Another agency to worry about

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jerry Irvin » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 04:19:22





Quote:
> Great, now we've got to worry about the EPA...

> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/01/perchloratecontam.ap/index...

> David Erbas-White

One rocket firm has had EPA all over them in nocal. All tests negative.
Pisses them off.

Similar testing at a storage site we used for years also came up
negative.

The original contamination EPA was alerted to years ago was done BY THE
GOVERNMENT so now they punish careful commercial firms since the
government is exempt!!

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
Ebay auction deals and specials. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by David Erbas-Whit » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 04:11:59


Great, now we've got to worry about the EPA...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/01/perchloratecontam.ap/index...

David Erbas-White

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jeff Dye » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:33:48



Are you answering for jeff, or are you jeff?

I am not Jerry and Jerry is not me.

I also use my real name. I also include a valid e-mail address in my posts
if you want to contact me directly. Ask Ray.

I am also a TRA member. 5903. Level 1 so I can play. I do ex stuff for
e***ment. Check me out!

I live in so. kalifornia and fly at Lucerne with ROC almost every month.

Just Jeff Dyer

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jerry Irvin » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:29:31




Quote:


> > > Look, if Ray wanted to answer the question, he would of by now.  He is
> > > not beholding to you or your TRA rule violation concern, as TRA rules do
> > > not pertain to his private rocketry activities. If that were the case, I
> > > know an indy group, full of TRA members that would be in deep s%^t with

> > > Fred

> > Please cite TRA exemption from their own safety code.

> > It appears that they may be in violation. See my other response to you.

> > Just Jeff

> What has the TRA safety code have to do with the indy group I
> referenced? You have lost me..

> Fred

It applies to all members at all times.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
Ebay auction deals and specials. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Dave Grayvi » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 07:53:31


Quote:




>>>Great, now we've got to worry about the EPA...

> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/01/perchloratecontam.ap/index...

>>>David Erbas-White

>>One rocket firm has had EPA all over them in nocal. All tests negative.
>>Pisses them off.

>>Similar testing at a storage site we used for years also came up
>>negative.

>>The original contamination EPA was alerted to years ago was done BY THE
>>GOVERNMENT so now they punish careful commercial firms since the
>>government is exempt!!

>>Jerry

> Kosdon got thyroid tests not long a go and showed no signs of perclorate
> contamination, and you know Dr. Kosdon lives in this stuff.

> Just Jeff


Do you know Frank?
 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by W. E. Fred Wallac » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 12:18:32


Quote:


> > Thanks for clearing that up.. I guess if you want to continue pitching
> > stones at ray, you can, without being hypocritical..(:-)

> I don't think i'm pitching stones at any one. Ray wrote an article in HPR
> and posted a launch report here.
> In both situations he stated that he flew " I " motors, all I did was ask if
> he had a waiver.

> Look, no one's perfect. If Ray said "I made a mistake and flew without
> approval", that would have been that.
> No further questions. But his defensiveness and that of others, and his
> reluctance to answer this simple question say's lot!

> Just Jeff


Look, if Ray wanted to answer the question, he would of by now.  He is
not beholding to you or your TRA rule violation concern, as TRA rules do
not pertain to his private rocketry activities. If that were the case, I
know an indy group, full of TRA members that would be in deep s%^t with

Fred

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jerry Irvin » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 14:34:05



Quote:


> << But the TRA safety code _does_ apply to members launching privately. >>

> So you're violating the TRA safety code by doing amateur rocketry with only a
> Level 1 cert. Guess we'd better kick you out too.   :)

That is the whole point Ray (and Fred). Selective enforcement is used,
not comnplete enforcement or even mostly enforcement.

Quote:

> BTW, you're using the same argument the NAR used back when they were booting
> out people who flew G motors. TRA doesn't operate that way and hopefully
> never
> will. Even the NAR doesn't do that anymore.

So it boots people out for arbitrary reasons, but not THOSE arbitrary
reasons?

Quote:

> Of course, if someone were to do something really stupid and cause a major
> incident, that could be considered grounds for suspension even if it was not
> at
> a TRA event.

Some guy who made and set off explosives at a Black Rock launch was
expelled for 3 years.

I am going on 12 years for a false charge the FAA itself said "go away"
on.

Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
Ebay auction deals and specials. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jeff Dye » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 07:26:27



Quote:

> > Great, now we've got to worry about the EPA...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/01/perchloratecontam.ap/index...

Quote:

> > David Erbas-White

> One rocket firm has had EPA all over them in nocal. All tests negative.
> Pisses them off.

> Similar testing at a storage site we used for years also came up
> negative.

> The original contamination EPA was alerted to years ago was done BY THE
> GOVERNMENT so now they punish careful commercial firms since the
> government is exempt!!

> Jerry

Kosdon got thyroid tests not long a go and showed no signs of perclorate
contamination, and you know Dr. Kosdon lives in this stuff.

