[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24441-24448]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08916]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
27 CFR Part 478
[Docket No. ATF-2026-0133; ATF No. 2025R-18P]
RIN 1140-AA73
Clarifying Interstate Transportation of Firearms Under the Gun
Control Act
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'')
[[Page 24442]]
regulations to clarify that, for purposes of transporting firearms
interstate, any activities that are reasonably necessary to
transportation such as staying overnight in temporary lodging, stopping
for food, fuel, vehicle maintenance, an emergency, or medical
treatment, or transiting between modes of transportation, are
considered ``transport'' and thus protected by the Gun Control Act
provision that addresses interstate transport of firearms. The proposed
rule also addresses transporting ammunition and firearm accessories
between states and the requirements for securing firearms during such
transit.
DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing, and must be submitted on
or before (or, if mailed, must be postmarked on or before) August 4,
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-AA73, 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: ATF 1140-AA73.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
number (RIN 1140-AA73) for this notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM''
or ``proposed rule''). ATF may post all properly completed comments
received 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 Gun Control
Act of 1968 (``GCA''), as amended. This responsibility includes the
authority to promulgate regulations necessary to enforce the provisions
of the GCA.\1\ See 18 U.S.C. 926(a). Congress and the Attorney General
have delegated the responsibility for administering and enforcing the
GCA 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 Attorney
General and ATF have promulgated regulations to implement the GCA in 27
CFR part 478.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some GCA 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 ATF's jurisdiction on those topics, including under
the National Firearms Act, GCA, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
Section 926A of the GCA provides that: ``Notwithstanding any other
provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a state or any
political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise
prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a
firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose
from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to
any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm
if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the
firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or
is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such
transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a
compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or
ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the
glove compartment or console.'' (Emphasis added).
The implementing regulation at 27 CFR 478.38 contains substantively
identical language. Neither the statute nor the regulation addresses
transit when a person is between modes of transportation or when a
firearm or ammunition is no longer in ``transport'' due to incidental
activities arising during the person's continuous transport. The
Department has previously advised that section 926A applies when (1) a
person is traveling from somewhere he lawfully may possess and carry a
firearm; (2) en route to the airport when the firearm is unloaded and
not accessible from the passenger compartment of his car; (3) the
person transports the firearm directly from his vehicle to the airline
check-in desk without any interruption in the transportation; and (4)
while carrying the firearm to the check-in desk, it is unloaded and in
a locked container. See Letter to the Honorable Don Young, U.S. House
of Representatives, from William E. Moschella, Assistant Attorney
General, Office of Legislative Affairs, U.S. Department of Justice
(Feb. 18, 2005). However, ATF has not codified this advice, nor has ATF
extended section 926A to delays or a break in travel. ATF also has not
codified how section 926A applies to the transportation of accessories,
such as ammunition magazines, that would ordinarily be transferred with
the firearm.
B. Justification for the Rule
Under two independent theories, ATF believes that section 926A
properly
[[Page 24443]]
encompasses some transportation of a firearm outside of a transporting
vehicle.
First, ATF believes that this is the best reading of the statute's
plain text. Section 926A provides that a person may transport an
unloaded firearm if ``neither the firearm nor any ammunition being
transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the
passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle.'' 18 U.S.C. 926A.
These provisions may be read independently: a requirement that firearms
transported in vehicles not be ``directly accessible from the passenger
compartment'' and a second requirement that firearms carried by means
other than vehicles not be ``readily accessible.'' See Ass'n of N.J.
Rifle & Pistol Clubs Inc. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 730 F.3d 252,
258-59 (3d Cir. 2013) (Jordan, J., concurring in the judgment).
Legal and textual arguments support this conclusion. A firearm that
is not ``directly accessible from the passenger compartment''--
primarily, one stored in the vehicle trunk or truck bed--would already
not be ``readily accessible'' because it would not be accessible for
immediate use as a weapon. See Henderson v. United States, 687 A.2d
918, 922 (D.C. 1996) (holding that a firearm was not ``on or about''
the defendant's person when it was located in the trunk of his car for
purposes of a D.C. Code violation); id. at 922 n.9 (explaining that
``the clear weight of authority in other jurisdictions'' holds that a
firearm in a trunk is not readily accessible). If ``readily
accessible'' modified only vehicular carry, it would be surplusage
because it would already be covered by the requirement that the firearm
and ammunition be stored outside the vehicle compartment (or in a
locked container other than the glove compartment or console). The
statute also repeats the word ``is,'' which gives some textual
indication that these two disjunctive provisions are meant to be
separate. See Ass'n. of N.J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs Inc., 730 F.3d at 259
(Jordan, J., concurring). The statute also connects the vehicle to
``directly accessible'' when it states that the firearm may not be
``directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such
transporting vehicle.'' 18 U.S.C. 926A. Relatedly, reading these
provisions independently gives ``or'' its usual disjunctive
application, i.e., signaling separate meanings. And while the term
``can sometimes introduce an appositive--a word or phrase that is
synonymous with what precedes it . . . --its ordinary use is almost
always disjunctive, that is, the words it connects are to be given
separate meanings.'' United States v. Woods, 571 U.S. 31, 45 (2013)
(internal quotation marks omitted); see also Loughrin v. United States,
573 U.S. 351, 357 (2014) (``As we have recognized, that term's ordinary
use is almost always disjunctive, that is, the words it connects are to
be given separate meanings. Yet [Petitioner] would have us construe the
two entirely distinct statutory phrases that the word `or' joins as
containing an identical element. And in doing so, his interpretation
would make [the statute's] second clause a mere subset of its first . .
. [This] construction thus effectively reads `or' to mean `including'--
a definition foreign to any dictionary we know of.'') (internal
citation and quotation marks omitted).
Nor does ATF read the proviso as altering the above analysis, in
that the ``Provided'' language specifically references the clause
directly preceding it, i.e., ``in the case of a vehicle,'' and
clarifies the unusual situation where a vehicle has a glove compartment
or console but no trunk or truck bed. See Las Vegas Sun, Inc. v.
Adelson, 147 F. 4th 1103, 1119 (9th Cir. 2025) (``As an initial matter,
it is a well-established canon of construction that `a proviso usually
is construed to apply to the provision or clause immediately preceding
it.' '' (quoting Pacificorp v. Bonneville Power Admin., 856 F.2d 94, 97
(9th Cir. 1988)) (quoting 2A Sutherland on Statutes and Statutory
Construction Sec. 47.33, at p.245 (4th ed. 1984)); see also Antonin
Scalia & Bryan A. Garner, Reading Law: the Interpretation of Legal
Texts at 154 (2012) (stating that, under the ``proviso canon,'' a
``proviso conditions the principal matter that it qualifies--almost
always the matter immediately preceding'').
Second, even assuming arguendo that these arguments are wrong--that
the statute governs ``only transportation of a firearm in a vehicle,''
Ass'n. of N.J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs Inc., 730 F.3d at 255 (majority
op.)--ATF still believes that some non-vehicle transportation would be
authorized under section 926A as incidental to the power to transport
firearms in vehicles. The power to do an act carries with it incidental
powers necessary to the act. For example, the right to keep and bear
arms includes the right to purchase arms and ammunition. See Andrews v.
State, 50 Tenn. 165, 178 (1871). A right to have a lawyer under the
Sixth Amendment includes the right to pay that lawyer. See Luis v.
United States, 578 U.S. 5, 27 (2016) (Thomas, J., concurring in the
judgment). As Justice Thomas explained in Luis, ``Constitutional rights
thus implicitly protect those closely related acts necessary to their
exercise.'' Id. at 26.
