This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

100404 

Vol. 89, No. 239 

Thursday, December 12, 2024 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 179 

[Docket No. FDA–2024–F–5467] 

Leprino Nutrition; Filing of Food 

Additive Petition 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notification of petition. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or we) is 

announcing that we have filed a 

petition, submitted by Leprino 

Nutrition, proposing that the food 

additive regulations be amended to 

provide for the safe use of ultraviolet 

light for the reduction of 

microorganisms in whey products. 

DATES: The food additive petition was 

filed on November 22, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to https://

www.regulations.gov and insert the 

docket number found in brackets in the 

heading of this document into the 

‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts, 

and/or go to the Dockets Management 

Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, 

Rockville, MD 20852. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lane A. Highbarger, Human Foods 

Program, Food and Drug 

Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., 

College Park, MD 20740, 240–402–1204. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 

section 409(b)(5) of the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 

348(b)(5)), we are giving notice that we 

have filed a food additive petition (FAP 

5M4840), submitted on behalf of 

Leprino Nutrition by Keller and 

Heckman LLP, 1001 G St. NW, Suite 500 

West, Washington, DC 20001. The 

petition proposes to amend the food 

additive regulations in § 179.39 (21 CFR 

179.39), ‘‘Ultraviolet radiation for the 

processing and treatment of food,’’ to 

provide for the safe use of ultraviolet 

light for the reduction of 

microorganisms in whey products. 

The petitioner has claimed that this 

action is categorically excluded under 

21 CFR 25.32(j), which applies to an 

action for substances used as a 

component of a food-contact surface of 

permanent or semipermanent 

equipment or of another food-contact 

article intended for repeated use. In 

addition, the petitioner has stated that, 

to its knowledge, no extraordinary 

circumstances exist that would warrant 

an environmental assessment (see 21 

CFR 25.21). If FDA determines a 

categorical exclusion applies, neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. If FDA determines a 

categorical exclusion does not apply, we 

will request an environmental 

assessment and make it available for 

public inspection. 

Dated: December 4, 2024. 

P. Ritu Nalubola, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2024–29248 Filed 12–11–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FBI–158; AG Order No. 6100– 

2024] 

RIN 1110–AA36 

Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 

2022 and Consolidated Appropriations 

Act of 2022—Implementation 

Revisions for National Instant Criminal 

Background Check System (NICS) 

AGENCY: Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The United States Department 

of Justice (‘‘Department’’) proposes to 

amend its regulations pertaining to the 

National Instant Criminal Background 

Check System (‘‘NICS’’) of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation (‘‘FBI’’) to 

implement parts of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2022 (‘‘CAA’’) and 

the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act 

(‘‘BSCA’’) by proposing additional, 

relevant definitions and procedures to 

reflect and implement the statutory 

mandates described above. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

postmarked, and electronic comments 

must be submitted, on or before 

February 10, 2025. Commenters should 

be aware the electronic Federal Docket 

Management System will not accept 

comments after 11:59 p.m., Eastern 

Time, on the last day of the comment 

period. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1110–AA36 or Docket 

No. FBI–158, by either of the following 

methods: 

D Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

D Mail: Charles Klebe, Assistant 

General Counsel, Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, Office of the General 

Counsel, Module C–3, 1000 Custer 

Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 

26306–0110; ATTN: Docket No. FBI– 

158. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and RIN 

(1110–AA36) or docket number (FBI– 

158) for this notice of proposed 

rulemaking. In general, all properly 

completed comments received will be 

posted without change to the Federal 

eRulemaking portal, https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill 

A. Montgomery, NICS Business and 

Liaison Unit Chief, Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, Criminal Justice 

Information Services Division, NICS 

Section. Telephone: (304) 625–0606 

(this is not a toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

A. Comments Sought 

The Department welcomes public 

comments from any interested person 

on any aspect of the changes proposed 

in this rule. In particular, and as 

discussed in more detail in the parts of 

this preamble that describe specific 

changes, the Department seeks 

comments from the public on the 

proposed amendments to NICS 

regulations regarding: (1) identifying 

firearms prohibitions imposed by local 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100405 

1Examples of prohibitions under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) 

and (n) include, but are not limited to, having 

sustained a conviction for, or being under 

indictment or information for, a ‘‘crime punishable 

by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year’’ 

(including State offenses denominated as 

misdemeanors but punishable by more than 2 years 

of imprisonment, see 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(20)); being a 

fugitive from justice; being addicted to or being an 

unlawful user of a controlled substance; being 

adjudicated as a mental defective or being 

committed to a mental institution; being subject to 

certain protection orders; and having sustained a 

conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic 

violence. 

2Applicable State law prohibitions are those 

imposed by the State where the prospective transfer 

is occurring and the State where the transferee 

resides (if the State of residence is different than the 

State of transfer). Additionally, other State laws 

may be relevant to determining if a Federal firearms 

prohibition (under 18 U.S.C. 922(d), (g), or (n), as 

applicable) applies to the prospective transferee. 

Suppose, for instance, a resident of South Dakota 

is attempting to receive a rifle or shotgun (‘‘long 

gun’’) from an FFL in Iowa. That prospective 

transferee, however, has a prior felony-level 

conviction from a State court in Washington. The 

State laws of South Dakota, Iowa, and Washington 

would all be considered during that transaction to 

assess that person’s ability to receive a firearm 

under State and Federal law. 

3A POC is ‘‘a state or local law enforcement 

agency serving as an intermediary between an FFL 

and the federal databases checked by the NICS.’’ 28 

CFR 25.2. POCs are agencies with express or 

implied authority to perform POC duties pursuant 

to State law. Id. 

4The FBI’s NICS electronic check system, known 

as E-Check, began in 2002. FBI, NICS E-Check, 

https://www.fbi.gov/video-repository/nics-echeck.mp4/view (last visited Oct. 4, 2024). 

5NCIC is searched for records such as active 

warrants and protection orders. See, e.g., FBI, 

National Instant Criminal Background Check 

System Posts NICS Index Data (Mar. 18, 2016), 

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/nationalinstant-criminal-background-check-system-postsnics-index-data (‘‘NICS Data’’). 

6 III is part of the FBI’s Next Generation 

Identification system and is used to search for 

available Federal, State, local, and Tribal criminal 

history records such as arrests, charges, or case 

dispositions. See NICS Data, supra; see also Privacy 

Act of 1974; System of Records, 84 FR 54182, 54184 

(Oct. 9, 2019). 

7The NICS Index consists of entries from Federal, 

State, local, and Tribal agencies of persons who are 

prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms 

under Federal or State law. See 28 CFR 25.2. When 

referencing the NICS Index, the remainder of this 

rule will refer to the ‘‘NICS Indices’’ as it is more 

commonly known today among NICS users. The 

changes made by this rule include updates to the 

FBI’s regulations to use the term ‘‘NICS Indices’’ 

rather than ‘‘NICS Index.’’ The Department is also 

Continued 

and Tribal governments; (2) providing 

denial notifications to local law 

enforcement; (3) conducting enhanced 

background checks of under-21 

transactions; (4) collecting, using, and 

purging, where applicable, residential 

address information to comply with the 

statutory requirements of the CAA and 

BSCA; and (5) implementing a delay of 

up to 10 business days for under-21 

transactions where NICS has notified 

the FFLs that additional research is 

required to determine if the prospective 

transferees have prohibiting juvenile 

records as described in 18 U.S.C. 922(d). 

The Department also seeks comments 

on a potential attestation process to 

facilitate interactions with State and 

local agencies, as described more fully 

in Section II.D of this preamble. The 

Department will carefully consider all 

properly submitted public comments in 

drafting any final rules. 

All comments must reference RIN 

1110–AA36 or this document’s docket 

number, FBI–158, and be legible. Please 

do not submit, under this proposed rule, 

any comments pertaining to a different 

rule that may be discussed in limited 

detail below. After those other proposed 

rules are published, public comments 

concerning those proposed rules should 

be submitted as directed within those 

rules. 

Please note that all comments 

received are considered part of the 

public record and may be made 

available for public inspection online at 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

Information made available for public 

inspection may include personal 

identifying information (such as name, 

address, etc.) submitted by the 

commenter. 

B. Confidentiality 

In general, the Department will make 

all comments, whether submitted 

electronically or on paper, available for 

public viewing on the internet through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal. If you 

do not want your name or other 

personal identification information 

posted on the internet as part of your 

comment, you must include the phrase 

‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also locate 

all the personal identifying information 

that you do not want posted online in 

the first paragraph of your comment and 

identify what information you want the 

Department to redact. Personal 

identifying information identified and 

located as set forth above will be placed 

in the Department’s public docket file 

but not posted online. 

If you wish to submit confidential 

business information as part of your 

comment but do not wish it to be posted 

online, you must include the phrase 

‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You must also 

prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, the Department may choose 

not to post that comment (or to post 

only part of the comment) on https://

www.regulations.gov. Confidential 

business information identified and 

located as set forth above will not be 

placed in the public docket file, nor will 

it be posted online. 

C. Submitting Comments 

Submit comments in either of the 

following ways (but do not submit the 

same comment multiple times or by 

more than one method). Hand-delivered 

comments will not be accepted. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: The 

Department recommends that you 

submit your comments via the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov and follow the 

instructions. 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. 

II. Background and Purpose 

The Brady Handgun Violence 

Prevention Act of 1993 (‘‘Brady Act’’), 

Public Law 103–159, 107 Stat. 1536, 

required the Attorney General to 

establish a national system for FFLs, 

more specifically, federally licensed 

manufacturers, dealers, and importers of 

firearms under 18 U.S.C. 923, to request 

immediate information as to whether 

the transfer of a firearm to any given 

unlicensed person could proceed. To 

implement that requirement, the 

Department created NICS and delegated 

management of NICS to the FBI. See 28 

CFR 25.3. NICS is managed by the NICS 

Section of the FBI’s Criminal Justice 

Information Services (‘‘CJIS’’) Division. 

The NICS Section processed the first 

NICS background check on November 

30, 1998. Background events that 

prohibited persons from being able, 

under the Brady Act, to receive a 

firearm were those specified in 18 

U.S.C. 922(g) and (n) 1 and applicable 

State law(s).2

Since that first NICS background 

check in 1998, FFLs have initiated NICS 

background checks by contacting the 

FBI or a designated ‘‘point of contact’’ 

(‘‘POC’’).3 FFLs contacted the FBI by 

phone or electronically.4 FFLs in each 

State are advised if they are required to 

contact the FBI’s NICS Section or a POC 

to conduct a background check pursuant 

to 18 U.S.C. 922(t). See 28 CFR 25.6(a). 

Prior to the implementation of BSCA, 

when an FFL contacted the FBI to 

initiate a NICS background check, NICS 

searched three electronic systems—the 

National Crime Information Center 

(‘‘NCIC’’),5 the Interstate Identification 

Index (‘‘III’’),6 and the NICS Indices 7— 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100406 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

updating the regulations to use ‘‘NICS Section’’ 

instead of ‘‘NICS Operations Center.’’ 

8State laws may require or allow POCs to collect 

further identifying information from a prospective 

transferee. 

9Further discussion of POCs can be found below 

within the discussion of denial notifications in 

Section II.B of this preamble and the discussion of 

under-21 transactions in Section II.C of this 

preamble. 

for the existence of a relevant record 

demonstrating that the individual is 

prohibited from receiving or possessing 

firearms under Federal or applicable 

State law(s). FFLs provided NICS the 

prospective transferee’s name, sex, race, 

complete date of birth, State of 

residence, height, weight, eye and hair 

color, place of birth, and, if provided, 

any unique identification number(s) 

such as a Social Security number or 

military number. See 28 CFR 25.7. It has 

typically taken NICS a matter of seconds 

to collect the prospective transferee’s 

identifying information and identify 

matching or potentially matching 

records in NCIC, III, or the NICS Indices. 

If the search of those three systems 

resulted in no matching (i.e., 

disqualifying) record, a ‘‘Proceed’’ 

response was provided to the FFL. If the 

search of those three systems resulted in 

at least one record demonstrating that 

the individual was prohibited from 

receiving a firearm, a ‘‘Denied’’ response 

was provided to the FFL. For those 

transactions in which the NICS Section 

could not provide a definitive response 

of either ‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ because 

additional research of a possible Federal 

or State disqualification was required, 

the transaction was placed in a 

‘‘Delayed’’ status. Upon issuance of a 

‘‘Delayed’’ response, NICS would 

continue to research the possible 

prohibitions, even after the initial 3 

business days had elapsed. If the NICS 

Section was unable to determine 

whether a delayed transaction should 

receive a ‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ 

response within 3 business days of the 

initiation of the NICS check, the FFL 

was not federally prohibited from 

transferring the firearm beginning on the 

day after the third business day, which 

was and still is referred to as the Brady 

transfer date. See 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(1). 

In instances where a POC had been 

designated to process NICS background 

checks, upon being contacted by an 

FFL, the POC would ‘‘check state or 

local record systems [and] perform NICS 

inquiries.’’ 28 CFR 25.2. In addition to 

using the NICS Transaction Number 

(‘‘NTN’’) that NICS assigns to submitted 

transactions, POCs may also assign their 

own unique ‘‘State-Assigned 

Transaction Number’’ (‘‘STN’’) to a valid 

background check inquiry. Id. When 

NICS received an inquiry from a POC 

for a NICS background check, it 

searched NCIC, III, and the NICS Indices 

for any matching records and provided 

an electronic response to the POC. See 

28 CFR 25.6(f).8 When contacted by a 

POC, NICS provided one of four types 

of responses to the POC: (1) ‘‘No record’’ 

response if NICS determined that no 

matching records existed in the 

databases searched; (2) ‘‘partial’’ 

response if NICS had not completed the 

search of all of its records (this response 

provided the POC with the information 

found in any database in which the 

search was completed and sent a followup response when NICS completed the 

search in all databases); (3) ‘‘single 

matching record’’ response when one 

matching record was found; and (4) 

‘‘multiple matching record’’ response if 

more than one matching record was 

found. See id. It has been and remains 

the responsibility of the POCs to review 

the responses that are provided by 

NICS, conduct any further research, 

render a final determination, and 

provide FFLs with the results. See 28 

CFR 25.6(g).9

The CAA, Public Law 117–103, 136 

Stat. 49 (2022), and BSCA, Public Law 

117–159, 136 Stat. 1313 (2022), 

mandated certain changes to the NICS 

process. In particular, as described 

below, the CAA and BSCA added new 

disqualifying events for consideration 

during NICS transactions. The CAA and 

BSCA added local and Tribal 

prohibitions to the Federal and State 

prohibitions already listed under 18 

U.S.C. 922(t). The CAA includes the 

NICS Denial Notification Act of 2022 

(‘‘NDNA’’), 136 Stat. at 919, which 

requires the FBI to send denial 

notification reports (‘‘denial 

notifications’’) to local law enforcement 

authorities following the FBI’s denial of 

a NICS transaction involving a 

prospective transfer of a firearm. BSCA 

sets forth new requirements for under21 transactions, including enhanced 

contacts to State and local entities and, 

if needed, additional delay to further 

investigate possibly disqualifying 

juvenile records. 136 Stat. at 1322–24. 

As described below, the Department 

proposes to amend the regulations 

outlining the NICS process to conform 

with these requirements of the CAA and 

BSCA. The Department is publishing 

this notice of proposed rulemaking to 

propose amendments to 28 CFR 25.1, 

25.2, 25.6, 25.7, 25.8, 25.9, 25.10, and 

25.11 to implement parts of the CAA 

and BSCA as codified at 18 U.S.C. 

922(d) and (t), 18 U.S.C. 925B, 18 U.S.C. 

925C, and 34 U.S.C. 40901(l). 

A. Updated Prohibitions 

As amended by the CAA and BSCA, 

18 U.S.C. 922(t) now precludes approval 

of a firearm transfer to a nonlicensee if 

the transfer or receipt of a firearm would 

violate local or Tribal law. 136 Stat. at 

921–22; 136 Stat. at 1323. The FBI now 

is required to review NICS results for 

any applicable firearm prohibitions 

imposed by local or Tribal authorities, 

in addition to reviewing NICS results for 

any events that meet firearm 

prohibitions imposed by Federal law 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(d), (g), or (n), or 

applicable State law(s). See 18 U.S.C. 

922(t)(1)(B)(ii), (t)(1)(C)(iii). Where a 

local or Tribal firearm prohibition may 

be applicable to the prospective 

transferee, the FBI must consider that 

prohibition in the same manner as 

Federal and State prohibitions that may 

be applicable based upon the 

prospective transferee’s backgroundcheck results. To reduce the risk of 

under-enforcement of local and Tribal 

prohibitions, this rule seeks public 

comments to identify which local and 

Tribal governments may, or may not, 

have enacted their own firearm 

prohibitions that are not already 

reflected in applicable State or Federal 

laws. What background record or event 

would prohibit a person from 

possessing firearms in the future? To 

whom do those local or Tribal 

prohibitions apply? 

