[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24466-24471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08915]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
27 CFR Part 479
[Docket No. ATF-2026-0005; ATF No. 2025R-17P]
RIN 1140-AA70
Allowing Makers To Adopt Certain Markings for National Firearms
Act Firearms
AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
(``ATF'') proposes amending Department of Justice (``Department'')
regulations to allow persons making National Firearms Act (``NFA'')
firearms to adopt certain markings previously placed on the firearm to
comply with NFA marking requirements.
DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing, and must be submitted on
or before (or, if mailed, must be postmarked on or before) July 6,
2026. Commenters should be aware that the federal e-rulemaking portal
comment system will not accept comments after midnight Eastern Time on
the last day of the comment period.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 1140-AA70, by
either of the following methods--
Federal e-rulemaking portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: ATF Rulemaking Comments; Mail Stop 6N-518, Office of
Regulatory Affairs; Enforcement Programs and Services; Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; 99 New York Ave. NE;
Washington, DC 20226; ATTN: RIN 1140-AA70.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
number (RIN 1140-AA70) for this notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM''
or ``proposed rule''). ATF may post all properly completed comments it
receives from either of the methods described above, without change, to
the federal e-rulemaking portal, https://www.regulations.gov. This
includes any personally identifying information (``PII'') or business
proprietary information (``PROPIN'') submitted in the body of the
comment or as part of a related attachment they want posted. Commenters
who submit through the federal e-rulemaking portal and do not want any
of their PII posted on the internet should omit it from the body of
their comment and any uploaded attachments that they want posted. If
online commenters wish to submit PII with their comment, they should
place it in a separate attachment and mark it at the top with the
marking ``CUI//PRVCY.'' Commenters who submit through mail should
likewise omit their PII or PROPIN from the body of the comment and
provide any such information on the cover sheet only, marking it at the
top as ``CUI//PRVCY'' for PII, or as ``CUI//PROPIN'' for PROPIN. For
detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. In accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule may be found at https://www.regulations.gov. Commenters must submit comments by using one of
the methods described above, not by emailing the address set forth in
the following paragraph.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Regulatory Affairs, by email
at [email protected], by mail at Office of Regulatory Affairs; Enforcement
Programs and Services; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives; 99 New York Ave. NE; Washington, DC 20226, or by telephone
at 202-648-7070 (this is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Attorney General is responsible for enforcing the National
Firearms Act (``NFA''), as amended, 26 U.S.C. chapter 53.\1\ Congress
and the Attorney General have delegated the responsibility for
administering and enforcing the NFA to the Director of ATF
(``Director''), subject to the direction of the Attorney General and
the Deputy Attorney General. See 28 U.S.C. 599A(b)(1), (c)(1); 28 CFR
0.130(a)(1)-(2); Treas. Order No. 221(2)(a), (d), 37 FR 11696-97 (June
10, 1972).\2\ Accordingly, the Department and ATF have promulgated
regulations to implement the NFA in 27 CFR part 479.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some NFA provisions still refer to the ``Secretary of the
Treasury.'' However, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law
107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, transferred the functions of ATF from the
Department of the Treasury to the Department of Justice, under the
general authority of the Attorney General. 26 U.S.C. 7801(a)(2); 28
U.S.C. 599A(c)(1). Thus, for ease of reference, this proposed rule
refers to the Attorney General where relevant.
\2\ In Attorney General Order Number 6353-2025, the Attorney
General delegated authority to the Director to issue regulations
pertaining to matters within ATF's jurisdiction, including under the
NFA, Gun Control Act, and Title XI of the Organized Crime Control
Act. ATF's jurisdiction also includes those portions of sec. 38 of
the Arms Export Control Act pertaining to permanently importing
defense articles and services and the Contraband Cigarette
Trafficking Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NFA regulates only certain statutorily defined firearms, such
as machine guns, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns
(``NFA firearms''). 26 U.S.C. 5845. Although ``manufacturer'' and
``maker'' are synonymous in ordinary language, the NFA uses technical
language to distinguish a ``manufacturer'' from a ``maker'' of an NFA
firearm. A ``manufacturer'' is a federally licensed firearms
manufacturer who is authorized to manufacture NFA firearms by virtue of
being a ``special (occupational) taxpayer.'' See, e.g., 26 U.S.C. 5801,
5802, 5841. The NFA refers to an individual who makes NFA firearms
without being a special (occupational) taxpayer as a firearms
[[Page 24467]]
``maker.'' See, e.g., 26 U.S.C. 5821, 5822, 5841, 5842.
