Rocketry regulations

Without a doubt, the most talked about
subject in hobby rocketry today is about the				"I can not say that I am surprised by the
increase of regulatory scrutiny. And also				outcome of the meeting. I can say that I'm
without a doubt, the area that has caused the				not pleased by the outcome, nor the current
most misinformation to be disseminated is the				direction that this matter is heading in. For
very same regulatory quagmire. More questions				the past few days I've contemplated just how
have been asked, more incorrect answers have				the trade association should respond. All of
been given, more inappropriate scenarios have				the responses boil down to one of three
been posed about this one topic than any of				options:
the other items of interest to hobby
rocketeers at any time in recent history.				1. Accept it. This would be the easiest and
				cheapest, at least in the short term. I can
Granted, regulatory concerns are something to				not recommend the option because of its large
be genuinely concerned about - the very				negative impact upon the trade and the hobby
smallest infractions could bear serious				as a whole.
consequences for the offender. With terms
like "felony" and "misdemeanor" being thrown				2. Legislative change. This would involve an
around with penalties that include "fined not				actual change to the federal law(s) that
more than $10,000" and "imprisoned not more				cover our industry/hobby. This option would
than 10 years," it's nothing to sneeze at. As				require the convincing of a Congressman or a
a result of this, it's time to look into the				Senator to sponsor the required legislation.
inner workings of exactly what is going on,
see if we can make heads or tails of the				3. Judicial remedy. This option would involve
situation, and get some common sense infused				entering into litigation with ATF, with the
into the frenzy that has become know as the				hope that a Judge will force the agency to
Regulatory Nightmare of 1999.				change its current regulations and/or
				policies."
Misconception #1:
				It appears the national rocketry
One of the first misconceptions many people				organizations favor a more proactive option
have about the current state of regulatory				than simply accepting it, however this would
oversight, the impending enforcement of				be a long-term solution, and one that will
explosives laws, is that this is new. Wrong.				require a lot of effort, money and time. If
These are not new regulations - they are				you plan to wait it out, be prepared for a
existing regulations that have not been				long, long sitting spell.
enforced since their inception with regard to
the rocketry community. The Bureau of				Misconception #2:
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms have been
charged with the responsibility of				Another misconception is that you must belong
maintaining a list of explosive materials,				to a national rocketry organization or that
published annually in the Federal Register.				you be certified by a national rocketry
On this list are compounds and materials that				organization to a certain level in order to
are deemed to be explosive in nature and				purchase federally regulated motors. Wrong.
therefore pose a threat to the general public				There is no mention in the federal law of any
if not regulated in a secure manner.				organizational requirements.

The mainstay of the rocketry hobby for rocket				This misconception probably stems from the
propulsion, compressed black powder				high power rocketry safety codes of the
propellant and ammonium perchlorate composite				several national rocketry organizations, such
propellant, have been on this list for years.				as TRA's verbatim adoption of NFPA 1127 as
However, certain volumes of these propellants				its safety code. As of this date, there are
have been exempted from regulatory oversight				no states that have officially adopted NFPA
by the authorities because of their				1127 into law, meaning the jurisdiction of
definition - toy propulsion devices for model				NFPA 1127 lies solely within the
rockets. Going back to 1970, model rocket				organizations that have adopted it.
motors were exempted from regulation by The
Organized Crime Control Act, 18 U.S.C.				Taking It To The Streets:
Chapter 40, a piece of legislation that
excluded model rocket engines utilizing small				In March of this year, Rocketry Online polled
amounts of black powder as propellants. Since				ten known high power rocket motor dealers to
that time, the popularity of the hobby as				find out where they stood on sales to
well as the desire for more power led to the				in-state residents, both with and without low
development of composite propellants,				explosives users permits, as well as sales to
ammonium and potassium perchlorate				individuals who were not certified by a
composites, to be exact.				national rocketry organization. They were
				asked how they currently operate and how they
Enter 62.5 Grams:				would operate in the future. Lastly, they
				were asked if they would be willing to store
When the Consumer Product Safety Commission				motors for individuals who lack sufficient
(CPSC) reviewed these products, they utilized				storage facilities.
an arbitrary limit of propellant weight and
power as the cutoff point for the definition				The ten motor dealers were: Red Arrow
of a toy propellant device. Defined in 16 CFR				Hobbies, Starflight Industries, Trailing Edge
1500.84(a)(8), those motors containing a				Technologies, Countdown Hobbies, Rocket
propellant weight of 62.5 grams or less and				Science, Zeppelin Hobbies, Magnum Rockets,
which produce less than 80 newton-seconds of				Commonwealth Displays, and California High
total impulse would be classified as a model				Power Rocketry.
rocket motor. The 62.5 grams number was
arrived at in the mid-70's by several motor				Of the ten who were contacted, only four
manufacturers to create DOT-E-7887, a				chose to participate. Here's how those four
Department of Transportation shipping				scored:
exemption. This limit resulted in the
legalized shipping of all F-class motors and				1. "Do you currently sell restricted products
the then "new" G-class motors under what was				to certified individuals who are residents of
known as Class C explosives, now known as				your state possessing a completed ATF 5400.4
Class 1.4.				form in lieu of a LEUP?"