This statement is true not just for constitutional rights, but for
statutory rights as well. If federal law grants a right to do an act,
it also grants the right to do those incidental acts necessary to make
one's exercise of the right effective. Here, federal law already
permits the interstate transportation of firearms in vehicles and
aboard commercial aircraft, provided the firearms and ammunition are
unloaded and not readily accessible or directly accessible from the
passenger compartment of the transporting vehicle (with a special rule
for vehicles without a separate compartment). 18 U.S.C. 926A (all
vehicles); see also 49 U.S.C. 46505(d)(3) (aircraft baggage); 18 U.S.C.
922(e) (regulating firearms aboard all common or contract carriers). If
section 926A covers transporting a firearm in the trunk of a motor
vehicle and the baggage hold of a commercial aircraft, there are strong
arguments that section 926A also covers transferring the firearm
between the car and the airplane. See Stephen P. Halbrook, Firearms Law
Deskbook, Section 4:9 (Oct. 2025 update) (In discussing section 926A,
``[t]he mode of transportation is not limited to any specific type and
may encompass motor vehicles, airlines, trains, and other forms.
Activities incidental to transportation, such as checking baggage with
firearms at airports, stopping for fuel and eating, and similar
activities are protected.''). ATF, thus, seeks comment on this
understanding.
Courts attempting to determine the scope of section 926A have
excessively narrowed its application. In Revell v. Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey, the plaintiff, a Utah resident flying through
New Jersey to Pennsylvania in 2005, missed his connecting flight and
was forced to collect his baggage and spend the night in a hotel. 598
F.3d 128, 130-31 (3d Cir. 2010). The following morning, after declaring
the unloaded firearm, he was arrested for illegal possession of a
handgun and ammunition under New Jersey law. Id. at 131. Revell sued
the arresting agency, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and
the arresting officer under 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging violations of his
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and appealed the subsequent
district court's decisions against him. Id. at 132-34. Although the
court recognized that Revell had been placed in ``a difficult
predicament through no fault of his own'' and had notified the airline
about the firearm, the court found Revell's actions were
[[Page 24444]]
beyond the scope of section 926A because ``the gun and ammunition were
readily accessible to Revell during his stay in New Jersey.'' Id. at
136-37. The court further suggested that ``[s]tranded'' gun owners like
Revell also had the option to go to airport law enforcement or airport
personnel before retrieving their luggage to request that they hold
their firearms overnight. Id. at 137-38. Such options, however, are not
ordinarily available. Airlines generally refuse to accept baggage more
than a few hours before a flight,\3\ and airport law enforcement does
not customarily hold firearms, even for delayed passengers. In fact,
the court in Revell recognizes that the idea to go to airport law
enforcement was merely a ``suggestion'' and ``this suggestion leaves
unanswered the question of what the gun owner should do if the law
enforcement officers decline to assist him.'' Id. at 138 n.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ American Airlines Check-in and Arrival, American Airlines,
https://www.aa.com/i18n/travel-info/check-in-and-arrival.jsp
[https://perma.cc/89HA-78C6] (listing airports with checked bag
limits for more than four hours, six hours, and eight hours); Delta
Check-In Times at U.S. Airports, Delta, https://www.delta.com/us/en/
check-in-security/check-in-time-requirements/domestic-check-
in#:~:text=All%20customers%20are%20required%20to,prior%20to%20schedul
ed%20departure%20time [https://perma.cc/FX6A-NH83] (stating Delta
will not accept baggage at the airport more than six hours prior to
the scheduled departure time).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a companion case, Ass'n of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs Inc.,
supra, the Association sought injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
1983 to enjoin the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey from
enforcing certain New Jersey statutes that prohibit possession of a
firearm without a permit and possession of certain ammunition against
non-resident members of the Association who are entitled to transport
firearms through New Jersey pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 926A. 730 F.3d at
253. The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief
and held that ``the statute protects only transportation of a firearm
in a vehicle'' and thus ``an ambulatory plaintiff who intends to
transit through Newark Airport is outside the coverage of the
statute.'' Id. at 255.