A person can ``make'' an NFA firearm in one of two ways. First, the
person can make a firearm from raw materials, such as a block of metal.
Second, the person can alter an existing firearm regulated by the Gun
Control Act (``GCA firearm'').\3\ For example, a person can take a
rifle with a barrel of 20 inches and shorten the barrel to 14 inches,
thereby making a short-barreled rifle. This proposed rule concerns only
those who make NFA firearms by altering existing GCA firearms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A GCA firearm is a firearm that is regulated only by the Gun
Control Act of 1968 and not subject, in its present configuration,
to the purview of the NFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 5842, manufacturers, importers, and anyone
making an NFA firearm must identify each firearm (other than a
destructive device) they manufacture, import, or make by marking it
with (1) a serial number that may not be readily removed, obliterated,
or altered, (2) the name of the manufacturer, importer, or maker, and
(3) such other identification as the Attorney General may by
regulations prescribe. The corresponding federal regulation that
implements these marking requirements is 27 CFR 479.102. This
regulation at Sec. 479.102 prescribes required markings that
importers, manufacturers, and makers must place on an NFA firearm,
including the serial number, and the name, city, and state where a
manufacturer or importer maintains a place of business, or, if a
maker--i.e., not a manufacturer or importer--where the firearm was
made.
Further, ATF has previously exercised the regulatory discretion
granted to the Attorney General pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 5842 to codify
alternative marking procedures or exceptions to the regulatory marking
requirements, including authorizing manufacturers to adopt existing
``serial number[s] and other identifying markings previously placed on
a firearm by another manufacturer,'' subject to certain conditions. 27
CFR 479.102(b)(3)(i). For example, the exceptions contained in Sec.
479.102(b)(3)(ii) for remanufactured or imported firearms allow
manufacturers or importers to adopt a pre-existing serial number,
provided they either mark the firearm with their name, city, and state
or with their name and abbreviated federal firearms license number.
However, Sec. 479.102 does not allow a maker to adopt the
manufacturer's markings already stamped on the maker's GCA firearm when
that person then applies to make a GCA firearm into an NFA firearm and
register the resulting firearm.\4\ Instead, pursuant to Sec.
479.102(a)(1), a maker must place on the firearm a new serial number
and ``Your name (or recognized abbreviation), and . . . in the case of
a maker, where you made the firearm[.]''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The maker does this by submitting ATF Form 5320.1,
Application to Make and Register NFA Firearm (``Form 1'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Proposed Rule
ATF has determined that this additional marking requirement for a
maker is burdensome and unnecessary, and that it does not enhance
public safety. The requirement is burdensome and unnecessary because
individuals must stamp their name, city, and state onto the frame or
receiver of the firearm, which may be crowded with existing markings
from the original manufacturer. Further, many makers do not have the
necessary equipment to stamp their own firearms in a manner that
satisfies Sec. 479.102, thus imposing a burden to pay for services
from a gunsmith or other individual to meet such requirements. As
noted, ATF requires the existing firearm to have been marked with the
name of the original manufacturer, and the manufacturer's city, state,
and a serial number. Moreover, a maker must include their name and
other identifying information on the Form 1 application and ATF then
retains that information in the National Firearms Registration and
Transfer Record (``NFRTR'').\5\ 27 CFR 479.63, 479.101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For example, the applicant's name and mailing address are
required as part of box 3b on the pre-2026 version of Form 1 (the
form is being revised in 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would not affect an NFA firearms maker who
manufactures a firearm from raw materials not regulated by the GCA.
Such firearms lack existing manufacturer markings and serial numbers.
Those firearms would continue to be marked by the maker as required
under Sec. 479.102. Thus, all NFA firearms would still be properly
marked in accordance with NFA requirements.
This rule therefore proposes to amend Sec. 479.102(b)(3) to
authorize persons who make an NFA firearm by remanufacturing or
altering an existing firearm to adopt the original manufacturer's
markings already on the underlying firearm. The new language would
merely extend exceptions to the marking requirements already contained
within Sec. 479.102(b)(3). Specifically, this rule would amend Sec.