The Department proposes amending 

28 CFR 25.1, 25.2, 25.6, and 25.9 to 

reflect the fact that 18 U.S.C. 922(t) now 

includes firearm prohibitions imposed 

by local and Tribal law. The Department 

also proposes amendments to 28 CFR 

25.7(a) and 25.8(f) to require an FFL, 

after initially providing NICS a 

prospective transferee’s State of 

residence and State of purchase, to 

subsequently provide the address and 

city limits information listed by a 

prospective transferee on the Bureau of 

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and 

Explosives (‘‘ATF’’) Form 4473 (‘‘Form 

4473’’), Firearms Transaction Record, 

when the FBI determines based on the 

State of residence and State of purchase 

that a local or Tribal firearms 

prohibition may apply. In such 

situations, and in the circumstances 

described further below, FFLs will be 

required to provide the FBI with the 

additional address information before 

the FBI provides the FFL with a 

transaction’s status and an NTN. 

Providing further residence information 

in such instances may prevent NICS 

from unnecessarily delaying a 

transaction if the residence information 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100407 

10A full residential address, as reflected on the 

revised Form 4473, includes the number and full 

street address; city, State, and ZIP Code; county, 

parish, or borough of residence; and whether the 

subject resides within the city (to include town or 

other municipal boundary) limits. 

11Historically, 18 U.S.C. 922(d) has encompassed 

the same prohibitions as referenced in 18 U.S.C. 

922(g) and (n). 

12 In addition to the other amendments relevant 

to NICS, title II, section 12004 of BSCA added two 

new prohibitions related to preventing illegal 

firearms trafficking. See 18 U.S.C. 922(d)(10) and 

(d)(11). 

13Federal law allows an FFL to transfer a long 

gun to a resident of another State so long as, among 

other considerations, the sale, delivery, and receipt 

otherwise satisfy the State laws and published 

ordinances of both jurisdictions. See 18 U.S.C. 

922(b). 

14For example, if a resident of Fort Wayne, 

Indiana, attempts to receive a firearm from an FFL 

in Indianapolis, Indiana, and the transaction is 

‘‘Denied,’’ then the FBI would send a denial 

notification to the local law enforcement authorities 

in Fort Wayne (where the denied transferee resides) 

and Indianapolis (where the firearm was sought). 

15 In fact, some local law enforcement authorities 

will not have a State, local, or Tribal violation of 

law to enforce if, for example, the denial was due 

to a Federal violation. 

excludes the possibility of local or 

Tribal laws applying to that transfer or 

receipt of firearms. For example, for a 

prospective transferee with a criminal 

history who resides in a State that also 

has potentially applicable local or Tribal 

firearm prohibitions, the individual’s 

full residential address, as reported on 

the revised Form 4473,10 can help 

quickly determine if the prospective 

transferee is subject to the local or 

Tribal firearm prohibitions. 

The full street address is needed to 

determine whether a local or Tribal 

prohibition should be considered in 

making the determination. Because 

there are multiple jurisdictional 

boundaries that may fall within a ZIP 

Code, county, or city, more granular 

information for the address may be 

needed to make an accurate 

determination. For example, different 

parts of one street could be subject to 

different local jurisdictions. The FBI 

anticipates utilizing the same city, State, 

county, and ZIP Code mapping as 

described in Section II.B of this 

preamble to determine if a local or 

Tribal prohibition is applicable. 

Under 18 U.S.C. 922(d), it is unlawful 

for any person to sell or otherwise 

dispose of a firearm or ammunition 

knowing, or having reasonable cause to 

believe, that the prospective transferee 

is subject to any of the described 

disqualifying events in that 

subsection.11 As amended by section 

12001(a) of BSCA, 18 U.S.C. 922(d) now 

prohibits such sales or dispositions to a 

person the transferor knows or has 

reasonable cause to believe is subject to 

one of the described disqualifying 

events, ‘‘including as a juvenile.’’ 136 

Stat. at 1322.12 This proposed rule 

would incorporate conforming changes 

into NICS regulations to reflect these 

statutory amendments expanding the 

Brady Act prohibitions as now 

described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t). 

The Department notes that, through 

various amendments to NICS 

regulations over the years, current NICS 

regulations contain inconsistent 

references to the Brady Act prohibitions, 

particularly the Federal prohibitions. 

The Department proposes amending 

NICS regulations found at 28 CFR 25.1, 

25.2, 25.6, and 25.9 to ensure 

consistency with respect to how 

firearms prohibitions are described. To 

the extent necessary, the Department 

intends to reconcile these various 

references to Brady Act prohibitions in 

the Department’s NICS regulations 

through this proposed rule as well as 

through RIN 1110–AA35 and through 

other technical updates to the 

Department’s NICS regulations in a 

future rulemaking, RIN 1110–AA37. 

B. Local Law Enforcement Notification 

The NDNA, which was enacted as 

part of the CAA, requires that the 

Attorney General send a denial 

notification to a ‘‘local law enforcement 

authority’’ upon denial of a NICS 

transaction involving the prospective 

transfer of a firearm by an FFL. See 

CAA, Public Law 117–103, div. W, title 

XI, sec. 1101, 136 Stat. 49, 919–20. 

Since the NDNA’s effective date, 

October 1, 2022, the FBI has been 

submitting denial notifications. 

When the FBI denies a NICS 

transaction, as described in 18 U.S.C. 

925B(a) related to the prospective 

transfer of a firearm, it sends a denial 

notification to the ‘‘local law 

enforcement authority’’ of the State or 

Tribe within whose jurisdiction the 

person sought the firearm transfer and, 

if different, to the ‘‘local law 

enforcement authority’’ of the State or 

Tribe within whose jurisdiction the 

person resides.13 This ensures that local 

law enforcement authorities in both 

jurisdictions are made aware of the 

denial.14 As proposed by this rule in 28 

CFR 25.2, ‘‘ ‘local law enforcement 

authority’ means a bureau, office, 

department, or other authority of a State 

or local government or Tribe that has 

jurisdiction to investigate a violation or 

potential violation of, or enforce, a 

State, local, or Tribal law.’’ See also 18 

U.S.C. 921(a)(36). The Department’s 

proposed amendments to 28 CFR 25.2, 

25.7(a), and 25.8(f) reflect the FBI’s 

current process for collection of 

information for carrying out the NDNA’s 

requirements and, if finalized, would 

generally not alter the current denial 

notification process as described herein. 

To reflect how the Department has 

implemented the NDNA, the 

Department proposes to amend 28 CFR 

25.7(a) and 25.8(f) to require FFLs to 

provide additional residence address 

information for prospective transferees 

whose prospective firearm transfers will 

be ‘‘Delayed’’ or ‘‘Denied.’’ Again, after 

an FFL has initiated the transaction, 

NICS determines within seconds if 

NCIC, III, or the NICS Indices include 

records that require the transaction to be 

‘‘Delayed’’ for further research or 

‘‘Denied.’’ After NICS has identified that 

a transaction will be ‘‘Delayed’’ or 

‘‘Denied,’’ the FFL must provide NICS 

with the subject’s full residential 

address before the FFL will be provided 

with the NTN and status. This 

information will be requested over the 

phone or collected electronically, 

depending on how the FFL initiated the 

transaction. Once the system has 

received the subject’s full residence 

address, the FBI will then, over the 

phone or electronically, provide the FFL 

with that transaction’s NTN and initial 

status. 

A ‘‘Delayed’’ transaction can change 

quickly to a ‘‘Denied’’ transaction. 

Consequently, by also collecting full 

address information before a ‘‘Delayed’’ 

status is provided to an FFL, the FBI 

will have that address information 

readily available should that transaction 

result in a denial. Collecting address 

information in such a manner avoids 

scenarios where the FFL is unavailable 

to receive a second contact from the FBI, 

which avoids delaying the address 

collection and denial notification. Thus, 

the amendments proposed in this rule 

and the process currently implemented 

by the FBI allow NICS to provide more 

timely denial notifications to local law 

enforcement authorities where the 

individual attempts to obtain the 

firearm and, if different, where the 

person resides. As discussed elsewhere 

in this rule, POCs will see similar 

results when they begin implementing 

the NDNA provisions (to the extent their 

State laws do not already require 

implementation of all or some aspects of 

the NDNA). 

Local law enforcement authorities are 

not required by the NDNA to take any 

action upon receiving the denial 

notification.15 However, to avoid 

potential conflict with ongoing Federal 

investigations, the denial notification 

effectively encourages local law 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100408 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

16Additional information on this topic and a 

copy of a draft notification can be found at FBI, 

NICS Denial Notifications for Law Enforcement, 

https://le.fbi.gov/informational-tools/nics-denialnotifications-for-law-enforcement (last visited June 

18, 2024). 

17 In addition to the prospective transferee’s State 

of residence, an FFL must submit the prospective 

transferee’s name, sex, race, and complete date of 

birth to initiate a NICS check. See 28 CFR 25.7. 

18For some transactions using NICS E-Check to 

submit information to NICS, NICS is able to 

systematically capture the residence without aid of 

the FFL. 

19An ORI is ‘‘a nine-character identifier assigned 

by the FBI to an agency that has met the established 

qualifying criteria for ORI assignment to identify 

the agency in transactions on the NCIC System.’’ 28 

CFR 25.2. 

20See FBI, NICS Participation Map, https://

www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics-participationmap.pdf/view (last visited Oct. 4, 2024). 

21See id. 

22The Department notes that the statutory 

obligation to issue denial notifications does not 

include the issuance of denial notifications to the 

same entity that denied the transaction. See 18 

U.S.C. 925B(d) (denial notification to State 

authorities not required if the same State authorities 

made the original denial determination with respect 

to the transfer of the firearm). For example, if a 

resident of Fort Wayne, Indiana, attempts to receive 

a firearm from an FFL in Illinois, and the 

transaction is denied by the Illinois POC (the 

Illinois State Police), then the Illinois POC would 

issue denial notifications to the ‘‘local law 

enforcement authorities to coordinate 

with their local ATF office prior to 

taking any anticipated action. The city 

in which the local ATF office is located 

and the office’s contact information are 

provided in the denial notification. The 

denial notification is transmitted 

through NCIC and contains the NDNArequired information that NICS 

‘‘Denied’’ the firearm transaction; the 

Federal, State, local, or Tribal 

prohibition that was the basis for the 

denial; the prospective transferee’s 

identifying information (i.e., the 

transferee’s name, sex, height, date of 

birth, place of birth, and residence 

address); the date and time the 

transaction was denied; and the location 

and contact information for the FFL 

where the denied transfer 

occurred.16 See 18 U.S.C. 925B(a)(1). 

The denial notification also contains a 

general reminder explaining why the 

denial notification is being provided 

and contact information for any other 

law enforcement entities to which NICS 

sent the denial notification. 

The NDNA provides that, where 

practicable, a denial notification will be 

provided to State, local, or Tribal 

prosecutors in the jurisdiction where 

the firearm transfer was sought to assist 

with enforcing State, local, or Tribal 

laws (when applicable). See 18 U.S.C. 

925B(a)(2). Should a ‘‘Denied’’ 

transaction be later overturned, the 

NDNA requires that any law 

enforcement authority and prosecutor 

previously provided with a denial 

notification for that transaction be 

provided an updated notification of the 

overturned denial. See 18 U.S.C. 

925B(c). Such updated notifications are 

also provided via NCIC to all agencies 

that received a denial notification for 

that transaction. 

Currently, FFLs obtain the 

prospective transferee’s residence 

address on the Form 4473. See 27 CFR 

478.124. This residence information is 

collected in box 10 of the Form 4473 

and includes number and street address, 

city, whether the residence is within 

city limits, State, ZIP Code, and county 

or parish or borough. Under 28 CFR 

25.7, the only address information that 

must be provided for the initial NICS 

check is the prospective transferee’s 

State of residence; the regulations have 

not required FFLs to submit further 

information to NICS about a prospective 

transferee’s residence address even 

though the FFL must collect such 

information on the Form 4473.17

The full street address of a 

prospective transferee is needed to 

determine which local jurisdiction(s) 

would be appropriate for notification of 

a denial determination. There are 

multiple agencies that may fall within a 

ZIP Code, county, or city. To notify the 

correct agency, specific information for 

the address is needed. For example, one 

street within a city could be within the 

jurisdiction of one police department 

while the adjacent street could be under 

a different police department’s 

jurisdiction. When an FFL initially 

submits a prospective firearm transfer to 

the FBI and the initial NICS check of 

NCIC, III, and the NICS Indices finds 

information indicating the transaction 

will be ‘‘Delayed’’ or ‘‘Denied,’’ the FBI, 

during that same, initial contact with 

NICS, requests (by phone or 

electronically 18) the full residence 

address of the prospective transferee 

while the FFL waits for NICS to provide 

them with the initial status and the 

NTN. Once NICS has been provided 

with the full residence address, the FFL 

is provided with the NTN and the 

transaction’s status. 

Through each State, local, and Tribal 

law enforcement agency’s Originating 

Agency Identifier (‘‘ORI’’), the FBI has 

mapped those law enforcement agencies 

to the city, State, county, and ZIP 

Code(s) for which they have jurisdiction 

to enforce laws.19 Each State (including 

Territories and the District of Columbia) 

has validated the mapping accuracy via 

an NCIC unsolicited message. NCIC 

unsolicited messages are automated 

communications that normally inform 

law enforcement and other criminal 

justice agencies about activity on an 

NCIC record, such as important details 

about a specific subject or property item 

or system status information. NICS now 

also uses this communication line to 

send denial notifications to applicable 

local law enforcement authorities. For 

transactions that are ‘‘Denied,’’ NICS 

systematically compares the full address 

information of the FFL and the 

prospective transferee with the address 

information of the mapped law 

enforcement agencies. NICS then 

submits, via NCIC unsolicited messages, 

the denial notifications to the State, 

local, and Tribal law enforcement 

agencies that fall within the jurisdiction 

of the FFL’s address where the transfer 

was sought and, if different, the State, 

local, and Tribal law enforcement 

agencies with jurisdiction over the 

denied transferee’s residence address. 

ATF also revised the Form 4473 to 

request full residence information for 

prospective transferees. In addition to 

assisting with the implementation of the 

CAA and BSCA provisions describing 

use of local and Tribal firearm 

prohibitions, the revised Form 4473 

ensures the information is available to 

FFLs when the FBI seeks such 

information to support the continued 

implementation of the NDNA. The 

denial notifications provide timely 

assistance to State, local, and Tribal 

governments that wish to enforce 

existing laws in their jurisdictions 

against individuals attempting to 

illegally purchase, possess, or receive 

firearms (whether through fraudulent 

background checks or otherwise). 

In the 19 States 20 in which partial or 

full POCs conduct NICS checks, POCs 

serve as intermediaries between FFLs 

and the Federal databases checked by 

NICS, with POCs acting on behalf of the 

FBI to perform the NICS transactions 

from those jurisdictions. See 28 CFR 

25.2 and 25.6. Partial POCs elect to 

process background checks for 

handguns, long guns, or both, and the 

FBI processes all other checks for FFLs 

in the State. Currently, all four partial 

POCs process their own NICS checks for 

handguns.21 The FBI has verified, based 

on discussions with POCs, that 14 of the 

19 POCs that responded in time for this 

rule already have some type of denial 

notification process established within 

their State. The FBI does not render 

denial decisions for POCs. See 28 CFR 

25.6(g). Therefore, this rule proposes 

revisions to 28 CFR 25.2 and 25.6 to 

reflect that POCs must, at a minimum, 

report denial notifications in accordance 

with the NDNA when the POC denies a 

prospective firearm transfer.22 If these 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100409 

enforcement authorities’’ in Indiana (where the 

denied transferee resides) but would not need to 

issue a denial notification to the Illinois State 

Police. 

23Currently, BSCA’s provisions related to under21 transactions are to sunset September 30, 2032. 

136 Stat. at 1324. 

24Currently, ‘‘Delayed’’ and ‘‘Open’’ are defined 

as follows: ‘‘Delayed means the response given to 

the FFL indicating that the transaction is in an 

‘Open’ status and that more research is required 

prior to a NICS ‘Proceed’ or ‘Denied’ response. A 

‘Delayed’ response to the FFL indicates that it 

would be unlawful to transfer the firearm until 

receipt of a follow-up ‘Proceed’ response from the 

NICS or the expiration of three business days, 

whichever occurs first.’’ 28 CFR 25.2 ‘‘Open means 

those non-canceled transactions where the FFL has 

not been notified of the final determination. In 

cases of ‘open’ responses, the NICS continues 

researching potentially prohibiting records 

regarding the transferee and, if definitive 

information is obtained, communicates to the FFL 

the final determination that the check resulted in 

a proceed or a deny. An ‘open’ response does not 

prohibit an FFL from transferring a firearm after 

three business days have elapsed since the FFL 

provided to the system the identifying information 

about the prospective transferee.’’ Id. 

