ATF NFA Branch Kicking Back Form 1 SBRs <29"

tc617 · May 7, 2014

Two members post yesterday in different threads that their pre-October 1 purchased lowers submitted to the NFA Branch to build SBRs with an OAL less than 29", and the NFA examiners returned their Form 1 applications. These Form 1s applications were submitted after October 1.

One of these members is a good friend of mine and he said that the NFA examiner does not understand how FSA '13 copycat laws apply to <29" SBRs, he has tried to get a response from the MSP to no avail, so he disapproved all seven of his Form 1 applications unless he can provide supporting documentation from the MSP that states that these SBR are not copycat weapons... Regardless of the fact that these lowers were purchased pre-October 1.

This is pretty bad when the NFA branch examiners can't figure out whether to apply, or not to apply FSA '13 "copycat weapons" to these SBRs because the law was written so poorly. Here is a copy of both posts regarding this subject.

ELCAM said:
Just got a call back from Ted (one of the examiners) at the NFA. Trying to SBR my lower(purchased prior to 10/1/2013) into a 28.5" 300 Blackout via Form 1 e-filed through a Trust(submitted 12/2 and should have been back by now). He told me it is being held up because the NFA branch doesn't understand the Maryland law. He asked me I could submit any clarification of the law that could help (which I was at a loss for words on how to do this). All I told him that I could do was sent him a copy of the bill of sale dated 7/5/2013 and the MSP 77-R also dated prior to 10/1/2013.

This is not good news....I don't think....I told him that the MSP has been signing off individual form 1's and he was going to research that. If anybody has a redacted(remove PII and serials) recently signed Form 1 from the MSP for an SBR less that 29" I would love to send that to them to expedite the process?

thanks,
ELcam

Blueclawz said:
CONFIRMATION

As of this past weekend I received back MULTIPLE F1's (Eforms) as Disapproved. All were filed post 10/1...all were being constructed from lowers and weapons owned legally PRE10/1. Included with the Disapproval was a conversation with the NFA Examiner discussing the specific documentation to accompany my Re-submission of the F1's. I was given the excerpt from SB-281 explaining "copycat weapons" and asked to provide documentation in the form of a "memo" or statement to the affect that the completed weapon would not fall into that category.
Given the MSP Licensing Division statement dated 3/20/2014 which expressly covers the SBR and SBS weapons this is not good. It appears that the NFA branch is now attempting like many on this board, the firearms community and our legislators to attempt to interpret regulations which were expressly designed to not be finite in the first place. I consider this a major issue not just for my own waste of time but for the fact that the documents were drawn with the intent of confusion and thus have been successful. I always considered the NFA to be the final word on Form 1 applications....they certainly have no issues with accepting the checks and handing out the stamps all those years. If they intend to defer to state interpretation of firearms and firearm traits it seems to me that the NFA as a whole would become obsolete given there is already mass inconsistency just in terminology. This also leaves open the fact that any state could sign in legal ownership and construction of a post-86 MG.....oh what a tangled web.

erwos · May 7, 2014

Not surprised. I was warning people back in pre-10/1 2013 that form 1s were a risky move if they weren't going to be approved before 10/1. The BATFE considers them manufacture of a new weapon, and that would seemingly put them in the category of post-10/1 guns. A form 1 is not a purchase order!

Now, if they start bouncing form 4s, that's going to be a much more interesting problem. But I don't think we've seen any indication of that yet.

Inigoes · May 7, 2014

This kind of stuff needs to be reported to MSI.

This can affect the Kolbe lawsuit

armed ferret · May 7, 2014

what's to stop people from submitting paperwork for an ar-15 lower in a primary configuration that's over 29" OAL, and then just building a shorter upper after approval?

as long as the firearm isn't permanently altered from the specifications on the form 1 (i.e. you don't get rid of the upper/barrel listed on the form 1 and can readily assemble it that way if necessary) there's no violation of any law. how exactly do they intend to stop that?

tc617 · May 7, 2014

You, Clandestine, and perhaps a few others warned about this possibile outcome. Blueclawz's Form 1s were submitted electronically with a NFA Trust. In conversation with the NFA examiner he told him that these were pre-October 1 purchases but the forms were submitted post-October 1.

The question now is... Has anyone submitted post-October 1 <29" SBR through the LEO/MSP signoff process that was approved/diapproved?

@Inigoes - Should he PM one of the MSI excutive members here or contact MSI directly?

swinokur · May 7, 2014

PM Dblas

erwos · May 7, 2014

armed ferret said:
what's to stop people from submitting paperwork for an ar-15 lower in a primary configuration that's over 29" OAL, and then just building a shorter upper after approval?

MSP sending them to jail for building a copycat?

BenL · May 7, 2014

I didn't realize the ATF even communicated with MSP over class III apps.

erwos · May 7, 2014

BenL said:
I didn't realize the ATF even communicated with MSP over class III apps.

I would bet that the recent MSP bulletin is what spawned this issue.

teratos · May 7, 2014

swinokur said:
PM Dblas

I'll take care of it.

armed ferret · May 7, 2014

erwos said:
MSP sending them to jail for building a copycat?

but if it's on a pre-10/1 receiver, with approved SBR paperwork, how is it illegal?

tc617 · May 7, 2014

erwos said:
I would bet that the recent MSP bulletin is what spawned this issue.