The Revell and Ass'n of N.J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs opinions cited
above create illogical and unintended restrictions on a citizen's right
to transport firearms interstate in the Third Circuit. The power to
transport firearms in a continuous interstate journey via automobiles
and aircraft also includes the incidental power to transit the firearm
from one mode of transportation to the next. Indeed, individuals may
find themselves transiting multiple vehicles during an interstate trip.
Take, for example, persons traveling by car from Maine, which
generally does not require a permit to carry or possess firearms, to an
airport in Massachusetts, a state requiring such permits, and then
flying to West Virginia, where a permit is generally not required. It
is clear that during any continuous travel by car, an individual
meeting the conditions described would fall within the ambit of section
926A. It is equally clear that 18 U.S.C. 922(e) and 49 U.S.C. 46505
authorize passengers to transport their firearms aboard commercial
aircraft, provided certain conditions are met. But under Third Circuit
jurisprudence, section 926A seemingly offers no protection if a person
lands at an airport outside their jurisdiction of origin, where they
cannot possess or carry a firearm, but is delayed from boarding their
flight to their ultimate destination until the next day; this person is
without protection under 926A from the time he exits the airport until
the next day when he checks the firearm in locked baggage to the
airline in compliance with section 922(e). Congress sought to assure
the right of individuals to travel in and between states with a firearm
in passing section 926A; it is doubtful that Congress intended to open
a window of criminal liability for travelers stranded through no fault
of their own.
Similarly, individuals could be temporarily stranded because of
vehicle problems. A person whose car breaks down or is involved in a
car accident may have a need to transport a firearm from the broken-
down vehicle to a new vehicle that is functioning (e.g., a rental).
Again, the best reading of section 926A--even a reading limited to
vehicular carry--is that the power to travel interstate includes
incidental acts that are reasonably necessary to facilitate that
travel. These acts include stopping for fuel or rest or picking up or
discharging passengers; otherwise, the statute would ignore the
realities of interstate travel and protect only those fortunate enough
to have an interstate journey that required no refueling or rest.
Similarly, the power to transport firearms and ammunition includes
incidental acts, such as the power to transport ammunition magazines
that feed the ammunition into the firearm.
The doctrine of constitutional avoidance also supports this
conclusion. Both the Third Circuit decisions narrowing section 926A
were decided before New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, 597
U.S. 1 (2022), where the Supreme Court specifically recognized the
Second Amendment's protection to firearms possession outside of the
home. While neither of the above opinions addressed the Second
Amendment, their interpretation of section 926A may not comport with
the Supreme Court's precedent on the Second Amendment, including
Bruen's recognition that the right extends to publicly carrying
firearms for self-defense. If individuals have a right to carry loaded,
accessible firearms for self-defense at their places of origin and
destination, it necessarily follows that they have, at a minimum, a
right to transport unloaded firearms for self-defense and other lawful
purposes at their place of destination. An excessively narrow
interpretation of section 926A would not protect travelers from state
or local laws that infringe on their right to bear arms. See United
States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680, 692 (2024) (``Even when a law regulates
arms-bearing for a permissible reason, though, it may not be compatible
with the right if it does so to an extent beyond what was done at the
founding.''); cf. Higbie v. James, 795 F. Supp. 3d 307, 342-343
(N.D.N.Y. 2025) (holding that New York cannot exclude nonresidents from
applying for a carry license in New York). As one commentator (who
shares the Bruen dissent's restrictive understanding of the right to
bear arms in public) explains, ``the general rule was that the law must
be flexible enough to allow individuals some means to transport their
firearms for lawful purposes, especially during travels from one
destination to another.'' Patrick J. Charles, The Second Amendment and
the Basic Right to Transport Firearms for Lawful Purposes, 13
Charleston L. Rev. 125, 150 (2018).