25The Department notes that, after receiving a 

‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘Open’’ response from NICS, Federal 

law would not prohibit the FFL from transferring 

the firearm. Receipt of such a response, however, 

‘‘[d]oes] not relieve’’ the FFL from complying with 

other provisions of law, such as 18 U.S.C. 922(d), 

that may be applicable to that transfer. 28 CFR 25.2 

(defining ‘‘Proceed’’). A similar caveat for the 

definition of ‘‘Open’’ has been proposed as part of 

this rule. When, throughout this rule, the 

Department observes that, in certain situations, 

receipt of a response from NICS indicates that 

Federal law would not prohibit an FFL from 

transferring a firearm, it should be understood that 

the FFL must still comply with other laws, such as 

18 U.S.C. 922(d). 

26Under Federal law, persons who are at least 18 

years of age are of lawful age to purchase long guns; 

however, some States set a higher minimum age to 

purchase long guns. See 18 U.S.C. 922(b). 

27 ‘‘State’’ is federally defined to include the 

District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 

Rico, and most possessions (‘‘Territories’’) of the 

United States. See 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(2). United States 

Territories that submit background checks to NICS 

include Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, American 

Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. See FBI, NICS 

Participation Map, https://www.fbi.gov/filerepository/nics-participation-map-020124/view (last 

visited Oct. 4, 2024). 

28The FFL is updated in the same manner as 

when the FFL initially contacted NICS, either 

electronically or by telephone. 

revisions are finalized, POCs will also 

be required to provide the NICS Section 

with applicable statistics necessary for 

the FBI to comply with the provisions 

of 18 U.S.C. 925C. 

C. Enhanced Background Checks for 

Individuals Under 21 Years of Age 

As described earlier in this rule, prior 

to BSCA’s enactment of new enhanced 

background checks during under-21 

transactions, when an FFL initiated a 

NICS transaction—regardless of the 

prospective transferee’s age—NICS 

searched three primary systems to 

determine if the person was disqualified 

from possessing or receiving firearms.23

If the traditional search resulted in no 

disqualifying or potentially 

disqualifying records, NICS provided a 

‘‘Proceed’’ status to the FFL. If a 

juvenile or adult record was located that 

disqualified the person under Federal or 

State law, NICS provided a ‘‘Denied’’ 

status to the FFL. If a possibly 

disqualifying record (whether having 

occurred as a juvenile or adult) resulted 

from the initial search, NICS provided a 

‘‘Delayed’’ status and advised the FFL 

that, if the FFL did not receive a 

‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ response from 

NICS on or before the end of the third 

business day after initiation of the 

check, the FFL was not federally 

prohibited from transferring the firearm 

on the day after the third business 

day.24 Cf. 18 U.S.C. 922(b), (d).25

In addition to the searches of NCIC, 

III, and the NICS Indices, BSCA now 

requires enhanced NICS background 

checks for prospective transferees under 

21 years of age. See 34 U.S.C. 40901(l).26

With respect to these enhanced 

background checks conducted for 

under-21 transactions, Congress 

imposed two overarching requirements 

on NICS. First, in addition to the 

traditional NICS check of relevant FBI 

systems, NICS is required to make three 

enhanced requests to specified types of 

State and local entities to determine 

whether the prospective transferee has a 

‘‘possibly disqualifying juvenile record’’ 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(d). The enhanced 

requests to State and local entities 

where the prospective transferee resides 

are to be made to (1) the State criminal 

history repository or juvenile justice 

information system, as appropriate; (2) 

the State custodian of mental health 

adjudication records; and (3) the local 

law enforcement agency. See 34 U.S.C. 

40901(l)(1). 

In October of 2022, the FBI began a 

phased, manual implementation of the 

enhanced background checks BSCA 

requires for under-21 transactions 

coming from the State of Maine. For the 

remaining States 27 for which the FBI 

processes NICS checks for prospective 

firearm transfers, since January 4, 2023, 

NICS has been automatically submitting 

all three enhanced requests via email. 

To begin implementing BSCA’s 

requirements of contacting the criminal 

history repository or juvenile justice 

information system and the appropriate 

State custodian of mental health records 

in the State in which the person resides 

for possibly disqualifying juvenile 

records pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 922(d), 

the NICS Section met with 

representatives from all States and 

Territories to establish contacts for those 

requests; this was because the NICS 

Section did not have such contacts 

required by BSCA at the time of 

enactment. 

Some States informed the NICS 

Section they do not have a centralized 

contact for some of the juvenile records 

BSCA requires NICS to request. Those 

States directed the NICS Section to 

contact courts that handle juvenile 

criminal history or mental health 

information. The FBI has shared all 

identified contacts (centralized or 

otherwise) with POCs so that POCs can 

utilize the same contacts as the NICS 

Section for enhanced background 

checks. Both the NICS Section and 

POCs utilize their own existing contact 

methods for contacting local law 

enforcement agencies during under-21 

transactions. The amendments proposed 

by this rule, unless noted otherwise, 

will not alter how the enhanced 

background checks related to under-21 

transactions are being conducted. 

Second, if NICS determines that cause 

exists to further investigate whether the 

prospective transferee has a 

disqualifying juvenile record under 18 

U.S.C. 922(d), BSCA provides for an 

additional period of time for NICS to 

process that under-21 transaction before 

the FFL may transfer the firearm. See 18 

U.S.C. 922(t)(1)(C); 34 U.S.C. 

40901(l)(2). BSCA requires NICS to 

notify the FFL ‘‘as soon as possible, but 

in no case more than 3 business days’’ 

after the initiation of the check if such 

cause exists. 34 U.S.C. 40901(l)(2). 

If NICS determines such cause exists, 

NICS notifies the FFL of that 

determination, and it is then unlawful 

for the FFL to transfer a firearm to the 

prospective transferee without receiving 

a follow-up ‘‘Proceed’’ response or 

waiting for the expiration of 10 business 

days from initial contact with NICS, 

whichever occurs first. See id. 

Accordingly, the Brady transfer date for 

an under-21 transaction where NICS has 

determined that cause exists for further 

investigation is the day after the tenth 

business day from the date the FFL 

contacted NICS. As NICS has begun 

submitting enhanced background 

checks for under-21 transactions, FFLs 

have also been notified by the FBI when 

cause for further investigation has been 

established and, consequently, that the 

Brady transfer date has changed to the 

day after the tenth business day.28

To reflect BSCA’s requirements 

during under-21 transactions, technical 

enhancements have been made to NICS 

to have NICS use the subject’s complete 

date of birth to immediately calculate 

whether the prospective transferee is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100410 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

29 During an under-21 transaction, a Tribal law 

enforcement authority may also receive a request 

for potentially prohibiting juvenile records if the 

Tribe shares the same ZIP Code as the prospective 

transferee. 

30For NICS purposes, ‘‘[a]udit log means a 

chronological record of system (computer) activities 

that enables the reconstruction and examination of 

the sequence of events and/or changes in an event.’’ 

28 CFR 25.2. 

31FBI subject matter experts estimate that, 

currently, more than half of all States, including the 

District of Columbia and the Territories, have laws 

in place that prohibit the sharing of juvenile justice 

records, juvenile mental health records, or both. 

Many agencies in those States do not currently 

respond to each NICS request with substantive 

records or a notification that the records sought are 

protected from dissemination by State law. 

under 21 years of age on the day the 

transaction was submitted to NICS. 

Systematically, this age calculation is 

occurring at the same time NICS is 

searching NCIC, III, and the NICS 

Indices. Once NICS determines the 

subject is under 21 years of age, NICS 

will request the transferee’s full 

residence address, and, generally, will 

notify the FFL that the transaction will 

be placed into a ‘‘Delayed’’ status. NICS 

collects the full residence address of 

subjects who are under 21 years of age 

in the same manner as NICS collects a 

full residence address for purposes of 

the NDNA. For an under-21 transaction, 

the FBI uses the full residence address 

of the subject to determine which ‘‘local 

law enforcement agency [has] 

jurisdiction where the person [under 21 

years of age] resides’’ and, therefore, 

must be contacted by NICS. 34 U.S.C. 

40901(l)(1)(C). The prospective 

transferee’s State of residence is used to 

identify which State-level agencies the 

FBI also needs to contact during 

enhanced background checks. 

After collecting the full residence 

address of the subject, NICS 

systematically sends the enhanced 

background check requests to the 

agencies corresponding to the subject’s 

full residence address.29 Generally, the 

FBI sends these enhanced requests by 

email communications to the designated 

agencies. Some States that are not 

centralized have designated that certain 

courts should be contacted for the 

requested juvenile records. The FBI also 

conducts some enhanced outreach to 

State agencies by manually accessing 

State databases that were established 

during the FBI’s outreach to States, the 

District of Columbia, and Territories. 

Unless the under-21 transaction can 

be denied sooner based on available 

information, NICS now has up to 3 

business days to determine if BSCA’s 

enhanced background checks, or any 

responses from the initial searches of 

NCIC or III, provide cause for further 

delay of the under-21 transaction due to 

a potentially prohibiting juvenile 

record. During this time, NICS is also 

investigating those same sources for any 

adult records that are prohibiting or 

potentially prohibiting. Some under-21 

transactions will be denied in a matter 

of seconds due to, for example, the NICS 

Indices responding with a prohibiting 

record that matches the subject’s 

biographic information. Even if the 

under-21 transaction is immediately 

‘‘Denied,’’ the Department reads BSCA 

to still require NICS to submit the 

enhanced background checks. 

BSCA’s enhanced background check 

requirements result in under-21 

transactions being significantly more 

complex than NICS background checks 

conducted before BSCA. Unlike the preBSCA background check process 

(described above in the beginning of 

Section II of this preamble), BSCA 

mandates enhanced background checks 

that include requiring NICS to also 

contact, in 56 different jurisdictions, the 

State and local agencies identified 

under 34 U.S.C. 40901(l)(1). The results 

of those queries will then depend on the 

ability and capabilities of those State 

and local agencies. 

Based on the FBI’s experience in 

conducting BSCA’s enhanced 

background checks, the FBI estimates 

the majority of State and local agencies 

that are contacted and that respond 

during the enhanced background checks 

of under-21 transactions do so within 3 

business days. The Department does not 

consider an agency to have provided 

‘‘cause for further investigation’’ within 

the first 3 business days if the agency 

contacted provides a substantive 

response that it has no potentially 

prohibiting juvenile record(s); if the 

agency responds to each enhanced 

background check request submitted to 

that agency that State law prohibits 

providing the type of juvenile records 

sought; or if the agency responds to each 

enhanced background check request 

submitted to that agency that the 

juvenile records sought are already 

provided to the relevant Federal system 

(NCIC, III, or the NICS Indices). 

If an agency informs the Department 

within 3 business days of the check 

being initiated that the agency requires 

more time to investigate whether a 

prospective transferee has potentially 

prohibiting juvenile records, or the 

agency has not responded at all within 

3 business days, the Department 

interprets these circumstances as ‘‘cause 

for further investigation,’’ and the 

agency will be afforded up to 7 

additional business days to respond to 

the request. See 34 U.S.C. 40901(l)(2). 

The Department believes Congress’s 

imposition of additional checks for 

disqualifying State and local juvenile 

records during under-21 transactions 

would be frustrated by practical 

administrative delays inherent in 

conducting these enhanced checks if a 

State or local agency’s failure to respond 

within the 3-business-day period could 

not be understood to constitute ‘‘cause 

for further investigation.’’ While this 

interpretation could result in a 

relatively short additional delay (up to 

7 additional business days at most) 

before Federal law would allow the FFL 

to complete the firearm transfer for the 

prospective transferee, the alternative 

interpretation might result in subjecting 

the public to a risk that BSCA was 

intended to address. 

As soon as all required checks are 

cleared of any possible 

disqualifications, the FBI will place the 

under-21 transaction in a ‘‘Proceed’’ 

status. See 34 U.S.C. 40901(l)(3). BSCA 

did not institute a mandatory 3- or 10- 

day waiting period for all under-21 

transactions. Instead, BSCA requires 

that NICS conduct the enhanced 

outreach described above, and it 

provides NICS up to 3 business days to 

determine if cause exists to further 

investigate whether the prospective 

under-21 transferee has a disqualifying 

juvenile record under 18 U.S.C. 922(d). 

Another technical enhancement made 

for under-21 transactions is that NICS 

automatically calculates and populates, 

to the NICS Audit Log,30 the 10- 

business-day transfer date in case that 

date becomes applicable. If that date is 

applied to the transaction, NICS 

provides the FFL with the 10-businessday transfer date during a follow-up 

communication. The FBI has also added 

to the NICS Audit Log fields for each 

under-21 transaction noting which State 

and local agencies were contacted 

during the enhanced background checks 

for a transaction and a general notation 

of whether and how those agencies 

responded (e.g., no records, records, or 

cannot respond by law). NICS must 

contact these State and local agencies 

according to BSCA, but the FBI 

understands that currently not all States 

have one or both State-level systems 

described above and, further, some 

States’ laws prohibit the sharing of 

juvenile justice records or mental health 

records.31 Notwithstanding such 

limitations, the FBI has continued to 

submit the enhanced background check 

requests to relevant State and local 

agencies during every under-21 

transaction since January 3, 2023. 

The Department proposes the 

following amendments to conform NICS 

regulations with the above-described 

provisions of BSCA for under-21 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100411 

32As noted earlier, see supra note 10, a full 

residential address, as reflected on the amended 

Form 4473, includes the number and full street 

address; city, State, and ZIP Code; county, parish, 

or borough of residence; and whether the subject 

resides within the city (to include town or other 

municipal boundary) limits. 

33As part of this rulemaking, the FBI is proposing 

an amendment to the definition of ‘‘Proceed’’ to 

clarify that the response indicates that all relevant 

systems have in fact been checked and all requests 

for records have in fact received responses. 

34For instance, suppose a person who is now 20 

years old attempts to receive a firearm from an FFL. 

The NICS check reveals that, at 17 years old, this 

person was adjudicated as a ‘‘juvenile delinquent’’ 

under State law for an offense that would have been 

a felony had the person been an adult. Within the 

next day, all three agencies contacted under the 

enhanced contacts for the under-21 transaction 

respond and provide no other potential juvenile 

prohibitions. Further suppose that, under the law 

of the State where the adjudication occurred, that 

adjudication is not considered a ‘‘conviction.’’ As 

a result, Federal law cannot consider that 

adjudication for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 922(d) or (g). 

See 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(20). Further, because that 

juvenile disposition would not fall within the reach 

of 18 U.S.C. 922(d), it would not qualify for 

consideration under 34 U.S.C. 40901(l) for 

application of further delay of an under-21 

transaction. However, suppose the law of the State 

where the adjudication occurred imposes a 10-year 

firearm prohibition for persons adjudicated as a 

juvenile delinquent for an offense that would have 

been a felony. The adjudication would not qualify 

for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 922(d), but it would 

prohibit that person from receiving or being 

transferred a firearm in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 

922(t). 

transactions. First, the Department 

proposes amending 28 CFR 25.7(a) and 

25.8(f) to require submission of the full 

residential address 32 for NICS checks of 

prospective transferees who are less 

than 21 years old, in addition to the 

information already required to be 

submitted as described above. Second, 

the Department proposes amending 28 

CFR 25.6(c) to reflect that, upon 

initiation of an under-21 transaction 

from an FFL, the FBI will immediately 

conduct a NICS check of NCIC, III, and 

the NICS Indices and make the 

enhanced outreach to the following 

agencies where the person resides: (1) 

the State criminal history repository or 

juvenile justice information system, as 

appropriate; (2) the State custodian of 

mental health adjudication records; and 

(3) the local law enforcement agency. 

The FBI has identified all necessary 

agencies to contact during this 

enhanced outreach to determine if cause 

exists for additional delay of the 

transaction to further investigate 

whether the person has a disqualifying 

juvenile record under 18 U.S.C. 922(d). 

The amendments proposed by the 

Department in this rule would not 

modify how the FBI is conducting the 

enhanced background checks of under21 transactions. 

