|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 30, 2016, 07:23 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: June 29, 2005
Posts: 41
|
New Ruling on Wetted Nitrocellulose
|
August 30, 2016, 07:34 PM | #2 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
That's the Chicago way. The current Administration and its designated successor are going to do everything they can to make legal gun ownership unpleasant and difficult via regulation outside Congress. If that fails, they'll do their best to make selling ammunition and firearms unprofitable via regulation.
Surrender to the Administration's gun control goals or else. |
August 30, 2016, 07:37 PM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: June 29, 2005
Posts: 41
|
I was afraid someone would confirm my deep set fear it meant what I thought it means.
Sounds like I better go out and pick up a few pounds of powder tomorrow, eh? I got a feeling it's going from about $25 to $40 here soon... |
August 30, 2016, 08:21 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,863
|
So this affects reloading powder too? I'm a bit confused.
__________________
NRA Life Member Read my blog! "The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig or .41 Magnum!" |
August 30, 2016, 08:50 PM | #5 | |
Member
Join Date: June 29, 2005
Posts: 41
|
Perhaps this will shed some light. From the article:
III. Impact of ATF Reclassification Quote:
I see nothing good coming of this one either. It will likely affect ammunition manufacturers and reloaders. |
|
August 31, 2016, 03:40 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Posts: 140
|
When the ITAR/gunsmithing thing started up a while back I was afraid something like this would be next:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...21#post6335121 I'm guessing we're going to see a blizzard of these regulation "enhancements" before the election. I see it as the administration's effort to divert gun-rights attention by focusing our bandwith on this stuff and away from the election. What I'm really afraid of is they're saving their "best stuff" for last. Last edited by mag1911; August 31, 2016 at 03:45 AM. |
August 31, 2016, 05:14 AM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
It's more misinformation from that purveyor of trash, Ammoland. They have the link to the BATFE document on their site. They are betting that very few pro-gunners will bother to vet their sensational trash.
Quote:
https://www.atf.gov/file/106536/download BTW: Nitrocellulose in higher concentration is also called guncotton. Two of my friends were burned to death when they laid out wetted guncotton prior to burning. In order to speed up the drying process they raked it, causing a conflagration that cost their lives. Last edited by thallub; August 31, 2016 at 07:05 AM. |
|
August 31, 2016, 07:06 AM | #8 |
Member
Join Date: June 29, 2005
Posts: 41
|
I hope you're right, and it is just a "sky is falling" garbage article.
|
August 31, 2016, 07:11 AM | #9 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
Since you hold yourseld to be in a position to evaluate this claim, which of the specific claims are sensationalistic in your view? Has ATF issued private letter rulings that wetted nitrocelluose of less than 25% nitrogen is not an explosive requiring an explosive magazine? If ATF has done this, how many manufacturers were relying on that ruling in their daily operation? Did ATF just change thus ruling with no advance notice or comment period? Which of those claims are sensationalistic? |
|
August 31, 2016, 07:53 AM | #10 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
August 31, 2016, 07:59 AM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,955
|
Quote:
General Dynamics and who else? |
|
August 31, 2016, 08:29 AM | #12 | ||
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
Quote:
It seems the key elements to determining this are: 1) How many smokeless powder manufacturers are using nitrocelluose in excess of 12.6% nitrogen. 2) Of those, how many are relying on an earlier private letter ruling or variance saying such nitrocelluose is not an explosive when wetted 25% by volume for either storage or logistics? Without knowing that information, I'm not sure how you can assess the impact. |
||
August 31, 2016, 08:34 AM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
I saw last night on another board that the letter was "in error" and that it will be business as usual in the powder business. We shall see if that is so.
