are reviewed the federal government. But the club did their part in trying to ascertain if the person was prohibited or not — the lie is on the liar.

tquigg

Thanks much for taking the time to help clarify these points for me Darrell. I REALLY appreciate it!

Best Regards
Tim Quigg

Rocket Flier

"This information is hoped to eventually result in an official notice from ATF that would be sent to all of their enforcement agents nationally."

rstaff3

I'd think at the least this is useful material to initiate a discussion with your local field office.

Rocket Flier

,..and the lawyer who reviews your by-law changes.

ddmobley

Whether or not the ATF ever makes a formal statement or notice about this specific scenario, the discussion has been presented to ATF in Washington, reviewed by their attorneys and was found to past muster. It is based on the current regulation and is completely legal, therefore there is no need to wait for an invitation to put it into use.

The LEUP holder can always report any suspicious persons or activities to the ATF if they really are worried about enforcing the law.

Using this arrangement, the club will have to have a person or persons who manage and are responsible for the magazine and magazine transactions. The club also needs to have a storage location and a red box. The rest is pretty easy, i.e. the list to vendors of authorized persons.

If clubs are interested, they should put it into action and apply for a club permit instead of trying to see why they can't do it. ATF will approve their application if it is presented according to the information stated.

On the topic of associations, each club must declare themselves an "association" and state the common purpose of purchasing motors in their bylaws, charter or articles of incorporation, as stated. The document must be, generally, as shown in the article to lay out the procedure under the permit. Being a member of NAR does not make all NAR members automatically members of an association that holds a LEUP. The local association or corporation is the LEUP holding entity, so naturally, the members must belong to the LEUP-holding entity. NAR is an association, but it is not a permit-holding association, so each local club must form their own "sub-association" of the larger national entity, and that sub-association will become its own entity, that stands on its own in the eyes of the law, with a charter or by-laws that stipulates their common purpose is to serve their members, one method of which is the purpose of securing regulated motors for the members to use.

Don't shoot it down, just do it. It's legal, and it's legal now. The worst thing that can happen unless you intentionally break the law is that rockets will fly at approved events. I think that's a pretty good outcome.

fox_racing_guy

On the convicted felon question maybe you could ask to see a voter registration card. It's my understanding that most states (NOT ALL) don't allow convicted felons voting privileges.

UhClem

A few comments:

1) If it is legal for clubs to do this, then it is legal for individuals to do it as well.

2) Some of the statements within this document are excessively restrictive: the requirement to return all materials to a magazine _prior_ to leaving the launch site, restricted to club events, restricted to club members, etc.

This next problem requires some explanation...

1. (F) requires that the permit holder provide a list of persons authorized by the permit holder to order materials on his behalf and references the regulations. The problem is that the regulation referenced deals with delivery by common carrier and has nothing to do with this. But perhaps this was a typo and they meant 555.103(b)(2)(ii). While a bit closer to the point this deals with persons authorized to accept delivery. Not order. So I am at a loss to explain where the ATF found this requirement. Oops, there it is. 103(a)(3)(ii). This is in section (a) which was no longer effective as of 25 May 2003. There is no current regulation on this topic. Perhaps this was an oversight on the part of the ATF but they have had more than four years to correct it.

http://a257.g.akamaitech.n.../aprqtr/27cfr555.103.htm


In any case the purchase of regulated materials needs to be controlled to prevent the problem of exceeding the capacity of the magazine. If the club manages to get a type 4 outdoor magazine, this is much less of a problem.

Before running down this path, do some research. The ATF has several letters on clubs on their web site at: http://www.atf.gov/explarson/eipb/letters.htm

Also see if you can find a local fireworks club and talk with them. Heck, since one permit fits all, you might be able to work together.

ddmobley

Voter's registration isn't a mandatory process therefore can't be used for identification of a person's legal status. Even so, if the person produced a forged voter's registration card, you are back to where you were if he signed a form stating he wasn't a prohibited person: he lied.

ddmobley

Dave, thanks for checking through this. Your understanding and knowledge of the explosives law is deeper than most hobbyists, so your insight is appreciated. Some comments on your comments:


Yes, this is correct, but an individual has less altruistic reasoning to do so, but they certainly can.


This confused me. Since the scenario focuses on the responsible persons maintaining possession and prodividing supervision, how could they accomplish this if the regulated items were allowed to leave their official area of operation?


So you are saying add responsible persons to the fireworks club's permit who are members of the club, right? The bylaws of the fireworks club would need to be reviewed to make sure it would cover rocketry activities if their original bylaws were specific to fireworks activities. But yes, that could work as long as all the i's were dotted and t's were crossed.

Rocket Flier

Maintaining possession does not require returning to magazine.

That then implies the magazine be at the launch site.

ddmobley

Ok, I see what David was saying now. That makes sense then. It is my understanding you are supposed to have regulated materials in some type of approved storage until they are being used, even on-site. A day box, perhaps, for use at the end of the day, especially at multi-day events, and for use to get the regulated items to and from the field safely.

Anyway. The act of non-licensed members returning the regulated items to the responsible persons before leaving the launch site for the day is an act of surrendering an item they have no lawful reason to retain and insures under this arrangement that the regulated items stay in the control and possession of the licensed parties.

The status of the regulated materials and whether or not they are returned to the magazine, a suitable temporary transportation container or a day box is the responsibility of the responsible parties and isn't really within the scope of what this particular arrangement is trying to accomplish, but a valid consideration that the responsible parties of any federal permit must resolve to the letter of the law, whether they are an association with responsible persons or just a solo permitee.

UhClem

I despise the ATF because they have forced me to pay closer attention to
the law and regulation than I otherwise would have.