Just Jeff

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Dave Grayvi » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:07:34


Quote:







>>>>>Great, now we've got to worry about the EPA...

>>>http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/12/01/perchloratecontam.ap/index...

>>>>>David Erbas-White

>>>>One rocket firm has had EPA all over them in nocal. All tests negative.
>>>>Pisses them off.

>>>>Similar testing at a storage site we used for years also came up
>>>>negative.

>>>>The original contamination EPA was alerted to years ago was done BY THE
>>>>GOVERNMENT so now they punish careful commercial firms since the
>>>>government is exempt!!

>>>>Jerry

>>>Kosdon got thyroid tests not long a go and showed no signs of perclorate
>>>contamination, and you know Dr. Kosdon lives in this stuff.

>>>Just Jeff

>>Do you know Frank?

> Well. His exposure is more than you even think and he has ZERO exposure
> detected.

> Jerry

Are you answering for jeff, or are you jeff?
 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jeff Dye » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 11:52:57



Quote:
> Thanks for clearing that up.. I guess if you want to continue pitching
> stones at ray, you can, without being hypocritical..(:-)

I don't think i'm pitching stones at any one. Ray wrote an article in HPR
and posted a launch report here.
In both situations he stated that he flew " I " motors, all I did was ask if
he had a waiver.

Look, no one's perfect. If Ray said "I made a mistake and flew without
approval", that would have been that.
No further questions. But his defensiveness and that of others, and his
reluctance to answer this simple question say's lot!

Just Jeff

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jeff Dye » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 13:20:36



Quote:


> > > Look, if Ray wanted to answer the question, he would of by now.  He is
> > > not beholding to you or your TRA rule violation concern, as TRA rules
do
> > > not pertain to his private rocketry activities. If that were the case,
I
> > > know an indy group, full of TRA members that would be in deep s%^t
with

> > > Fred

> > Please cite TRA exemption from their own safety code.

> > It appears that they may be in violation. See my other response to you.

> > Just Jeff

> What has the TRA safety code have to do with the indy group I
> referenced? You have lost me..

> Fred

You said:

"TRA rules do not pertain to his private rocketry activities. If that were
the case, I
know an indy group, full of TRA members that would be in deep s%^t with
TRA." (:-)

But the TRA safety code _does_ apply to members launching privately.

Please see my post with the quote from the TRA handbook A-1. I explains it
all very well.

Just Jeff

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by W. E. Fred Wallac » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:12:17


Quote:




> > > > Look, if Ray wanted to answer the question, he would of by now.  He is
> > > > not beholding to you or your TRA rule violation concern, as TRA rules
> do
> > > > not pertain to his private rocketry activities. If that were the case,
> I
> > > > know an indy group, full of TRA members that would be in deep s%^t
> with

> > > > Fred

> > > Please cite TRA exemption from their own safety code.

> > > It appears that they may be in violation. See my other response to you.

> > > Just Jeff

> > What has the TRA safety code have to do with the indy group I
> > referenced? You have lost me..

> > Fred

> You said:

> "TRA rules do not pertain to his private rocketry activities. If that were
> the case, I
> know an indy group, full of TRA members that would be in deep s%^t with
> TRA." (:-)

> But the TRA safety code _does_ apply to members launching privately.

No it "_dose_ not apply" and it "_does_ not" specificly say what you say
or discribe..

Fred Wallace
TRA5763 L3, TAP
MDRA BOD member

Quote:

> Please see my post with the quote from the TRA handbook A-1. I explains it
> all very well.

TRA is referenced, not individual's or other non TRA group's activities.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> Just Jeff


 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by Jerry Irvin » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:17:04




Quote:


> > Do you know Frank?

> > Kind of. He personaly told me about his tests. Does that help?

> > Just Jeff

> Do you mean, you know Frank and He told you about his tests, or do you
> mean, Frank told you about his tests and now you kinda know him?

> :)

Troll

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA

Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration.
Produce then publish.  http://www.usrockets.com
Ebay auction deals and specials. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by AlMa » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 12:44:35



Quote:
> I am also a TRA member. 5903. Level 1 so I can play. I do ex stuff for
> e***ment. Check me out!

I was thinkin' you had to be TRA #2 for EX.

so if your L1, you really are doing AR

 
 
 

Another agency to worry about

Post by W. E. Fred Wallac » Sat, 04 Dec 2004 11:19:21


Quote:


> > But you can't do EX at TRA launches under TRA rules, right?? Do you??

> No ex at regular TRA launches. I do not fly ex at  _any_ TRA/NAR launches,
> period.
> Is Balls a sanctioned TRA event?(realy does not matter because won't fly ex
> there anyway)
> With reguards to TRA/NAR launches, I only fly level 1 motors and smaller.

> The only TRA/NAR sanctioned launches I go to are ROC's. If you go to one of
> their launches you'll see what I fly!

> Just Jeff


Thanks for clearing that up.. I guess if you want to continue pitching
stones at ray, you can, without being hypocritical..(:-)

Fred