New OSHA Rulemaking-Black & Smokeless Powder, Primers, Ammo

Status
Not open for further replies.
Left a comment.

I think this reg change is being pushed by some industry heavyweights in order to hurt their competition with the little guy BPers, reloaders and shooters being caught in the middle.

Of course the author, Edwin G Foulke Jr, may be an anti and found a great way to help his industry friends and screw us over at the same time.

Finding the document is easier if you use it's title "explosives" (minus quotes) in the catagory: document title in document search: optional step 4.
 
Unless I misread the part in original post, I noticed that paragraph (c)(2)(i) neglected to differentiate between explosives and propellants. Strange, isn't it?

I followed the method your post described/linked and left my comment.

ranger335v writes:

alan: "One wonders as to who or what it is that winds OSHA up?"

ALL gov. agencies want to grow larger, more people more chances of promotion and better retirements for themselves! Thus, it doesn't take much to wind them up.

One of the "intellectual" concepts is that such agencies should be "pro-active", meaning they should dream up things that could happen instead of things likely happen or have happened, and make provisions to prevent them before they happen. That mindset opens some small doors very wide!

----------------------

Funny thing about government agencies to have noticed. Did you happen to have seen JPFO's latest DVD dealing with, among other things, the development and history of what is nowadays called the BATFE, which mentioned the growth of agencies, and the road to promotions for employees thereof.
 
Abc agencies

If they can't do away with the 2 nd, the corporate fascism will price you out of it. Just like they are after gun shops now, for not dotting an I or crossing a T.
Only criminals, Dictators, and Communists fear armed citizens! They better.
 
I have read the proposed rule and find very little that is not already in various regulations. The main purpose of this rule seem to be elimination of overlapping and conflicting regulations. The only new items I see are:

Possibly requiring a CDL w/hazmat endorsement for on site movement by truck in large facilities.
Limiting display of smokeless powder to 20 1 pound containers. That is just display, not what is allowed in the store.
Limiting primer display to 10,000 primers. Again, more could be in storage, not on display.
Requiring that employees be trained how to safely perform their jobs relating to handling the materials.

I think that a lot of people (few of whom have actually read the proposed rule) are panicing without reason.

If you object to any of the new standards, you are welcome to submit your objections to OSHA. That is what a public comment period is for. Please actually read the part you object to so that you can make a reasonable argument. I have seen significant changes made to final rules because of comments received from the public during the comment period.

OSHA is specifically asking if small arms ammunition, primers and smokeless powder should be included in the regulation. That seems to be the main concern here. Reasonable arguments can be made to remove those provisions.

By the way, smokeless powder, primers, and small arms ammunition have always been classed as explosive materials. DOT allows reclassification of ammunition and smokeless powder when shipped in smaller packages.
 
hmmm...

...seems to me, everytime we don't catch some stupid regulation before it gets adopted, and react...we get screwed...panic? How about healthy scepticism...What can it hurt to discuss and react with opinions, instead of wake-up to another set of regulations being placed on one of our freedoms...?
Enough with the sky is falling and also enough of don't worry, it's nothing... rauch06.gif
I say it's a good catch and time to act...
 
Hmmm, time to start stocking up on sulfur, saltpeter, and charcoal. Plenty of flinty rocks around. :eek:

Even without these OSHA regulations being enacted, has anyone else noticed that it is virtually impossible to buy primers lately?
 
Sistema1927 said:
Even without these OSHA regulations being enacted, has anyone else noticed that it is virtually impossible to buy primers lately?
Click to expand...

No, I've had no problem at all finding primers.
 
Oh this can't be good. Nothing good ever comes from OSHA.
Click to expand...

I'll have to beg to differ on that one. As an electrician, whenever some overpaid cubicle weasel suggests I do something inane, rather than telling them "you're an effing idiot", I can just say "sorry, OSHA regs."
 
I sure wish I could find the way to comment on those proposed regulations. Do they purposely make that web page confusing so you can't find your way through that tanged mess!:mad: Would somebody please wade through that mess, then once they're on the correct page, copy and past the URL here on this forum? Thanks;).
 