Next, the Department proposes a new 

transaction status of ‘‘No Known 

Prohibitors: At least one state or local 

agency has not responded or cannot 

respond,’’ which is not a part of the 

current under-21 transaction process. A 

definition for this new status is 

proposed under 28 CFR 25.2. Also, the 

FBI proposes revisions to 28 CFR 

25.6(c)(iv), 28 CFR 25.8(g)(2), 28 CFR 

25.9(b), and 28 CFR 25.11(b)(1) to reflect 

the status of ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At 

least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond.’’ The 

Department proposes that an FFL be 

provided the status of ‘‘No Known 

Prohibitors: At least one state or local 

agency has not responded or cannot 

respond’’ generally in circumstances 

where NICS has either not received one 

or more responses to the enhanced 

background checks or the relevant State 

is barred from sharing juvenile 

information by a governing State law. 

This status would be provided under 

the following circumstances: 

• Barred from Responding. If at least 

one agency affirmatively responds that 

it is barred by State law from sharing 

relevant information with NICS, any 

other agencies have responded, and the 

available information does not 

demonstrate a (potentially) prohibiting 

record exists for the subject. 

• Non-Response. At the end of the 

tenth business day if at least one of the 

agencies contacted during the enhanced 

background checks for that under-21 

transaction has not responded and 

available information does not 

demonstrate a (potentially) prohibiting 

record exists for the subject. 

A ‘‘Proceed’’ status to an FFL signifies 

that all systems have been checked, 

requests for records have received 

responses, and available information 

reveals no (potentially) prohibiting 

record exists.33 Accordingly, where 

State or local agencies either do not or 

cannot share information on a 

prospective transferee, providing an FFL 

with the status of ‘‘Proceed’’ would be 

inaccurate. Similarly, an ‘‘Open’’ 

response signifies to an FFL that NICS 

is still researching a potential firearm 

prohibition. See 28 CFR 25.2. 

Accordingly, it would also be inaccurate 

for an ‘‘Open’’ response to be provided 

in any of the above circumstances 

because NICS would not be conducting 

further research at that point. The 

Department believes providing this new 

status of ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At 

least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond’’ to FFLs 

in these circumstances would more 

accurately inform the FFL of the fact 

that the State or local agencies at issue 

either did not or could not respond to 

the enhanced requests for juvenile 

records. However, unless NICS has 

provided an FFL with a status of 

‘‘Denied,’’ the FFL retains the ultimate 

discretion to transfer a firearm, or not, 

to the subject. 

Do commenters believe the new status 

would have unforeseen impacts? What 

further information would the public 

find useful or necessary before 

approving or rejecting the new, 

proposed status? Should a different 

status be proposed, and if so, why? 

A prospective transferee who is under 

21 years of age could have a possibly 

disqualifying juvenile record under 18 

U.S.C. 922(d) or a possibly disqualifying 

record (incurred as an adult or juvenile) 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) or (n), or State, 

local, or Tribal law.34

The following examples clarify the 

types of records that NICS may receive 

during an under-21 transaction and how 

the Department proposes to have NICS 

process the different scenarios. 

Scenario 1: No adult or juvenile 

disqualifying records are found in NCIC, 

III, or the NICS Indices, and the under21 enhanced background checks rule 

out cause for additional delay before the 

end of the third business day. The 

transaction is placed in a ‘‘Proceed’’ 

status. 

Scenario 2: Only a possibly 

disqualifying adult record is located, but 

cause for additional delay, related to a 

possibly disqualifying juvenile record, 

is ruled out before the end of the third 

business day. Although cause for 

additional delay of the transaction was 

ruled out, the transaction will remain 

‘‘Delayed’’ (in an ‘‘Open’’ status) due to 

the possibly disqualifying adult record 

being found. The FFL may transfer the 

firearm after the third business day if 

the FFL has not first received a 

‘‘Denied’’ status update. NICS will 

continue to research to establish or rule 

out the possible adult prohibition until 

the transaction is proceeded, denied, or 

purged in compliance with 28 CFR 25.9. 

Scenario 3: No possibly disqualifying 

adult record is located, but cause for 

additional delay is established based on 

a possibly disqualifying juvenile record. 

NICS will notify the FFL of the 

additional delay being applied up 

through the tenth business day (if 

necessary) to further research whether 

there is a disqualifying juvenile record. 

If cause for the additional delay of the 

transaction is ruled out, the transaction 

will be updated to ‘‘Proceed’’ status. If 

cause for additional delay cannot be 

ruled out by the end of the tenth 

business day, the transaction will 

remain ‘‘Delayed’’ (in an ‘‘Open’’ 

status), and under Federal law, the FFL 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100412 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

35Again, persons under 21 are federally 

prohibited from receiving a handgun through an 

FFL, and the NICS Section currently processes only 

long gun transactions for all partial POCs. 

may transfer the firearm after the tenth 

business day if the FFL has not first 

received a ‘‘Denied’’ status update. NICS 

will continue research to establish or 

rule out the relevant possible juvenile 

prohibition until the transaction is 

proceeded, denied, or purged in 

compliance with 28 CFR 25.9. 

Scenario 4: A possibly disqualifying 

adult record is found and cause for 

additional delay is established based on 

a possibly disqualifying juvenile record 

on or before the third business day. 

Because cause for additional delay has 

been found to exist, the FFL is notified 

of additional delay being applied, up 

through the tenth business day (if 

necessary), to further research whether 

there is a disqualifying juvenile record. 

In accordance with Federal law, the FFL 

may transfer the firearm after the tenth 

business day if the FFL has not first 

received a ‘‘Denied’’ status update. NICS 

will continue researching any possible 

prohibition until the transaction is 

proceeded, denied, or purged in 

compliance with 28 CFR 25.9. 

Scenario 5: No potentially prohibiting 

adult or juvenile records return from 

NCIC, III, or the NICS Indices, but, after 

10 business days have elapsed, one of 

the agencies contacted during the 

enhanced background check still has 

not responded in substance or by telling 

NICS that the laws of the jurisdiction 

prohibit the agency from disclosing the 

juvenile records sought. The 

Department proposes that the 

transaction’s status be updated to ‘‘No 

Known Prohibitors: At least one state or 

local agency has not responded or 

cannot respond.’’ Federal law would 

then allow the FFL to transfer the 

firearm. 

Scenario 6: After the transaction has 

been ‘‘Delayed,’’ and prior to the firearm 

being transferred, a firearm 

disqualification (as described in 18 

U.S.C. 922(t)) is established. The 

transaction is placed into a ‘‘Denied’’ 

status and the FFL is notified of the 

status. The FFL is prohibited from 

transferring the firearm to the 

prospective transferee. 

In any under-21 transaction, as soon 

as all possible disqualifications are 

ruled out, the transaction will be placed 

into ‘‘Proceed’’ status. If a transaction 

has been placed into ‘‘Proceed’’ status, 

or when Federal law otherwise allows 

the firearm to be transferred, the FFL is 

permitted to transfer the firearm to the 

prospective transferee if the person 

returns to the FFL to receive the firearm 

within 30 days from when the FFL first 

contacted NICS. See 27 CFR 478.102(c). 

POCs are currently required to complete 

any research for possible prohibiting 

records outside of system responses 

from NCIC, III, and the NICS Indices. 

This proposed rule would amend the 

definition of ‘‘POC (Point of Contact)’’ 

in 28 CFR 25.2 to reflect that, similarly, 

POCs that receive and process under-21 

transactions 35 will also be required to 

conduct the enhanced background 

checks for under-21 transactions now 

required under 34 U.S.C. 40901. To the 

extent POCs process under-21 

transactions, those POCs have begun 

conducting the enhanced background 

checks. To account for BSCA’s 

requirement to conduct the enhanced 

background checks, if finalized, and in 

contrast to current practice under 28 

CFR 25.6(h), NICS will not presume that 

a POC proceeded a ‘‘newly created’’ 

under-21 transaction if the applicable 

POC has not provided NICS with a 

‘‘Delayed’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ determination 

message by ‘‘the end of the operational 

day on which the transaction was 

initiated.’’ The FBI proposes that 28 

CFR 25.6(h) be amended to reflect that 

change. As indicated previously, the FBI 

has shared any identified contacts, 

centralized or otherwise, with POCs so 

that POCs have the same contacts as the 

NICS Section. Both the NICS Section 

and POCs will utilize their own existing 

contact methods for contacting local law 

enforcement agencies during under-21 

transactions. 

D. Attestation Process for Enhanced 

Background Checks 

The Department seeks public 

comments about a potential attestation 

process that is not a part of the current 

under-21 transaction process. The 

Department envisions that this 

attestation process would allow State 

agencies to voluntarily provide the FBI 

with an attestation that State law 

prohibits sharing juvenile mental health 

or juvenile justice records (or both). The 

attestation could be completed by a 

government official in the jurisdiction 

(State, District of Columbia, or 

Territory). For example, the head of the 

chief law enforcement agency for the 

jurisdiction, or that person’s designee, 

whether that be the jurisdiction’s 

Attorney General or the head of another 

agency, could submit this attestation. In 

addition to noting that State law 

prohibits the sharing of juvenile mental 

health or juvenile records (or both), 

such an attestation could include 

additional information regarding the 

law in the jurisdiction, including, for 

example, whether the State’s laws also 

prohibit local law enforcement agencies 

from sharing juvenile records. 

This potential attestation process also 

could be applicable to State agencies 

that have informed NICS that they 

already send the requested juvenile 

mental health or juvenile justice records 

to NCIC, III, or the NICS Indices, as 

applicable. An option would be to make 

the attestation renewable at some 

defined interval (for example every 6 

months or annually), unless rescinded 

due to a change in State law. If an 

attestation process were implemented, 

the submission of an attestation would 

be discretionary; States could choose, 

for example, to decline to submit an 

attestation and to instruct their agencies 

to continue responding individually to 

NICS inquiries even if State law 

generally prohibits the sharing of 

relevant records. Also, reliance on an 

attestation would similarly be 

voluntary. Thus, even in States that 

have executed attestations, agencies 

could still reply to individual requests 

that they receive from the FBI or POCs. 

Finally, an agency would remain free to 

reply to individual requests in 

circumstances in which a State 

prohibition on disclosing the records 

has been lifted or when the agency has 

potentially responsive adult records for 

a subject. This potential attestation 

process may therefore afford the 

Department, the States, and local 

jurisdictions more flexibility in deciding 

how to process under-21 transactions. 

Under this potential attestation 

process, the FBI and POCs would 

continue to submit the requests for 

juvenile records as described in the 

enhanced background check provisions 

of 34 U.S.C. 40901(l)(1). With respect to 

a request involving a State jurisdiction 

that has submitted an attestation that 

conveys that the State agency is 

prohibited by State law from sharing the 

pertinent records, if the agency does not 

individually respond by the end of the 

third business day, then the attestation 

would prevent enhanced delay from 

being applied due to that agency’s nonresponse. The FBI in such 

circumstances would provide the status 

‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At least one 

state or local agency has not responded 

or cannot respond.’’ In addition, where 

the State has already verified by 

attestation that the requested juvenile 

records are already shared, as 

applicable, with NCIC, III, or the NICS 

Indices, the NICS Section would 

‘‘Proceed’’ that transaction no later than 

the expiration of the third business day 

if no other potential prohibition exists 

needing further research, any other 

enhanced background check requests 

have responses or are covered by an 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100413 

36Based on the FBI’s experience in conducting 

background checks for under-21 transactions, States 

and Territories with laws that prohibit sharing of 

both juvenile mental health and juvenile criminal 

history records are Arkansas, Alaska, Arizona, 

Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, 

Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, 

North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto 

Rico, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, the 

U.S. Virgin Islands, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and 

Wyoming. 

37Based on the FBI’s experience in conducting 

background checks for under-21 transactions, the 

States with laws that currently prohibit sharing of 

juvenile mental health records are Connecticut, 

Florida, Idaho, Massachusetts, New Mexico, and 

Oklahoma. 

38Based on the FBI’s experience in conducting 

background checks for under-21 transactions, the 

States with laws that currently prohibit sharing of 

juvenile criminal history records are Mississippi, 

Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, 

Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Virginia. The 

District of Columbia also prohibits such sharing. 

39Through correspondence with State agencies, 

the FBI learned that Connecticut, Kentucky, 

Nevada, and Vermont have changed their State laws 

to allow for sharing juvenile criminal history 

records. Texas has changed its State law to allow 

for sharing juvenile mental health records. 

attestation similarly indicating that the 

relevant records are already shared, and 

the State has not individually 

responded to that enhanced background 

check request. 

For example, this potential attestation 

process could be used in the following 

scenario: NICS receives an under-21 

transaction from an FFL in a State that 

is unable to share juvenile justice 

records or juvenile mental health 

records pursuant to existing State law. 

No other (potentially) prohibiting 

records are returned from NCIC, III, or 

the NICS Indices. NICS collects the 

subject’s full residence address to 

complete the enhanced background 

checks. Using the full residence address, 

NICS immediately sends the enhanced 

background check requests as required 

by BSCA. These requests are sent to the 

State’s established contacts for juvenile 

justice and mental health records, as 

well as to the relevant local law 

enforcement agency. The State has 

provided an attestation conveying that 

State law prohibits sharing both types of 

requested juvenile records. At the end of 

the third business day, all responses to 

which the attestation applies will be 

considered received and the transaction 

status will be updated to ‘‘No Known 

Prohibitors: At least one state or local 

agency has not responded or cannot 

respond,’’ provided there are no further 

prohibiting or potentially prohibiting 

records returned during the enhanced 

background checks. Federal law would 

then allow the FFL to transfer the 

firearm. If, under the same facts but, 

before the end of the third business day, 

the State and local agencies provide 

individual responses that the attestation 

no longer applies (because, for example, 

State law has changed to allow sharing 

of the relevant records) but that the 

agencies have found no potentially 

disqualifying records to share with 

NICS, the transaction will be updated to 

‘‘Proceed’’ status. Federal law would 

then allow the FFL to transfer the 

firearm. 

If an attestation process is adopted, 

the FBI anticipates that the FBI would 

continue working with State entities to 

encourage discrete responses for each 

individual transaction where possible, 

even if a response notes that State law 

prohibits the agency from providing the 

juvenile records sought and would 

likewise prohibit the agency from 

providing similar records for other 

transactions. However, the attestation 

process may benefit the Department, 

prospective transferees, and the 

agencies contacted during enhanced 

background checks of under-21 

transactions, as it could reduce, if not 

end, problematic results that Congress 

likely did not intend during the 

enhanced background check process. 

During the FBI’s current 

implementation of enhanced 

background checks for under-21 

transactions, it has found that agencies 

have grown frustrated with NICS’s 

continued requests for juvenile records 

that cannot be shared. Consequently, 

some agencies have stopped responding 

at all to NICS, even if they had just been 

responding that they were prohibited 

from providing any records. The 

Department does not believe Congress 

intended to require State and local 

partners to carry out a potentially 

inconvenient process of repetitively 

providing responses to requests for 

juvenile records even in circumstances 

where the State and local partners know 

(and have already advised the FBI) that 

State law prohibits the sharing of the 

records. Currently, the Department is 

aware of 22 States and Territories that 

have laws that prohibit the sharing of 

both juvenile mental health and juvenile 

criminal history records,36 6 States that 

have laws prohibiting the sharing of 

juvenile mental health records,37 and 8 

States (and the District of Columbia) 

that have laws prohibiting the sharing of 

juvenile criminal history records.38 Four 

States have changed their laws to allow 

for sharing juvenile criminal history 

records, and one State has changed its 

laws to allow for sharing juvenile 

mental health records since the passage 

of BSCA.39

Accordingly, the Department seeks 

comments as to whether a potential 

attestation process could foster strong 

relationships with State and local 

agencies while benefiting the 

Department and subjects of under-21 

transactions by more promptly resolving 

many under-21 transactions. The 

Department also seeks public comments 

as to any potential benefits or costs of 

an attestation process. What further 

information would the public find 

useful or necessary before the attestation 

process proceeds? If an attestation 

process is adopted, who do commenters 

believe should provide the attestation 

for the agencies? Are commenters aware 

of any State with laws that would allow 

local law enforcement agencies in that 

State to share juvenile justice or juvenile 

mental health records where State-level 

agencies would be limited or prohibited 

from sharing the same juvenile records? 

Are commenters aware of any local 

government passing a law or laws that 

limit or prohibit sharing juvenile 

records in circumstances where the laws 

of the State in which the local 

government is located do not similarly 

limit or prohibit such sharing? How 

frequently should attestations be 

renewed? Would attesting agencies 

prefer to craft their own attestations or 

use a template supplied by the FBI? 

