Armory Sponsor
Posted: 1/4/2014 7:19:28 PM EDT
|
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15
Will it get kicked backed? |
|
Quoted:
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15 Will it get kicked backed? Very possibly. I had a good friend get one kicked back last week for using AR-15 instead if the ST15 engraved on the Spike's lower. I actually asked them (using the Ask the Experts tab in the EForms system) and they want the model number already on the lower. Pretty sure they have a database of manufacturers, models and serial numbers that they compare forms against. |
|
You might want to scan through this: what to use for model on eForm
-Greg |
|
I did read that thread, oh well, as the saying goes haste makes waste |
|
Quoted:
I did read that thread, oh well, as the saying goes haste makes waste Quoted:
I did read that thread, oh well, as the saying goes haste makes waste Yeah, no guarantees it'll get kicked back, but there have been multiple examples. And, since you can't correct it when they find the error, you're forced to start over. Because of that, I'd cancel and resubmit. Just means you'll be out an extra $200 for a couple weeks, but at least you can jump right back in line. (If you'd been 2+ months into it, I may say wait and see if you slip through) |
|
How can it get kicked back for a wrong model #?
E.g., what I'm saying is, if you make an honest mistake and inadvertently select "AR15" instead of "AR-15", how could the examiner possibly know or catch this? They have no photo of the gun/receiver, and the only info they have is what you submit to them with the eForm. IMO, the better question is the steps to update the NFA registry for your gun when it gets approved with an incorrect model #. [as a related aside, I debated recently whether to list "SIG556P" for a submission or "SIG556"; in the end, I went with exactly what was engraved in steel on the gun, not what was on the invoice...] |
|
Email to: [email protected]
This is how mine read. Dear Sir/Ma’am, I am writing you to request the withdrawal my application to make a Short barreled rifle & refund tax paid. It was submitted via E-Forms ID # ______, tax paid of 200$, Permit Number _______, Model: ______ (ST-15), serial number _______. Thank you. They request you include all that information. |
|
Quoted:
Email to: [email protected] This is how mine read. Dear Sir/Ma’am, I am writing you to request the withdrawal my application to make a Short barreled rifle & refund tax paid. It was submitted via E-Forms ID # ______, tax paid of 200$, Permit Number _______, Model: ______ (ST-15), serial number _______. Thank you. They request you include all that information. thanks, at least I caught it now and not a month or two into it. |
|
Quoted:
Because they have a database from the manufacturers that has model and serial numbers. That's how. I know that the rejection letter my friend got said the model (AR15) was wrong and when he was told to correct it, the examiner added (ST15?) as a hint. This is what I though also, it will clearly show that the model # does not correspond to the serial # Totally my fault, attention to detail 
|
|
Quoted:
This is what I though also, it will clearly show that the model # does not correspond to the serial # Totally my fault, attention to detail Quoted:
Quoted:
Because they have a database from the manufacturers that has model and serial numbers. That's how. I know that the rejection letter my friend got said the model (AR15) was wrong and when he was told to correct it, the examiner added (ST15?) as a hint. This is what I though also, it will clearly show that the model # does not correspond to the serial # Totally my fault, attention to detail I posted this in the thread I linked above, but here it is again. My friends denial included some issue with the trust followed by: ALSO, PLEASE VERIFY MODEL NUMBER AS ENGRAVED ON THE RECEIVER (ST15?) Them knowing what it should've been, not just that it should not have been leads me to my assumption about some form of database. Others here have agreed that's the case. Maybe the generic AR-15 went away about the same time as "multi" for caliber? |
|
Interesting. Perhaps some manufacturers provide that level of detail, and/or maybe there is overlap
in serial # ranges and certain model designations. However-- I also speak from personal experience: I had an incorrect model # slip through recently; I only found the mistake when inspecting the approved Form 1. I had to send a letter to the ATF to update (correct) the NFA registry for this weapon. (*yes, everything else was correct, e.g., Mfg, Ser #, caliber, etc.) YMMV. |
|
Quoted:
I posted this in the thread I linked above, but here it is again. My friends denial included some issue with the trust followed by: ALSO, PLEASE VERIFY MODEL NUMBER AS ENGRAVED ON THE RECEIVER (ST15?) Them knowing what it should've been, not just that it should not have been leads me to my assumption about some form of database. Others here have agreed that's the case. Maybe the generic AR-15 went away about the same time as "multi" for caliber? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because they have a database from the manufacturers that has model and serial numbers. That's how. I know that the rejection letter my friend got said the model (AR15) was wrong and when he was told to correct it, the examiner added (ST15?) as a hint. This is what I though also, it will clearly show that the model # does not correspond to the serial # Totally my fault, attention to detail I posted this in the thread I linked above, but here it is again. My friends denial included some issue with the trust followed by: ALSO, PLEASE VERIFY MODEL NUMBER AS ENGRAVED ON THE RECEIVER (ST15?) Them knowing what it should've been, not just that it should not have been leads me to my assumption about some form of database. Others here have agreed that's the case. Maybe the generic AR-15 went away about the same time as "multi" for caliber? I basically got click happy, as my PSA lower is engraved PA-15 Multi and I just clicked on AR-15 
