ATF rule change on powder

Status
Not open for further replies.
THIS, is really bad.

More later....

This is one of those "clarifications" that gets twisted, for certain.

its "intent" is noble, its actual wording and potential application far outpace that intent.
 
Info on Takata says they are using AN.

Sodium azide NaN3 has some use on soil nematode pests.
Toxic, 0.7 gram lethal to a human, as well as explosive.
The deal with the airbags is Takata switched from sodium azide to ammonium nitrate to have a less toxic product. Unfortunately AN is very hygroscopic, and over time the propellant breaks down. Apparently when it goes off after that happens, the explosion is too powerful and also gets shrapnel from the airbag module (how "breaks down" turns into more powerful rather than a dud I don't know). If your car has a Takata airbag it will be getting recalled.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 
AN is indeed hygroscopic. If exposed to higher than its Critical Relative Humidity, it will get damp, then soggy, then a puddle. Hard to see how that is going to cause an explosion.

Bulk AN fertilizer is conditioned with a clay coating and bags are pretty tight so as to reduce moisture absorption.


As to the letter ruling, 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.
 
Parenthetical:

"...how 'breaks down' turns into more powerful rather than a dud I don't know..."

Possibly because a certain amount of the liquid allows the shock wave to progress more rapidly and energetically through the mass of loose AN particles, thus decomposing more AN more rapidly.

Also possibly because of the extra gas developed from the resulting steam.

Just theories. But "stuff happens" in powerful energetic reactions.

/Parenthetical

stopjack.gif
 
Last edited:
"But cheer up. They can't ban flint, bat guano, and half-burnt wood."
Well, you say that...

I read that they apparently have claimed authority to regulate anything more than 15% nitrate content, or something along those lines (old film reels, furniture, musical instruments, pregnancy tests, fertilizer, Compound W, glass plate photography, Radon tests, magicians, nail salons & hair stylists, ping-pong balls, guitar picks, and model airplanes). Might as well change their name to the Bureau of Excessively Energetic Chemistry* --really drives home how hopeless and asinine their mission is.

TCB

*Transportation would become the Dept. of Excessive Kinetics, Energy the Dept. of Excessive Physics
 
barnbwt, you missed Sensodyne toothpaste. Contains KNO[sub]3[/sub] as an anesthetic.

Don't drop a tube of it. You might destroy a whole city block.

Think of the children.
 
Oh dear...sensidine is C-4. Don't let the dentists find out or they will start explosively removing teeth.

And yes, if the intent is to simply regulate the transportation of a hazardous substance then more power to them for doing so. The problem we have in this country is that since all things not explicitly made illegal are legal, people try hard to skim by just ever so slightly on the legal side by circumventing as little as possible to bring them into the gray area which is by default legal since it's not explicitly illegal. Furthermore the laws are written first by concerned citizens of some form (paid or not) in the form of a proposal, then by a lawmaker/congress-critter in a slightly different form of a proposal, then rewritten entirely by lawyers trying to translate the common sense stuff into legalese then once it finishes this phase it becomes a bill which is modified a few times as it makes its way through the system to become a law. It's no wonder that things get confusing. ...not to say people are circumventing here, just the process has become the norm due to the circumventing...

It's almost like the episode of After M*A*S*H where the Padre is trying to sort through the red tape to get his and a patients VA bills paid for...as many if not more updates and letters of clarification as there are actual laws. Beyond ridiculous.
 
To summarize

NRA ILA reported "ATF Delays Any Changes to Nitrocellulose Regulation" Wed 31 Aug 2016

Snopes.com reported "Controversy De-Fused: Pending industry input, the government reclassification of ammo component wetted nitrocellulose from "nonexplosive" to "high explosive" has been rescinded." Thu 1 Sep 2016

https://www.atf.gov/explosives/docs...dustry-newsletter-june-2016-addendum/download
31 Aug 2016 Addendum
Nitrocellulose - Update

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.

