done. #2636

CRB, BOD, ITAC, September 5, 2010
I am writing in support of the changes per item # 1767 in the September, 2010 FasTrack.
This is long overdue. I wrote a letter in November 2008 stating that I was in favor of the use of a “Process” and used my 1986 Honda CRX Si in ITB as an example of why this was necessary and why it needed to be adjusted. Please note that the 85-87 CRX Si was moved from ITA to ITB per the March 2005 Fastrack. At that time, the car was given an arbitrary 150 # adjustment.
That note resulted in future letter writing and requests. I received emails and personal messages from ITAC members regarding that things were progressing slowly and that the broader issue of using the process for other cars needed to be addressed. It was my understanding that when that part of the “Process” was completed, my car would be considered and that there was the potential for a weight reduction.
Then many of the ITAC members resigned and the CRB adopted an improved tracking method for responding to member requests. I then filed another request.
Imagine my surprise when after literally years of on again and off again requests and correspondence my last response was denied saying I had failed to meet the 4 year deadline. That was unfair. My original request was easily within the 4 year deadline.
This use of “rules” was completely inappropriate considering that the same rules had said that “At the end of the second, third, and fourth years of classification, the vehicle’s racing performance relative to other vehicles in its class shall be evaluated.” I challenge the ITAC to publish the meeting minutes and the results of the evaluations for not just my car but for any car.

I feel that I met the requirements of the rules by requesting my car be evaluated within the 4 year deadline and that I should not be punished for the disruption of the ITAC and the poor tracking of requests by the CRB. Unfortunately, I am unaware of any “appeals” process to follow short of leaving for NASA’s Performance Touring.

I see the proposed rule change as a means to not only make adjustments to ITB where some cars have been classed with the process and others have been classed by guestimates but it will also be a ruleset that will allow for adjustments as future cars are classified.

And to borrow a line from the November 23, 2008 request:

“Thanks in advance for your consideration”

Tom