DING-DING-DING! We have a winner!

The NFA examiner said that they were approving <29" SBR Form 1s until the MSP SBR bulletin came out.

teratos · May 7, 2014

tc617 said:
DING-DING-DING! We have a winner!

The NFA examiner said that they were approving Form 1 SBRs until the MSP SBR bulletin came out.

Dammit. I have a < 29" Form 1 on a trust. Mailed September 3. I guess it may be sent back. I'm going to be pissed.

tc617 · May 7, 2014

I just got off the phone with Blueclawz. He and ELCAM are dealing with the same NFA examiner. He is going to contact MSI.

Blueclawz · May 7, 2014

erwos said:
I would bet that the recent MSP bulletin is what spawned this issue.

That is EXACTLY what spawned the disapprovals. Those words came from the mouth of TED CLUTTER - NFA Branch Examiner.

Blueclawz · May 7, 2014

You all realize that it was the "special people" who continually asked questions and essentially forced various LE agencies to publish statements that started this?

Had SB281 been simply enacted and then a lawsuit promptly filed none of this would be an issue. The NFA would have kept chugging out form's and not had specific text published by a LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY to cause them to take notice. The real issue is explaining and showing to the NFA that any LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY can publish advisories and materials related to legal measures....but they ARE NOT the governing body. I realize in MD though....EVERYBODY thinks are they are somebody.

Maryland Attorney General -
The Attorney General's Office is the attorney for the state and its agencies and cannot offer legal advice to individuals. If you need help with a personal legal matter you may want to contact a private attorney. The Office does assist individuals with consumer problems through the mediation service offered by the Consumer Protection Division.

Maryland State Police -
The Maryland State Police has served the citizens of Maryland since its inception in 1921. Our Troopers are among the finest law enforcement officers in the world and each one is sworn to uphold our core values of Integrity, Fairness and Service. To learn more about the many facets of the Maryland State Police, please follow one of the links below.

Our Mission & Vision

Mission
The Mission of the Maryland State Police is to protect the citizens of the State of Maryland from foreign and domestic security threats, to fight crime, and to promote roadway safety by upholding the laws of the State of Maryland. This will be accomplished through aggressive patrol, investigation, intelligence gathering and interdiction efforts; and by providing leadership and assistance to state and local agencies.

Vision
We will be the model of a responsive, coordinated, composite statewide police department; independent yet supportive of allied law enforcement agencies. We are committed to the utmost professionalism in delivering all-encompassing police services focused on traffic safety, homeland security, crime reduction and criminal apprehension. We continually strive to develop the skills of our members and to efficiently and effectively manage our resources as we carry out our public responsibilities.

NFA Branch Process -
How does an individual obtain authorization to make an NFA firearm?

Prior to making a firearm, the individual must submit ATF Form 1 (5320.1), Application to Make and Register a Firearm, to the Bureau of ATF, NFA Branch, and receive approval. The applicant must follow the procedures described in the question “What are the required transfer procedures for an individual who is not qualified as a manufacturer, importer, or dealer of NFA firearms?” concerning photographs, fingerprints and certifications. The applicant must forward the original and a duplicate of the form along with a check or money order for $200 made payable to the Bureau of ATF, National Firearms Act Branch, P.O. Box 530298, Atlanta, GA 30353-0298. If the application is approved, the original of the form with the cancelled stamp affixed showing approval will be returned to the applicant. If the application is denied, the tax will be refunded.

Applications to make a firearm will not be approved if Federal, State, or local law prohibits possession of the firearm. (FYI - MD Does not prohibit ownership of APPROVED NFA items)

[26 U.S.C. 5822, 27 CFR 479.61-65]
People need to understand the specific powers entrusted to various organizations prior to accepting their word as LAW.

Chevyman85 · May 7, 2014

I recently received 2 approved form 1's for <29" SBR's. Pre 10/1 lowers submitted pre 10/1
and approved 4/10/14. Different examiner.

BradMacc82 · May 7, 2014

Blueclawz, understand your upset. But I hope you realize that by asking for those advisories, it helps further put MSP into a corner come lawsuit time.

Chess, not checkers.

Blueclawz · May 7, 2014

BradMacc82 said:
Blueclawz, understand your upset. But I hope you realize that by asking for those advisories, it helps further put MSP into a corner come lawsuit time.

Chess, not checkers.

Its not a game to me...

I think asking MSP for direction on a legal issue they have no GOVERNING control over was a poor first move.

clandestine · May 7, 2014

The MSP would have clarified simply based on FFLs wanting clarification. These questions were asked by the FFLs when we met with the MSP after FSA2013 passed.

ATF NFA Branch Kicking Back Form 1 SBRs <29"

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

USN Sub Vet

The Hebrew Hammer

Head'n for the hills

Banned

USN Sub Vet

In a State of Bliss

The Hebrew Hammer

John Galt Speaking.

The Hebrew Hammer

My hair is amazing

Banned

USN Sub Vet

My hair is amazing

USN Sub Vet

Bottom Feeder

Bottom Feeder

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Bottom Feeder

AR-15 Savant

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics