Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 7/28/2014 12:53:53 PM EDT
Quick question just had my form 1 returned for the following reasons:

1. Firearm description inconsistent with registry; see highlighted section(s).

Checked the highlighted section (which is where the model of firearm is listed) I have listed it as an AR15 which is indeed what the lower receiver is. I'm confused as to what i should have put here instead.

Also i've been waiting on this since November once I get this issue straight and send it back does my wait start again?
Link Posted: 7/28/2014 1:01:30 PM EDT
[#1]

Quoted:


Quick question just had my form 1 returned for the following reasons:



1. Firearm description inconsistent with registry; see highlighted section(s).



Checked the highlighted section (which is where the model of firearm is listed) I have listed it as an AR15 which is indeed what the lower receiver is. I'm confused as to what i should have put here instead.



Also i've been waiting on this since November once I get this issue straight and send it back does my wait start again?
View Quote
There is a manufacturer's designated Model engraved/stamped on the receiver.  This is the model # the NFA Branch is looking for, and if it was a paper filing, you just line through "AR15", write in the correct model, initial, date, and return to the NFA Branch.  You should then get it back in two to three weeks...

 
Link Posted: 7/28/2014 1:03:47 PM EDT
[#2]
Great thanks!

Link Posted: 7/28/2014 1:06:01 PM EDT
[#3]
No problem, and I'm sure there will be many more forms in your future...  
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 6:09:30 AM EDT
[#4]
Is that what they're looking for, or the type of firearm being manufactured? In this case you would put "short barreled rifle". Just wanna be sure we're clear here.
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 6:51:06 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Is that what they're looking for, or the type of firearm being manufactured? In this case you would put "short barreled rifle". Just wanna be sure we're clear here.
View Quote


Box 4b, they want to see one of these items:



Box 4d, they want to see the model number engraved on the item, not a generic AR-15.
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 8:23:47 AM EDT
[#6]
This all depends. I got one back last month on a factory Colt LE693. I put "LE6933" as the model, as that is what it is. The NFA kicked it back and had me put "AR-15" in as the model. "AR-15" is not stamped on the gun either. The NFA has no idea what they want. Just put whatever they are looking for and be done with it. Its just another way to screw with you in hopes that you will not purchase any further evil items.
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 12:31:45 PM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This all depends. I got one back last month on a factory Colt LE693. I put "LE6933" as the model, as that is what it is. The NFA kicked it back and had me put "AR-15" in as the model. "AR-15" is not stamped on the gun either. The NFA has no idea what they want. Just put whatever they are looking for and be done with it. Its just another way to screw with you in hopes that you will not purchase any further evil items.
View Quote


Just for the sake of discussion, I think Colt owns the trademark AR-15 so Colt is the only rifle that might say AR-15 on it.

With that said, I agree with the theory of giving Martinsburg whatever they ask for.

I think we have 9 examiners that have been there less than a year.

Just out of curiosity does anyone have a gun, not made by Colt that is marked AR-15.

Does anyone have a Form 1/4 that describes a gun, not made by Colt, as a model AR-15.
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 12:47:40 PM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Just for the sake of discussion, I think Colt owns the trademark AR-15 so Colt is the only rifle that might say AR-15 on it.

With that said, I agree with the theory of giving Martinsburg whatever they ask for.


I think we have 9 examiners that have been there less than a year.

Just out of curiosity does anyone have a gun, not made by Colt that is marked AR-15.

Does anyone have a Form 1/4 that describes a gun, not made by Colt, as a model AR-15.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
This all depends. I got one back last month on a factory Colt LE693. I put "LE6933" as the model, as that is what it is. The NFA kicked it back and had me put "AR-15" in as the model. "AR-15" is not stamped on the gun either. The NFA has no idea what they want. Just put whatever they are looking for and be done with it. Its just another way to screw with you in hopes that you will not purchase any further evil items.


Just for the sake of discussion, I think Colt owns the trademark AR-15 so Colt is the only rifle that might say AR-15 on it.

With that said, I agree with the theory of giving Martinsburg whatever they ask for.


I think we have 9 examiners that have been there less than a year.

Just out of curiosity does anyone have a gun, not made by Colt that is marked AR-15.

Does anyone have a Form 1/4 that describes a gun, not made by Colt, as a model AR-15.


not saying nuttin...........just give them what they ask for.
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 12:52:01 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Quick question just had my form 1 returned for the following reasons:

1. Firearm description inconsistent with registry; see highlighted section(s).

Checked the highlighted section (which is where the model of firearm is listed) I have listed it as an AR15 which is indeed what the lower receiver is. I'm confused as to what i should have put here instead.