The original is found here:
www.atf.gov/file/106536/download
ATF EXPLOSIVES Industry Newsletter
Jun 2016
Nitrocellulose

ATF was recently asked about the status of nitrocellulose under the Federal explosives laws and regulations. “Nitrocellulose explosive” is on ATF’s List of Explosive Materials. ATF has determined that nitrocellulose containing greater than 12.6 percent nitrogen is a high explosive under 27 CFR, Part 555 (nitrocellulose containing 12.6 percent or less nitrogen is generally not an explosive material under Part 555). Therefore, it must be stored in a type 1 or type 2 magazine. We are aware that the U.S. Department of Transportation may assign a nonexplosive classification to nitrocellulose when it has been wetted with water or alcohol. This is based, in part, on the diminished likelihood of explosion in a transportation accident. Because the nitrocellulose retains its explosive characteristics when the water or alcohol is removed, the wetted nitrocellulose remains a nitrocellulose explosive, subject to the licensing, safety and security requirements of the Federal explosives regulations. However, based upon the diminished likelihood of wetted nitrocellulose exploding, ATF will consider variance requests to store the wetted material under an alternative arrangement.

The ammo manufacturing expense is not so much in storing wetted itrocellulose; the expense is in transporting wetted nitrocellulose as a high explosive rather than as non-explosive. The June 2016 mewsletter implies wetted NC will have to meet high explosive transport standards; industry might be allowed a variance in storage requirements according to the June newsletter. Thus the 31 Aug oopsie addendum.

(The June implication was to remove the economic incentive to wet NC and make it safe to transport. How would that enhance public safety? The ammunition industry has pointed out that there have been no accidents in transport of wetted nitrocellulose and no diversion of transported wetted nitrocellulose to illicit channels, so the newsletter announcing reclassification of wetted nitrocellulose as "high explosive" served no useful purpose.)
 
Nitrocellulose containing >12.6 percent nitrogen is used exclusively in the manufacture of explosives. The BATFE got part of it right. But the classification can change based on the percentage of nitrogen and the percentage of wetting material.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/explosives-class.htm

1. The BATFE licenses companies to manufacture propellant and explosives.

2. The manufacture of propellants and explosives comes under the regulatory authority of OSHA. Therefore, BATFE has no authority to dictate explosive storage at manufacturing plants. Of course, when someone asks for clarification the kingdom builders at BATFE will not tell you to contact OSHA.

3. The DOT handles the safe shipment of hazardous materials. DOT has its act together. i'm certified to ship hazardous materials.

http://www.inchem.org/documents/icsc/icsc/eics1560.htm

Too many US government agencies are involved in the storage of explosives. The US Army Corps of Engineers dictates explosive storage by its contractors on USACE jobsites.
 
Last edited:
Does anybody actually SHIP raw guncotton? I figured it was made and incorporated into smokeless at the powder mill.
As said, the lack of explosions at the NC side of powder mills should indicate they are doing adequate storage and handling there.

I read a gunpowder MSDS that gave 12.6% N in the NC ingredient as standard and therefore not covered in even the first version. Although I have also read that they get to that by blending higher and lower nitrated feedstocks, so there will be some 13% around.
 
Most of the smokeless powder used in the US is imported. Example: IMR powder is made in Canada.

So far as i can determine there are only two commercial manufacturers of smokeless powder in the US. Alliant makes powder at a plant at Radford, Virginia. General Dynamics owns the St. Marks Powder Plant in Florida.

http://www.gd-ots.com/commercial_powder.html
 
I know.
There is also powder coming in from Australia, Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, Hungary, France, Czech Republic, and in the past from China, Israel, and South Africa that I recall. Oh, yeah, Finland.
But that is finished powder.

Is anybody shipping guncotton (nitrocellulose 13+% nitrogen) outside the plant?
 
Last edited:
alsaqr said:
Most of the smokeless powder used in the US is imported. Example: IMR powder is made in Canada.

So far as i can determine there are only two commercial manufacturers of smokeless powder in the US. Alliant makes powder at a plant at Radford, Virginia. General Dynamics owns the St. Marks Powder Plant in Florida.

http://www.gd-ots.com/commercial_powder.html
Just to add on to that, most of the Alliant rifle powder is imported. I believe they only make the pistol and shotgun stuff over here.
 
Most of the smokeless powder used in the US is imported. Example: IMR powder is made in Canada.

So far as i can determine there are only two commercial manufacturers of smokeless powder in the US. Alliant makes powder at a plant at Radford, Virginia. General Dynamics owns the St. Marks Powder Plant in Florida.

http://www.gd-ots.com/commercial_powder.html
If there were only two plants in the USA that manufactured electricity it would be a national security crisis of the highest order, but the fact only two plants make smokeless powder is somehow A-OK?

It's not like they use smokeless powder to fight wars or anything...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top