already sent an email out to cancel this Form 1 and sent a new one, using another Lower so that there is not a mix up with serial numbers |
|
Quoted:
Can you send me his email information? I might need to adjust model number as well... Quoted:
Quoted:
Email Gary and tell him the problem. He can fix it if you catch it early. Or you can cancel, get your refund and re-submit. Can you send me his email information? I might need to adjust model number as well... If you click the "ask the experts" link on the e-forms site, it goes to him. If you email him directly, it would be more of a hassle for him to input your info. |
|
Quoted:
In other words, nothing will happen to your form? Quoted:
Quoted:
Just got an email that my request to cancel this form has been cancelled In other words, nothing will happen to your form? form is disapproved, and I should get a refund in a couple weeks. Already submitted a new one with the right model # I was actually surprised I got the email that fast. |
|
Quoted:
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15 Will it get kicked backed? it should not. You can use any model you want. Feel free to put "Plasma Rifle in the 40 watt Range". It is an "Application to Make". In other words, it has not been made yet thus the model cannot be wrong. |
|
Quoted:
it should not. You can use any model you want. Feel free to put "Plasma Rifle in the 40 watt Range". It is an "Application to Make". In other words, it has not been made yet thus the model cannot be wrong. Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15 Will it get kicked backed? it should not. You can use any model you want. Feel free to put "Plasma Rifle in the 40 watt Range". It is an "Application to Make". In other words, it has not been made yet thus the model cannot be wrong. Not quite true, if there's an existing model and serial, you use that model and serial. That doesn't mean it WILL be kicked back, but it might, depending on the examiner, as has been shown here several times. |
|
Quoted:
Not quite true, if there's an existing model and serial, you use that model and serial. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15 Will it get kicked backed? it should not. You can use any model you want. Feel free to put "Plasma Rifle in the 40 watt Range". It is an "Application to Make". In other words, it has not been made yet thus the model cannot be wrong. Not quite true, if there's an existing model and serial, you use that model and serial. No legal requirement to retain the Title I model name. In addition, it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is on a firearm they cannot see. I have SBR'd several "HK-94" firearms and the model on all of them is now "MP5". "HK-94" no longer appears on them anywhere. Likewise if you want to put "M16A1" on your AR lower, you can legally do that. |
|
Quoted:
No legal requirement to retain the Title I model name. In addition, it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is on a firearm they cannot see. I have SBR'd several "HK-94" firearms and the model on all of them is now "MP5". "HK-94" no longer appears on them anywhere. Likewise if you want to put "M16A1" on your AR lower, you can legally do that. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15 Will it get kicked backed? it should not. You can use any model you want. Feel free to put "Plasma Rifle in the 40 watt Range". It is an "Application to Make". In other words, it has not been made yet thus the model cannot be wrong. Not quite true, if there's an existing model and serial, you use that model and serial. No legal requirement to retain the Title I model name. In addition, it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is on a firearm they cannot see. I have SBR'd several "HK-94" firearms and the model on all of them is now "MP5". "HK-94" no longer appears on them anywhere. Likewise if you want to put "M16A1" on your AR lower, you can legally do that. The part in red is not true, and there have been rejections because someone put the wrong model name. If you read through the big E-file thread, you will see examples. Others have gotten approval with just "AR-15" as the model name when it's not the model shown on the receiver. It seems to depend on the examiner. |
|
Quoted:
The part in red is not true, and there have been rejections because someone put the wrong model name. If you read through the big E-file thread, you will see examples. Quoted:
Quoted:
No legal requirement to retain the Title I model name. In addition, it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is on a firearm they cannot see. I have SBR'd several "HK-94" firearms and the model on all of them is now "MP5". "HK-94" no longer appears on them anywhere. Likewise if you want to put "M16A1" on your AR lower, you can legally do that. The part in red is not true, and there have been rejections because someone put the wrong model name. If you read through the big E-file thread, you will see examples. It is 100% true. I do not think you understand the law here. On a Title I firearm you can remove any marking you want, except the SN. Thus many HK fans remove the "HK-94" model name from their HK-94. They then re-mark it MP5 and then SBR it and use "MP5". This is legal. Thus it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is currently on a firearm unless they are looking at it. I have a Spikes Lower that was once Model ST-15. now it is "HK416". I imagine if you explained to the examiner the model was changed, they would be OK with it, as they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. |
|
Quoted:
It is 100% true. I do not think you understand the law here. On a Title I firearm you can remove any marking you want, except the SN. Thus many HK fans remove the "HK-94" model name from their HK-94. They then re-mark it MP5 and then SBR it and use "MP5". This is legal. Thus it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is currently on a firearm unless they are looking at it. I have a Spikes Lower that was once Model ST-15. now it is "HK416". I imagine if you explained to the examiner the model was changed, they would be OK with it, as they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No legal requirement to retain the Title I model name. In addition, it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is on a firearm they cannot see. I have SBR'd several "HK-94" firearms and the model on all of them is now "MP5". "HK-94" no longer appears on them anywhere. Likewise if you want to put "M16A1" on your AR lower, you can legally do that. The part in red is not true, and there have been rejections because someone put the wrong model name. If you read through the big E-file thread, you will see examples. It is 100% true. I do not think you understand the law here. On a Title I firearm you can remove any marking you want, except the SN. Thus many HK fans remove the "HK-94" model name from their HK-94. They then re-mark it MP5 and then SBR it and use "MP5". This is legal. Thus it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is currently on a firearm unless they are looking at it. I have a Spikes Lower that was once Model ST-15. now it is "HK416". I imagine if you explained to the examiner the model was changed, they would be OK with it, as they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. I was pointing out that with the serial number and original manufacturer, they can know what model the Title 1 firearm was when it was created, and some E-forms have been rejected specifically because the model listed on the form and the model on the receiver did not match. I'm not saying you can't change it, but I'm saying that if the model listed on the form in 4d is not identical to the original model designation, it may be (and in several cases, has been) rejected. |
|
Quoted:
I was pointing out that with the serial number and original manufacturer, they can know what model the Title 1 firearm was when it was created, Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No legal requirement to retain the Title I model name. In addition, it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is on a firearm they cannot see. I have SBR'd several "HK-94" firearms and the model on all of them is now "MP5". "HK-94" no longer appears on them anywhere. Likewise if you want to put "M16A1" on your AR lower, you can legally do that. The part in red is not true, and there have been rejections because someone put the wrong model name. If you read through the big E-file thread, you will see examples. It is 100% true. I do not think you understand the law here. On a Title I firearm you can remove any marking you want, except the SN. Thus many HK fans remove the "HK-94" model name from their HK-94. They then re-mark it MP5 and then SBR it and use "MP5". This is legal. Thus it is not possible for the examiner to know what the model is currently on a firearm unless they are looking at it. I have a Spikes Lower that was once Model ST-15. now it is "HK416". I imagine if you explained to the examiner the model was changed, they would be OK with it, as they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. I was pointing out that with the serial number and original manufacturer, they can know what model the Title 1 firearm was when it was created, They cannot do that either. There is no Title I registration, so they have no clue to the specifics of Models on Title I guns. The MFG reports required to be submitted for rifles only tell quantity, Not the model names of each and every gun. What they are doing is basically guessing based on well-known makes & models. |
|
Quoted:
What they are doing is basically guessing based on well-known makes & models. So you're saying that there have been form rejections because the examiner "guessed" that the model on the form didn't match the model on the receiver? 
Did you read the first response in this thread? |
|
Quoted:
So you're saying that there have been form rejections because the examiner "guessed" that the model on the form didn't match the model on the receiver?
Did you read the first response in this thread? Quoted:
Quoted:
What they are doing is basically guessing based on well-known makes & models. So you're saying that there have been form rejections because the examiner "guessed" that the model on the form didn't match the model on the receiver?