Since then, hobby rocketry has continued to				All four answered "yes."
enjoy a successful period of growth,
attracting more and more new entrants into				2. "Will you in the future sell restricted
the ranks, effectively raising the visibility				products to certified individuals who are
of the hobby on the regulatory radar screen.				residents of your state possessing a
Given the increased participation and the				completed ATF 5400.4 form in lieu of a LEUP?"
continued growth of more and more powerful
motors, hobby rocketry today is a victim of				All four answered "yes."
its own success, painting the regulatory
community into the proverbial corner,				3. "Do you currently sell restricted products
demanding that something be done to assure				to uncertified individuals who are not
the safe pursuit of such endeavors. Combined				members of a national organization but are in
with other unfortunate incidents of late				full compliance with federal requirements of
involving explosives and terrorism, its only				possessing either a valid LEUP or a completed
natural that the mass of the unknowing				ATF 5400.4 form?"
populace wants some kind of assurances.
				Two answered "yes" and two answered "no."
Big Brother Is Watching:
				4. "Will you in the future sell restricted
In February of 1997, the Bureau of Alcohol,				products to uncertified individuals who are
Tobacco and Firearms sought to initiate				not members of a national organization but
discussion within their ranks about "high				are in full compliance with federal
power rocketry," as today's high performance				requirements of possessing either a valid
large model rockets have come to be known.				LEUP or a completed ATF 5400.4 form?"
They produced an internal memorandum bearing
that name as the title (See sidebar). In this				Three answered "yes" and one answered "no."
memo, they addressed the issues as they saw
them, stating that it was their belief that				5. "Based on the requirements for lawful
the ATF needed to be proactive before any				storage of all restricted products, no matter
accidents involving high power rockets				if the users holds a low explosives users
occurred, certainly a common sense deduction				permit or a completed ATF form 5400.4, would
if there ever was one. The ATF considers any				you, or do you already, provide storage for a
model rocket motor that contains a propellant				customer if they were/are unable to use their
weight greater than 62.5 grams and producing				restricted product at the launch to which it
a total impulse of more than, or equal to, 80				was delivered?"
newton-seconds, a high power rocket motor,
placing it under the provisions of the				All four answered "Yes."
Federal explosives laws, 18 U.S.C. Chapter
40. The memo went on to discuss the 62.5				Of the ten contacted, only two confirmed
grams limit and addresses single use as well				companies were already operating exactly as
as reloadable motors. It in so much as stated				the law allows: Countdown Hobbies and
that propellant slugs that could not be used				Starflight Industries. Zeppelin Hobbies was
individually but were intended to be "used as				prepared to modify future operations based on
a segment for installation into larger				a "revised understanding of the law." The
motors" to create a motor with greater than				last "no" stated there were extenuating
62.5 grams of propellant would indeed be				circumstances with California state law
regulated. This, back in February of 1997!				requiring additional registrations that
				hamper the ability to sell to uncertified
Certainly the regulatory agency's radar				individuals. With no clear understanding of
screen "blipped" earlier the previous year.				how California law works, further comment is
ATF Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)				unavailable.
Number 841 was filed on October 15, 1996, and
hundreds of letters from concerned rocketry				So, there are dealers who are willing to work
enthusiasts poured into Washington protesting				with in-state residents, whether they are
the call for an increase in Low Explosive				members of national rocketry organizations or
Users Permit fees from $20 for a one year				not. Granted, if you purchase regulated
permit to $100 for a three year permit. One				products and show up at a sanctioned launch,
thing it did was to let Washington know that				you will have to abide by that organization's
there were more than just a handful of				rules - which means you must be certified to
rocketeers out there that felt their actions				fly the level of motor you wish to use. The
deserved regulation. Logically the only				point of this being that it is not a
people effected by a fee increase would be				regulatory condition that you must be a
those who needed to apply for a permit in the				member to purchase a regulated product, but
first place, something only a user of low				what good would it do you to purchase these
explosives would need to do. As such, we				products if you always fly at sanctioned
tipped our hand to the "other players." In				events? Participation in the national
fact, in the June 1997 issue of the ATF				organizations is a good thing, and one that
Explosives Newsletter was the following				is strongly encouraged. But by all means
statement:				participate from an educated position, not
				one of ignorance.
"During the comment period, ATF received
approximately 400 letters, primarily from the				Time To Decide:
model rocket industry. Their comments
suggested that ATF create a separate catagory				What does all this mean for you? It's really
for rocketry permits with lower fees. ATF is				very simple. How do you respond to these:
considering the relative merits of such a
proposal and will issue a final rule in the				1. I need to purchase single-use or
near future."				reloadable motors with larger than 62.5 grams
				of propellant in states other than the one in
Where Do I Fit In?:				which I reside, or