URGENT Possible bad news for all Shooters and Reloaders

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=9&t=592609&page=1

http://sassnet.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=71872

http://www.regulations.gov
Document ID: OSHA-2007-0032-0001

[[Page 18826]]

Issue #17: Although proposed paragraph (h)(2) is consistent with
paragraph 923 of the 1970 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-13), it is not
consistent with paragraph 13.2.3 of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex.
2-5). In the 2001 edition, NFPA has reduced the separation distance
from 25 to 15 feet. This reduction in distance may reduce employee
protection. OSHA requests specific comments on whether the minimum
separation distance between small arms ammunition and flammable
liquids, flammable solids, and oxidizing materials should remain 25
feet, be reduced to 15 feet, or be changed to some other distance.
Existing paragraph (j)(2)(iii), which addresses small arms
ammunition storage with Class A and Class B explosives, has not been
retained in the proposed rule because it is already covered by ATF
storage regulations (27 CFR part 555 subpart K) and OSHA does not want
to duplicate the regulations of other federal agencies.
Proposed paragraph (h)(3) sets forth requirements for smokeless
propellants. Paragraph (h)(3)(i)(A) would require the employer to
ensure that all smokeless propellants be stored in shipping containers
in accordance with DOT regulations at 49 CFR part 173 for smokeless
propellants. The proposed provision is consistent with paragraph 13.3.6
of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5) and substantially the same as
existing paragraph (j)(3)(i).
Paragraph (h)(3)(i)(B) would require the employer to ensure that no
more than 20 pounds of smokeless propellants, in containers not to
exceed 1 pound, are displayed in a commercial establishment. The
existing standard does not have any provisions restricting the quantity
of smokeless propellants that may be displayed in commercial
establishments. On March 31, 1972, OSHA revised Sec. 1910.109 to
include the following language: ``Not more than 20 pounds of smokeless
propellants, in containers of 1 pound maximum capacity, shall be
displayed in commercial establishments'' (37 FR 6577). This is
identical to the intent of proposed paragraph (h)(3)(i)(B). However, on
October 24, 1978, OSHA removed this language from the explosives
standard because it believed it addressed public safety requirements
that are subject to the control of local building and fire code
officials (43 FR 49726). While OSHA agrees that the provision did cover
a public safety issue, it now believes that it also addressed an
employee safety issue because employees in commercial establishments
that display smokeless propellants are often in close proximity to the
propellants. OSHA believes that having no restriction on the quantity
of smokeless propellants that can be displayed in commercial
establishments is contrary to employee safety. Therefore, OSHA is
reinstating this provision in the proposed standard as paragraph
(h)(3)(i)(B).
Issue #18: Although proposed paragraph (h)(3)(i)(B) is consistent
with paragraph 937 of the 1970 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-13), it is
not consistent with paragraph 13.3.8 of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495
(Ex. 2-5), which allows not more than 50 pounds of smokeless
propellants to be displayed in a commercial establishment. The 1970
edition appears to provide greater employee safety. OSHA requests
specific comments on whether there should be a weight restriction for
the display of smokeless propellants in commercial establishments and,
if so, whether the maximum weight limit should be 20 pounds, 50 pounds,
or some other quantity.
Proposed paragraph (h)(3)(ii) sets forth storage requirements for
commercial stocks of smokeless propellants. Proposed paragraph
(h)(3)(ii)(A) would require the employer to ensure that quantities of
smokeless propellants over 20 pounds and not exceeding 100 pounds be
stored in portable wooden boxes having walls at least 1 inch thick.
Issue #19: Proposed paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(A) is not consistent with
paragraph 13.3.9(1) of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5) which
requires commercial stocks of smokeless propellants exceeding 50 pounds
but not over 100 pounds to be stored in portable wooden boxes having
walls at least 1 inch thick. The weight restrictions in proposed
paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(A) are the same as in paragraph 937 of the 1970
edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-13) and in existing paragraph (j)(3)(iii)
(i.e., over 20 pounds but not over 100 pounds). Thus they appear to
provide better employee protection than the 2001 edition of NFPA 495.
OSHA requests comments on whether the weight restrictions should be
over 20 pounds but not over 100 pounds, over 50 pounds but not over 100
pounds, or some other range of weights. In addition, OSHA seeks
comments on whether it should allow storage of quantities of 20 to 100
pounds in either portable wooden containers or non-portable cabinets.
Paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(B) would require the employer to ensure that
quantities of smokeless propellants over 100 pounds and not exceeding
750 pounds are stored in non-portable cabinets having walls at least 1
inch thick. Paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(B)(1) would require that not more than
400 pounds be permitted to be stored in any one non-portable cabinet,
and paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(B)(2) would require non-portable cabinets be
separated by a distance of at least 25 feet or by a fire barrier wall
with at least a 1-hour fire resistance rating. Proposed paragraphs
(h)(3)(ii)(B) and (h)(3)(ii)(B)(1) are similar to existing paragraph
(j)(3)(iv). Proposed paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(B)(2) is a new requirement
that OSHA believes would increase employee safety and is contained in
paragraph 13.3.9(2) of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5).
Issue #20: Proposed paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(B) is not consistent with
paragraph 13.3.9(2) of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5), insofar
as the NFPA provision requires commercial stocks of smokeless
propellants exceeding 100 pounds but not over 800 pounds to be stored
in nonportable storage cabinets having walls at least 1 inch thick. The
weight restrictions in proposed paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(B) (over 100
pounds but not over 750 pounds) are the same as in paragraph 937 of the
1970 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-13). Thus they appear to provide better
employee protection than the 2001 edition of NFPA 495. OSHA requests
comments on whether the weight restrictions for the storage of
commercial stocks of smokeless propellants should be over 100 pounds
but not over 750 pounds, over 100 pounds but not over 800 pounds, or
some other range of weights.
Paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(C) would require the employer to ensure that
quantities of smokeless propellants over 750 pounds and not exceeding
5,000 pounds are stored in a building only if the requirements in
proposed provisions (h)(3)(ii)(C)(1) through (h)(3)(ii)(C)(7) are met.
These proposed provisions are new and offer an alternate means of
compliance to existing paragraph (j)(3)(v) for commercial stocks of
smokeless propellants over 750 pounds but less than 5,000 pounds. If
the quantity of smokeless propellants is greater than 750 pounds, and
the provisions in proposed paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(C)(1) through (7) are
not met, storage in accordance with the proposed (h)(3)(iii) is
required. If the quantity of smokeless propellants is over 5000 pounds,
then the storage requirements in proposed paragraph (h)(3)(iii) must be
met.
Paragraph (h)(3)(ii)(C)(1) would require that the warehouse or
storage room not be accessible to unauthorized personnel. Paragraph
(h)(3)(ii)(C)(2) would require that smokeless propellants be stored in
nonportable

