Osha to regulate ammo and components

[TomD]

Below is pasted the proposed Osha regulations. These are regulations and have the force of law but it doesn't go through congress. Basically, they want to define ammunition, powder and primers as explosives and them regulate any business that deals with them in the name of worker safety. This, I suppose, is because of all the accidents, explosions and worker deaths due to exploding ammo. This could make it quite expensive to deal in any of these items.

Comments and bold are by someone else.

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

---

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main
Go to the Option 4 drop down menu and select "Document ID"
Key this ID in to the action box ... OSHA-2007-0032
Click on the SUBMIT button

OSHA has proposed rules that may adversely affect the transportation of black and smokeless powder, primers and small arms ammunition, and may affect prices and availability. Below are some sections of the proposed rule (55 PDF pages) that I felt had a direct impact on shooters.

Comments in italics are mine. Bolding is also mine.

Explosive. This term would be defined to mean any device, or liquid
or solid chemical compound or mixture, the primary or common purpose of
which is to function by explosion. The term ``explosive'' would be
defined to include all material included as a Class 1 explosive by DOT
in accordance with 49 CFR chapter I. The term would include, but would
not be limited to, dynamite, black powder, pellet powders, detonators,
blasting agents, initiating explosives, blasting caps, safety fuse,
fuse lighters, fuse igniters, squibs, cordeau detonant fuse,
instantaneous fuse, igniter cord, igniters, pyrotechnics, special
industrial explosive materials, small arms ammunition, small arms
ammunition primers, smokeless propellant, cartridges for propellant-
actuated power devices, and cartridges for industrial guns.

Paragraph (c)(1)(ii) would require the employer to ensure that only
persons trained in accordance with paragraph (j) of this section handle
or use explosives. Loading and unloading of explosives are examples of
handling, and blasting of slag pockets is an example of the use of
explosives. This is a new requirement that reinforces the importance of
training for all employees engaged in the handling and use of
explosives.

Paragraph (c)(1)(vii) would require the employer to ensure that no
person is allowed to enter facilities containing explosives, or to
transport, handle, or use explosives while under the influence of
intoxicating liquors, narcotics, or other drugs that may cause the
person to act in an unsafe manner in the workplace. Due to safety
considerations, OSHA is proposing that such persons be completely
restricted from access to a facility where explosives are manufactured
or stored as well as restricting them from the handling and
transportation of explosives.
This would appear to require some sort of drug testing to be in compliance.

Paragraph (c)(1)(ix) would require the employer to ensure that no
flammable cleaning solvents are present in facilities containing
explosives except where authorized by the employer and where their
presence does not endanger the safety of employees. This is a new
requirement and is based on a recommendation in the Petition (Ex. 2-1).
Due to their potential to create a fire and thus cause an explosion, it
is generally not safe to have flammable cleaning solvents in facilities
containing explosives.

Paragraph (c)(2)(i) would require the employer to ensure that the
primary electrical supply to any part of the facility (e.g., building,
loading dock, etc.) containing explosives can be disconnected at a safe
remote location away from that part of the facility. A safe remote
location from a part of the facility containing explosives is a
location far enough away to ensure that, if all the explosives in that
part of the facility detonated, a person at the remote location would
not be injured by the explosion. In determining what a safe remote
location is, the employer will need to consider factors such as the
type and amount of explosives present.
This is a new requirement
Would this even be possible in a small gunshop?

Proposed paragraph (c)(2)(ii) deals with safety hazards caused by
electrical storms. During the approach and progress of an electrical
storm, paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) would require the employer to ensure
that all explosive manufacturing and blasting operations are suspended,
and paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(B) would require the employer to ensure that
employees located in or near facilities containing explosives, or in
blast sites, are withdrawn immediately to a safe remote location. A
safe remote location in this case would be a location far enough away
from all the explosives in the facility or blast site so that a person
would not be injured if there were an explosion. These proposed
requirements are based on therequirements in existing paragraph (e)(1)(vii)(a) which requires
employers to remove employees from the blasting area during the
approach and progress of an electrical storm. However, proposed
paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) has been expanded to require the suspension of
explosive manufacturing operations and proposed paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(B)
also requires the immediate withdrawal of employees located near
explosives. This reduces the time the employees are exposed to a
potential hazard. The expansion of the existing requirement is in
recognition that an electrical storm may be hazardous to employees at
facilities and blast sites containing explosives and that employees
need to be kept a safe distance away from a potential explosion. This
is standard practice in the industry and is consistent with a
recommendation in the Petition (Ex. 2-1).