The February 1997 ATF memorandum pretty much				2. I wish to transport single-use or
stated the issues as clearly as they could be				reloadable motors with larger than 62.5 grams
stated. Hobby rocketry-related users of low				of propellant to states other than the one in
explosives were defined as those people who				which I reside, or
were purchasing or transporting single-use or
reloadable motors with greater than 62.5				3. My state is one in which there is no
grams of total propellant weight in				licensed dealer from which I could purchase
interstate or foreign commerce.				single-use or reloadable motors with larger
				than 62.5 grams of propellant.
They also clearly stated in the memo that
users of these products making their				If you answered yes to any of these
purchases from dealers licensed in their own				questions, then you should apply for a Low
state of residence were not required to have				Explosives Users Permit.
a federal users permit. But, they also cover
very clearly that ALL individuals who store				If on the other hand, how do you respond to
explosives, whether they have a federal users				these:
permit or not MUST have storage facilities
that comply with federal standards. They				1. I have a dealer from whom I could purchase
further go on, in this same memo, to touch				single-use or reloadable motors with larger
upon a seemingly "hot potato" issue - the one				than 62.5 grams of propellant that is
about storage in an attached garage. The memo				licensed in my state of residence, or
states that storage in attached garage will
be allowed, as long as the magazine is				2. I have no desire to fly single-use or
separated from the living quarters by "a				reloadable motors with larger than 62.5 grams
wall." Read that again - it does not state a				of propellant in states other than the one in
"1 hour firewall." It says "a wall."				which I reside, or I fly only single-use or
				reloadable motors with less than 62.5 grams
The result of the NPRM 841 was a posting in				of propellant in states other than the one in
the Federal Register of Treasury Decision				which I reside.
ATF-400 on August 24, 1998, the official
status of the rulemaking proposal. The				If you answered yes to these questions, you
increased fees that were proposed would				probably do not need a Low Explosives Users
become official on December 22, 1998. Upon				Permit. Be aware that in doing so, you limit
closer scrutiny, it was determined that				your flying specifically to the state of your
several UN-exempted products had been left				residence or you restrict your flying in
off the regulation, meaning previously				other states only to unregulated motors.
exempted model rocket motors would now become
regulated, even those with less than 62.5				If you just need more information, check out
grams of propellant. Once this was				the online Orange Book linked from the
discovered, and was brought to the attention				sidebar above. If you have questions, you can
of the ATF, a letter was issued (see sidebar)				post them in Rocketry Online's Regulatory
to Gary Rosenfield of AeroTech that stated:				Issues discussion forum, the place were all
				answers are a question away. Questions not
"As noted in your letter, the final rule				readily answered are forwarded on to ATF in
included a revision of 27 CFR 55.141(a)(7).				Washington for detailed answers from the
The revision of 22 CFR 55.141(a)(7) did not				Explosives Technologies area. The important
include UN numbers for model rocket motors				thing is that information is available to be
that were previously exempted from regulation				utilized.
under 27 CRF Part 55. Since it was not the
intent of the final rule to regulate these				Lights, Camera, ACTION!:
items, please be advised we are in the
process of amending the regulations to				If you have determined that you have a need
reflect this exemption."				for a user permit, you need to complete an
				application and submit it to the ATF with a
On August 24, 1998, the Bureau of Alcohol,				check or money order for $100. You can get an
Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) published a final				application by mail from:
rule. Treasury decision, T.D. ATF-400: Notice
No. 841, in the Federal Register amending 27				Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms
CFR Part 55. The final rule, which becomes
effective December 22, 1998, amended 27 CFR				P.O. Box 2994
55.141 (a) (7), which lists low explosives
exempted from regulation. The final rule was				Atlanta, GA 30301-2994
not supposed to change which low explosives
were exempted. However, ATF failed to list in				Or you can call the ATF Atlanta Office at
the final rule all the low explosives that				404-679-5040. Applications are also available
were meant to be exempted from regulation.				online at the ATF Web site at http:/
Consequently, as of December 22, 1998, items				www.atf.treas.gov.
such as toy plastic and paper caps, explosive
auto alarms, and toy model rockets will be				While there is no such thing as a
subject to regulation under Part 55. We are				"non-storage" Low Explosives Users Permit,
currently taking steps to correct the				ATF will grant you one without personal
oversight by amending 27 CFR 55.141 (a) (7)				storage so long as you have a contingency
to include all low explosives that were meant				plan should you not be able to use your
to be exempted from regulation under 27 CFR				motors. An information flyer from the ATF
Part 55.				states:

In the interim, no enforcement action is to				"Careful consideration of your projected
be taken regarding the importation,				needs can help you avoid having excess
distribution, and storage of the following				explosives at the end of the day and being
explosives;				subject to the special requirements of proper
				storage. Avoiding any excess is usually the
1. Fireworks classified as UN0336, UN0337,				easiest option. Otherwise, you are left with
UN0431, or UN0432 explosives by the U.S.				the need to either destroy the explosives,
Department of Transportation at 49 CFR				arrange to return them to your supplier, or
172.101 and generally known as "consumer				store them properly."
fireworks" or "articles pyrotechnic. "
				Most business-savvy dealers will make
2. Model rocket motors classified by the U.S.				arrangements to take back unflown regulated
Department of Transportation at 49 CFR				products. Those that don't will find that
172.101 as UN0349, UNO351, UN0471, NA0276, or				their competition will be taking away all
NA0323; consisting of ammonium perchlorate				their customers. Businesses exist to serve
composite propellant, black powder, or other				one purpose: to fill a unique need. The needs
similar low explosives; containing no more				of individuals change all the time, and those
than 62.5 grams propellant weight; and				businesses that cater to existing and current
designed as single use motors or as reload				needs are the ones getting the most business.
kits.
				Today's regulatory environment demands that
3. Other low explosives classified by the				motor dealers address this customer service
U.S. Department of Transportation at 49 CFR				issue - either they will provide a refund or
172.101 as NA0337, UN0336, and UN0337.				storage service, or they will lose customers.
				Dave Popkin of Starflight Industries has such
Please ensure that this information is				a policy, and will provide a letter to
disseminated to all field personnel.				accompany your Low Explosives Users Permit
				application stating that he will take back
If there are any questions about which				unused motors for a full refund or credit.
explosives are to be treated as exempted				This is the action of a progressive,
under 27 CFR 55.141 (a) (7), please contact				proactive businessman at work.
the Public Safety Branch at 202-927- 8690.
				With storage solutions such as these, there
What Next?:				is no reason not to get legal. Unless, of
				course, you are an old-school conspiratorial
After an unproductive regulatory "summit" in				theorist who believes your activities are of
Washington DC on February 4th of this year,				interest to the Government. That, or you're
the director of the High Power Rocket				already breaking the law and don't want to be
Manufacturers and Dealers Association				detected. Please, don't play games, get
announced his retirement in a letter to the				legal. It's really not that hard. And it's
members of the rocketry trade, stating:				certainly not worth it to get caught.

1 A B C 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 79 80 81 82 83 84 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93

Your ultimate rocketry resource on the net

Rocketry regulations