27 CFR 555.141(a)(10)I still do not understand why Estes motors which contain black powder are not regulated. I do not want to encourage this, but why are they exempt?
See also: https://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/pdf/06-6862.pdfModel rocket motors that meet all of the following criteria--
(i) Consist of ammonium perchlorate composite propellant, black
powder, or other similar low explosives;
(ii) Contain no more than 62.5 grams of total propellant weight; and
(iii) Are designed as single-use motors or as reload kits capable of
reloading no more than 62.5 grams of propellant into a reusable motor
Good luck on getting BP taken off the list. The ATF has hundreds of examples where BP is used to make pipe bombs and bomb ignitors/detonators to present as evidence to a federal judge in order not to vacate BP from the explosives list.I smell another lawsuit.
I don't think they are in contempt of court. They are exerting their authority to regulate black powder. If the high power APCP rocket motors do not include a BP ejection charge they are not regulated. If they do include a BP charge then they are still going to be regulated since the BP is not for use in antique firearms and /or devices (cannon) in historical re-enactments or hunting per Section 555.141 (b) "...if the black powder is intended to be used solely for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes in antique firearms, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(16) or antique devices, ...". What the motor manufacturers need to do is find a substitute to the BP ejection charges in their motors and reload kits. Until that happens maintain your LEUP and magazine. It would be better (and probably cheaper in the long term) to spend the money on a substitute for BP in HPR motors and reloads than filing another lawsuit. (IIRC there is already a non-BP alternative that uses compressed CO2 but it is patented. Maybe the patent owner could release that patent so the motor manufacturers can use it or make it very cheap to license (like $25 per manufacturer) so that HP can quickly get out from under federal ATF oversight and regulations.)OR contempt of court.
Yeah, I smell another lawsuit in the making.
Randy....It would be better (and probably cheaper in the long term) to spend the money on a substitute for BP in HPR motors and reloads than filing another lawsuit. (IIRC there is already a non-BP alternative that uses compressed CO2 but it is patented. Maybe the patent owner could release that patent so the motor manufacturers can use it or make it very cheap to license (like $25 per manufacturer) so that HP can quickly get out from under federal ATF oversight and regulations.)
I can answer that one....what happened to TWrackers post?
hehe funny, I was in the middle of quoting you and pretty much helping you understand just that Then I got this "post does not exist" thing and refreshed and it vanishedI can answer that one....
I realized the basic premise of my post was wrong: I missed the distinction between AP and APCP. When I saw the reference in the letter to motors containing APCP only, I read that as "AP only" and thought to myself, "Myself, NO motor only has AP in it, that's just the oxidizer. Are they trying to pull a fast one?"
Then I realized my mistake, making my entire post moot. Rather than editing it, I saw a "Delete" button at the bottom, so I just killed it myself.
Yep. And I just saw the new "Harry Potter" movie yesterday, and have learned a few new ways to vanish stuff. :eyepop:hehe funny, I was in the middle of quoting you and pretty much helping you understand just that Then I got this "post does not exist" thing and refreshed and it vanished
You need a manufacturers license for KNO3 now, in quantities larger than 1lb per year. Also, you can manufacture your bp, but you cannot remove it from your property, if that is your intent, you need a licensee with hazmat endorsed cdl to take it, and you cannot accept any payment. Once you accept payment, it's considered commerce and the fines go from minimal to astronomical.Pyrodex is a black powder cousin, with a slightly altered formula. It supposed to burn (in firearms) without generating all the nasty corrosive by-products.
Strictly speaking (and that's the only way a lawyer or bureaucrat will make an official statement), anything containing potassium nitrate (either by itself or mixed with literally anything) is on the federal list of explosives. Pyrodex has potassium nitrate in it. Pyrodex is unregulated for use in firearms because of our "sister NAR" organization (the NRA) but for any other use (like rocketry) Pyrodex becomes re-classified as an explosive again.
This is the same trick by which the government has started picking on sugar motors now. They have potassium nitrate in them, too.
What I love about this situation is the bizarre fact that I could theoretically hold an infinite quantity of Estes BP motors without any LEUP, storage locker, or anything else, but I may not hold one single gram of commercially-made loose BP if I want to use it for a model rocket ejection charge (at least, not without the LEUP, storage locker, etc.). Does it make sense to any of you?
I have to wonder what loophole is used to sell those stump-removal products over the counter, seemingly without any requirement to store yard-maintenance products in an explosives locker, or without any requirement to file for a LEUP to clean up the yard. Those stump-removal products are mostly KNO3, not really pure enough to make black powder worth a hoot, but still solidly on the federal list of explosives.
Also, from what has been explained to me by a legal professional, the afore-mentioned laws pertaining to black powder apply only to commercial aspects of BP manufacture and use. Unless all those other laws have also changed, it is completely legal to make your own BP and use it, without holding a LEUP or LEMP, and apparently without any restriction on quantities. So the ATF letter seems incorrectly worded as regards black powder, as though they are trying to intimidate us to not even try. You should do your own check into the murky legal conditions to satisfy yourself before you try to push anything.
Model rocket motors are specifically exempted from BATF regulation. See 27 CFR 555.141:They are not exempt. The ATF chooses to ignore them, probably because they are less than 62.5 grams.