Static electricity as a potential source of ignition is probably
the single greatest concern for facilities and blast sites containing
explosives. The Petition (Ex. 2-1) recommends new requirements for
static electricity protection that would require any new static
electricity protection system to comply with NFPA 77, Static
Electricity (Ex. 2-7). However, it recommended limiting the application
of the requirements only to systems installed after the effective date
of the new standard and would not require an existing manufacturing
facility to install a new system or modify an existing system to meet
the requirements of NFPA 77. IME informed OSHA that certain explosives
are not static-sensitive and do not require protection. IME further
argues that, since explosives manufacturing is subject to the
requirements of OSHA's PSM standard at Sec. 1910.119, areas in an
explosives manufacturing facility where static electricity protection
systems may be needed should already have been identified through the
process hazard analysis requirements of the PSM standard, and adequate
safeguards should have been instituted in accordance with the PSM
standard.
OSHA believes that static electricity protection systems can be
important safety features for facilities containing explosives. The
Agency considered proposing a requirement in paragraph (c) that would
require the employer to ensure that all facilities containing
explosives have appropriate and effective static electricity protection
systems, with suggested methods of compliance found in NFPA 77. The
Agency decided not to propose such language because it lacked
sufficient data and information on the types and effectiveness of
static electricity protection systems. OSHA is seeking additional
information on these issues through public comments.

The hazards of flame, matches, and spark producing devices are
dealt with in proposed paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(A) by requiring the
employer to ensure that no open flames, matches, or spark producing
devices are located within 50 feet of explosives or facilities
containing explosives. As mentioned earlier, ``facilities containing
explosives'' refers to any building on a site where explosives are
manufactured, handled or stored.
Stripsearch customers?

Issue #4: OSHA seeks specific comments on the impact proposed
paragraph (c)(3)(iii) would have on the storage and retail sale of
small arms ammunition, small arms primers, and smokeless propellants.
Do open flames, matches, or spark producing devices create a hazard
when located within 50 feet of small arms ammunition, small arms
primers, or smokeless propellants, or facilities containing these
products? Can employers involved in the storage or retail sale of small
arms ammunition, small arms primers, or smokeless propellants prevent
all open flames, matches, or spark producing devices from coming within
50 feet of these products or facilities containing these products? If
not, why not? Should proposed paragraph (c)(3)(iii) use a protective
distance other than 50 feet and, if so, what distance should it be and
why? Should OSHA exclude small arms ammunition, small arms primers, and
smokeless propellants from the requirements of proposed paragraph
(c)(3)(iii)?

Proposed paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C) would require the employer to
ensure that no person carries firearms, ammunition, or similar articles
in facilities containing explosives
No armed employees in gunshops? No legally-armed customers? How about cops?

Issue #9: Should OSHA require lightning protection systems for any
facility that contains ammonium nitrate or explosives? What would these
systems cost?

Proposed paragraph (e)(1) addresses general provisions associated
with the transportation of explosives. Proposed paragraph (e)(1)(i)
would require the employer to ensure that no employee smokes, carries
matches or any other flame-producing device, or carries any firearms or
cartridges (except firearms and cartridges required to be carried by
guards) while in, or within 25 feet (7.63m) of, a vehicle containing
explosives.

Paragraph (e)(1)(iii) would require the employer to ensure that
explosives are not transferred from one vehicle to another without
informing local fire and police departments. This will help to ensure
that the transfer is performed in a safe manner. In addition, a
competent person must supervise the transfer of explosives. This is
applicable to all transfer work whether it is done within private
facilities or on public highways.
UPS, Fed-ex & DHL will just love this.

Proposed paragraph (h)(2) would require the employer to ensure that
small arms ammunition is 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.
Small gunshops better get bigger.

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.

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.

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.

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?