The proposed rule, thus, responds to the lack of clarity
surrounding the interstate transportation of firearms and aims to
prevent law-abiding persons from facing travel delays or arrest despite
complying with ATF's reading of section 926A. See Torraco v. Port Auth.
of N.Y. & N.J., 539 F. Supp. 2d 632 (E.D.N.Y. 2008); Revell v. Port
Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 598 F.3d 128 (3d Cir. 2010). Litigation in the
wake of these instances has resulted in an overly narrow and burdensome
application of the statute.
II. Proposed Rule
Based on current case law addressing section 926A regarding the
right of a citizen to travel interstate with a firearm as well as cases
recognizing that the Second Amendment, in part, secures the right to
bear arms in public, ATF believes it is imperative to clarify the
intended scope of section 926A in the
[[Page 24445]]
accompanying regulation. Accordingly, the proposed rule amends 27 CFR
478.38 to clarify that incidental activities that are reasonably
necessary to a person's interstate transportation are considered
``transport'' and thus within the scope of activities protected by 18
U.S.C. 926A and 27 CFR 478.38. This would include, but not be limited
to, staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, fuel,
vehicle maintenance, an emergency, medical treatment, transiting
between modes of transportation, or moving a firearm at the beginning
of a journey from a fixed address to a vehicle for transportation or at
the end of a journey from a vehicle to a fixed address. Because section
926A provides a ``safe harbor'' for travelers and ``[a]ny regulatory
preemption of State law shall be restricted to the minimum level
necessary to achieve the objectives of the statute pursuant to which
the regulations are promulgated,'' see E.O. 13132(4)(c), the proposed
rule only protects reasonably necessary incidents of travel, such as
stopping for fuel or temporary rest. The rule does not authorize,
however, someone to have an extended break in transportation, for
reasons unrelated to travel, in a jurisdiction where possession of the
firearm or ammunition would be prohibited.
To ensure firearms are stored or transported in a manner consistent
with sections 926A or 922(e), as the case may be, the proposed rule
lays out the storage provisions depending on the mode of transportation
(e.g., by vehicle, by common or contract carrier) during travel.
Additionally, the proposed rule addresses storage where there is an
activity incidental to the original transportation that requires a
break in continuous transit (e.g., an overnight stay at a hotel), and
storage in a vehicle is not possible. In this scenario, the proposed
rule would stipulate that the firearm must be unloaded and must be in a
locked container that makes it and any ammunition not readily
accessible for immediate use. This is consistent with section 926A's
admonition that ``during such transportation the firearm is unloaded,
and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily
accessible.''
Additionally, the proposed rule would make clear that the right to
transport firearms also includes the concomitant incidental right to
transport accessories and attachments of such firearms, such as
ammunition, sights, and magazines. ATF believes this is the best
interpretation of section 926A. Section 926A would not serve its
intended purpose if state and local governments could indirectly
restrict the transportation of firearms by enforcing transportation
restrictions of items that are constituent parts and accessories of the
firearms being transported, including ammunition and firearm magazines.
Indeed, section 926A already implies that ammunition is covered by the
entitlement to transport firearms when it states, ``and neither the
firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or
is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such
transporting vehicle: Provided, that in the case of a vehicle without a
compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or
ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the
glove compartment or console.'' It would be a strange interpretation if
federal law authorized the transportation of the firearm and the
ammunition, but not the magazine that would feed the ammunition into
the firearm. And the same impracticalities would apply to other
accessories such as firearm sights.
The incidental power granted by this section would only apply to
the transportation of lawfully possessed accessories. Accessories would
not fall within the incidental protection offered by section 926A and
this regulation if they were illegal under federal law (e.g., an
unregistered machinegun conversion device, see 18 U.S.C. 922(o)), or if
they were illegal at the place of origin or destination. For example, a
person could not claim protection by transporting a magazine over ten
rounds of ammunition if his place of destination forbade such
accessories.