E. Severability 

The CAA and BSCA address critical 

but distinct components of the NICS 

background-check process. The 

Department believes that its proposals 

to implement these statutes are wellsupported in law, reflect sound policy, 

and, once finalized, should be upheld 

against any legal challenge. However, if 

any portion of the proposed rule, once 

finalized, is declared invalid, the 

Department intends that the proposals 

contained herein, once finalized, be 

viewed as independent, necessary, and 

severable from each other to the 

maximum extent possible. Further, the 

Department intends that the provisions 

contained herein and in any resulting 

final rule be viewed as independent, 

necessary, and severable from the 

current NICS regulations under 28 CFR 

part 25. Accordingly, the Department 

proposes adding a severability provision 

in 28 CFR 25.1. 

As further described above, the CAA 

enacted the NDNA and added 

consideration of relevant firearm 

prohibitions imposed by local and 

Tribal governments during NICS checks 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(t). Further, as 

relevant to this rule, BSCA mandated 

enhanced background checks during 

each under-21 transaction and allowed 

for an extended delay (potentially up 

through the tenth business day) of some 

under-21 transactions before an FFL 

may lawfully transfer the firearm(s) 

under Federal law. Each of those 

statutory mandates is independently 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100414 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

40See FBI, National Instant Criminal Background 

Check System Operational Report 2020–2021 7 

(Apr. 2022), https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/ 

nics-2020-2021-operations-report.pdf/view 

(‘‘Operational Report’’). 

41See Operational Report at 13. 

42This number is based upon the transactions 

about which full addresses are collected from FFLs 

for denial notifications (approximately 1.428 

million transactions) and under-21 transactions 

(approximately 340,000 transactions), for a total of 

approximately 1.7 million transactions. That total 

would be increased by the number of transactions 

that are impacted by local or Tribal firearm 

prohibitions, but that number of transactions cannot 

be estimated at this time. As described below, some 

FFLs will also be impacted by needing to update 

additional delays of some under-21 transactions; 

however, those under-21 transactions have already 

been included due to the need to collect address 

information. 

significant to the functioning of the 

NICS background-check process and 

thus independently requires updates to 

the Department’s NICS regulations. 

While certain features of the FBI’s 

implementation efforts overlap between 

proposals, these amendments remain 

severable proposals necessary to 

accomplish each of the statutory 

mandates. For example, residential 

address collection is necessary both to 

effectuate denial notifications in 

satisfaction of the NDNA and, 

separately, to conduct the enhanced 

State and local outreach required in 

connection with under-21 transactions 

pursuant to BSCA. If a court were to 

invalidate one or more of the provisions 

of the final rule resulting from the FBI’s 

proposals pertaining to (1) local and 

Tribal prohibitions, (2) under-21 

transactions, or (3) denial notifications, 

the Department intends that the 

remaining provisions of the final rule be 

severed from the invalidated 

provision(s) and that all remaining 

provisions stand. 

To obviate any doubt as to the 

Department’s intent, even if some 

provision(s), once finalized, were 

deemed invalid (which, again, the FBI 

does not believe is supported), the 

Department would still have proposed 

each of the other provisions in this rule. 

Cf. American Fuel & Petrochemical 

Manufacturers v. E.P.A., 3 F.4th 373, 

384 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (EPA expressly 

stating the severability of sections of its 

rule in issue eliminated the potential for 

substantial doubt of the agency’s intent). 

Each proposed amendment in this rule 

stands on its own with no reliance on 

another proposed amendment. Each 

proposed amendment is necessary, for 

example, to notify the public, update 

relevant NICS regulations, or to 

implement the provisions of the CAA or 

BSCA. 

F. Separate Rulemakings 

BSCA also contained two provisions 

pertaining to FFLs for which the 

Department is conducting separate 

rulemakings, as discussed below. 

In RIN 1110–AA34, the Department 

has published an interim final rule to 

address the new provision allowing 

FFLs to receive information from the 

FBI’s NCIC system relating to stolen 

firearms (specifically, for the purpose of 

determining whether a firearm offered 

to the FFL has been reported stolen). 

See Bipartisan Safer Communities Act— 

Access to Records of Stolen Firearms in 

the National Crime Information Center, 

89 FR 54344 (July 1, 2024). The 

amendments made by RIN 1110–AA34 

do not impact NICS regulations; please 

consult RIN 1110–AA34 for further 

information about the regulatory 

amendments made therein. The 

Department requests that any public 

comments concerning FFLs receiving 

stolen gun information from NCIC be 

provided within and as directed by RIN 

1110–AA34. 

Additionally, in RIN 1110–AA35, the 

Department is planning to issue a 

proposed rule amending the NICS 

regulations in compliance with a 

congressional mandate to promulgate 

regulations that will help limit firearms 

trafficking by allowing FFLs to 

voluntarily conduct NICS background 

checks with respect to current or 

prospective employees of the FFL if the 

person does, or will, transfer or 

otherwise handle firearms or 

ammunition for the FFL and has 

provided written consent for the NICS 

check. The Department proposes to 

describe those FFL employee checks as 

‘‘firearm handler background checks’’ 

(also referred to as ‘‘FHCs’’). 

The Department anticipates that RIN 

1110–AA35 will be published as a 

proposed rule prior to finalizing the 

present rulemaking. Several regulations 

in 28 CFR part 25 contain provisions for 

which this notice of proposed 

rulemaking proposes amendments and 

which may also be the subject of 

proposed amendments in the 

forthcoming proposed rule in RIN 1110– 

AA35. The Department will coordinate 

the final rules resulting from these 

rulemakings to ensure clarity and 

consistency. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review), 13563 

(Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review), and 14094 (Modernizing 

Regulatory Review) 

This proposed rule has been drafted 

and reviewed in accordance with 

Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 

13563, and Executive Order 14094. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, of 

reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, 

and of promoting flexibility. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) has determined that this 

proposed rule is a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866, as amended by Executive 

Order 14094, and accordingly, this 

proposed rule has been reviewed by 

OMB. 

1. Need for Federal Regulatory Action 

The Department is publishing this 

proposed rule to amend NICS 

regulations to implement various parts 

of the CAA, Public Law 117–103, and 

BSCA, Public Law 117–159. 

2. Population 

Although manufacturers and 

importers may also initiate NICS checks 

when transferring firearms to nonlicensees, dealers and pawnbrokers 

initiate most of the background checks 

on non-licensees. As of December of 

2021, there were an estimated 50,588 

FFLs that the FBI served across 31 

States and 5 Territories that will be 

impacted by this rule.40 There are also 

an estimated 10 or fewer computer 

software vendors that may be affected 

by this proposed rule. As further set out 

below, the FBI estimates, based on FBI 

subject matter experts’ further internal 

analysis of 2021 annual transaction 

numbers,41 this proposed rule will 

impact approximately 2 million NICS 

transactions per calendar year.42

3. Benefits 

This proposed rule benefits the 

public, public safety, and interested 

populations in several ways. First, this 

proposed rule benefits the public and 

interested populations by further 

clarifying how NICS procedures and 

regulations comply with the relevant 

mandates imposed by the CAA and 

BSCA. As discussed above and below, 

public safety will benefit from this 

proposed rule in several ways. Rather 

than only a single State-level entity 

receiving a denial notification, State and 

local law enforcement in multiple 

jurisdictions will, under the proposed 

rule, each receive a timely notification 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100415 

43See Nat’l League of Cities, City Rights in an Era 

of Preemption: A State-by-State Analysis 23 (2018), 

https://www.nlc.org/resource/city-rights-in-an-eraof-preemption-a-state-by-state-analysis/; see also 

Giffords Law Ctr., Preemption of Local Laws, 

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policyareas/other-laws-policies/preemption-of-local-laws/ 

(last visited Oct 4, 2024) (reporting that there are 

five States with ‘‘no state laws expressly 

preempting local authority to regulate firearms or 

ammunition’’ and two additional States that ‘‘allow 

local governments to retain substantial authority to 

regulate firearms and ammunition,’’ but where ‘‘the 

state legislature has expressly removed this 

authority in certain areas’’). 

44See, e.g., U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, Indian 

Affairs, Tribal Leaders Directory, https://

www.bia.gov/service/tribal-leaders-directory (last 

visited Oct. 4, 2024); Nat’l Cong. of Am. Indians, 

Tribal Nations & the United States: An Introduction 

(Feb. 2020), https://www.ncai.org/about-tribes/ 

demographics. 45See, e.g., Nat’l Indian Law Library, Tribal Law 

Gateway: Find Tribal Law Material by Tribe, https:// 

narf.org/nill/triballaw/index.html (last visited Oct. 

4, 2024). 

containing (1) the name of a prohibited 

person who has been denied the receipt 

of a firearm during a NICS transaction, 

(2) information on where that prohibited 

person claims to reside, and (3) 

information about the FFL where that 

transaction took place. Authorities in 

the jurisdiction in which the attempted 

transaction occurred will be able to take 

more timely action(s) when prohibited 

persons attempt to obtain firearms 

through FFLs in their jurisdiction. If the 

attempt is made outside of the 

prohibited person’s jurisdiction of 

residence, the State and local law 

enforcement in the jurisdiction of 

residence will also have timely 

awareness and be able to take any 

actions necessary. This information will 

allow for potential retrievals of firearms, 

apprehensions of prohibited persons, 

interviews of witnesses, and collection 

of other potentially relevant evidence. 

There are also public safety benefits 

in applying the NDNA to delayed 

transactions. When a NICS transaction 

is denied after the third business day, 

such circumstances are known as 

‘‘delayed denials.’’ Delayed denials 

impact public safety because those 

transactions may have resulted in an 

FFL transferring at least one firearm to 

a prohibited person before the 

transaction could be denied. When a 

delayed denial occurs, the FFL is 

contacted to determine whether the 

transfer of one or more firearms 

occurred. If a transfer did occur, ATF is 

notified by the NICS Section of the need 

to retrieve any firearms. Providing 

address information up front in delayed 

transactions will benefit public safety 

because prohibited persons’ residential 

addresses will be readily available to 

immediately provide to applicable local 

law enforcement authorities, who can 

then take any applicable action. Critical 

time will not be lost waiting for another 

contact with the FFL to collect the 

address at that point in time (or perhaps 

await confirmation as to whether the 

firearm was in fact transferred). If, for 

example, the FFL happens to be closed 

and NICS cannot connect with the FFL 

in a timely manner (to update the denial 

or collect the full address), particularly 

after the third business day, at which 

time the firearm may have already 

transferred, the resulting delays 

jeopardize public safety by potentially 

increasing the time that a prohibited 

person has a firearm. 

This proposed rule also would benefit 

interested populations by minimizing 

impacts to prospective transferees and 

FFLs by requiring further residential 

address information only if the 

prospective transferee has been denied 

by NICS, has had a prospective firearm 

transfer delayed, may be subject to an 

applicable local or Tribal firearm 

prohibition, or is under 21 years of age. 

The Department does not propose that 

all prospective firearm transferees have 

their full residential address 

information submitted to NICS simply 

because that information is now 

required for some NICS transactions. 

Limiting the scope of the proposed rule 

in this way benefits prospective 

transferees because most will not need 

to have further address information 

provided to NICS. Similarly, limiting 

the scope of the rule in this fashion 

benefits FFLs as well by not requiring 

FFLs to spend time providing NICS with 

unnecessary additional address 

information in every transaction they 

submit. Further, by requiring the 

information be provided upon the initial 

contact (where an instantaneous review 

of available information about the 

person reveals that the transaction must 

be delayed or denied, the person is 

under 21, or to determine if the person 

is potentially subject to an applicable 

local or Tribal firearm prohibition), this 

rule reduces the need to contact the FFL 

at a later time to obtain this information. 

4. Costs 

This proposed rule will affect NICS 

transactions that: (1) may be impacted 

by local or Tribal prohibitions; (2) have 

been delayed or denied; or (3) involve 

persons under 21 years of age wishing 

to receive or be transferred a firearm 

from an FFL. Because the scope of 

applicable local or Tribal prohibitions is 

still being researched, it is unknown 

how many such prohibitions exist, but 

the FBI does not anticipate many will be 

identified. Notably, FBI research 

currently reveals that 43 States have 

preempted local jurisdictions from 

imposing firearms prohibitions that 

exceed the firearms prohibitions 

imposed by State law.43 States cannot 

preempt Tribal laws, however, so the 

FBI is continuing its research for 

applicable Tribal firearm prohibitions. 

There are 574 federally recognized 

Tribes, see Indian Entities Recognized 

by and Eligible To Receive Services 

From the United States Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, 88 FR 54654, 54654 (Aug. 11, 

2023), exercising jurisdiction in Indian 

country, 18 U.S.C. 1151. More than 300 

of these Tribes are currently located 

within the States of Alaska, California, 

and Oklahoma.44 An initial review of 

publicly available resources revealed 

that a number of these federally 

recognized Tribes may have enacted 

laws regulating the possession or use of 

firearms within their respective 

jurisdictions.45 Review of Tribal codes 

is ongoing to determine to what extent 

the use of Tribal firearm possession 

prohibitions will arise during NICS 

background checks and will, therefore, 

impact FFLs, prospective transferees, or 

Tribes. More specifically, to reasonably 

assess any applicable impact such 

prohibitions may have, the FBI will 

review active Tribal codes for firearm 

prohibitions that differ from existing 

Federal (or applicable State) 

prohibitions. The Department welcomes 

comments from the public that, for 

example, may assist the FBI in 

effectively and accurately identifying 

the federally recognized Tribes that 

have imposed their own firearm 

prohibitions. Many Tribes already 

contribute relevant orders to FBI CJIS 

systems to help determine possible 

Federal firearm prohibitions in 

individual cases, and the FBI 

encourages Tribes to continue to do so. 

Given the number of Tribes and the 

diverse nature of Tribal firearms laws, 

the FBI is unable, at this time, to 

reasonably estimate the impact the 

additional Tribal firearm possession 

prohibitions will have during NICS 

background checks. The FBI will be 

conducting outreach with 

representatives of federally recognized 

Tribes and seeking comment from the 

public generally as the FBI moves to 

incorporate additional Tribal firearm 

prohibitions into the analysis of 

prospective firearm transfers. 

Consequently, the fiscal impact analysis 

of this proposed rule will focus upon 

the other impacts that denial 

notifications and research associated 

with enhanced outreach during under21 transactions may have upon firearm 

transfers submitted by FFLs. 

As described above, under the NDNA, 

the FBI is required to send denial 

notifications to the local law 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100416 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

46FBI, NICS Firearm Checks: Year by State/Type, 

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics_firearm_

checks_-_year_by_state_type.pdf/view (last visited 

Oct. 4, 2024). 

47 325,000 transactions = 6.5 million NICS checks 

* 5 percent of transactions involving individuals 

under the age of 21. 

48 2,698 aggregate hourly burden = 325,000 

transactions * 30 seconds (.0083 hours) per 

transaction. 

49BLS Series ID 

CMU2010000000000D,CMU2010000000000P 

(average of 2021 quarterly Private Industry 

Compensation = $37.15)/BLS Series ID 

CMU2020000000000D,CMU2020000000000P 

(average of 2021 quarterly Private Industry Wages 

and Salaries = $26.23) = load rate of 1.42 (rounded 

up). See BLS, BLS Data Finder 1.1, https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/ 

find?fq=survey:[cm]&s=popularity:D (last Oct. 4, 

2024). The ‘‘load rate’’ takes into account additional 

compensation for fringe benefits such as insurance. 

50Chart sources for Wage Categories used for the 

FFL community from BLS: 

BLS, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 

2021: 11–2022 Sales Managers (Mar. 31, 2022), 

https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes112022.htm. 

BLS, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 

2021: 41–2011 Cashiers (Mar. 31, 2022) https://

www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes412011.htm. 

BLS, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 

2021: 41–2031 Retail Salespersons (Mar. 31, 2022), 

https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes412031.htm. 

enforcement authority of the State or 

Tribe in whose jurisdiction a firearm 

was sought and, if different, where the 

denied person resides when the FBI 

denies a NICS transaction that would 

violate 18 U.S.C. 922(g) or (n) or State, 

local, or Tribal law. The FBI needs to 

collect more specific residency 

information during a subset of NICS 

transactions to comply with the NDNA. 

For under-21 transactions, as set out 

above, an enhanced NICS background 

check entails contacting State and local 

entities to determine if the prospective 

transferee has a possibly disqualifying 

juvenile record as described in 18 U.S.C. 

922(d). Some enhanced outreach during 

under-21 transactions may show that 

cause exists to further investigate a 

possibly disqualifying juvenile record 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(d). If such cause 

exists, the under-21 transaction will be 

placed into an additional delay period 

not to exceed the tenth business day 

from when the licensee contacted NICS. 

