1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Stop OSHA

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Straight99, Jul 14, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Straight99

    Straight99 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    336
    Go to website and sign up

    http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/say-no-to-osha-ammunition-regulations.html
     
  2. RobertT

    RobertT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,354
    The Facts About OSHA's Ammunition Proposal

    Friday, July 13, 2007

    A recent proposal for new “explosives safety” regulations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has rightly caused a flurry of concern among gun owners and those in the firearm business. OSHA had set out to make legitimate updates to workplace safety regulations pertaining to explosives; unfortunately, the proposed rule goes far beyond regulating true explosives. The proposed rules include restrictions that very few gun stores, sporting goods stores, shippers, or ammunition dealers could comply with.



    The key problem in the proposed rule is that OSHA defines “explosives” to include “black powder, … small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, [and] smokeless propellant.” The proposal defines different classes of “explosives” based on the hazards they present, but then treats ammunition and components the same as the most volatile high explosives, for nearly all purposes.



    In fact, industry and military tests have long proved that small arms cartridge pose little hazard in a fire. A classic reference work from the 1940s describes tests in which large quantities of shotgun shells and metallic cartridges were deliberately set on fire. The ammunition generally burned slowly, and cartridges ignited “piece by piece” without throwing fragments more than a few feet. (Julian S. Hatcher, Hatcher’s Notebook 532-33 (2d ed. 1962).)



    Because small arms ammunition and components are far less hazardous than high explosives, existing practices for their storage, transportation and sale are very different. But under the proposed rule, a workplace that contains even a handful of small arms cartridges, for any reason, is considered a “facility containing explosives” and therefore subject to many impractical restrictions. Among the many examples:



    No person could carry “firearms, ammunition, or similar articles in facilities containing explosives … except as required for work duties.” This rule would make it impossible to operate any kind of gun store, firing range, or gunsmith shop.


    Employers would have to evacuate all employees when an electrical storm approaches a “facility containing explosives.” This requirement would apply to all “facilities,” from a small country store that stocks a few boxes of hunting ammunition, to the largest mass-merchandise outlet such as Wal-Mart.


    Employers would have to ensure that “no open flames, matches, or spark producing devices are located within 50 feet (15.2 m) of explosives or facilities containing explosives.” Neither small gun stores, nor “big box” retailers have any practical way to enforce this rule; realistically, a person smoking a cigarette outside a large concrete building can’t set fire to ammunition inside the building anyway.


    Vehicles could not be “refueled within 50 feet (15.2 m) of a facility containing “explosives.” Again, many gas stations and convenience stores in rural areas stock small quantities of ammunition; gas pumps outside don’t pose any danger to ammunition in the store.


    The proposed rules on storage of small arms ammunition and components would also create problems for retailers.



    The rule would require 25 feet of separation between small arms ammunition and all “flammable liquids, flammable solids, and oxidizing materials.” As an even more impractical alternative, a dealer could construct a one-hour fire barrier wall. Neither should be necessary, given the low level of hazard created by (for instance) a countertop display of gun oil near a supply of rifle or pistol cartridges.


    The rule would also impose stricter limits on storage of smokeless powder than existing National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) guidelines require. OSHA has presented no evidence that the existing NFPA standard is insufficient to protect workplace safety.


    Finally, transportation provisions in the proposed rule would create similar problems. For example, the rule would require shippers to notify “local fire and police departments” before transferring “explosives” between vehicles, and even to notify these agencies about vehicle breakdowns or collisions. A fender-bender while delivering shotgun shells to a gun store hardly justifies this level of government involvement. These provisions do not reflect standard practices in the shipping industry, and many carriers would probably refuse to ship ammunition under these rules.



    It’s important to remember this is only a proposed rule, so there’s still time for concerned citizens to speak out. The National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, and Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute will all file comments urging a major rewrite of these proposed regulations, based on the severe effect the proposed regulations (if finalized) would have on the availability of ammunition and reloading supplies to safe and responsible shooters.



    The public comment period on OSHA’s proposal ends September 10, 2007. To file a comment, or to learn more about the OSHA proposal, go to www.regulations.gov and search for Docket Number OSHA-2007-0032”; you can read OSHA’s proposal and learn how to submit comments electronically, or by fax or mail.



    For additional information on this bill, please visit http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3145.



