home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
- Path: sparky!uunet!darwin.sura.net!mips!nec-gw!netkeeper!vivaldi!rsd0!rsd.dl.nec.com!buzz
- From: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott)
- Subject: Re: DOT Bans Reloads (temporarily?)
- Message-ID: <1992Jul29.155656.24146@rsd0.rsd.dl.nec.com>
- Sender: usenet@rsd0.rsd.dl.nec.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rsd2.rsd.dl.nec.com
- Organization: NEC America, Radio Software Dept
- References: <1992Jul28.210614.3479@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:56:56 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <1992Jul28.210614.3479@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe) writes:
- |> I just found out that as of yesterday the DOT has declared ALL reloads G and
- |> above as "Banned Hazardous Substances" and will not let Aerotech or
- |> Distributers ship them. It is unclear how long this will last. I wonder if
- |> this will affect things at NARAM?
-
- This is another good example of why Tripoli and NAR have to work together.
- Neither organization is strong enough to find government red-tape alone.
- Both organizations want HPR to continue.
-
- Now, about what you found out....
-
- Did the ruling just cover RMS technology? Did they rule on G expendables?
- Did they rule on under-G reloads?
-
- Also, does anyone know if current HPR disposables (H & up) are, in fact,
- 'Banned Hazardous Substances' or something else? In other words, does this
- ruling put reloads in the same class as HPR disposables or something even
- worse?
-
- ============================================================================
- Buzz McDermott Internet: buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com
- NAR 13559
- TRA 1785
- ============================================================================
-