AR Lower replacement

[tonymel19]

I am hoping someone could answer this question, or point me to some laws as confirmation:

I have two (2) cast pre-ban AR-15 lowers from Essential Arms (EA) of Krotz Springs, LA. I recently heard that EA will be offerring forged lowers very soon. I contacted Mr. Johnson at EA and he said that he could make forged lowers with my serial numbers on them but pointed-out that the forged lowers will have the designation of JR-15-F (F as in forged). He wondered if this would cause any problems. My understanding is the lower designation would not matter, and its pre-ban status not change, as long as the serial numbers do not change as previously registered and that the lower was replaced by the original manufacturer.

Can anyone confirm this, and possibly point me to a source so that I can have it for reference?

Thanks.

Tony

 

[Len-2A Training]

Tony, I can't point you out to anything definitive, only a few suggestions/thoughts.

BATF had FAQs posted that possibly covered this back during the AWB. Not sure if they pulled them or if they are still on the website. They also published these FAQs in books sent to every FFL.

Problem is that MGLs now apply and NOTHING in the MGLs are that specific. They don't collectively have the brain power on Bacon Hill <spelling intentional> that the BATFE Technical Branch has (they generated the FAQs)!

Just be aware that a pre-ban receiver IS NOT enough to meet MGLs, it HAD TO BE ASSEMBLED INTO "AWB" CONFIGURATION PRIOR TO 9/13/94 for it to qualify. That was true of the Fed ban and is true of the MA Ban now! [Most folks don't understand this detail.]

Mfr replacing a legit Pre-Ban receiver from a Pre-Ban "AWB" should be OK even under MGLs, but you will NOT find anything in the MGLs about it and I doubt that they have created any CMRs on it. Also, those that create these CMRs can barely spell "G-U-N", so they wouldn't have the technical skills to cover such details. That's the big difference between MA and BATFE Tech Branch, the Tech Branch folks are knowledgeable about guns and engineering issues.

Good luck!

 

[tonymel19]

LenS:

Thanks for the reply. I guess I should have worded my post more clearly.

Both of the lowers I was referring to were indeed complete rifles prior to the 1994 ban and I purchased them as those complete rifles. I made sure of that before I purchased them. I also purchased them from a reputable dealer so that gave me some definite peace-of-mind. It was difficult to find them at first, but I lucked-out.

As for the references to the BATFE FAQ and MGLs, I thank you. I tried to look-up this same issue on the MGLs but could not find anything even close to referring to the model no./designation of the lower. I could only find some obscure reference to the serial number being registered.

As I mentioned, I believe as long as the original serial numbers are used on the replacement lower, the designation/model no. displayed on the lower will not matter as there will be no other firearm with the original serial number registered/existing elsewhere.

I will be checking with my local FFL (actually the dealer I purchased both rifles from) to see if he has the books from the BATF.

Thanks, again.

Tony

 

[Len-2A Training]

Tony,

I think the re-manufacture issue may be answered in the following BATF Q&A
http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/qa.pdf

Since it is a PDF file you can do a search on keywords and probably find it, if it is there.

It's also worth DL'g and keeping the entire document, since that is what MA AWB is based on:
http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2000_ref.htm

Since the Fed law is now gone, BATF can pull that doc at any time and we'd be SOL for a valuable reference.

BATF indeed did certify S/Ns as being pre-ban when the ban went into effect and that is what was used to justify pre-ban status. Again, MA doesn't have the brain power to put it together succinctly, so it's best to arm yourself with ammo from the old Fed AWB as CYA.

 

[tonymel19]

LenS:

Found it:

p. 34, Section O, Item 7:

(O7) Are replacement parts for grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices subject to regulation under the law?

No. Parts may be replaced in grandfathered semiautomatic assault weapons and grandfathered feeding devices without violating the law. However, if the frame or a receiver for a semiautomatic assault weapon is defective, the replacement must be made by the weapon's manufacturer or importer. The replacement receiver must be marked with the same serial number as the original receiver, and the original receiver must be destroyed. However, a manufacturer or importer who is unable to mark the replacement receiver with the same serial number as the original receiver may seek a marking variance inaccordance with 27 CFR 178.92. In addition, the permanent records of the manufacturer or importer should indicate that the receiver for the weapon has been replaced.

Thanks, again.

Tony

 

[JonJ]

Tony,

I think the re-manufacture issue may be answered in the following BATF Q&A
http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/qa.pdf

Since it is a PDF file you can do a search on keywords and probably find it, if it is there.

It's also worth DL'g and keeping the entire document, since that is what MA AWB is based on:
http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2000_ref.htm

Since the Fed law is now gone, BATF can pull that doc at any time and we'd be SOL for a valuable reference.

BATF indeed did certify S/Ns as being pre-ban when the ban went into effect and that is what was used to justify pre-ban status. Again, MA doesn't have the brain power to put it together succinctly, so it's best to arm yourself with ammo from the old Fed AWB as CYA.

Len, Do you think that either you or Derek may be able to DL these files and save them somewhere on the site for future ref? I grabbed them for myself but others may not want to store them.

As a point of reference, I just received my C&R License and ifo pack. Inluded in the pack is the Federal Firearms Regulations and Reference Guide 2000. All the same info as the posted links. I guess it'll be a while until they re-print with the newer (no AWB).
Thanks,
Jon

 

[Len-2A Training]

Jon, thanks for the suggestion. Both docs are now posted on my personal website at the following URL.

http://www.mvps.org/wintech/personalstuff.htm

 

[Reptile]

Maura Healey's edict in 2016 states that a lower can be replaced.

I believe that is on her FAQ.

I really like this because if a blow up a lower I can get a new one.

I doubt it pertains to pre ban - pre 1994 lowers, though.

 

[MGnoob]

Maura Healey's edict in 2016 states that a lower can be replaced.

I believe that is on her FAQ.

I really like this because if a blow up a lower I can get a new one.

I doubt it pertains to pre ban - pre 1994 lowers, though.

You’re more likely to damage a lower by dropping it with the takedown pin open for various other reasons it’s pretty hard to blow up a lower, wear it out even then I doubt it you can always have it fixed. But it is funny that is listed in a FAQ.

There’s lots of reasonable doubt, really muddy waters, but in this state, it doesn’t matter what’s legal or not it’s what you can convince other people of.

I forget what the ATF had to say about this, but I’m pretty sure if it was like a transferable. The answer would be no, but at that point anybody with enough talent there’s plenty of people out there could fix it no matter what you did do it.

It’s all about the money

 

[MAJoe]

Mmmm nearly 20 year old necropost. 2005 was a simpler time.

 

[PappyM3]

For anybody who’s more recently curious, the publicly posted state AWB FAQ says that you can have an “assault weapon” replaced under warranty work.