479.102(b)(3) by adding a new paragraph (iv) to address makers of
firearms that are remanufactured or altered from existing firearms. The
new exception would provide that ``[m]akers that remanufacture or alter
an existing firearm may adopt the serial number or other identifying
markings previously placed on the firearm if the markings otherwise
meet the requirements of this section.''
III. Statutory and Executive Order Review
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) directs
agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of agencies quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting public
flexibility.
The Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has determined that
this rule would not be a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866. Therefore, it did not review this rule. ATF
provides the following analysis to comply with Executive Orders 12866
and 13563.
1. Need Statement
This proposed rule would amend Sec. 479.102(b)(3) to rescind the
requirement, for individuals making an NFA firearm by remanufacturing
or altering an existing firearm, to have to subsequently re-mark the
resulting firearm with their own personal NFA marking, and would
instead allow them to adopt the serial number or other identifying
markings previously placed on the firearm, as long as those markings
otherwise comply with marking requirements. Currently, persons who make
NFA firearms by altering existing firearms must add their own markings
to manufacturer and importer markings already on the firearm. This
creates difficulties due to lack of space on the frame or receiver and
adds costs and burdens to such makers that are unnecessary. Many makers
do not have the necessary equipment to stamp their own firearms in a
manner that satisfies Sec. 479.102, thus imposing a burden on them to
pay for services from a gunsmith or other individuals to meet such
requirements.
2. Benefits
Currently, individuals who choose to make an NFA firearm by
remanufacturing or altering an existing
[[Page 24468]]
firearm employ professional gunsmithing services to re-mark the newly
made NFA firearm with markings required under 27 CFR 479.102 in
addition to the GCA markings already on the firearm in question. Based
on a search of available information regarding professional NFA marking
services, ATF estimates that a federal firearms licensee (``FFL'') may
charge $54 in order mark a firearm.\6\ To determine the number of
firearms that would be affected by this proposed rule, ATF used data on
the number of Form 1 applications submitted, since makers submit a Form
1 for each NFA firearm they make. Based on information from ATF's
National Firearms Act Division, the average number of Form 1
applications between the years 2016 to 2025 submitted by makers was
64,618, making the annualized savings for this rule approximately $3.5
million.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., RS Shooting Sports, NFA Engraving Services,
https://www.rsshootingsports.com/engraving076ea072 [https://perma.cc/A7SY-FR67], Capitol Armory, NFA Laser Engraving-Form 1,
https://www.capitolarmory.com/sbr-sbs-nfa-firearm-laser-engraving-form1.html (last visited Jan. 5, 2026), SA Lasers, NFA Engraving
Service for SBRS, SBSS, Silencers and Suppressors, https://salasers.com/product/nfa-engraving-service-for-sbrs-sbss-silencers-and-suppressors/ [https://perma.cc/S3K4-MFL6], EOD Gear, NFA
Engraving, https://www.eod-gear.com/nfa-engraving/?srsltid=AfmBOoqjJTPbsR-N4G0VH12Ij2TEry_qsQ4IAutH5JPgXOBfpTY9bwIs
[https://perma.cc/9NBT-Y7RU].
\7\ $3,489,372 in annual savings = $54 NFA marking services *
64,618 Form 1 applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits from this proposed rule would also include reducing
confusion regarding what constitutes the firearm's serial number when
there are multiple numbers engraved on the frame or receiver and
reducing burdensome requirements. Although a person may modify an
existing GCA weapon into an aftermarket NFA weapon, the newly created
NFA weapon would still be traceable by means of the existing markings
and would be registered in the NFRTR.