Also i've been waiting on this since November once I get this issue straight and send it back does my wait start again?
View Quote

Hey brother........is this lower an 80%er, or maybe a NoDak that you had some engraving work done?
Link Posted: 7/29/2014 3:44:56 PM EDT
[#10]
I had an error on mine as well. Sent it in Nov 13, got form returned with error highlighted, fixed it after call to number on the form. Stamp was approved and in my hand a week later.
Link Posted: 7/30/2014 3:04:27 AM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Just for the sake of discussion, I think Colt owns the trademark AR-15 so Colt is the only rifle that might say AR-15 on it.

With that said, I agree with the theory of giving Martinsburg whatever they ask for.
View Quote

You are mistaken.  I have three NATMIL lowers, all marked "AR-15" (with the hyphen), and an approved eForm 1 for one of them, dated January of this year, listing the model as "AR15" (without the hyphen).  I honestly don't remember whether I included the hyphen when I submitted the form, but I'd guess not.

In the case where the NFA branch asked for something other than what's marked, I think I would have been inclined to respond with a photo of the markings in question, but I haven't had to deal with that case yet.
Link Posted: 7/30/2014 2:44:46 PM EDT
[#12]
The ATF just makes it up as they go along.  I did a couple of ARs in late 2012.  I put the mfg model number with "(AR-15)" after it and my apps went through without any trouble.  A friend of mine did the same thing about six months later and got his form 1 kicked back.  The examiner rejected the "(AR-15)" after the model number so he had to submit an amended form without it.  It's totally up to the whim of the individual examiner.  Just nod, smile, do what they want, and move  along.
Link Posted: 7/30/2014 4:08:29 PM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The ATF just makes it up as they go along.  I did a couple of ARs in late 2012.  I put the mfg model number with "(AR-15)" after it and my apps went through without any trouble.  A friend of mine did the same thing about six months later and got his form 1 kicked back.  The examiner rejected the "(AR-15)" after the model number so he had to submit an amended form without it.  It's totally up to the whim of the individual examiner.  Just nod, smile, do what they want, and move  along.
View Quote


I did a change letter once for barrel length (didn't know any better and will never do it again)  I changed the barrel length without changing the overall length because I put a RRA entry stock on it at the same time I changed the barrel, so the overall length happened to stayed the same.  It took literally two years to straighten that mess out.  The final letter from Martinsburg accepted my change to the NFRTR but reminded me that only permanent changes need be reported.  I has stated in the first letter that I considered the changes permanent; I was preparing my Form 5s for the day I kicked the bucket and didn't want the kids to have an issue. Live and learn.
Link Posted: 7/30/2014 4:12:20 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


You are mistaken.  I have three NATMIL lowers, all marked "AR-15" (with the hyphen), and an approved eForm 1 for one of them, dated January of this year, listing the model as "AR15" (without the hyphen).  I honestly don't remember whether I included the hyphen when I submitted the form, but I'd guess not.

In the case where the NFA branch asked for something other than what's marked, I think I would have been inclined to respond with a photo of the markings in question, but I haven't had to deal with that case yet.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just for the sake of discussion, I think Colt owns the trademark AR-15 so Colt is the only rifle that might say AR-15 on it.

With that said, I agree with the theory of giving Martinsburg whatever they ask for.


You are mistaken.  I have three NATMIL lowers, all marked "AR-15" (with the hyphen), and an approved eForm 1 for one of them, dated January of this year, listing the model as "AR15" (without the hyphen).  I honestly don't remember whether I included the hyphen when I submitted the form, but I'd guess not.

In the case where the NFA branch asked for something other than what's marked, I think I would have been inclined to respond with a photo of the markings in question, but I haven't had to deal with that case yet.


Mistaken...certainly possible, that is why I started the sentence with "I think."

At one time Colt owned the trade mark.  Unlike patents, trade marks can last forever.  Either Colt is not enforcing it or they abandoned it.

Just Sayin!
Link Posted: 7/31/2014 4:35:13 AM EDT
[#15]
The new examiners are definitely helping but causing a few hiccups along the way.

I had a couple paper form 1's kicked back because they said the lady that signed did not have authority to do so or at least they had no record of it. Problem was they approved my form 4 that I sent in at the same time with here signature on it and the sheriffs office said she's been signing them all for years.

After a couple calls and a email we got it straightened out and I sent them back in with no trouble.
Link Posted: 8/2/2014 6:12:20 AM EDT
[#16]
I'll keep you guys update I spoke to the gentleman working on mine and I told him what I did to correct it. He didn't sound too sure on anything so i'll be interested to see if it gets kicked back again.
Link Posted: 8/8/2014 3:33:52 PM EDT
[#17]
Owe all of you guys a beer and a thank you for your help....stamp finally arrived today!

(the upper is kind of a cheapo that will eventually be changed out but it was the upper i duracoated along with the lower for when i had it as a pistol!)

Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top