Paragraph (j) Training. Proposed paragraph (j) is new and contains
proposed training requirements for employees in the explosives
industry.
This proposes training and re-training commensurate with each employee's duties and the requisite record-keeping.
__________________

[gunner]

Was wondering how they were going to go after ammo. I thought it would be as a heavy tax to the end user, I guess in a sense this will be it.

Hope everyone is finished stocking up, or at least in the process of finishing. The increase in ammo price and materials should be greater than PMs just like the Clinton assault weapon ban pushed up prices of preban weapons.

We all knew this was coming, but I admit, seeing the reality of this crap really smacks you in the face. I could say so much more but won't.

www.cannonfuse.com
www.firefox-fx.com/
www.aimsurplus.com

[gunner]

"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."

Are they now defining an ammo cache ?? What's excessive and what isn't?

[Baphomet Jones]

Kinda like what they did with the ATF/CPSC about "fireworks". Some chemicals are getting real hard to find now. This OSHA development shows the true intentions behind the CPSC fireworks chemical ban ideas.

No IED's, no rockets, no reloading shells, whats next?

[Kahlil Gibran]

Originally Posted by Baphomet Jones

Kinda like what they did with the ATF/CPSC about "fireworks". Some chemicals are getting real hard to find now. This OSHA development shows the true intentions behind the CPSC fireworks chemical ban ideas.

No IED's, no rockets, no reloading shells, whats next?

After the Oklahoma City false-flag bombing they tightened control over fertilizer. They don't want We The People able to resist.

[Thade]

This is what made a lot of dealers drop black powder sales years ago, they had to provide an underground bunker for its storage.

Classic case of Administative body redefining Legislative intent and Constitutional law.

The invisible "fourth branch" of government our founding father James Madison warned us about.

[<SLV>]

Originally Posted by gunner

"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."

Are they now defining an ammo cache ?? What's excessive and what isn't?

According to Lyman's 48th a reloader is only allowed to have 10,000 primers at a residence. 10,000 isn't a lot to some people. How in the world can they only have 10,000 total on their shelves (or, now behind the counter) at Sportsman's Warehouse?

I'm so glad they are trying to protect us from ourselves!

[GOLD DUCK]

QWAK,DEBT SLAVES don't need no GUNS they could HURT them selves or OTHERS and their DEBTS never get payed!

the DUCK

[elroy]

Undoubtedly these new regulations are needed. Everyone has surely seen

the stories on the nightly news about exploding gunshops, right?

[fvk]

Originally Posted by elroy

Undoubtedly these new regulations are needed. Everyone has surely seen

the stories on the nightly news about exploding gunshops, right?

And given there are about 7 osha inspectors on the face of the earth from what I can tell, it ought not to cause too much of a problem. At any rate just another reason to buy all my rounds from the artist formerly know as the soviet union. It may be old but its steel core and it fits my rifles. I'm joking of course. Nothing to see here. Move along.

[Abouthadit]

Originally Posted by Kahlil Gibran

They don't want We The People able to resist.

Bingo. There can be no armed resistance when there are no means to resist.

[keehah]

Currently viewing: '1 member and 38 guests'

A link to this thread on WRH gets the views up! Good post TomD!

Osha to regulate ammo and components

Posted Jul 2, 2007 10:30 PM PST
Category: RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

[Abouthadit]

Originally Posted by keehah

Currently viewing: '1 member and 38 guests'

A link to this thread on WRH gets the views up! Good post TomD!

38 gubbamint guests??? I guess the name taking is first, followed by the butt kicking, so to speak, in court.

[platinumdude]

Bump.
Took wnd a week to print out this information:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=56556

They mention a July 12 deadline. Wonder what date everyone will have to comply if it goes into effect.

[917601]

This means the end of mail order.All ammo,bullets, and components have a designated "UN" code.That is what Fed ex and UPS ship by(airlines also).Ammo has until now,apparently had an "uncontrolled' "UN" shipping designator.My thoughts are now there will be a tax or outrageous cost to ship ammo and components-thus discouraging cheap mail order transactions.I used to ship aviator signal flares ,they now carry a "UN" code that makes it illegal to ship, prison and jail time if discovered.OSHA and EPA have bankrupt more businesses than hard times.The doors are swinging closed.