3. Costs
The potential costs from this proposed rule would be an increased
risk that this type of NFA firearm might not be traceable if the
maker's markings are not also included. However, ATF does not
anticipate that allowing makers to adopt the existing manufacturer's
markings would negatively impact law enforcement's ability to trace an
NFA firearm. If law enforcement were to recover an NFA firearm and need
to trace it, the firearm could still be traced to the first retail
purchaser based on the manufacturer's or importer's markings \8\
because the tracing process relies on the records that FFLs maintain
pursuant to the GCA (and not information in the NFRTR). Thus, requiring
additional markings by a maker is unnecessary for public safety
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Upon recovering the firearm, law enforcement completes the
trace request on the firearm based on the markings on the firearm,
including the manufacturer or importer name, city, state, and serial
number. ATF can then trace the firearm through licensees'
acquisition and disposition records from the original licensed
manufacturer or importer to the licensed wholesaler, to the licensed
retailer, and then to the first unlicensed purchaser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, the number of NFA firearms, excluding machine gun
conversion devices, that are recovered from a crime scene is a very
small subset of the overall firearms traced. In FY25, for example, the
total number of firearms traces was 654,879, and of those, 3,195 were
coded as NFA firearms; specifically, 196 destructive devices, 1,512
machine guns (excluding machine gun conversion devices), and 1,487
silencers. As a result, even if an NFA firearm is made by adopting the
existing markings and is recovered at a crime scene but could not be
traced using the original manufacturer markings, the number of such
firearms would be exceedingly small.
4. Regulatory Alternatives
Alternative 1. Maintaining the Status Quo (No-Action Alternative)
This alternative would require a person to add markings in addition
to the existing markings for any GCA firearm that is modified to become
an NFA weapon. This alternative has no additional costs or benefits
since it would maintain the existing requirements. However, makers of
NFA firearms would continue to incur the burdens and costs inherent in
having to add markings to those already existing on the firearms. As a
result, ATF rejected this alternative as it would not address those
costs.
Alternative 2. Rulemaking (the Proposed Alternative)
ATF alternatively considered proposing a rule to rescind the
requirement that individuals making an NFA firearm by remanufacturing
or altering an existing firearm must subsequently re-mark the resulting
firearm with their own personal NFA marking, and to instead allow them
to adopt the original manufacturer or importer's markings required
under 27 CFR 478.92. While these newly made NFA weapons would not have
markings added by the maker of the NFA weapon under this proposal,
registration of these NFA weapons would still exist using the existing
GCA markings, which the maker would submit to the NFRTR. This
alternative was chosen because the firearm would still have a serial
number with which it could be registered with ATF and traced in the
event that the firearm is recovered from a crime scene. This
alternative was also chosen because it would reduce the number of
serial numbers on a given firearm, reducing confusion for tracing
purposes. Furthermore, it would provide savings to individuals who
choose to modify a GCA weapon into an NFA weapon. No quantifiable costs
were assessed since traceability would still be maintained.
Alternative 3. Issuing Guidance
This alternative was considered but rejected. While this
alternative would not impose any additional costs, it would not rescind
the requirement that makers of NFA weapons add marks of identification
when remanufacturing or altering an existing GCA firearm. This
alternative does not have the force and effect of a regulation and
would thus not effectuate the desired change; therefore, this
alternative was rejected.
Alternative 4. Removing Marking Requirements for All NFA Makers
This alternative was also considered but rejected. Other persons
who make NFA firearms do so from scratch. As a result, these types of
firearms do not already have markings from manufacturers or importers.
Permitting these makers to not mark the NFA firearms they make would
result in unmarked firearms, which would violate the law, make it
impossible to register the firearms in the NFRTR, or trace the
firearms, thus posing a risk to public safety. As a result, ATF did not
select this alternative.
B. Executive Order 14192
Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
requires an agency, unless prohibited by law, to identify at least ten
existing regulations to be repealed or revised when the agency publicly
proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new
regulation that qualifies as an Executive Order 14192 regulatory action
(defined in OMB Memorandum M-25-20 as a final significant regulatory
action under in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 that imposes
total costs greater than zero). In furtherance of this requirement,
section 3(c) of Executive Order 14192 requires that any new incremental
costs associated with such new regulations must, to the extent
permitted by law, also be offset by eliminating existing costs
associated with at least ten prior regulations. However, this proposed
rule would not be an Executive Order
[[Page 24469]]
14192 regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order 12866 and it would not impose
total costs greater than zero. This proposed rule would have an
annualized deregulatory savings of $3.5 million. ATF therefore expects
this rule, if finalized as proposed, to qualify as an Executive Order
14192 deregulatory action (defined by OMB Memorandum M-25-20 as a final
action that imposes total costs less than zero).