For all of these described transactions, 

FFLs must, using information the 

prospective transferee places on the 

revised Form 4473, provide to the FBI 

the prospective transferee’s complete 

residential address so that NICS can 

determine whether a local or Tribal 

prohibition should be considered and 

for investigation and reporting when a 

NICS transaction has otherwise been 

delayed or denied. Further, where cause 

exists for additional delay of an under21 transaction, and the FFL has been so 

notified before expiration of the third 

business day, the FFL will be prohibited 

from transferring the firearm until after 

the tenth business day, unless the FFL 

first receives a ‘‘Proceed’’ response. In 

such instances, conveying the 

additional delay period to an FFL will 

likely require an additional contact— 

telephonically or electronically— 

beyond what was previously necessary, 

as well as an obligation by an FFL to 

record the additional delay on the 

revised Form 4473. 

i. Costs: Updated Prohibitions 

In order to determine whether a local 

or Tribal prohibition would be 

applicable to a prospective transfer, the 

Department proposes requiring FFLs to 

provide the residential addresses (and 

city limits information) of a prospective 

firearm transferee for certain 

transactions. Address information 

would be based upon the State of 

residence of the prospective transferee, 

State of purchase, and initial results 

from the three primary databases NICS 

searches during each transaction. As 

noted previously, State law preempts 

many local firearm prohibitions, and 

initial research has not revealed a 

substantial number of existing local 

firearm prohibitions. 

As noted above, review of Tribal 

codes is ongoing to determine to what 

extent the use of Tribal firearm 

possession prohibitions will arise 

during NICS background checks and 

will, therefore, impact prospective 

transferees or Tribes. The FBI is, 

however, unable at this time to 

reasonably estimate the costs, if any, 

that the added consideration of Tribal 

firearm possession prohibitions will 

have during NICS background checks. 

Ultimately, the FBI does not 

anticipate that a large number of NICS 

transactions will involve local or Tribal 

prohibitions that would preclude 

transfers permitted by applicable 

Federal or State law. Further, the FBI 

believes that most instances would fall 

under the broader delayed or denied 

circumstances noted below and would 

impose nominal to no financial impact 

upon FFLs. The Department requests 

public comments regarding potential 

costs that may impact Tribes, 

prospective transferees, and FFLs. 

ii. Costs: Under-21 Transactions 

Federal law authorizes FFLs to 

transfer only long guns to individuals 

under the age of 21. See 18 U.S.C. 

922(b). In 2021, internal FBI subject 

matter experts estimated there were 

approximately 6.5 million total 

transactions involving the prospective 

transfer of a long gun.46 Subject matter 

experts within the FBI also anticipate 5 

percent, or lower, of annual long gun 

transactions constitute under-21 

transactions. That percentage equates to 

approximately 325,000 under-21 

transactions.47 For the purposes of this 

analysis, the FBI estimates that it would 

take 30 seconds (0.0083 hours) per 

under-21 transaction to provide address 

information from the Form 4473 to NICS 

(telephonically or electronically). That 

process is therefore estimated to result 

in an additional 2,698 work hours from 

FFLs per year.48

The FBI uses some possible wage 

rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(‘‘BLS’’) and uses the average wage rate 

as the wage rate for FFLs. The FBI uses 

a loaded wage rate to account for fringe 

benefits such as insurance. The ‘‘load 

rate’’ used for this proposed rule is 

1.42.49 Table 1.0 shows the estimated 

wage rates and loaded wage rates. 

TABLE 1.0—WAGE CATEGORIES USED FOR THE FFL COMMUNITY 50

Job category Wage rate Loaded wage 

rate 

11–2022 Sales Managers ........................................................................................................................................ $68.46 $97.22 

41–2011 Cashiers .................................................................................................................................................... 12.87 18.28 

41–2031 Retail Salespersons .................................................................................................................................. 15.35 21.80 

Average ............................................................................................................................................................ 32.23 45.77 

Using an average, loaded wage rate for 

staff of BLS job categories that the FBI 

anticipates may be involved in 

prospective firearm transfers for FFLs, 

which is $46.00 per hour (rounded up), 

providing address information to NICS 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100417 

51 2,698 work hours * $46 loaded hourly wage 

rate = $124,108 ($125,000, rounded up). 

52The amended Brady transfer date would be the 

day after the tenth business day. 

53FBI internal subject matter experts have noted 

that almost all POCs have some form of Stateimplemented processes that, even before BSCA, 

already required FFLs in those States to collect and 

report the full residence addresses of some subjects. 

Further, FFLs in some POC States will not be 

impacted by enhanced delay for some subjects of 

under-21 transactions because those States have 

mandatory waiting periods that meet or exceed 10 

business days. Additionally, many POC States 

currently have laws that, generally, do not allow 

even long guns to be transferred to persons who are 

under 21 years of age. See, e.g., Giffords Law Ctr., 

Minimum Age to Purchase & Possess, https://

giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/whocan-have-a-gun/minimum-age/ (last visited Oct. 4, 

2024). 

54 $499,000 = $374,000 (50 percent additional 

delay of under-21 transactions total of 162,500) + 

$125,000 (aggregate cost to provide under-21 

address information at 30 seconds (.0083 hours) per 

transaction). The aggregate cost impact to the FFL 

community for under-21 transactions is 

approximately $635,000 ($374,000 + $261,000) if 

estimating 1 minute (.0167 hours) average for FFLs 

to provide address information during each under21 transaction. 

55 XML provides FFLs an additional, electronic 

secure server-to-server method (in addition to ECheck) of submitting a NICS background check to 

the FBI. Operational Report at 10. 

56Chart sources for Wage Categories used for the 

FFL community from BLS: 

BLS, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 

2021: 15–1251 Computer Programmers (Mar. 31, 

2022), https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/ 

oes151251.htm. 

BLS, Occupational Employment and Wages, May 

2021: 15–1252 Software Developers (Mar. 31, 2022), 

https://www.bls.gov/oes/2021/may/oes151252.htm. 

57According to internal FBI subject matter 

experts’ estimate of transactions the NICS Section 

performed in 2021, 1,388,000 were delayed and 

approximately 40,000 more were immediately 

denied without being placed into delay. An 

example of an immediate denial would be a 

transaction denied based upon a biographic match 

to a NICS Indices entry. The NICS Section reported 

performing a total of 11,106,931 NICS background 

checks in 2021. See Operational Report at 13. 

58The NDNA will impact POCs but, due to a 

variety of factors, the Department anticipates the 

address collection necessary to implement the 

NDNA will have little to no economic impact (let 

alone a significant economic impact) on small 

entity FFLs in POC States. FBI internal subject 

matter experts estimate there are 10,300 FFLs in 

POC States that would be considered small entities. 

In addition to the Form 4473 needing to be 

completed by prospective firearm transferees, some 

POC States have laws that also require separate 

State paperwork to be completed and provided to 

the POC. Those State forms will often require FFLs 

in those States to collect and provide the POC with 

the subject’s full residence address. See, e.g., 

California Dep’t of Just., Bureau of Firearms, 

Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) Worksheet (May 

2023), https://des.doj.ca.gov/forms/DROS_

Worksheet_BOF-929.pdf. Also, as discussed in 

Section II.B of this preamble, before the NDNA was 

enacted, most POC States already had their own 

denial notification procedures in place, and those 

procedures would require the FFLs to produce the 

subject’s residence information at some point. Some 

POCs may collect full residence address 

information through means other than the FFL, 

such as by completing a driver’s license check on 

the subject. Some POC States have laws that require 

that permits to purchase be obtained before any 

firearms can be purchased in those States; as a 

result, some of those permit applicants may never 

be approved for a permit that would allow them to 

attempt a firearm transfer through FFLs in that 

State. These State processes mean there are a 

variety of ways in which FFLs in POC States are 

already required to collect and report residence 

address information of subjects or where State laws 

reduced the pool of (potentially) prohibited persons 

that could be subject to the NDNA because they are 

ineligible to attempt firearm purchases in those 

POC States. 

59The NICS Section reported denying 153,565 

transactions in 2021. See Operational Report at 18– 

19. FBI subject matter experts note that this total 

includes an estimated 3,000 denials of non-Brady 

NICS background checks, which would not be 

denied transactions where the NDNA mandates 

notification to local law enforcement authorities. 

These other checks include checks for the 

Disposition of Firearms and for the Nuclear 

Continued 

for under-21 transactions would result 

in an estimated annual cost to the FFL 

community of $125,000.51 Even if the 

FBI’s address collection time from an 

FFL is estimated at 1 minute (.0167 

hours) per transaction, this would only 

be an anticipated yearly cost of 

approximately $250,000. 

For a subset of these under-21 

transactions, there may be an additional 

delay notification. For the purposes of 

this analysis, the Department assumes 

50 percent (162,500) of all under-21 

transactions will have cause established 

and require that the FFL be notified of 

additional delay being applied to the 

transaction (which includes providing 

the FFL with the amended Brady 

transfer date 52). Estimating an average 

of 3 minutes (.05 hours) per additional 

delay notification, this may require an 

additional 8,125 work hours per year for 

all FFLs in total.53 Multiplying 8,125 

hours by the estimated BLS average 

loaded wage rate of $46.00 (rounded 

up), this additional delay notification 

will impose an estimated yearly 

combined cost to FFLs of approximately 

$374,000. The aggregate estimated 

impact to all FFLs in total for under-21 

transactions is therefore anticipated to 

be $499,000 per year.54

In conjunction with the impacts to 

FFLs, there are a limited number of 

vendors that will also incur cost to 

provide software programming updates 

to some FFLs’ electronic systems used 

to communicate with NICS. These 

updates will be required for the FFL to 

receive the amended Brady transfer date 

during an under-21 transaction when 

cause for additional delay exists. This 

cost will only impact those FFLs who 

submit their background checks by ECheck and are eXtensible Markup 

Language (‘‘XML’’) users.55 There are 

approximately 10 total vendors serving 

all XML users. XML users 

predominantly are within the larger, 

corporate FFLs (some of which have inhouse personnel that would perform 

these system updates), but the FBI 

estimates 95 FFLs that would be 

considered small entities also utilize 

XML to communicate with NICS and are 

served by these vendors. Using the same 

load rate (1.42) used in Table 1.0 above 

for calculating costs to FFLs, the FBI 

calculates below the average loaded 

wage rate for anticipated job categories 

of vendors providing XML software 

updates for the FFLs. The Department 

has identified BLS job categories within 

these 10 vendors that are anticipated to 

be involved with these software 

updates. Table 2.0 provides the wage 

rates and loaded wage rates for such 

vendor employees as well as their 

averages. 

TABLE 2.0—WAGE CATEGORIES USED

FOR THE SOFTWARE UPDATES 56

Job category Wage 

rate 

Loaded 

wage 

rate 

15–1251 Computer Programmers ...................... $46.46 $65.97 

15–1252 Software Developers ............................. 58.17 82.60 

Average ..................... 52.32 74.29 

Assuming that it would take 100 

hours to update their software, 

multiplied by an estimated average 

loaded wage rate (rounded up) of 

$75.00, the FBI anticipates a one-time 

cost to each vendor of $7,500 or less to 

make these updates. The FBI anticipates 

this would not be a significant financial 

impact to the vendors because the costs 

would likely be passed onto the 

particular FFLs that would require the 

updates or the costs would be covered 

by existing contracts or agreements 

between the vendors and FFLs. 

iii. Costs: Notifications Required by the 

NDNA 

In addition to requiring that FFLs 

provide address information for under21 transactions and where needed to 

determine whether a local or Tribal 

prohibition may apply, the proposed 

rule will require FFLs to provide the 

residential addresses of prospective 

firearm transferees for all delayed and 

denied transactions to allow the FBI and 

POCs to implement the NDNA’s 

requirement of sending denial 

notifications as described above. In 

2021, internal FBI subject matter experts 

estimated that 1,428,000 57 firearm 

background checks processed by the 

FBI 58 were either delayed or denied.59


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100418 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Regulatory Commission, see id. at 25, as well as 

those conducted for ATF under their National 

Firearms Act and Gun Control Act responsibilities, 

see, e.g., id. at 21. Further, also not subject to this 

rule, the totals for explosives checks, see id. at 14, 

would be in addition to the totals provided in this 

footnote and footnote 57 above. 

60Even if the address collection time were 

estimated at 1 minute (.0167 hours) per transaction, 

this would be an anticipated yearly cost of $1.1 

million. 

61The FBI notes that there were 7,711,803 total, 

non-permit NICS checks conducted by all POCs in 

2021. See Operational Report at 13. 

62Not taken into account is the fact that use of 

the 2021 total of delayed and denied transactions 

will include some persons who also fall into the 

under-21 transaction category, resulting in some 

duplication of FFL costs related to address 

collection needs described in this preamble. 

63The total estimated cost incurred by FFLs for 

under-21 transactions is $499,000 ($635,000 if 

estimating 1 minute per address collection) + 

$545,238 (FFL total costs incurred by the NDNA 

address collection) + $75,000 (estimated vender 

costs passed on to FFLs), for a total of between 

$1.12 million and $1.26 million. 

64For example, 2021 saw ATF run about 138,500 

NICS checks for explosives licensing, see 18 U.S.C. 

chapter 40, with 1656 being recommended for 

denial; there were 133 total backgrounds of security 

personnel under 42 U.S.C. 2201a in 2021; and there 

were 121,961 Disposition of Firearms checks 

through NICS, with 2150 denied. Operational 

Report at 14, 25. The FBI routinely publishes such 

statistics. 

As above for under-21 transactions, if it 

takes 30 seconds (0.0083 hours) per 

transaction for the FFL to provide the 

NICS Section with the applicant’s 

address as required, then providing this 

information will require an additional 

11,853 (rounded up) working hours per 

year for the FFL community. The 

average loaded wage rate used for the 

FFL community (see Table 1.0) is 

estimated at $46.00 per hour (rounded 

up). This address collection for delayed 

and denied transactions will impose an 

estimated yearly cost of $545,238 60 to 

the FFL community.61

Between anticipated yearly under-21 

transaction costs and other costs 

anticipated from yearly delay or denial 

address collections stemming from the 

NDNA, the FBI anticipates an aggregate 

economic impact of approximately 

$1.04 to $1.18 million for all FFLs in 

States in which the FBI processes NICS 

background checks and an estimated 

cost of $75,000 for the vendor 

community, which is expected to be 

passed onto the FFLs.62 The total impact 

to the FFL community is estimated to be 

$1.12 to $1.26 million. This amount 

includes the requirement to produce to 

NICS further address information during 

under-21 transactions and for purposes 

of the NDNA; some FFLs receiving 

subsequent notification for (and 

recording on the revised Form 4473) the 

amended Brady transfer date during 

under-21 transactions as required by 

BSCA; and the estimated vendor costs 

that are anticipated to be passed on to 

the FFLs.63

iv. Costs: Government 

State, local, and Tribal agencies that 

enforce juvenile criminal justice and 

mental health laws, as well as any State 

repositories of such records, may 

receive requests for juvenile record 

information from NICS that they have 

not received in years past; however, 

those entities are under no obligation to 

respond, and some government entities 

are prohibited under State laws from 

providing juvenile records to NICS. The 

Department seeks comments from State, 

local, and Tribal entities on costs of 

processing a contact for juvenile records 

for an under-21 transaction. In addition 

to the State, local, and Tribal agencies 

described in 34 U.S.C. 40901(l) 

receiving the FBI’s requests for juvenile 

justice and mental health records, any 

records those agencies provide to the 

FBI may lead to the FBI requesting 

further records from additional State, 

local, or Tribal agencies (such as courts 

or prosecuting authorities). Again, 

Federal law does not require State, 

local, or Tribal agencies to respond to 

the FBI’s requests for records (and, in 

some instances, State, local, or Tribal 

laws may prohibit those agencies from 

disseminating records concerning a 

juvenile’s mental health or juvenile 

justice history). 

Should the Department ultimately 

decide to use the enhanced under-21 

outreach or denial notifications during 

other authorized uses of NICS, there 

would be some additional contacts of 

some State and local entities. That 

additional number of contacts cannot be 

currently estimated because there are 

unknown numbers of persons 

determined to be prohibited or under 21 

years of age who may be checked 

through NICS. While some statistics are 

available concerning denials 

recommended through use of NICS, 

those numbers also cannot be 

reasonably estimated after enactment of 

BSCA.64

B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This proposed rule may have direct 

effects on the States; however, such 

effects will not be substantial, nor will 

such impact concern the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

the States, or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 6 of Executive 

Order 13132, the Attorney General has 

determined that the proposed rule does 

not have sufficient federalism 

implications to warrant the preparation 

of a federalism summary impact 

statement. 

C. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

This proposed rule meets the 

applicable standards set forth in 

sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive 

Order 12988. 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed rule amends the 

Department’s regulations to incorporate 

changes made by statutory provisions 

enacted as part of the CAA and BSCA. 