Paragraph (h)(4)(i)(B) would require the employer to ensure that
small arms ammunition primers be separated from flammable liquids,
flammable solids, and oxidizing materials by a fire barrier wall with
at least a 1-hour fire resistance rating or by a distance of at least
25 feet. The proposed requirement is similar to existing paragraph
(j)(4)(iii) and is consistent with paragraph 13.5.6(2)(f) of the 2001
edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5). The existing provision defines
``flammable solid'' in terms of the classification used by DOT. The
proposed rule has dropped the reference to DOT's classification because
``flammable solid'' is defined in OSHA's Hazard Communication standard
at Sec. 1910.1200.


Paragraph (h)(4)(i)(C) would require the employer to ensure that no
more than 10,000 small arms primers be displayed in a commercial
establishment. This requirement is in accordance with paragraph 13.5.5
of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5). In a notice published in the
Federal Register on October 24, 1978 (43 FR 49726), OSHA revoked a
similar provision that it believed addressed public safety requirements
subject to the control of local building and fire code officials. As
with proposed paragraph (h)(3)(i)(B) discussed above, OSHA agrees that
this is a public safety issue but believes that it is also an employee
safety issue because employees, as well as the public, can be near
primers in a commercial establishment that displays them. Limiting
display quantities of small arms primers protects such employees.
Therefore, a display limitation is included in proposed paragraph
(h)(4)(i)(C).
Issue #21: Proposed paragraphs (h)(3)(i)(B) and (h)(4)(i)(C) place
restrictions on the quantity of smokeless propellants and small arms
primers, respectively, that can be displayed in commercial
establishments. Should OSHA further clarify the quantity limitations
for smokeless propellants and small arms primers to allow multiple
displays in commercial establishments? If so, what quantities should be
allowed and should the quantities be based on the size of the
commercial establishment? Should there be a minimum distance between
displays to ensure employee safety? Should the same limitations placed
on commercial establishments also apply to gun shows?
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(ii) sets forth requirements for
commercial stocks of small arms primers. Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(A)(1) and
(2) would require the employer to ensure that, when quantities of
750,000 or less are stored in a building, not more than 100,000 are
stored in any one pile and the piles are at least 15 feet (4.6 m)
apart. The proposed provisions are equivalent to and replace existing
paragraph (j)(4)(iv) and are in accordance with paragraph 13.5.6(1) of
the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5).
Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(B) would require the employer to ensure that
quantities of small arms ammunition primers in excess of 750,000 are
stored in a building only if it meets the requirements in proposed
paragraphs (h)(4)(ii)(B)(1) through (h)(4)(ii)(B)(7).
Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(B)(1) would require that the warehouse or
storage room not be accessible to unauthorized personnel. Paragraph
(h)(4)(ii)(B)(2) would require primers to be stored in cabinets with no
more than 200,000 primers stored in any one cabinet. Paragraph
(h)(4)(ii)(B)(3) would require that shelves in cabinets have a vertical
separation of at least 2 feet. Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(B)(4) would require
cabinets to be located against the walls of the warehouse or storage
room. Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(B)(5) would require the cabinets be at least
40 feet apart. It further allows that the separation between cabinets
may be reduced to 20 feet where barricades twice the height of the
cabinets are firmly attached to the wall midway between each cabinet
and the barricades extend at least 10 feet outward and are constructed
of either \1/4\-inch boiler plate, 2-inch thick wood, brick, or
concrete block. Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(B)(6) would require primers to be
separated from materials classified by DOT as flammable liquids,
flammable solids, and oxidizing materials by a distance of at least 25
feet or by a fire barrier wall with at least a 1-hour fire resistance
rating. Paragraph (h)(4)(ii)(B)(7) would require the building to be
protected by an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with
Sec. 1910.159. Proposed paragraphs (h)(4)(ii)(B)(1) to (7) are based
on paragraph 13.5.6(2) of the 2001 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-5). These
proposed paragraphs are all new and offer an alternate means of
compliance to existing paragraph (j)(4)(v), which requires primers in
excess of 750,000 to be stored in magazines. OSHA believes that the
level of safety provided by these alternative requirements would
provide an equivalent level of employee safety as the existing
paragraphs (j)(4)(iv) and (j)(4)(v).
Proposed paragraph (h)(4)(iii) would require the employer to ensure
that small arms ammunition primers that are not stored in accordance
with proposed paragraph (h)(4)(ii) be stored in a magazine in
accordance with ATF regulations for the storage of explosives (27 CFR
555.203 and 555.210).
Issue #22: Paragraph 14.1.6 of the 2006 edition of NFPA 495 (Ex. 2-
21)
Click to expand...
 
Did you notice the word "displayed"? that means they have to keep it in the back, a lot of shops I go to already do that.
 
Yeah, I was going to mention that too. Plus, it looks to me that this is just a change in language to bring it into compliance with existing NFPA fire codes, which many states have adopted already. Of course, I don't know why we need so many regulations, but I don't think this is a change for the worse, just more of the same.

I don't see where it discusses shipping by Fedex, UPS, or DHL.

Also, I'm confused about the limitation to displaying in no more than 1lb containers, as there are 5/8lb containers on the shelf at my local Gander Mountain.
 
Comment Submission

1. Go to www.regulations.gov
2. In the search criteria, use option 4, then enter document ID OSHA-2007-0032
3. Click "submit"
4. on results, right side, comments, click and comment away
 
Last edited:
How will this affect gun shows?

Also why does the regulations website need so much of my information? Also does anyone know how to view the comments already made?

Well after having read that long and boring document twice I have determined that it is going to greatly affect buying primers, powder etc at gunshows and off the internet and raise the price of these components.
 
Suggestions for posters

If you want to submit a comment that's longer than 1-2 sentences over there, type it in a word processor, copy and paste.
I just spent 20 minutes to type in an intelligent (at least, I thought it was an intelligent) response, and then the connection timed out. Will have to re-do tomorrow.
There are very few responses, by the way, and some are with that freakin' "separatist" attitude like "I am against the changes, unless you exclude the black powder, than I am OK"-type of thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
  • Locked
This was posted on handload.com
Replies
1
Views
417
Art Eatman
A
B
  • Locked
OSHA pulls new rule proposal!
Replies
2
Views
500
Car Knocker
C
T
  • Locked
Proposed “Safety” Regulations Would Dry Up Ammunition Sales
Replies
4
Views
482
Art Eatman
A
R
  • Locked
NRA: OSHA to revise explosives rule
Replies
2
Views
432
Robert Hairless
R
M
  • Locked
NRA-ILA: Labor Department Announces It Will Revise Overreaching OSHA Explosives Rule
Replies
12
Views
877
baz
B
Back
Top