C. Executive Order 14294
Executive Order 14294 (Fighting Overcriminalization in Federal
Regulations) requires agencies promulgating regulations with criminal
regulatory offenses potentially subject to criminal enforcement to
explicitly describe the conduct subject to criminal enforcement, the
authorizing statutes, and the mens rea standard applicable to each
element of those offenses. This proposed rule would not create a
criminal regulatory offense and is thus exempt from Executive Order
14294 requirements.
D. Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule would not have substantial direct effects on the
states, the relationship between the federal government and the states,
or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), the Director has determined that
this proposed rule would not impose substantial direct compliance costs
on state and local governments, preempt state law, or meaningfully
implicate federalism. It thus does not warrant preparing a federalism
summary impact statement.
E. Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule meets the applicable standards set forth in
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform).
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-612,
agencies are required to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of
any proposed rule subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements
unless the agency head certifies, including a statement of the factual
basis, that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities
include certain small businesses, small not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Director certifies, after consideration, that this proposed
rule would not have a significant direct economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because it is deregulatory and
would not impose any additional direct costs or burdens on small
businesses in the firearms arena. However, it is possible that the
proposed rule could indirectly have an impact on small businesses that
provide NFA marking services, such as gunsmiths, because this rule
would no longer require NFA makers who modify existing firearms to add
maker markings, which they usually do by hiring a gunsmith.
Therefore, ATF performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis
of the indirect impacts that small gunsmith businesses and other
entities might incur due to this proposed rule, if finalized as
proposed. Based on the information from this analysis, ATF found--
Direct costs and savings: there are no direct costs or
savings to small businesses or entities. Direct costs and savings from
this proposed rule would apply only to individuals.
Indirect costs: an unknown number of FFLs who provide NFA
marking services. This proposed rule would indirectly cause an unknown
reduction in revenue for an unknown number of businesses due to
individuals no longer performing NFA markings on aftermarket GCA
firearms.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'')
The RFA establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and
of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational
requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this
principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible
regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to
ensure that such proposals are given serious consideration.'' Public
Law 96-354, section 2(b), 94 Stat. 1164 (1980).
Under the RFA, the agency is required to consider whether the
proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Agencies must perform a review to determine
whether the proposed rule would have such an impact. If the agency
determines that it would, the agency must prepare an IRFA (or a
regulatory flexibility analysis for a final rule) as described in the
RFA.
ATF determined that the proposed rule may affect a subset of small
businesses that operate in the firearms business (see item 3 below).
Based on the requirements above, ATF prepared the following IRFA
assessing the proposed rule's impact on small entities.
1. Describing the Reasons Why the Agency Is Considering Taking Action
This proposed rule would reduce burdens and costs to individuals
because it would no longer require persons who make NFA firearms by
modifying existing GCA firearms to add their own markings alongside
existing manufacturer and importer markings on those firearms. The
existing requirement makes it confusing as to which number is the
correct serial number, presents difficulties due to the limited space
on the frame or receiver, and costs time and money because makers
generally must hire marking services from gunsmiths.
2. Succinctly Stating the Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the
Proposed Rule
The objective of this proposed rulemaking is to reduce the
regulatory burden on those who make NFA firearms. The NFA requires
markings on the firearm, and the markings are critical for tracing guns
used in crimes, but the statutory requirements would still be met by
allowing persons who make NFA firearms by altering an existing firearm
to adopt the original manufacturer or importer markings because tracing
can still easily be accomplished using those numbers. Therefore, ATF
would no longer require persons who make NFA firearms by altering an
existing firearm to add their own markings to the firearm. However,
other NFA makers who make their NFA firearms from scratch would still
be required to add markings to their firearms.
3. Describing and, Where Feasible, Estimating the Number of Small
Entities to Which the Proposed Rule Would Apply
The proposed rule directly affects individuals, not small entities,
so there would be no direct impact to small entities from this rule.