    To read a letter from Representative Doug Lamborn (R-CO) and 31 other members of Congress to OSHA, please visit http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/nypd_kelly_to_ashcroft.pdf

    Robert
     
  3. ricks1

    ricks1 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,545
    like the post but your late they have done it so your we are screwed rick
     
  4. jnoemanh

    jnoemanh TS Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    526
    ricks1 - who is it and what is it you think they have done? Do you have the smallest clue? No? Okay, go back to watching Simpsons reruns....
     
  5. RobertT

    RobertT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,354
    The public comment period on OSHA’s proposal ends September 10, 2007. To file a comment, or to learn more about the OSHA proposal, go to www.regulations.gov and search for Docket Number OSHA-2007-0032”; you can read OSHA’s proposal and learn how to submit comments electronically, or by fax or mail.


    For additional information on this bill, please visit http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3145.


    To read a letter from Representative Doug Lamborn (R-CO) and 31 other members of Congress to OSHA, please visit http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/nypd_kelly_to_ashcroft.pdf
     
  6. Steve-CT

    Steve-CT TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    524
    Thank you Robert for keeping this critical issue in the forefront. I appreciate it.
     
  7. recurvyarcher

    recurvyarcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,450
    Good synopsis for those who who did not take the time to read the proposal and think about the possible repercussions.
     
  8. ArmySGM

    ArmySGM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    252
    Sign an online petition about the proposed OSHA ammo regulations.

    The headline says it all, so just check out the online petition here. (external link)

    Posted Fri Jul 13 21:42:45 CDT 2007

    Found this easy way to sign petition on Illinois State Rifle Association site.

    Gary

    Found out the link doesn't work. Go to http://www.isra.org/ To click the link and sign the petition.
     
  9. grunt

    grunt TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,922
    Location:
    Thousand Oaks Ca
  10. ArmySGM

    ArmySGM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    252
    Go to the site above and sign the petition. It's in your interest too.

    Gary
     
  11. Baron23

    Baron23 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,632
    Labor Department Announces It Will Revise Overreaching OSHA Explosives Rule

    Monday, July 16, 2007

    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will significantly revise a recent proposal for new “explosives safety” regulations that caused serious concern among gun owners. OSHA had originally set out to update workplace safety regulations, but the proposed rules included restrictions that very few gun shops, sporting goods stores, shippers, or ammunition dealers could comply with.

    Gun owners had filed a blizzard of negative comments urged by the NRA, and just a week ago, OSHA had already issued one extension for its public comment period at the request of the National Shooting Sports Foundation. After continued publicity through NRA alerts and the outdoor media, and after dozens of Members of Congress expressed concern about its impact, OSHA has wisely decided to go back to the drawing board.

    Working with the NRA, Congressman Denny Rehberg (R-MT) planned to offer a floor amendment to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill this Wednesday when the House considers this legislation. His amendment would have prohibited federal funds from being used to enforce this OSHA regulation.

    Such an amendment is no longer necessary since Kristine A. Iverson, the Labor Department’s Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, sent Rep. Rehberg a letter, dated July 16, stating that it “was never the intention of OSHA to block the sale, transportation, or storage of small arms ammunition, and OSHA is taking prompt action to revise” this proposed rule to clarify the purpose of the regulation.

    Also, working with the NRA, Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) gathered signatures from 25 House colleagues for a letter, dated July 11, expressing concerns about this proposed OSHA rule. The letter calling the proposal “an undue burden on a single industry where facts do not support the need outlined by this proposed rule” and “not feasible, making it realistically impossible for companies to comply with its tenets.”

    The OSHA proposal would have defined “explosives” to include “black powder, … small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, [and] smokeless propellant,” and treated these items the same as the most volatile high explosives.

    Under the proposed rule, a workplace that contained even a handful of small arms cartridges, for any reason, would have been considered a “facility containing explosives” and therefore subject to many impractical restrictions. For example, no one could carry “firearms, ammunition, or similar articles in facilities containing explosives … except as required for work duties.” Obviously, this rule would make it impossible to operate any kind of gun store, firing range, or gunsmith shop.

    The public comment website for the proposed rule is no longer accessible. The Labor Department will publish a notice in the July 17 Federal Register announcing that a new rule proposal will soon be drafted for public comment. Needless to say, the NRA monitors proposed federal regulations to head off this kind of overreach, and will be alert for OSHA’s next draft.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.