[randymatt]

facilities containing explosives'' refers to any building on a site where explosives are manufactured, handled or stored.

Too much red tape, stores like JI Joes, Wal-Mart, Ace Hardware, Etc. will simply not sell ammo anymore, and forget the mom & pop places,,, stock up boyz.

Explosive. This term would be defined to mean any device, or liquid
or solid chemical compound or mixture, the primary or common purpose of
which is to function by explosion. The term ``explosive'' would be defined to include all material included as a Class 1 explosive by DOT in accordance with 49 CFR chapter I. The term would include, but would not be limited to, dynamite, black powder, pellet powders, detonators, blasting agents, initiating explosives, blasting caps, safety fuse, fuse lighters, fuse igniters, squibs, cordeau detonant fuse, instantaneous fuse, igniter cord, igniters, pyrotechnics, special industrial explosive materials, small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, smokeless propellant, cartridges for propellant-actuated power devices, and cartridges for industrial guns.

Wonder how will this go over at construction sites using 22 cal stud drivers?

[randymatt]

So,,, anyone stockin' up?

[platinumdude]

Originally Posted by randymatt

So,,, anyone stockin' up?

There is still lots of time left.

From http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Fe...d.aspx?id=3145 :

"The public comment period was originally scheduled to end July 12 but has been extended sixty (60) days until September 10, 2007. To read the OSHA proposal click here (PDF file)."


So even after the period, I would think they would have to set a time table for businesses to comply with.

[917601]

Still plenty of time? Most reloader suppliers on the internet out of stock on primers already,if you have them,a wise investment.

[TomD]

Originally Posted by randymatt

So,,, anyone stockin' up?

I guess that by a lot of standards I am already stocked up but I shoot a lot. I shoot 4 different disciplines and that works out to many thousands of rounds a year. I won't say quantities in case it attracts attention.

[Rampon]

OSHA has extended comment period til Sept 10.
http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topi...OPIC_ID=237044

[RiverRat]

:D Let's keep up with this one...this could turn nasty.

[Kahlil Gibran]

Originally Posted by 917601

Still plenty of time? Most reloader suppliers on the internet out of stock on primers already,if you have them,a wise investment.

My local Cabella's had very little ammo on the shelves. They said their suppliers warned of further "diversion" to Iraq.

[J.D.Rockinfeller]

Originally Posted by Rampon

OSHA has extended comment period til Sept 10.
http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topi...OPIC_ID=237044

...well then, here's MY comment ; Osha.... 'em all.
.............

[RiverRat]

:rolleyes_m: I passed this around to at least a dozen guys at work as soon as it was posted.

All...and I mean ALL of them have ordered reloaders...primers and powder have been wiped out locally around here.

The big Internet dealers like Midway and Graf still have stock,but it's drying up fast from the looks of things.

I was ordering 2,000 12 gauge hulls and wads at Midway and before I could place the order their hull stock had dropped 600 in five minutes...I got 1,400...oh well.

Let's hope this doesn't snowball with the liberal crowd before we can all stock up.


:D :D :D :D

[Kahlil Gibran]

Anybody here been happy buying 9mm ammo over the internet? Price/shipping costs worth it? Any downside?

[platinumdude]

This may be a reason why ammo is getting scarce:

http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread....hreadid=729078

[RiverRat]

:D KG...try Cheaper Than Dirt.

Their ammo prices are cheaper than local...even with shipping,if you buy enough other stuff or a quantity big enough to average out the total cost.

Never had a problem...they ship fast.

There are a few others,but so far I have no complaints.

:D :D :D

[Abouthadit]

Originally Posted by platinumdude

but has been extended sixty (60) days until September 10, 2007. T

Exactly 6 years since the fed false flag op.

[Kahlil Gibran]

Originally Posted by RiverRat

:D KG...try Cheaper Than Dirt.

Their ammo prices are cheaper than local...even with shipping,if you buy enough other stuff or a quantity big enough to average out the total cost.

Never had a problem...they ship fast.

There are a few others,but so far I have no complaints.

:D :D :D

Thanks RR! Local supplies are drying up so I'm gonna buy a case of 9mm from them.