However, it is possible that there may be indirect costs to gunsmiths
who provide NFA marking services to persons who make NFA firearms by
modifying an existing GCA firearm. According to ATF's Federal Firearms
Licensing Center, there are approximately 45,000 Type 1 (dealers) FFLs,
of which an unknown subset may be providing aftermarket NFA firearm
[[Page 24470]]
marking services. These gunsmiths would continue other gunsmithing
business activities they provide, such as repairing firearms, marking
firearms for manufacturers and other NFA firearm makers, and other
kinds of work on other firearms. According to ATF subject matter
experts, marking NFA firearms made from GCA firearms represents a small
portion of their business.
4. Describing the Proposed Rule's Projected Reporting, Record-Keeping,
and Other Compliance Requirements, Including an Estimate of the Classes
of Small Entities Which Would Be Subject to the Requirement and the
Type of Professional Skills Necessary To Prepare the Report or Record
There are no additional requirements or costs being imposed by this
proposed rule. This rule would remove costs and requirements to the
public.
5. Identifying, to the Extent Practicable, All Relevant Federal Rules
Which Might Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
other federal rules.
6. Describing Any Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule Which
Accomplish the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes and Which
Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact the Proposed Rule Might Have
on Small Entities
ATF has considered the alternative of maintaining the status quo
with respect to NFA maker marks even when the person makes an NFA
firearm from an existing GCA firearm. Maintaining the status quo would
alleviate the indirect costs to companies that facilitate NFA marking
services. However, ATF has determined that the direct, economic
benefits to the public would outweigh the indirect costs to a few
businesses incurred from the proposed rule as this proposed rule would
only apply to aftermarket GCA firearms being converted into NFA weapons
and not NFA weapons in general. According to ATF subject matter
experts, such converted firearms represent a small portion of gunsmith
business activities, and ATF estimates that the impact would be low.
ATF has also considered eliminating the existing marking
requirements for NFA firearms that are made from scratch rather than
made by converting a GCA firearm into one subject to the NFA. ATF
rejected this alternative because such NFA firearms made from scratch
do not already have markings on them. This would not only violate the
NFA, but it also would make it impossible to trace such firearms if
used in crimes.
ATF also considered issuing guidance instead of a rule, but because
the existing requirements are in a regulation, guidance would not be
able to change the regulatory requirements. In addition, for purposes
of this IRFA, it would still result in the same indirect impact on
gunsmiths who provide NFA markings services.
G. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed rule might have an indirect economic impact on a
small subset of FFLs that serialize aftermarket GCA weapons made into
NFA weapons. Because this proposed rule would not impose additional
compliance activities (it reduces compliance activities), ATF does not
anticipate imposing any enforcement activities against any small entity
affected by this proposed rulemaking.
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule does not include a federal mandate that might
result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, ATF has determined that no actions are
necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
I. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA''), 44 U.S.C.
3501-3521, agencies are required to submit to OMB, for review and
approval, any information collection requirements created by a rule or
any impacts it has on existing information collections. An information
collection includes any reporting, record-keeping, monitoring, posting,
labeling, or other similar actions an agency requires of the public.
See 5 CFR 1320.3(c).This proposed rule involves one existing
information collection under the PRA. That information collection is
OMB control number 1140-0011, Application to Make and Register NFA
Firearm, which includes ATF Form 5320.1 (``Form 1''). Although this
rule is associated with information being collected under this existing
ICR, the proposed changes would not add or change the burden imposed on
the respondent beyond existing, OMB-approved requirements.
J. Congressional Review Act
This proposed rule would not be a major rule as defined by the
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804.
IV. Public Participation
A. Comments Sought
ATF requests comments on the proposed rule from all interested
persons. ATF specifically requests comments on the clarity of this
proposed rule and how it may be made easier to understand. In addition,
ATF requests comments on the costs or benefits of the proposed rule and
on the appropriate methodology and data for calculating those costs and
benefits.
All comments must reference this document's RIN 1140-AA70 and, if
handwritten, must be legible. If submitting by mail, you must also
include your complete first and last name and contact information. If
submitting a comment through the federal e-rulemaking portal, as
described in section IV.C of this preamble, you should carefully review
and follow the website's instructions on submitting comments. Whether
you submit comments online or by mail, ATF will post them online. If
submitting online as an individual, any information you provide in the
online fields for city, state, zip code, and phone will not be publicly
viewable when ATF publishes the comment on https://www.regulations.gov.