If the clubs magazine is not at the launch site, how do you return the materials to it without leaving the launch site? You could do it by having a portable or mobile magazine to transport everything to and from the magazine but this is not required by regulations. Storage requirements are specifically exempted for transport and use. See 27 CFR 555.205

The limitation to a club launch and club members also makes no sense. The important thing is that the permittee controls the materials. This can happen just as easily at some other clubs launch, LDRS for example, as at a club launch. Likewise the responsible person can assist a non-club member.

I suspect that you will find that the ATF's idea of supervision is more restrictive than you think. Two scenarios:

1) Non-permittee comes up to responsible person with their rocket etc. Responsible person retrieves the reload and then hovers over the non-permittee while they prepare and fly their rocket.

2) Responsible person hands reload to non-permittee who then walks back to their prep area to prepare and fly their rocket.

(1) looks OK to me but (2) looks way too much like an illegal distribution for my tastes. I suspect that the ATF would think the same way.

I see basically two problems. The first is just what is "direction and control"? I suspect that it requires direct and personal supervision although the ATF hasn't provided any guidance. The second problem is: can I as a user permittee purchase items on behalf of a non-permittee, accepting payment for these items, or allow a non-permittee to make the purchases for delivery to me for the non-permittees use? I have yet to see any guidance on the first question and this is the first document, though unofficial, that addresses the second.

My solution, although it isn't really a good one, is to limit myself to helping people get their level 1 certification. I will provide the reload kit, handle the certification paperwork, and stay with the flier throughout the process. Thereby maintaining direction and control. In return I ask that the flier make a donation to the NAR legal fund for at least the value of the reload kit.

UhClem

A storage magazine is not required on site unless you "store" the materials. I recall either the ISEE or IME making this point in a document a while back. Alas I can't locate it now. In any case a day box would be useless at the end of the day because it _must_ be attended at all times. Storing materials in a magazine also brings up the ugly problems of notifying the ATF and local AHJ plus the table of distances.




If the non-permittee is returning the regulated materials to the permittee at the end of the day it looks to me like they have been "distributed" as the permittee has given up control.

Steve_Shannon

Hi David,
I think that when it gets down to it that as long as the people are onsite and the "responsible persons" are onsite, they are considered under the supervision of the "responsible persons". I believe that is how it would be for pyrotechnics and other explosives also. They are considered the same as employees. I will see if I can find something from ATF that supports that.

ddmobley

I seem to remember something recently where ATF agents have given various rocketeers grief at launches for not keeping their regulated motors in a magazine. The users were keeping them in their car, in their hotel room, at the launch site in the club trailer, etc. This does not jive with what you are saying about the regulations exempting storage for transportation and use, as it sounds like some of them are considering transportation as the trip to the field and use as pushing the button.

I also recall another incident where the user was told the motors had to be in a magazine or other storage at the field up until he pulled it out, prepared it and put it in his rocket, suggesting that the motors should be used the minute a user arrives as the field. It is this type of inconsistent enforcement, whether with or without supporting regulations, that is making our life so difficult.

We need an official position on what is expected to be done from the time a user arrives at the launch, participates for the day, goes to his hotel, and comes back for another day.


From my understanding of Burl's work, this was what was discussed. The example was given of a fireworks show where non-licensed association members were given club-procured regulated fireworks which they then took to the fireworks shooting area and set up. The responsible persons were on site, but not hovering over the non-licensed association member's shoulder.

Steve touched on this too, as the scenario has been discussed in the past in the ATF Explosives Scenario FAQ. See 4b:

http://www.atf.treas.gov/e...documents/scenarioqa.pdf

This arrangement would work similarly based on the current regulations, because i-iv of the above scenario are met: regulated items received lawfully, the responsible person takes them from the magazine, the non-licensed party is in possession and under the responsible person's supervision, and the association has taken reasonable effort to insure the non-licensed party is not a prohibited person.

Rocket Flier

From the 3rd letter at the link David posted:
"You would not need a Federal explosives license or permit to have a licensee or permittee transport the materials to the'event location on your behalf. However, no person other than a licensee or permittee may receive any explosive materials. Therefore, the licensee or permittee would not be able t9 provide (distribute) the materials back to you at the event.

That licensee or user permittee may transfer the display fireworks to a "club" at the event site, if the club has a license or peimit. Additionally, if you are a club member in good standing, you may possess explosives at the show site if specifically authorized to do so by the club on behalf of the club. Persons prohibited under 18 U .S.C. 842 may not possess explosives under any circumstances and the club must not allow possession by any members that the club knows or has reasonable cause to believe is prohibited from possessing explosives."

The link Darrel posted indicated an LEUP holder may have a friend assist as long as "However, their assistance is only lawful under similar circumstances as those described in 4b."


If you stay in a motel room you must have a portable magazine (not a type 3 in your car), because if you are sleeping, the explosives are not 'in use' and you must provide storage. A car is not a secure location.

Like I said, talk to your club lawyer as legal advise given here without ATF link as reference is only opinion.

Steve_Shannon

Darrell's link was exactly the link I was remembering. Thanks Darrell!

CF-105

If I read all this correctly, this all boils down to placing an onus on the permit holder to only provide motors for non-permit holders that he/she feels they can trust. If a non-permitee leaves without returning an unused motor, then the permitee is in trouble, along with the person with the motor.

I imagine the next step will be some sort of legal waiver for the non-permitee to sign, absolving the permit holders of any responsibility, etc.

I'm curious: as a non-US flyer, what sort of standing would I have as a non-permitee? There are quite a few Canadian rocketeers that are a reasonable drive from some big US launches. A lot of us stay on our side of the border because of the legal situation on your side.