Finally, this rule would include a severability paragraph in 27 CFR
478.38. Because the full scope of a person's incidental power to
transport firearms, ammunition, and accessories in interstate commerce
has not been elucidated through judicial review, the severability
paragraph would provide that any invalid part of the regulation or any
invalid application of the regulation should be severed and the
remainder of the regulation would not be affected. This inclusion of
the severability paragraph in section 478.38 should not be construed to
suggest that other regulations in part 478 are inseverable. ATF has
included (or intends to include) a severability discussion in the
preamble of other proposed rules. The explicit severability paragraph
in this section should not create a negative severability inference for
any other rule or regulation.
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.
This rule proposes to amend 27 CFR 478.38 to clarify the scope of
18 U.S.C. 926A in order to make clear that it covers the activities and
breaks that are incidental to the original transportation and decreases
the likelihood that a person traveling with their firearm or ammunition
interstate will be charged for violating state firearm laws.
The Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has determined that
this rule would not be a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866. This rulemaking provides qualitative benefits to
the public by clarifying how to comply with statutory provisions and
existing standards on transporting firearms and ammunition interstate.
However, ATF does not have sufficient information to calculate
quantifiable savings. Therefore, ATF requests more information from the
public regarding the economic effects that this rulemaking may have on
the public and the regulated industries.
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 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 14192 regulatory action because it is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
[[Page 24446]]
by Executive Order 12866 and it would not impose total costs greater
than zero. In addition, ATF expects this rule, if finalized as
proposed, to qualify as an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action
(defined in 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
ATF has concluded that this rulemaking may have some federalism
implications as provided in Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) because
it implements 18 U.S.C. 926A's statutory preemption provision, which
creates a safe harbor for individuals transporting their firearm for a
lawful purpose from any place where they may lawfully possess and carry
such firearm to any other place they may lawfully possess and carry
such firearm regardless of any other provision of law or regulation of
a state or any political subdivision. Nevertheless, this proposed rule
abides by the principle of section 4(c) of Executive Order 13132, which
states that ``[a]ny regulatory preemption of State law shall be
restricted to the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of
the statute pursuant to which the regulations are promulgated.'' The
proposed rule protects incidental activities that are reasonably
necessary to a person's transport--for example, as stated above, food,
fueling, lodging, an emergency, or medical treatment, or an unscheduled
overnight stop due to airline or weather disruptions--consistent with
section 926A's safe harbor provision.
ATF believes that rule would restrict preemption of state law to
the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of section 926A
as described above and that it would not impose a financial cost to
state or local agencies. Further, ATF anticipates that this rule would
provide qualitative benefits to the public by providing the best
reading of the federal provisions and clarifying how individuals may
lawfully transport their firearms and ammunition interstate. However,
ATF recognizes that some states may have more restrictive laws that
could be impacted by this rule, but ATF does not have sufficient
information to assess the scope of state regulation or the costs on
states that could be impacted. Therefore, ATF is soliciting comments
from state and local governments on any potential preemption impacts
stemming from ATF's proposed interpretation of section 926A's safe
harbor provision.
ATF notes that it had an opportunity to inform some state officials
of this proposed rule during a Federal Bureau of Investigation Criminal
Justice Information Service System Officers meeting and encouraged them
to comment on any potential federalism impacts that the rule might have
on states. One state representative commented that section 926A should
extend to overnight breaks in travel to accommodate rest breaks. ATF
agreed and has included overnight breaks in this proposed rule.
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, 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 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 economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because it would not impose any additional
costs and only clarifies the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 926A, which
concern the rights of individuals who are lawfully transporting
firearms and ammunition interstate.
G. 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 would 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.
H. 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 a rule creates 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 would not create any new
information collection requirements or impact any existing ones covered
by the PRA.
I. 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-AA73 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 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
[[Page 24447]]
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.
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-AA73. 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 it 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 and 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.''
D. Request for Hearing
Any interested person who desires an opportunity to comment orally
at a public hearing should submit his or her request, in writing, to
the Director within the 90-day comment period. The Director, however,
reserves the right to determine, in light of all circumstances, whether
a public hearing is necessary.