However, if you include such personally identifiable information
(``PII'') in the body of your online comment, it may be posted and
viewable online. Similarly, if you submit a written comment with PII in
the body of the comment, it may be posted and viewable online.
Therefore, all commenters should review section IV.B of this preamble,
``Confidentiality,'' regarding how to submit PII if you do not want it
published online. ATF may not consider, or respond to, comments that do
not meet these requirements or comments containing excessive profanity.
ATF will retain comments containing excessive profanity as part of this
rulemaking's administrative record, but will not publish such documents
on https://www.regulations.gov. ATF will treat all comments as
originals and will not acknowledge receipt of comments. In addition, if
ATF cannot read your comment due to handwriting or technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, ATF may not be
able to consider your comment.
ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received
on or before the closing date.
[[Page 24471]]
B. Confidentiality
ATF will make all comments meeting the requirements of this
section, whether submitted electronically or on paper, and except as
provided below, available for public viewing on the internet through
the federal e-rulemaking portal, and subject to the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Commenters who submit by mail and who
do not want their name or other PII posted on the internet should
submit their comments with a separate cover sheet containing their PII.
The separate cover sheet should be marked with ``CUI/PRVCY'' at the top
to identify it as protected PII under the Privacy Act. Both the cover
sheet and comment must reference this RIN 1140-AA70. For comments
submitted by mail, information contained on the cover sheet will not
appear when posted on the internet but any PII that appears within the
body of a comment will not be redacted by ATF and may appear on the
internet. Similarly, commenters who submit through the federal e-
rulemaking portal and who do not want any of their PII posted on the
internet should omit such PII from the body of their comment and any
uploaded attachments. However, PII entered into the online fields
designated for name, email, and other contact information will not be
posted or viewable online.
A commenter may submit to ATF information identified as proprietary
or confidential business information by mail. To request that ATF
handle this information as controlled unclassified information
(``CUI''), the commenter must place any portion of a comment that is
proprietary or confidential business information under law or
regulation on pages separate from the balance of the comment, with each
page prominently marked ``CUI/PROPIN'' at the top of the page.
ATF will not make proprietary or confidential business information
submitted in compliance with these instructions available when
disclosing the comments that it receives, but will disclose that the
commenter provided proprietary or confidential business information
that ATF is holding in a separate file to which the public does not
have access. If ATF receives a request to examine or copy this
information, it will treat it as any other request under the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). In addition, ATF will disclose such
proprietary or confidential business information to the extent required
by other legal process.
C. Submitting Comments
Submit comments using either of the two methods described below
(but do not submit the same comment multiple times or by more than one
method). Hand-delivered comments will not be accepted.
Federal e-rulemaking portal: ATF recommends that you
submit your comments to ATF via the federal e-rulemaking portal at
https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions. Comments will
be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large
volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment
may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment
tracking number that is provided after you have successfully uploaded
your comment.
Mail: Send written comments to the address listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. Written comments must appear in
minimum 12-point font size, include the commenter's first and last name
and full mailing address, and may be of any length. See also section
IV.B of this preamble, ``Confidentiality.''
Disclosure
Copies of this proposed rule and the comments received in response
to it are available through the federal e-rulemaking portal, at https://www.regulations.gov (search for RIN 1140-AA70).
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 479
Administrative practice and procedure, Arms and munitions, Exports,
Imports, Military personnel, Penalties, Reporting and record-keeping
requirements, Seizures and forfeitures, Taxes, Transportation.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, ATF proposes to amend 27
CFR part 479 as follows:
PART 479--MACHINE GUNS, DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES, AND CERTAIN OTHER
FIREARMS
0
1. The authority citation for 27 CFR part 479 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 5801-5812; 26 U.S.C. 7801; 26 U.S.C. 7805.
0
2. Amend Sec. 479.102 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading and the paragraph heading for paragraph
(b)(3); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (b)(3)(iv).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 479.102 Identifying/marking firearms.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) Adopting identifying markings. * * *
(iv) Makers. Makers that remanufacture or alter an existing firearm
may adopt the serial number or other identifying markings previously
placed on the firearm if the markings otherwise meet the requirements
of this section.
* * * * *
Robert Cekada,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2026-08915 Filed 5-5-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P