The FBI is developing systematic 

solutions for collections, notifications, 

and contacts required by the CAA and 

BSCA. The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(‘‘RFA’’), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., generally 

requires that when an agency issues a 

proposed rule or a final rule pursuant to 

section 553(b) of the Administrative 

Procedure Act or another law, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis that meets the 

requirements of the RFA and publish 

such analysis in the Federal Register. 

See 5 U.S.C. 603, 604. An initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) 

is not required if the head of the agency 

certifies that the rule would not, if 

promulgated, have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. See 5 U.S.C. 

605(b). While the statistics below 

support a conclusion that this proposed 

rule, if promulgated, would not result in 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

FBI has, in an abundance of caution, 

nonetheless prepared an IRFA. 

In accordance with the RFA, the FBI 

prepared an IRFA that examines the 

impacts of the proposed rule on small 

entities. The term ‘‘small entities’’ 

comprises small businesses, not-forprofit organizations that are 

independently owned and operated and 

are not dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of fewer than 50,000 

people. The FBI performed an IRFA of 

the impacts on small businesses and 

other entities of this proposed rule. The 

FBI performed this IRFA using the 

known or estimated statistical and cost 

information discussed below. 

Based on the information from this 

analysis, the FBI found: 

Æ The FBI’s internal subject matter 

experts estimate that in States in which 

the FBI processes NICS background 

checks, the FBI served 47,100 FFLs 

(rounded up) in 2021 that would have 

been considered small businesses under 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100419 

65There are an estimated 3,500 FFLs in States 

where the FBI processes NICS background checks 

and that the FBI anticipates would not be 

considered small entities because they are larger, 

retail, or corporate stores that have chains of 

locations throughout the United States. As noted in 

footnotes 53 and 58 of this preamble, for a variety 

of reasons, internal FBI subject matter experts 

anticipate that, because of State processes required 

in many POC States before the NDNA or BSCA were 

effective, the processes this rule reflects or proposes 

to implement for denial notifications and under-21 

transactions will not result in a significant 

economic impact to most of the 10,300 small entity 

FFLs in POC States. For those same reasons, 

however, the Department cannot reasonably 

estimate a more precise economic impact that those 

FFLs in POC States may experience due to denial 

notifications or under-21 transactions; again, 

however, it is anticipated that most FFLs in POC 

States will experience little to no economic impact 

due to this rule. 

66The total impact to each FFL using the larger 

estimates provided earlier is $37.00 (rounded up) 

cost per small entity FFL ($5.54 (for under-21 

address collection of $261,000/47,100 FFLs) + 

$23.36 (for NDNA address collection at $1.1 

million/47,100) + $7.94 (for additional delay 

notifications $374,000/47,100)). This results in an 

FFL needing to earn $3,700 or less in revenue to 

incur an impact of one percent or more. Again, not 

taken into account is the fact that the use of the 

2021 total delayed and denied transactions will 

include some persons who also fall into the under21 transaction category, resulting in some 

duplication of FFL costs related to address 

collection needs described in the preamble. Also 

not included here are FFLs located in POC States 

because there are variety of factors that may exclude 

many of those FFLs from the equations noted above. 

For example, not all FFLs in POC States will 

conduct under-21 transactions because several of 

those States, like Florida and Hawaii, have laws 

that do not (or with limited exceptions, do not) 

allow persons under 21 years of age to purchase 

firearms. See footnotes 53, 58, and 65. 67See Operational Report at 7. 

Small Business Administration sizing 

standards.65

Æ The FBI estimates that this 

proposed rule would potentially affect 

most FFLs that use NICS to determine 

whether a potential firearm transfer may 

‘‘Proceed,’’ is ‘‘Denied,’’ or is 

‘‘Delayed.’’ 

Æ The highest anticipated cost will be 

for under-21 transactions, where 

personnel for a small entity FFL, within 

the third business day, would need to 

take time to locate the prospective 

transferee’s Form 4473 and indicate that 

additional delay of that transaction has 

been established and that there is a new 

Brady transfer date (the day after the 

tenth business day). The Brady transfer 

date reflects when Federal law would 

allow that firearm to be transferred if the 

FFL is not first provided with a 

‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ response from 

the FBI or a POC. The FBI anticipates 

these scenarios will average 3 minutes 

(.05 hours) of time for the FFL to 

complete this new process. 

Æ FFLs would need to make $2,200 or 

less in revenue in order to incur an 

impact of 1 percent or more. This 

estimate is based upon the following 

analysis: The FBI estimates a $2.65 cost 

per small-entity FFL to provide address 

information for under-21 transactions 

($125,000 aggregate cost to FFL 

community/47,100 estimated small 

entity FFLs) + a $7.82 cost per FFL for 

additional delay notifications ($373,000 

aggregate/47,100) + a $11.58 cost per 

FFL for the NDNA address collection 

($545,238/47,100) = estimated $22 

(rounded down) per small entity FFL, 

per year to implement these new 

provisions.66

Æ The FBI estimates that 10 or fewer 

software vendors that serve a limited 

portion (estimated to be 100 or fewer) of 

these 47,100 small entity FFLs may 

indirectly have a one-time significant 

impact as a result of the mandates from 

Congress reflected in this proposed rule, 

but that they may redistribute the 

overall costs in small fees to the FFLs 

they serve. 

Æ There will be an impact on 

government entities, but that impact 

will not be significant, and those 

government entities are not obligated to 

take any particular actions based upon 

the notifications or requests that are 

submitted to them by the FBI. 

Preliminary Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis 

The RFA establishes that agencies 

must try to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this goal, 

agencies must solicit and consider 

flexible regulatory proposals and 

explain the rationale for their actions to 

assure that such proposals are given 

serious consideration. 

Under the RFA, agencies are required 

to consider what, if any, impact a 

proposed rule would have on small 

entities. Although the FBI anticipates 

that this proposed rule will not have a 

significant economic impact upon a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

FBI has prepared an IRFA. Under 5 

U.S.C. 603(b), the regulatory flexibility 

analysis must provide or address: 

(1) A description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered; 

(2) A succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

proposed rule; 

(3) A description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the proposed 

rule will apply; 

(4) A description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping, and other 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule, including an estimate of 

the classes of small entities that will be 

subject to the requirement and the type 

of professional skills necessary for 

preparation of the report or record; and 

(5) An identification, to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with the proposed rule. 

In addition, under 5 U.S.C. 603(c), the 

IRFA must also contain a description of 

any significant alternatives to the 

proposed rule that accomplish the 

stated objectives of applicable statutes 

and that minimize any significant 

economic impact of the proposed rule 

on small entities. 

Following is an analysis of each of 

these factors: 

A description of the reasons why 

action by the agency is being 

considered. 

The Department is publishing this 

proposed rule to amend NICS 

regulations to implement various parts 

of the CAA and BSCA. 

A succinct statement of the objectives 

of, and legal basis for, the proposed 

rule. 

The objective of this proposed rule is 

to comply with procedures mandated by 

Congress to prevent prohibited persons 

from obtaining firearms from FFLs. The 

Department is publishing this proposed 

rule to amend NICS regulations to 

implement various parts of the CAA and 

BSCA. 

A description of and, where feasible, 

an estimate of the number of small 

entities to which the proposed rule will 

apply. 

Based on the FBI’s statistics reported 

from 2021,67 there are an estimated 

50,855 FFLs that may be impacted by 

this rule, the majority of which would 

be considered as small entities. The 

FBI’s internal subject matter experts 

note that, indirectly, an estimated 10 or 

fewer computer software vendors may 

be affected by this proposed rule. The 

FBI’s internal subject matter experts also 

estimate the majority of these FFLs and 

vendors would be considered small. 

A description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping, and other 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule, including an estimate of 

the classes of small entities that will be 

subject to the requirement and the type 

of professional skills necessary for 

preparation of the report or record. 

As described previously, FFLs 

currently collect the information about 

prospective transferees necessary for 

NICS to implement the congressional 

mandates of the CAA and BSCA as 

relevant to this proposed rule. This rule 

proposes that FFLs would now be 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100420 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

68ATF, Updated ATF Form 4473—Firearms 

Transaction Record (August 2023 Revisions) (last 

reviewed Feb. 12, 2024), https://www.atf.gov/ 

firearms/updated-atf-form-4473-firearmstransaction-record-august-2023-revisions. 

69See id. 

required to provide this information to 

NICS for (1) under-21 transactions 

subject to an enhanced background 

check under BSCA; (2) individuals who 

may be subject to a firearm prohibition 

under applicable local or Tribal law; 

and (3) individuals whose background 

has led to their NICS transaction being 

delayed for further research of a 

possible disqualification or denied due 

to a disqualification as described in 18 

U.S.C. 922(t). Each FFL will also, on an 

annual basis, likely have to record the 

additional delay of a limited number of 

under-21 transactions that the FFL 

processes (moving the allowed Brady 

transfer date from the day after the third 

business day to the day after the tenth 

business day) after the FBI has notified 

the FFL the transaction has been placed 

into additional delay. Where an FFL 

utilizes electronic recordkeeping, the 

FBI anticipates updates to those 

computer systems by software vendors 

necessary to capture the additional 

delay information. 

An identification, to the extent 

practicable, of all relevant Federal rules 

that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with the proposed rule. 

There are no duplicate or overlapping 

rules. While there may be similar 

rulemakings from ATF associated with 

BSCA, these rulemakings are 

coordinated with each other and do not 

overlap. 

A description of any significant 

alternatives to the proposed rule that 

accomplish the stated objectives of 

applicable statutes and that minimize 

any significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities. 

There are no significant alternatives to 

the proposed rule. This proposed rule 

puts in place the minimum changes to 

NICS regulations needed to accomplish 

the mandates of the CAA or BSCA and 

avoid any significant impact on small 

entities. 

E. Congressional Review Act 

This rule, when finalized, is not 

expected to be a major rule as defined 

for purposes of the legislation 

commonly known as the Congressional 

Review Act, Public Law 104–121, sec. 

251, 110 Stat. 847, 868 (1996). See 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This proposed rule will not result in 

the expenditure by State, local, and 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of $100 million or 

more (adjusted for inflation) in any 1 

year, and it will not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, no actions were deemed 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995, Public Law 104–4, 109 Stat. 48. 

See 2 U.S.C. 1532. 

G. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Department believes any 

collections of information needed to 

implement the above requirements, 

such as further residential address 

information, are or will be generally 

covered under the collection of 

information through ATF Form 4473. 

All address information sought by these 

amendments, except for whether an 

individual resides within city or 

municipal limits, is currently collected 

by the FFL on the Form 4473. To further 

implement any ‘‘local’’ firearm 

prohibitions added by the CAA, the 

Department is proposing to require the 

FFL to inquire and collect whether the 

prospective transferee lives within city 

or municipal limits if that information 

is known by the transferee. A revised 

Form 4473 received approval by OMB 

on August 30, 2023, and was renewed 

for another 3-year period. Use of the 

new form by the industry becomes 

mandatory on February 1, 2024, and 

will continue through August 31, 

2026.68 The revisions add this question 

and make other modifications relevant 

to carrying out the new requirements 

imposed by the NDNA and BSCA. ATF 

has published the revised Form 4473.69

The Department is amending relevant 

NICS regulations through this proposed 

rule to reflect that, for some transactions 

as noted herein, the FBI will require the 

FFL to provide all address information 

already collected on the revised Form 

4473 to NICS regarding a prospective 

transferee. 

H. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments) 

The Department has determined that 

formal Tribal consultation under 

Executive Order 13175 is not required 

because this proposed rule is provided 

as part of a public collaboration that 

includes Tribes and is being issued to 

implement congressional mandates 

regarding Tribal law prohibitors, 

enhanced background checks for 

transferees under the age of 21 years, 

and NICS denial notifications. Further, 

implementation of these provisions is 

not discretionary, nor do there appear to 

be any policy decisions in this proposed 

rule that would affect federally 

recognized Tribes. 

List of Subjects 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Arms and munitions, 

Computer technology, Crime, Firearms, 

Juvenile delinquency, Law Enforcement, 

Penalties, Privacy, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority and Issuance 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

in the preamble, 28 CFR part 25, subpart 

A, is proposed to be amended as 

follows: 

PART 25—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

INFORMATION SYSTEMS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 25 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Authority: Public Law 103–159, 107 Stat. 

1536, 49 U.S.C. 30501–30505; Public Law 

101–410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended by Public 

Law 104–134, 110 Stat. 1321; Public Law 

117–103, 136 Stat. 49; Public Law 117–159, 

136 Stat. 1313; 34 U.S.C. 40901; 18 U.S.C. 

921; 18 U.S.C. 922; 18 U.S.C. 925B; 18 U.S.C. 

925C. 

Subpart A—the National Instant 

Criminal Background Check System 

■ 2. Revise § 25.1 to read as follows: 

§ 25.1 Purpose and authority. 

The purpose of this subpart is to 

establish policies and procedures 

implementing the Brady Handgun 

Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act), 

Public Law 103–159, 107 Stat. 1536. 

The Brady Act requires the Attorney 

General to establish a National Instant 

Criminal Background Check System 

(NICS) to be contacted by any licensed 

importer, licensed manufacturer, or 

licensed dealer of firearms for 

information as to whether the transfer of 

a firearm to any person who is not 

licensed under 18 U.S.C. 923 would be 

in violation of law as described in 

subsection (t) of 18 U.S.C. 922. The 

regulations in this subpart A are issued 

pursuant to section 103(h) of the Brady 

Act, 107 Stat. 1542 (18 U.S.C. 922 note), 

and include requirements to ensure the 

privacy and security of the NICS and 

appeals procedures for persons who 

have been denied the right to obtain a 

firearm as a result of a NICS background 

check performed by the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation (FBI) or a state or local 

law enforcement agency. The 

regulations in this subpart A are also 

issued pursuant to Public Law 117–103 

(18 U.S.C. 925B, 925C), and Public Law 

117–159 (34 U.S.C. 40901) to reflect the 

need to contact local law enforcement 

for purposes of providing denial 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100421 

notification reports in accordance with 

18 U.S.C. 925B and reporting certain 

data in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 925C; 

and with respect to enhanced 

background checks of prospective 

transferees who are under 21 years of 

age. The provisions of this subpart A 

shall be construed as being severable 

from one another and any remaining 

upheld or unchallenged provisions shall 

be treated independently of any 

invalidated provision. 

■ 3. Amend § 25.2 by: 

■ a. Revising the definitions of 

‘‘Delayed’’, ‘‘Denied’’, and ‘‘Denying 

agency’’; 

■ b. Adding the definition of ‘‘Local 

Law Enforcement Authority,’’ 

■ c. Revising the definition of ‘‘NICS’’; 

■ d. Adding the definition of ‘‘NICS 

Indices’’; 

■ e. Removing the definitions of ‘‘NICS 

Index’’ and ‘‘NICS Operations Center’’; 

■ f. Revising the definition of ‘‘NICS 

Representative’’; 

■ g. Adding the definitions of ‘‘NICS 

Section,’’ and ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: 

At least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond;’’ and 

■ h. Revising the definitions ‘‘Open,’’ 

‘‘POC (Point of Contact),’’ and 

‘‘Proceed;’’ 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 25.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Delayed means the response given to 

the FFL indicating that the transaction 

is in an ‘‘Open’’ status and that more 

research is required prior to a NICS 

‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ response. 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(2) of this definition, a ‘‘Delayed’’ 

response to the FFL indicates that it 

would be unlawful to transfer the 

firearm until receipt of a follow-up 

‘‘Proceed’’ response from the NICS or 

the expiration of three business days 

without notification of a ‘‘Denied’’ 

response, whichever occurs first. 

(2) For a prospective transferee under 

21 years of age, if the NICS has notified 

the FFL before three business days have 

elapsed from initial contact that 

additional delay is required to 

determine whether the prospective 

transferee has a prohibiting record 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(d), a ‘‘Delayed’’ 

response to the FFL indicates it would 

be unlawful to transfer the firearm until 

receipt of a follow-up ‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘No 

Known Prohibitors: At least one state or 

local agency has not responded or 

cannot respond’’ response from the 

NICS or the expiration of 10 business 

days from initial contact without 

notification of a ‘‘Denied’’ response, 

whichever occurs first. 

Denied means denial of a firearm 

transfer based on a NICS response, or 

through the enhanced background check 

of a person under 21 years of age as 

provided in 34 U.S.C. 40901, indicating 

one or more matching records were 

found providing information 

demonstrating that a prospective 

transferee is prohibited from receiving 

or being transferred a firearm as 

described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t). 

Denying agency means a POC or the 

NICS Section, whichever determines 

that the subject is prohibited from 

receiving or being transferred a firearm 

as described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t). 

