Major Court Victory for
Model and Amateur Rocketry
Are model rockers dangerous? According
to a paper by M.T. Lynch, K.T. Bellian, R.F. Edlich
and H.N. Himel (Model
rocket engine burn injuries: the need for stricter regulation,
Journal of Emergency Medicine12, 325-30 (1994)),
during the 18-year period from 1975 to 1992, the US
Consumer Product Safety Commission's National Electronic
Injury Surveillance System database received reports
of 18 burn injuries caused by model rocket engines.
That's only one injury per year, which
isn't bad for a hobby as popular as model rocketry.
Yet the authors of the paper cited above conclude, "The
current regulations appear to be inadequate and need
to be altered to cover the population at risk. Specific
recommendations include imposing an adequate age limit
and improving the labeling of these products."
Lynch and colleagues found an ally
for their cause in the United States in the form of
the Homeland Security Act and rules by the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). The
BATFE rules came to the attention of US
Senator Mike Enzi (Wyoming), who in 2003 wrote pending
legislation that will, "amend title 18, United
States Code, to exempt certain rocket propellants from
prohibitions under that title on explosive materials."
Senator Enzi stated,
" "It's a sad state of affairs when we see a government
agency and senators go to such lengths to squash efforts
to preserve a constructive, educational and important
hobby enjoyed by millions of Americans. This kind of
opposition to my legislation serves to discourage innovation
and darken spirits. It doesn't make Americans that much
safer, but it does make us more fearful and less free."
While Sen. Enzi's bill languishes in
the Senate, on 10 February 2006 the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued
its opinion as to whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) had properly classified
APCP propellant as an explosive. As reported in a joint
media release by the National Association of Rocketry
(NAR) and Tripoli Rocketry Association, "the court
found in favor of NAR and Tripoli and remanded the matter
back to the agency."
Details about the decision are given
on the NAR web site here
and the Tripoli web site here.
Model rocketry enthusiasts have spent
seven years in their battle with the BATFE. The court
fully vindicated them and repudiated the government's
position: "The problem in this case is that ATFE's explanation
for its determination that APCP [ammonium perchlorate
composite propellant] deflagrates lacks any coherence.
We therefore owe no deference to ATFE's purported expertise
because we cannot discern it. ATFE has neither laid
out a concrete standard for classifying materials along
the burn-deflagrate-detonate continuum, nor offered
data specific to the burn speed of APCP when used for
its ‘common or primary purpose.' On this record, the
agency's decision cannot withstand judicial review."
The full decision can be downloaded here.
On learning that NAR and Tripoli prevailed
against the government in their suit, Senator Enzi issued
a press release that stated, "People who build
and launch model rockets for fun should not have to
give up their hobby due to an unnecessary set of obstacles
and an unjustified claim which classifies rocket propellant
as an explosive. This safe, mind-expanding activity
offers many benefits to today’s youth including
increased interest in math, science, and space exploration
while providing them with a fun recreational activity.
While this decision is not the end, it gives rocketeers
firmer footing and gets them closer to enjoying their
hobby without having to bear the burden of unnecessary
regulation. I hope the BATFE will see clear to give
those law-abiding citizens the space they deserve and
that in the end rocketeers will enjoy the same freedoms
with their hobby as rock collectors and scrap-bookers
enjoy with theirs.
Forrest M. Mims III 
|