Any road, there are only two manufacturers of smokeless powder in the USA and surely they handle nitrocellulose properly. Also, the redesignation applied only to nitrocellulose containing more than 12.6% nitrogen. A powder MSDS I recently looked up called for NC of 12.6% N, so that intermediate would not be affected. I have seen an old description of powder manufacture that said the desired degree of nitration was produced by blending, so if they still do that, they are handling something stronger that could be restricted, if that regulation went through. It would still be internal to the powder mill and the end user probably would not see any change... except higher prices like our friends in the shipping business have given us with Hazmat charges. |
August 31, 2016, 08:37 AM | #14 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
August 31, 2016, 09:20 AM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
With the exception of Alliant, most commercial gun powder is made overseas and packaged the USA. Most of the IMR powders are made in Canada. Most of the Hodgdon branded powders are made in Australia.
|
August 31, 2016, 09:37 AM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 1, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 1,804
|
St. Marks FL is the winchester powder factory still there?
|
August 31, 2016, 09:42 AM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,955
|
Quote:
That do not manufacture any smokeless powder |
|
August 31, 2016, 09:54 AM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
i forgot about Winchester. It's now owned by General Dynamics: http://www.gd-ots.com/commercial_powder.html |
|
August 31, 2016, 09:55 AM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
SOME Alliant powders are made in Radford VA where ATK runs the military ammo plant.
ALL Winchester Ball powders and Hodgdon Spherical powders are made at St Marks, FL, plant now owned by General Dynamics. That is it, as far as US powder makers. Western Powder (Ramshot and Accurate) comes from all over, St Marks and foreign. The Alliant Reloder line comes from Sweden and Switzerland. Hodgdon is kind of a mess, they have grabbed the distributorship for a lot of stuff, Winchester, IMR, and Vihtavuori that I know of. Their own stuff, Spherical from St Marks, extruded from ADI Australia and IMR Canada, flake from ADI, IMR, and Alliant. They also own Goex and make Pyrodex or have it toll manufactured by a contractor. Last edited by Jim Watson; August 31, 2016 at 01:37 PM. |
August 31, 2016, 10:05 AM | #20 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
In that case, I'd say sensationalistic then. BATFE won't be winning any battles with ATK or General Dynamics.
|
August 31, 2016, 11:44 AM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2009
Location: Blue Ridge Plateau
Posts: 151
|
Go Highlanders!
Hey Jim! I think you meant Radford, VA.
|
August 31, 2016, 01:37 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
Well, yes I did.
No excuse, I've been there. |
August 31, 2016, 02:41 PM | #23 |
Member
Join Date: June 29, 2005
Posts: 41
|
Well, I'm a little more relieved. I guess I'll hold off on buying a couple more lbs of powder. I knew if I posted this here it would get vetted properly.
|
August 31, 2016, 03:03 PM | #24 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
|
ATF Reclassifies Wetted Nitrocellulose as Explosive Materials Under Federal Laws
http://www.ammoland.com/2016/08/atf-...ederal-laws/?- Quote:
ROLE OF DIPHENYLAMINE AS A STABILIZER IN PROPELLANTS; ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY OF DIPHENYLAMINE IN PROPELLANTS Quote:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/783499.pdf Gunpowder is a mixture of nitrocellulose and stabilizers, plus 11 herbs and spices. If nitrocellulose dries out there is no reason to assume that it won't ignite. After reading the above listed post, I am going to say it is probably that due to lack of oversight, some wetted nitrocellulose did dry out and went kaboom or almost went kaboom. So the ATF is probably requiring manufacturers to now pay more attention to the stuff.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading. |
||
August 31, 2016, 03:24 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,541
|
We can calm down, now.
https://www.atf.gov/file/109341/download ATF’s June 2016 Explosives Industry Newsletter included a brief discussion of Nitrocellulose, and attempted to clarify the circumstances under which wetted Nitrocellulose is considered a high explosive under 27 CFR, Part 555. As with all explosives, ATF’s focus is on the potential public safety risks associated with materials that can be misused or diverted to unlawful purposes. Subsequent contact from industry members who import, transport, store or employ wetted Nitrocellulose in the production of ammunition, however, has brought to our attention issues that were not fully addressed in the Newsletter and require further consultation and consideration with the industry. Accordingly, ATF has and will conduct further industry outreach concerning wetted Nitrocellulose. In the interim, previously authorized industry practices concerning wetted Nitrocellulose will not be affected. |
|
|