WaterfowlChat Forum Index WaterfowlChat
Welcome
 
 State ForumsState Forums   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   Member MapMember Map   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 Photo AlbumPhoto Album   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Google
Proposed OSHA Regulations

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    WaterfowlChat Forum Index -> The Lodge
Author Message
Choclab
Pit Boss
Pit Boss


Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 2299
Location: Your back door.....

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 1:11 pm    Post subject: Proposed OSHA Regulations Reply with quote

http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRloc=common/PR/&PR=BP070207.cfm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 in rich text format (Word). 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.


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

Even consider contacting our Senators

Cantwell, Maria- (D - WA) Class I
511 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3441
Web Form: http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/index.html

Murray, Patty- (D - WA) Class III
173 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2621
Web Form: http://murray.senate.gov/email/index.cfm

House

http://www.house.gov/
Back to top
Boomn4x4
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 5222
Location: Avon, Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've done my research on this one.... The whole thing is a scam....

The Institue of Makers of Explosives and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute were the ones that called for the reform in the first palce.

I've read most of the document...(if you want the gists of it you can start on page 47 for a summary) Almost ALL of the proposals are not new regulations... they are only rewording of current regulations to make them more understandable.

The reference to evacuating the building in a lightening storm is also hogwash...It has been OSHA requirements since 1972 to require employers to remove employees from the blasting area duing the approach and progress of an electrical store.... They are only revising the definition to add "to require the suspension of explosive manufacturing operations" ... "requires the immediate withdrawl of employees located near explosives" The only thing this proposal is doing is redefining the rules that are already in place.

I'm guess that the author of this was in kahutz with an explosives manufacturer that was somehow affected by one of the VERY FEW new rules... maybe they were storing all of their ammonium sulfate in a wooden barn with a straw roof??? And not they will have to build a new warehouse...

Either way there is ABSOLUTLY nothing that I could find in the proposal that would lead me to beleive that there will be even a minimal effect on the consumer of firearms. If someone could find something that says otherwise... I'd be glad to listen.
Back to top
shrpshtr
Pit Boss
Pit Boss


Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boomn4x4 wrote:
I've done my research on this one.... The whole thing is a scam....

The Institue of Makers of Explosives and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute were the ones that called for the reform in the first palce.

I've read most of the document...(if you want the gists of it you can start on page 47 for a summary) Almost ALL of the proposals are not new regulations... they are only rewording of current regulations to make them more understandable.

The reference to evacuating the building in a lightening storm is also hogwash...It has been OSHA requirements since 1972 to require employers to remove employees from the blasting area duing the approach and progress of an electrical store.... They are only revising the definition to add "to require the suspension of explosive manufacturing operations" ... "requires the immediate withdrawl of employees located near explosives" The only thing this proposal is doing is redefining the rules that are already in place.

I'm guess that the author of this was in kahutz with an explosives manufacturer that was somehow affected by one of the VERY FEW new rules... maybe they were storing all of their ammonium sulfate in a wooden barn with a straw roof??? And not they will have to build a new warehouse...

Either way there is ABSOLUTLY nothing that I could find in the proposal that would lead me to beleive that there will be even a minimal effect on the consumer of firearms. If someone could find something that says otherwise... I'd be glad to listen.



where is the "i'm with stupid" smiley when you need it?
Back to top
Snafu
Pit Boss
Pit Boss


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 1470
Location: Erie, PA

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm with Stupid


Right there.
Back to top
Boomn4x4
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 5222
Location: Avon, Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Snafu wrote:
I'm with Stupid


Right there.

Hysterical ... good burn
Back to top
Choclab
Pit Boss
Pit Boss


Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 2299
Location: Your back door.....

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I stole what you said and posted on another board...the Huntingwa. one.....thanks Mike
Back to top
Boomn4x4
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 5222
Location: Avon, Ohio

PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Choclab wrote:
I stole what you said and posted on another board...the Huntingwa. one.....thanks Mike


When someone hands you something to sign... it ALWAYS means one thing.. they want you to sign it.... In order to get you to sign it, they are only going to provide you with information that would encourage you to do so.... There is a reason they need signatures... its because not everyone supports it (if everyone supported, they wouldn't need signatures) and there is a reason everyone dosen't support it... and I want to know what those reasons are.

There is so much crap on the internet that I always check into it... Especially when someone is trying to flame someone else.

I truely believe that people really aren't just out to get everyone else... MOST people (and orginzations) do things with the best of intentions... sometimes those intentions are misinterpreted... and sometimes they are blatently misconstrued.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    WaterfowlChat Forum Index -> The Lodge All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 


Registration Agreement: Terms and Conditions


image linking to 100 Top Birds and Waterfowl Sites
Waterfowl  Topsites with your website ranked.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group