"my" interpretation is that the review committee's ruling:
concluded that the spoiler is non-compliant because the spoiler/air dam is not mounted onto the body of the car, as mandated by 9.1.3.D.8.b.
was overturned by the COA for TWO reasons per:
The Court of Appeals upholds the determination of the Review Committee that the design is non-compliant; however,
the basis for the non-compliance is not the attachment design, but rather the presence of the unducted openings.
The Court of Appeals finds that Mr. Moser’s appeal is well founded and his appeal fee, less the amount retained by SCCA, will be returned.
the COA specifically mentioned the attachment design is not an issue AND the appeal was "well founded."
1985 CRX Si competed in Solo II: AS, CS, DS, GS
1986 CRX Si competed in: SCCA Solo II CSP, SCCA ITA, SCCA ITB, NASA H5
1988 CRX Si competed in ITA & STL
Bookmarks