Did you read the first response in this thread? Yes. The expert is wrong. They do not have a complete database. Just the well-known makes & models. Example: An 07 FFL can make 10,000 AR lowers this month. There is no way NFA branch even knows they exist, much less what the model names are. |
|
Quoted:
Seems like a legit way to waste someone's 3 months and sit on their $200 bucks without paying interest. Not really, Like I said, I think they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. If they are rejecting without verifying with the applicant, that is not good. |
|
Quoted:
Not really, Like I said, I think they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. If they are rejecting without verifying with the applicant, that is not good. Quoted:
Quoted:
Seems like a legit way to waste someone's 3 months and sit on their $200 bucks without paying interest. Not really, Like I said, I think they are only trying to help you get your paperwork to match your Form. If they are rejecting without verifying with the applicant, that is not good. The issue with Eforms is that there is no correction loop. If you don't get it fixed right away after you submit (usually directly through Gary) then it will be rejected and you get to start over. |
|
If I had noticed what I did lets say a month from now, I would of let it run, but then again, if it came back approved, and I have a form 1 with a model# AR-15 and my model# on my SRB is PA-15 could I get slammed???
any ways I noticed the error one day later after submitting so no biggie but am curious if others have had it approved |
|
Quoted:
I did a form1 via eforms this morning, I have a PSA lower that I am going to use, when filling out the form, I did select PSA as the Manufacturer, but on model I selected AR15 instead of PA-15 Will it get kicked backed? I know on a paper Form 1 this would get the form kicked back but on an Eform 1, has anyone actually had this issue??? I emailed Gary at NFA and received this response: For the issue described, do the correction after the form is processed and approved by directing a letter to the Chief, NFA Branch at 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, detailing the updates needed. This, to me, implies that this issue will not deny an Eform 1.... Any first hand kickbacks? Quoted:
If I had noticed what I did lets say a month from now, I would of let it run, but then again, if it came back approved, and I have a form 1 with a model# AR-15 and my model# on my SRB is PA-15 could I get slammed??? any ways I noticed the error one day later after submitting so no biggie but am curious if others have had it approved Same as my above quote. |
|
Already posted earlier in this thread, but I'll post it again and add some additional details.
Not first hand, but about as close as you can get. A friend of mine submitted an eForm 1 a little over three months ago. He used AR-15 as the model. It was built on a Spike's stripped lower that said Model ST15. He got rejected a couple weeks ago. He sent me a copy of the rejection rationale. It first mentioned something about a missing page from his trust (he submitted it in multiple files, and thought he gave them everything, but who knows?). The second half of the rejection said: ALSO, PLEASE VERIFY MODEL NUMBER AS ENGRAVED ON THE RECEIVER (ST15?) Now, I don't know if the rejection would've come if his trust had been perfect. But I do know it was "wrong enough" to be included in the rejection notice. Gary at ATF answered my Ask the Experts question and said the model engraved in the lower is what needed to be input. |
|
Quoted:
Already posted earlier in this thread, but I'll post it again and add some additional details. Not first hand, but about as close as you can get. A friend of mine submitted an eForm 1 a little over three months ago. He used AR-15 as the model. It was built on a Spike's stripped lower that said Model ST15. He got rejected a couple weeks ago. He sent me a copy of the rejection rationale. It first mentioned something about a missing page from his trust (he submitted it in multiple files, and thought he gave them everything, but who knows?). The second half of the rejection said: ALSO, PLEASE VERIFY MODEL NUMBER AS ENGRAVED ON THE RECEIVER (ST15?) Now, I don't know if the rejection would've come if his trust had been perfect. But I do know it was "wrong enough" to be included in the rejection notice. Gary at ATF answered my Ask the Experts question and said the model engraved in the lower is what needed to be input. Quoted:
Already posted earlier in this thread, but I'll post it again and add some additional details. Not first hand, but about as close as you can get. A friend of mine submitted an eForm 1 a little over three months ago. He used AR-15 as the model. It was built on a Spike's stripped lower that said Model ST15. He got rejected a couple weeks ago. He sent me a copy of the rejection rationale. It first mentioned something about a missing page from his trust (he submitted it in multiple files, and thought he gave them everything, but who knows?). The second half of the rejection said: ALSO, PLEASE VERIFY MODEL NUMBER AS ENGRAVED ON THE RECEIVER (ST15?) Now, I don't know if the rejection would've come if his trust had been perfect. But I do know it was "wrong enough" to be included in the rejection notice. Gary at ATF answered my Ask the Experts question and said the model engraved in the lower is what needed to be input. I think the trust issue drew the extra attention...again, the below was from Gary himself today: For the issue described, do the correction after the form is processed and approved by directing a letter to the Chief, NFA Branch at 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, detailing the updates needed. Obviously forms being submitted with this info should err on the side of caution, but this reply from Gary indicates that it isn't an automatic disqualifier by itself... |
Armory Sponsor