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-AA73).
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 478
Administrative practice and procedure, Arms and munitions, Exports,
Freight, Imports, Intergovernmental relations, Law enforcement
officers, Military personnel, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Research, Seizures and forfeitures, Transportation.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, ATF proposes to amend 27
CFR part 478 as follows:
PART 478--COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION
0
1. The authority citation for 27 CFR part 478 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 18 U.S.C. 847, 921-931; 44 U.S.C.
3504(h).
0
2. Revise Sec. 478.38, including its heading, to read as follows:
Sec. 478.38 Transporting firearms, ammunition, and accessories
between states.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or
regulation of a state or any political subdivision thereof, any person
who is not otherwise prohibited by chapter 44 of title 18, United
States Code, from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm is
entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place
where such person may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any
other place where such person may lawfully possess and carry such
firearm, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section. The right to
transport firearms under this section also includes the right to
transport ammunition and accessories for the firearm consistent with
paragraph (b) of this section. Protected transportation under this
section includes reasonably necessary activities incidental to
interstate travel, such as staying in temporary lodging overnight,
transiting between modes of transportation, stopping for food, fuel,
vehicle maintenance, an emergency, or medical treatment, picking up or
discharging passengers, moving a firearm at the beginning of a journey
from a fixed address to a vehicle for transportation or at the end of a
journey from a vehicle to a fixed address, and any other activity
incidental to the original transportation.
(b) When transporting firearms under this section:
(1) Firearms and ammunition in a vehicle must comply with the
conditions set forth in 18 U.S.C. 926A. When a person is transporting a
firearm in a vehicle, the firearm must be unloaded, and neither the
firearm nor
[[Page 24448]]
any ammunition being transported may be directly accessible from the
passenger compartment of the vehicle. If the vehicle is without a
compartment separate from the driver's compartment, the firearm or
ammunition must be contained in a locked container other than the glove
compartment or console.
(2) If the journey includes transporting firearms or ammunition by
a common or contract carrier, persons must also comply with 18 U.S.C.
922(e), 27 CFR 478.31, and, for travel aboard commercial aircraft, 49
U.S.C. 46505(d)(3).
(3) If the journey requires a break in continuous transit (e.g., an
overnight stay in a hotel) that is reasonable in the circumstances and
it is not possible to store the firearm in the vehicle, the person must
store the unloaded firearm and ammunition in a locked container so they
are not readily accessible for immediate use.
(4) A person switching between vehicles or modes of transportation
shall keep the firearm unloaded and keep it and any ammunition in a
locked container so they are not readily accessible for immediate use.
(5) A person does not lose 18 U.S.C. 926A's in-transit protection
by presenting the firearm or ammunition for inspection when required by
a common carrier, the Transportation Security Administration, or U.S.
Customs and Border Protection.
(6) Individuals also have the right to transport attachments,
accessories, or other instruments for the firearms they are
transporting, including, but not limited to, ammunition (regardless of
bullet type), scopes, sights, optics, stocks, grips, stabilizing
braces, mounts, weapon-mounted lights, multifunction aiming lights,
magazines, clips, feed strips, any other ammunition feeding device,
holsters, slings, and firearm cleaning kits. Any such item the person
transports must be lawful under federal law and must also be lawful in
both the place where travel began and at the destination. To have the
transportation rights conferred by this paragraph and by 18 U.S.C. 926A
for an attachment, accessory, or other instrument, any such item being
transported with the firearm must be transported in the manner provided
by paragraph (b)(1), (b)(3), or (b)(4), as applicable.
(c) If any portion of this section, or its application to any
person or any circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this
section and the application of such portion to other persons not
similarly situated or to other circumstances shall not be affected. The
existence of an explicit severability clause in this paragraph shall
not be construed as an indication that any other section in part 478,
portion of such sections, or application of such sections or portions
to any person or in any circumstance are not similarly severable.
Robert Cekada,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2026-08916 Filed 5-5-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P