Rocketry Planet

WASHINGTON, District of Columbia USA — Attorneys for the Tripoli Rocketry Association and the National Association of Rocketry today filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking over $395,000 in fee recovery associated with their landmark lawsuit against the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The original lawsuit, which dragged on for nearly 10 years in the courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton, challenged the ATF's claim that ammonium perchlorate composite propellant (APCP) was an explosive.  After having the case remanded back to Judge Walton's courtroom on appeal from the U.S. District Court of Appeals, Judge Walton awarded the victory to the hobby vacating APCP as an explosive, removing it from federal regulation.

The recovery lawsuit, filed today in Washington, bases its claim on the federal Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) and seeks to recover fees and costs the two hobby organizations encountered while seeking to rein in the over-reaching federal agency.  The victory for two organizations was awarded on March 16th of this year by Judge Walton.

The EAJA provides, in relevant part, that:

Except as otherwise specifically provided by statute, a court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other expenses, in addition to any costs . . . incurred by that party in any civil action (other than cases sounding in tort), including proceedings for judicial review of agency action, brought by or against the United States in any court having jurisdiction of that action, unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.

As the prevailing party, Tripoli and NAR are entitled to this recovery.  The 118 page document filed on behalf of the two organizations provides an overview of the nine year fight, and spells out the request for reimbursement of $395,136.99 in attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in the total litigation costs, including the $23,929.34 fee for filing the legal recovery application.

Attachment: Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs Pursuit to EAJA (5,107KB Adobe PDF)

Reader comments:

#1 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

The attachment is fascinating and illuminating reading. Thank you for the link.

albqslim on 06-15-2009 08:14 PM

#2 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

Hopefully our two organizations can recover this staggering sum that WE'VE had to pay with our dues and contributions over the years to finally shed the yoke of the unfair and unlawful assertion by BATFE that APCP was/is an explosive.

We shouldn't have had to bear this huge financial burden and should be compensated.

On a side note, all of the affected rocketeers who've paid huge hazmat fees, LEUP fees and all other such financial burdens and inconveniences should get relief too. Unfortunately that will never happen.

Cheers
Shannon

srollins on 06-16-2009 12:43 PM

#3 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

Quote:

On a side note, all of the affected rocketeers who've paid huge hazmat fees, LEUP fees and all other such financial burdens and inconveniences should get relief too. Unfortunately that will never happen.

Initially I read this and thought - huh? Hazmat didn't change due to this ruling. But then I thought about the effect on dealers and I think I agree that there will be a reduction in overall Hazmat's paid. I think that with decreased paperwork and the elimination of a permit requirement on the consumer and the dealer more dealers will be in the business of selling motors. Hazmat fees are more likely to be absorbed and spread out over more orders resulting in lower Hazmat overhead per motor.

UncleVanya on 06-16-2009 03:25 PM

#4 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

On the other hand we used to combine our orders so they all came in one shipment to our LEUP holder. That resulted in a single Hazmat charge. Now, multiple members might be placing individual orders, each with its own Hazmat charge. The Hazmat charge will not go down and there will be more of them.

Steve_Shannon on 06-16-2009 06:29 PM

#5 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

Quote:

On the other hand we used to combine our orders so they all came in one shipment to our LEUP holder. That resulted in a single Hazmat charge. Now, multiple members might be placing individual orders, each with its own Hazmat charge. The Hazmat charge will not go down and there will be more of them.

We did the same. I was thinking that as well. In our case we will now have a dealer for HPR again since our dealer lacks an LEDP but is now able to sell motors.

UncleVanya on 06-17-2009 09:51 AM

#6 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

once the NAR/TRA divies this money up between themeselves, I hope they will realize that the majority of these monies came from the donations of its members. Thats right. If it wasn't for the donations of the membership the NAR/TRA could never have persisted in the 10 year war with the BATFE.

I would propose that the NAR/TRA give back this money to its members in the form of a membership rebate. Thats right they should subsidize a members membership for at least one year... a one year free membership .

The catch is, that the only people in the NAR/TRA that should get this free membership as a reward for their long time support of the NAR/TRA against the BATFE is those that actually contributed to the cause. I mean people who didn't contribute for whatever reasons shouldn't get a free membership.


I don't know how much of the monies this would cost the org's but there should be some money left over to pay for upgraded HQ stuff and other needed stuff for both orgs.

I don't think this windfall should be squandered. Whatever is left over could also seed a new legal fund as I'm sure we are going to need it.

what do you think?

terry dean

shockwaveriderz on 06-18-2009 10:27 AM

#7 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

Quote:

I would propose that the NAR/TRA give back this money to its members in the form of a membership rebate. Thats right they should subsidize a members membership for at least one year... a one year free membership .

The catch is, that the only people in the NAR/TRA that should get this free membership as a reward for their long time support of the NAR/TRA against the BATFE is those that actually contributed to the cause. I mean people who didn't contribute for whatever reasons shouldn't get a free membership.

I personally would not be in favor of this. (Clarification: "This" = Returning money to the membership)

UncleVanya on 06-18-2009 10:33 AM

#8 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

Quote:

once the NAR/TRA divies this money up between themeselves, I hope they will realize that the majority of thesemonies came from the donations of its members. Thats right. If it wasn't for the donations of the membership the NAR/TRA could never have persisted in the 10 year war with the BATFE.

I would propose that the NAR/TRA give back this money to its members in the form of a membership rebate. Thats right they should subsidize a members membership for at least one year... a one year free membership.

what do you think?

terry dean

MOD Edit: Removed Insult

Plenty of NON-MEMBERS also donated. It should not surprise you I disagree with what you say Terry. BTW if you ever do write a book on model rocket history, I for one will not be buying it, as I have seen how trustworthy your comments are.

I have said and I reiterate here again, both NAR and TRA should BANK the money and let it collect interest. An endowment fund. It should use the moneys to ENFORCE the judgement they just obtained and to seek ADDITIONAL RELIEF based on the PRECEDENT set in this FEDERAL CASE.

Once all legal matters are settled, they should use the interest to cover annual expenses and then reevaluate membership fees in that context. That will put them on a VERY LONG TERM glide slope to strength and service to this industry.

Jerry

Sensible shipping, and the return of the 200,000 pound-second rule to Class 2 would be a good start. How about a definition for an explosive and an exempt shipping mass for paper free motor shipments. How about the return of exemption of all Class C items (1.4) from ATF. There's my short list. Try it without the lawsuit first this time.

Just Jerry on 06-18-2009 10:38 AM

#9 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

I agree with banking the money. We will need to maintain a substantial war chest for the foreseeable future. Sad but true.

When I sent my contribution to the legal effort I did not expect to see it back. If we can get it back, then I say let's not change its intended use and keep it as a reserve for potential legal efforts or for seeking additional relief in some areas.

nh4clo4 on 06-18-2009 11:26 AM

#10 Re: Article: Hobby industry files suit for $395K in fee recovery

Plus, most contributors deducted the contributions off their taxes, and the return via waived membership fees would then become a taxable distribution. Put the money in the bank, earn interest, save for a rainy day.

ddmobley on 06-18-2009 11:31 AM

Comments 1-10 of 20 shown. Click here to read comments 11 through 20.

Registered users can add comments and discuss this article. To participate, please login or register.