Proposed LEUP Permit Fee Hike
If you're an NAR member who uses high-power rocket motors, this note is addressed to you. Time is short, and the NAR needs your assistance concerning two BATF regulatory issues we face. Let me outline our course of action and ask for your help on both matters.
Proposed LEUP Permit Fee Hike
The first issue requires a response by January 13, 1997. It is an outstanding Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that outlines a Low Explosive User Permit (LEUP) fee increase. BATF proposes to increase explosives license and permit fees to $200 for each license and $100 for each renewal.
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that BATF had not raised
the explosives license and permit fees since 1970. Faced with
tightening budgets and increased administrative costs, OIG recommended
raising the fees to the maximum currently allowed by law.
After meeting with representatives from the BATF, we believe that a
request for a special category of LEUP solely for rocket
users would receive favorable consideration from the BATF.
We suggest leaving the fee structure for sport rocket users at the
current level; $20 for the initial application and $10 for the
renewal. We also believe a separate class of sport rocket user
permits would allow BATF to better instruct field agents in the
particular, noncommercial needs of rocket users and actually simplify
administration of the permits for them.
You Must Comment Before January 13
If you wish to support the NAR's position, you need to write a
letter responding to the NPRM. A sample letter outlining the
points to make can be found below.
You need to make sure your letter arrives on or before January 13,
1997, in order to ensure that it receives consideration in the
writing of the final rule -- so please prepare and mail a letter as
soon as possible!
BATF And The 62.5-Gram Propellant Limit
The second issue concerns a change in BATF interpretation of the 62.5 gram propellant limits and will require legislative change by Congress for NAR members to receive relief from the more restrictive interpretation. The issue is more complex, but we have more time to formulate a plan to address it. My comments here are solely to inform NAR HPR consumers of the situation, and to outline the general plan towards addressing the problems we face.
Prior to the December 1996 NFPA meeting, BATF had stated that
rocket motors or reload components with propellent weighing less than
62.5 grams did not require an LEUP for possession or
transportation. While providing no relief for most single-use HPR
motors, many reloadable motors became available for use by HPR flyers
without the expense and administration of obtaining a BATF permit.
In the interim, however, BATF recently noted two trends. The first
was the increasing use of individual 62.5-gram components to create
larger motors. The second was increasing inquiry from other
government agencies about the use and capabilities of HPR rockets as
potential terrorist weapons. These agencies voiced increased concerns
about terrorist activity in the United States, and BATF was under
increasing pressure from them to be absolutely certain it had properly
regulated HPR materials as required in the enabling legislation.
As a result, BATF announced at the December, 1996, NFPA meeting
that all motors would be evaluated in their assembled condition.
This means that even if the individual propellent components were 62.5
grams or less, the motor would still require possession of an LEUP
if the assembled total propellant weight was more than 62.5
grams.
BATF indicated that:
- they would issue such a formal interpretation early in 1997;
- they would give sport rocket users, and distributors one year to
come into compliance with the change in interpretation; - any change in the 62.5 gram limit must be initiated by legislative
change, and; - BATF had been asked by Congressional representatives to research
changes in other countries' explosives laws as a prelude to a rewrite
of the Explosives Act of 1972.
Implications For High-Power Flyers
The implications for NAR members are three-fold:
- As was the case prior to this ruling, HPR flyers who remain in
their home state, buy an HPR motor from a licensed dealer in that
state and use that motor on the field prior to leaving do not need an
LEUP, and may continue to fly HPR under those terms; - Other users of HPR motors with more than 62.5 grams of propellant
have one year to obtain a LEUP and come into compliance; - With Congress preparing to rewrite the enabling legislation which
imposed both the need for BATF to regulate ammonium perchlorate based
motors and the 62.5 gram limit, the NAR, Tripoli and the sport rocket
industry has the opportunity to assist in the legislative process to
obtain long term relief from what we believe is excessive
regulation.
Give Us Your Input Before January 24
In the short run, you're welcome to offer comments to me on two subjects:
- What should the new legislation contain regarding sport rocket
motors? - What effort should the NAR expend to change the legislation?
Both subjects will be discussed at length at the upcoming NAR Board of Trustees Meeting which is scheduled for January 24-26 in Phoenix. You can send me your comments via email or mail them to me at
1350 Lilac Lane
Carol Stream, IL 60188-3369
I've also had some conversations with Bruce Kelly, president of
Tripoli, regarding a joint effort to effect the legislative change.
Bruce and I agree that such an effort must:
- be jointly sponsored by both organizations;
- involve all members of the industry; and
- encompass both single use and reloadable motors.
Difficult, Complex Processes
Many details, such as which congressional committees handle the legislation, the political makeup of those committees, how much effort the NAR or TRA can legally expend on legislative change as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, etc. are unclear at this point. NAR Counsel Craig Spomer is researching these and others, but I don't have the answers as of now.
I also caution members that this process could well span two years or
more (recall that it took over nine years for us to change FAR Part
101) and that we could do everything right, and still not win any
changes. Politics has a funny way of working sometimes, and we might
benefit from that -- but realize we can get swept away by a much
larger, better-financed lobbying effort by other user communities.
When we do have a firmer tactical strategy, I will need your help.
Contacting congressmen on the committee or subcommittee handling the
legislation at the proper time will be necessary, and you will be
asked to help in that effort when we need those contacts made. I will
make sure that all NAR members, and HPR-qualified flyers in
particular, are kept completely aware of the status of the legislative
process as we proceed.
I appreciate your support on the NPRM response, and your patience with
the legislation. Please contact me with any of your comments or
concerns.
SAMPLE LETTER TO USE
TO RESPOND TO NPRM
123 Main Street
Anytown XY 12345-6789
January 1, 1997
Chief, Firearms and Explosives Operations Branch
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
650 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington DC 20091-0221
Dear Sirs:
I am a member of the National Association of Rocketry and have a "High
Power Sport Rocket User Certification" from that organization. As a
sport rocket flyer, I am required to secure a Low Explosives User
Permit (LEUP) in order to obtain selected commercially-produced solid
rocket motors. I am writing to offer comments on Notice No. 841,
particularly on proposed changes to "Section 55.42 -- License fees".The proposed increases in fees represent an unfair burden on sport
rocket flyers, most of whom possess less than $500 worth of regulated
material. Since fewer than 4,000 sport rocket users exist nationwide,
I believe BATF would not substantially increase their revenues from
this change. Faced with such a substantial fee increase, many sport
rocket flyers would abandon use of the regulated motors altogether, so
that total fee collections from this group would actually decrease.Recognizing the legislative mandate on the BATF to regulate some sport
rocket motors due to their chemical composition, I would however
support the creation of a separate class of LEUP for sport rocket
users only, with a fee structure similar to that currently in place:
$20 for the initial application and $10 for renewal. Since many BATF
agents are currently unfamiliar with the sport rocket regulated
motors, and current LEUP procedures are geared to commercial
explosives users, a special class of licenses would simplify
administration for BATF. If field agents know in advance that an
application is for a sport rocket user, they would be better prepared
and able to evaluate the specialized circumstances of this class of
permit holder.Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerly yours,
Joe Smith
NAR Member #12345