View Full Version : Regulation of BP

06-29-2007, 02:14 PM
Here is a thread from another board concerning regulation of BP. It is possible to comment on these proposed rules and might not hurt to send something to your Senators and Representatives. The gentleman that started the thread is in the explsives industry.


Share This Thread ---------------------------- Digg del.icio.us Google Bookmarks Yahoo Bookmarks Share on Facebook Blog This! [?]

Colour Sergeant
Posts: 240
(6/29/07 9:40 am)

an end to all blackpowder sales????
i don't want to be one to cry wolf needlessly but.... we may be looking at an end to all blackpowder sales in the united states. in a typical game played by government agencies to see who's in charge and will have control... osha may end up with blanket authority over all explosives, propellants black and smokeless, small arms ammo and components etc..... this power play would put osha on top, over dot, atf and others.
the new proposed reg changes was published 4/13/07, listed as explosives-72:18791, end date for pulic comment is 7/12/07.

this thing is so long and so very difficult to read.... but there's small changes is shipping regulations that may very well end most all transport of blackpowder for use in small arms...

suggest people take notice and put in your comments or the next thing you know this sport could change greatly.

Carignan Salieres

Posts: 3265
(6/29/07 9:52 am)

Re: an end to all blackpowder sales????
I have not heard anything Mike, but if it goes this way in the US, Canada will be right behind by default as all our powder comes State-side. I will see what I can find out. A guy can get by with 777 or something else in a BP cartridge gun, but no black powder at all could make using a flint gun a misery


Colour Sergeant
Posts: 241
(6/29/07 10:37 am)

sorry that artical/ federal register number should have read: explosives-72:18791-18845
too early and too tired.


Lance Corporal
Posts: 54
(6/29/07 11:32 am)

Re: Link to article
Here's a link to the article:



Posts: 3690
(6/29/07 11:32 am)

Re: ooops
Thanks, Mike. I'd heard rumblings about this, but didn't give it much weight because there was no citation or anything to back it up.

I'm sending off a note to my congressman.


Next Topic >>

Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies

06-29-2007, 08:31 PM
Got an e mail about this today, havent had time to check it out.

The Double D
07-04-2007, 01:10 AM
Generally politics is not allowed in the this forum. This is one of those exceptions. Action needed fast!!!! If the sporting goods industry is worried we should really be worried!


Proposed OSHA Regulation Threatens Firearm and Ammunition Industry

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the government agency charged with assuring the safety and health of America's workers, is proposing a regulatory rule affecting the manufacturing, transportation and storage of small arms ammunition, primers and smokeless propellants.

As written, the proposed rule would force the closure of nearly all ammunition manufacturers and force the cost of small arms ammunition to skyrocket beyond what the market could bear—essentially collapsing our industry. This is not an exaggeration. The cost to comply with the proposed rule for the ammunition industry, including manufacturer, wholesale distributors and retailers, will be massive and easily exceed $100 million. For example, ammunition and smokeless propellant manufacturers would have to shut down and evacuate a factory when a thunderstorm approached and customers would not be allowed within 50 feet of any ammunition (displayed or otherwise stored) without first being searched for matches or lighters.

NSSF and SAAMI have already had a preliminary meeting with OSHA officials to begin the process of explaining to them the major problems this proposed rule presents for all levels of the firearms and ammunition industry. Furthermore, NSSF and SAAMI are each seeking a 60 day extension of the public comment period (currently scheduled to expire July 12).

NSSF is urging all retailers to contact OSHA directly and request a 60-day extension of the public comment period. Retailers should inform OSHA that the proposed rule constitutes a "significant regulatory action" as defined in Executive Order 12866 (1993) Section 3(f)(1) in that it will clearly "adversely affect in a material way" the retail sector of the firearms and ammunition industry, productivity, competition and jobs and that the annual compliance cost for all retailers of ammunition will far exceed $100 million dollars.

Click here for a template letter. If you choose to draft your own letter, the reference line must read as follows:

RE: Docket No. OSHA–2007–0032
Request to Extend Public Comment Period and Request for Hearing on
"Significant Regulatory Action" as Defined in Executive Order 12866

Please fax the letter to: 202-693-1648 (include the docket number and Department of Labor/OSHA on the cover sheet and in the reference section of your letter).

Please e-mail the letter by visiting: http://www.regulations.gov and following the submission instructions.

07-04-2007, 07:56 AM
Guys you need to jump on this, the deadline is the 7th I beleive. Just download the letter and print it, or e-mail it.
The last time the industry that I'm in missed one of these NPRM's it cost us dearly and we are still seeing the effects in increased nonproductive paperwork that doesn't do anything to increase safety. This could end the sport as we know it. Backdoor gun control.
Thanks Douglas.


07-04-2007, 11:05 AM
OK, I just submitted this:

RE: Docket No. OSHA–2007–0032
Request to Extend Public Comment Period and Request for Hearing on
"Significant Regulatory Action" as Defined in Executive Order 12866

This rule as proposed will adversely affect the retail arms and ammunition industry, and significantly impact the business and other activities of numerous companies and individuals who have not yet or are just beginning to become aware of it. The public comment period needs to be extended to allow those affected to analyze the rule's potential impact on them and to propose changes to improve the rule's intended purpose of increasing employee safety without causing unnecessary adverse effects.

This needs to be crosslinked to the discussion going on upstairs in Cast Boolits as well.

07-04-2007, 11:24 PM
ricochet, hope you don't mind, I just copied your statement and submitted it.

07-04-2007, 11:27 PM
I certainly don't mind. There's a sample letter on the rule itself on the NRA-ILA site linked in the discussion up in Cast Boolits, too.