http://www.examiner.com/article/atf-quietly-laying-groundwork-to-expand-multiple-rifle-sales-reporting



ATF quietly laying groundwork to expand multiple rifle sales reporting



May 6, 2014

A little noticed and virtually unreported April 15 notice posted in the
Federal Register suggests the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and
Explosives intends expanding the multiple rifle sale requirement currently
imposed on four border states (Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas)
to all states.



Titled “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection
eComments Requested; Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of
Certain Rifles,” and assigned OMB Number 1140–0100, the 60-day notice
abstract declares “The purpose of this information collection is to require
Federal Firearms Licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions
whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles
within any five consecutive business days with the following
characteristics: (a) Semi automatic; (b) a caliber greater than .22; and
(c) the ability to accept a detachable magazine.



“Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until June 16,
2014,” the notice advises. That means much of the comment period has
already passed with most unaware it ever began. And the ATF website offers
no additional information other than links to the notice and to various
forms.



The question now becomes, especially with a seeming total lack of
publicity, is ATF attempting an “under the radar” action to impose on the
entire country what they previously imposed (over objections that could
have been stronger) on southwest gun buyers and sellers?



“That's what it looks like,” one legal adviser approached for his read on
this development offered. “And no, I haven't seen this yet, which is
strange as I'm subscribed to the ATF Federal Register filings.”



Compounding the lack of information: There is nothing about this posted
during April on ATF’s press release page. But such a move by the Holder
Justice Department would not be unexpected.



“Now that ATF is saying straw purchasers are altering their behavior,
expect that to be used as justification to expand this requirement to all
the states,” this column anticipated in a May 5, 2012 report.



Those wishing to make comments within the 41 remaining days the period will
be open can find further information on the Federal Register proposal
information page, and then click on the “Submit a formal comment” button --
or you can try to. Several attempts were made and no comment form appeared.
There was, however, further instruction on the page the link cycles back to.



“If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden
or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed
information collection instrument with instructions or additional
information, please contact Natisha Taylor at fipb-
[email protected], Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives, Firearms Industry Programs Branch, Washington, DC 20226,” the
Federal Register post advises.



Also of note: Searches for “OMB Number 1140–0100” yield no results at this
writing on Regulations.gov and the OMB’s Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs websites, both of which have been referenced in the past
for ATF comment periods, such as when Gun Rights Examiner was encouraging
input during the proposed NFA rule change comment period. Whether this is
just a temporary issue is unknown at this time, so readers are encouraged
to test things for themselves. Also unknown is if this would be
justification to extend the comment period.



Still, it's curious that email appears to be the primary way to submit
comments, particularly since this column was advised that anti-gun
activists used an "automated form emailer" to flood ATF with supportive
comments when the original border states scheme was soliciting public
input. That could be repeated here.



Then again, there may be a more benign explanation.



“It looks to me as if they are planning a new rule, haven't proposed it
yet, but are trying to get advance clearance under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (which you have to comply with separate from the proposed rule,”
another adviser speculated to explain the absence. “The agency predicts how
many hours it will take to fill out each new form, and OMB gives its
approval.”



If that’s the case, the notice that commenting will be open until June 16
is most confusing to those not familiar with wending their way through
government websites. In any case, evident media silence on this development
means if it’s going to get noticed, shared and investigated, that will be
up to gun owners. That in turn means, especially in the absence of readily
accessible information, anyone with information leading to a more complete
understanding of administration direction to ATF could lend valuable
insights into this.



Perhaps congressional representatives should be contacted and asked what
they know about this, if anything, and if the administration bypassing the
elected representatives of the people to enact “gun control” via executive
diktat is something that sits OK with them. That might be especially
relevant in an election year, as the move seemingly allows the president’s
party to keep a low profile on guns until after the elections, while he
does their lifting for them.



UPDATE: A comment poster pointed out fine print: "Extension without change
of an existing collection" which may mean this is limited to the border
states -- but the notice does not specifically say that, and does not
indicate a subset of FFLs this will be required of. The "purpose" statement
appears to apply to all. We'll need to watch and see. It's very unclear,
and the lack of information means this is something that needs to be
investigated to find out for sure.



UPDATE 2: I took the raised concern back to the attys I vetted this with
and asked what we should make of "Extension without change of an existing
collection." The answer: "I don't think anyone knows for sure, but as [name
redacted] already stated, it is likely a precursor to a new rule being
proposed."



A second replied “I do not see any information that limits the multiple
rifle reporting to 'only' border states in the new collection. The OLD
federal register actually stated only the border states. I believe this is
going to apply to all FFLs."



I will continue to monitor and update this as relevant information is
learned.



UPDATE 3: The new notice estimates the same number of hours as on the
original : "In fiscal year 2010, 36,148 reports of multiple sales of hand
guns sales were submitted by FFLs in the four southwest border states. ...
we estimate we will receive 18,074 reports of multiple sale of the
specified rifles from FFLs located in the four southwest border states. We
estimate that each report will take 12 minutes to complete. If we receive
18,074 reports from 2,509 licensees the total burden is 3,615 hours. The
estimated annual burden per respondent is 1 hour and 26 minutes."



That said, the earlier notice provided a key bit of information missing
from this latest one: "This requirement will apply only to Federal Firearms
Licensees (FFLs) who are dealers and/or pawnbrokers in Arizona, California,
New Mexico and Texas."



------------





------------






__._,_.___


 Visit Your 
Group<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdnIxcmU0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEzOTk2NzIwNDc->

   - New 
Members<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/members/all;_ylc=X3oDMTJnZXRldjUxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJycwRzdGltZQMxMzk5NjcyMDQ3>
   2

 [image: Yahoo!
Groups]<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcHI0cXRjBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM5OTY3MjA0Nw-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>•
Terms
of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to