* * * * * 

Local Law Enforcement Authority 

means a bureau, office, department, or 

other authority of a state or local 

government or tribe that has jurisdiction 

to investigate a violation or potential 

violation of, or enforce, a state, tribal, or 

local law. 

* * * * * 

NICS means the National Instant 

Criminal Background Check System, 

which an FFL must, with limited 

exceptions, contact for information on 

whether a person who is not licensed 

under 18 U.S.C. 923 can lawfully 

receive, or be transferred, a firearm as 

described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t). 

* * * * * 

NICS Indices means the database, to 

be managed by the FBI, containing 

information provided by Federal, state, 

tribal and local agencies about persons 

prohibited from receiving or being 

transferred a firearm as described in 18 

U.S.C. 922(t). The NICS Indices is 

separate and apart from the NCIC and 

the Interstate Identification Index (III). 

For purposes of this subpart, the term 

NICS Index shall be understood to refer 

to the NICS Indices. 

* * * * * 

NICS Representative means a person 

who receives telephone or electronic 

inquiries to the NICS Section from FFLs 

requesting background checks and 

provides a response of ‘‘Proceed,’’ ‘‘No 

Known Prohibitors: At least one state or 

local agency has not responded or 

cannot respond,’’ ‘‘Delayed,’’ or 

‘‘Denied.’’ 

NICS Section means the section of the 

FBI that receives telephone or electronic 

inquiries from FFLs to perform 

background checks, makes a 

determination based upon available 

information as to whether the receipt or 

transfer of a firearm would be 

prohibited as described in 18 U.S.C. 

922(t), researches criminal history 

records, tracks and finalizes appeals, 

and conducts audits of system use. For 

purposes of this subpart, the term NICS 

Operations Center shall be understood 

to refer to the NICS Section. 

No Known Prohibitors: At least one 

state or local agency has not responded 

or cannot respond means, for a 

prospective transferee under 21 years of 

age, a NICS response indicating that the 

information available to the system at 

the time of the response did not 

demonstrate that the prospective 

transferee would be prohibited from 

receiving or being transferred a firearm 

as described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t), and: (1) 

all agencies contacted during the 

enhanced background checks required 

by 34 U.S.C. 40901(l) have responded 

and at least one of those responses is 

that state law prohibits juvenile justice 

records, juvenile mental health records, 

or both from being shared; or (2) at the 

end of the tenth business day if at least 

one of the state or local agencies 

contacted during the enhanced 

background checks required by 34 

U.S.C. 40901(l) has not responded to the 

request for records. A ‘‘No Known 

Prohibitors: At least one state or local 

agency has not responded or cannot 

respond’’ response to the FFL indicates 

that Federal law does not prohibit the 

licensee from transferring the firearm. 

* * * * * 

Open means those non-canceled 

transactions related to the prospective 

transfer of a firearm where the FFL has 

not been notified of a final 

determination. In cases of ‘‘Open’’ 

responses, the NICS continues 

researching potentially prohibiting 

records regarding the prospective 

transferee and, if definitive information 

is obtained, communicates to the FFL 

the final determination that the check 

resulted in a ‘‘Proceed’’ or a ‘‘Denied’’ 

response. 

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(2) of this definition, an ‘‘Open’’ 

response does not prohibit an FFL from 

transferring a firearm after three 

business days have elapsed since the 

FFL provided to the system the 

identifying information about the 

prospective transferee. 

(2) For an individual under 21 years 

of age, if the NICS has notified the FFL 

within three business days that 

additional research is required, an 

‘‘Open’’ response does not prohibit an 

FFL from transferring a firearm after 10 

business days have elapsed since the 

FFL provided to the system the 

identifying information about the 

prospective transferee. 

(3) An ‘‘Open’’ response, whether 

under paragraph (1) or (2) of this 

definition, does not relieve an FFL from 

compliance with other provisions of 

Federal, state, local, or tribal law that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100422 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

may be applicable to firearms transfers. 

For example, under 18 U.S.C. 922(d), an 

FFL may not lawfully transfer a firearm 

if the FFL knows or has reasonable 

cause to believe that the prospective 

transferee is prohibited by law from 

receiving or possessing a firearm for 

certain reasons. 

* * * * * 

POC (Point of Contact) means a state 

or local law enforcement agency serving 

as an intermediary between an FFL and 

the Federal databases checked by the 

NICS. A POC will receive NICS 

background check requests from FFLs, 

check available state, local, or tribal 

record systems, perform NICS inquiries, 

determine whether matching records 

provide information demonstrating that 

the prospective transferee is prohibited 

from receiving or being transferred a 

firearm as described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t), 

and respond to FFLs with the results of 

a NICS background check. For an 

individual under 21 years of age, the 

POC will contact state and local 

agencies, in accordance with 34 U.S.C. 

40901(l) and as further described in 

§ 25.6, to determine if the individual has 

a possibly disqualifying juvenile record 

under 18 U.S.C. 922(d). When a POC 

processes a NICS transaction and 

notifies the FFL of a denial 

determination, the POC shall report that 

denial notification to local law 

enforcement authorities in accordance 

with 18 U.S.C. 925B. A POC shall also 

provide applicable statistics necessary 

for the FBI to comply with the 

requirements of 18 U.S.C. 925C. A POC 

will be an agency with express or 

implied authority to perform POC duties 

pursuant to state statute, regulation, or 

executive order. 

Proceed means a NICS response 

indicating that all relevant systems have 

been checked, all requests for records 

have received responses, and the 

information available to the system at 

the time of the response did not 

demonstrate that the prospective 

transferee would be prohibited from 

receiving or being transferred a firearm 

as described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t). A 

‘‘Proceed’’ response does not relieve an 

FFL from compliance with other 

provisions of Federal, state, local, or 

tribal law that may be applicable to 

firearms transfers. For example, under 

18 U.S.C. 922(d), an FFL may not 

lawfully transfer a firearm if the FFL 

knows or has reasonable cause to 

believe that the prospective transferee is 

prohibited by law from receiving or 

possessing a firearm for certain reasons. 

* * * * * 

§ 25.6 [Amended] 

■ 4. Amend § 25.6 by revising 

paragraphs (c)(1)(iii), (c)(1)(iv), (f)(1), (g), 

(h) and (i) to read as follows: 

§ 25.6 Accessing records in the system. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(iii) Search the relevant databases 

(i.e., NICS Indices, NCIC, III) for any 

matching records and, for a prospective 

transferee under 21 years of age, 

perform the contacts required by 34 

U.S.C. 40901(l), specifically: the 

criminal history repository or juvenile 

justice information system, as 

appropriate, of the state in which the 

person resides; the appropriate state 

custodian of mental health adjudication 

records in the state in which the person 

resides; and a local law enforcement 

agency of the jurisdiction in which the 

person resides. These contacts are made 

for the purpose of determining whether 

the prospective transferee has a 

disqualifying juvenile record under 18 

U.S.C. 922(d). If a state has identified to 

the NICS Section that it does not have 

a criminal history repository, juvenile 

justice information system, or state 

custodian of mental health adjudication 

records, a contact to an alternative 

agency (if one is identified by the state) 

shall be made; and 

(iv) Provide the following NICS 

responses based upon the consolidated 

NICS search results to the FFL that 

requested the background check: 

(A) ‘‘Proceed’’ response, if no 

disqualifying information was found: 

(1) As a result of searching the NICS 

Indices, NCIC, or III; and 

(2) During the enhanced background 

check required by 34 U.S.C. 40901 for 

transactions involving a person under 

21 years of age. 

(B)(1) ‘‘Delayed’’ response, except as 

provided in paragraph (c)(1)(iv)(B)(2) of 

this section, if the NICS search finds a 

record that requires more research to 

determine whether the prospective 

transferee is disqualified from receiving 

or being transferred a firearm as 

described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t). A 

‘‘Delayed’’ response to the FFL indicates 

that the firearm transfer should not 

proceed until the receipt of a follow-up 

‘‘Proceed’’ response from the NICS or 

the expiration of three business days 

(exclusive of the day on which the 

query is made), whichever occurs first. 

(Example: An FFL requests a NICS 

check on a prospective firearm 

transferee at 9:00 a.m. on Friday and 

shortly thereafter receives a ‘‘Delayed’’ 

response from the NICS. If state offices 

in the state in which the FFL is located 

are closed on Saturday and Sunday and 

open the following Monday, Tuesday, 

and Wednesday, and the NICS has not 

yet responded with a ‘‘Proceed’’ or 

‘‘Denied’’ response, the FFL may 

transfer the firearm at 12:01 a.m. 

Thursday.) 

(2) In the case of a prospective 

transferee under 21 years of age at the 

time of the NICS check, if NICS notifies 

the FFL that additional delay is needed 

to further investigate whether the 

prospective transferee has a 

disqualifying juvenile record under 18 

U.S.C. 922(d), the firearm transfer shall 

not proceed until receipt of a follow-up 

‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: 

At least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond’’ response 

from the NICS, or the expiration of 10 

business days (exclusive of the day on 

which the query is made) without a 

‘‘Denied’’ response, whichever occurs 

first. 

(C) ‘‘Denied’’ response, when at least 

one matching record is found as a result 

of searching the NICS Indices, NCIC, III, 

or through the enhanced background 

checks described in 34 U.S.C. 40901 for 

persons under 21 years of age, that 

provides information demonstrating that 

the prospective transferee would be 

prohibited from receiving or being 

transferred a firearm as described in 18 

U.S.C. 922(t). The ‘‘Denied’’ response 

will be provided to the requesting FFL 

by the NICS Section during its regular 

business hours. 

(D) ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At least 

one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond’’ response, 

when available information does not 

demonstrate the subject would be 

(potentially) prohibited from receiving 

or being transferred a firearm as 

described in 18 U.S.C. 922(t) and: (1) all 

agencies contacted during the enhanced 

background checks required by 34 

U.S.C. 40901(l) have responded and at 

least one of those responses is that state 

law prohibits juvenile justice records, 

juvenile mental health records, or both 

from being shared; or (2) at the end of 

the tenth business day if at least one of 

the state or local agencies contacted 

during the enhanced background checks 

required by 34 U.S.C. 40901(l) has not 

responded to the request for records. A 

‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At least one 

state or local agency has not responded 

or cannot respond’’ response to the FFL 

indicates that Federal law does not 

prohibit the licensee from transferring 

the firearm. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) ‘‘No record’’ response, if the NICS 

determines, through a complete search, 

that no matching record exists. A ‘‘no 

record’’ response does not relieve a POC 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 100423 

from its obligation under § 25.6 to 

perform an enhanced background check 

described in 34 U.S.C. 40901 for persons 

under 21 years of age. 

* * * * * 

(g) Generally, based on the response(s) 

provided by the NICS, and other 

information available in the state and 

local record systems, a POC will: 

(1) Confirm any matching records; 

(2) Notify the FFL with a response of 

‘‘Proceed,’’ ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At 

least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond,’’ 

‘‘Delayed,’’ or ‘‘Denied.’’ ‘‘Proceed,’’ 

‘‘Delayed,’’ and ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: 

At least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond’’ 

notifications will be accompanied by 

the NTN or STN traceable to the NTN. 

The POC may or may not provide a 

transaction number (NTN or STN) when 

notifying the FFL of a ‘‘Denied’’ 

response; and 

(3)(i) Report denial notifications to 

local law enforcement authorities in 

accordance with 18 U.S.C. 925B (NICS 

Denial Notification Act) when a POC 

provides denial determination to FFLs; 

and 

(ii) Provide the NICS Section with 

applicable statistics necessary for the 

FBI to comply with the requirements of 

18 U.S.C. 925C. 

(h) POC Determination Messages. 

POCs shall transmit electronic NICS 

transaction determination messages to 

the FBI for the following transactions: 

‘‘Delayed’’ transactions that are not 

resolved before the end of the 

operational day on which the check is 

requested; ‘‘Denied’’ transactions; 

transactions reported to the NICS as 

‘‘Delayed’’ or ‘‘Open’’ and later changed 

to ‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: 

At least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond;’’ and 

‘‘Denied’’ transactions that have been 

overturned. The FBI shall provide POCs 

with an electronic capability to transmit 

this information. These electronic 

messages shall be provided to the NICS 

immediately upon communicating the 

POC determination to the FFL. For 

transactions where a determination has 

not been communicated to the FFL, the 

electronic messages shall be 

communicated no later than the end of 

the operational day on which the check 

was initiated. With the exception of 

permit checks and NICS transactions of 

persons under 21 years of age, newly 

created POC NICS transactions that are 

not followed by a determination 

message (‘‘Denied’’ or ‘‘Delayed’’) before 

the end of the operational day on which 

they were initiated will be assumed to 

have resulted in a ‘‘Proceed’’ 

notification to the FFL. The information 

provided in the POC determination 

messages will be maintained in the 

NICS Audit Log described in § 25.9(b). 

The NICS will destroy its records 

regarding POC determinations in 

accordance with the procedures detailed 

in § 25.9(b). 

(i) Response recording. FFLs are 

required to record the system response, 

whether provided by the FBI NICS 

Section or a POC, on the appropriate 

ATF form for audit and inspection 

purposes, under 27 CFR part 478 

recordkeeping requirements. The FBI 

NICS Section response will always 

include an NTN and associated 

‘‘Proceed,’’ ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At 

least one state or local agency has not 

responded or cannot respond,’’ 

‘‘Delayed,’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ determination. 

POC responses may vary as discussed in 

paragraph (g) of this section. In these 

instances, FFLs will record the POC 

response, including any transaction 

number or determination. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Revise § 25.7(a) to read as follows: 

§ 25.7 Querying records in the system. 

(a)(1) The following search 

descriptors will be required in all 

queries of the system for purposes of a 

background check: 

(i) Name; 

(ii) Sex; 

(iii) Race; 

(iv) Complete date of birth; 

(v) State of residence; 

(2) For a transaction that involves a 

subject under 21 years of age, or where 

initial background check results of the 

subject reveal the transaction will be 

delayed or denied, or may be subject to 

a local or tribal prohibition preventing 

the transfer or receipt of a firearm, the 

following information will also be 

required prior to the FFL being provided 

with the NTN (or applicable STN) and 

initial status: 

(i) Residence address of the subject of 

the NICS check, to include the number 

and full street address, city, state, and 

ZIP Code; 

(ii) County, parish, or borough of 

residence; and 

(iii) Whether the individual resides 

within the city (to include town or other 

municipal boundary) limits. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In § 25.8, revise paragraphs (f)(2) 

and (g)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 25.8 System safeguards. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) FFLs will provide the NICS 

Representative with their FFL Number 

and code word, the type of sale, and the 

name, sex, race, date of birth, and state 

of residence of the prospective buyer. 

For those transactions that are delayed 

or denied, may be subject to a local or 

tribal prohibition on the transfer or 

receipt of a firearm (based on initial 

background check results), or involve a 

prospective transferee under 21 years of 

age, the FFL must provide additional 

residence address information, to 

include the number and street address, 

city, state, and ZIP Code; county, 

borough, or parish of residence; and 

whether the residence is within the city 

(to include town or other municipal 

boundary) limits. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(2) The NICS Representative will 

provide only a response of ‘‘Proceed’’ or 

‘‘Delayed’’ (with regard to the 

prospective firearms transfer) and will 

not provide the details of any record 

information about the transferee. In 

cases in which potentially disqualifying 

information is found in response to an 

FFL query, the NICS Representative will 

provide a ‘‘Delayed’’ response to the 

FFL. Follow-up ‘‘Proceed,’’ ‘‘No Known 

Prohibitors: At least one state or local 

agency has not responded or cannot 

respond,’’ or ‘‘Denied’’ responses will be 

provided by the NICS Section during its 

regular business hours. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In § 25.9, revise paragraphs (a), 

(b)(1)(ii) and (iii), (b)(2)(i), and (b)(3), to 

read as follows: 

§ 25.9 Retention and destruction of 

records in the system. 

(a) The NICS will retain NICS Indices 

records indicating that the individuals 

to whom the records pertain would be 

prohibited from receiving or being 

transferred firearms as described in 18 

U.S.C. 922(t). The NICS will retain such 

records indefinitely unless they are 

canceled by the originating agency. In 

cases where a firearms disability is not 

permanent (e.g., a disqualifying 

restraining order), the NICS will 

automatically purge the pertinent record 

when it is no longer disqualifying. 

Unless otherwise removed, records 

contained in the NCIC and III files that 

are accessed during a background check 

will remain in those files in accordance 

with established policy. 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) NICS Audit Log records relating to 

transactions in an ‘‘Open status, except 

the NTN and date, will be destroyed 

after not more than 90 days from the 

date of inquiry; and 

(iii) In cases of NICS Audit Log 

records relating to allowed transactions, 

all identifying information submitted by 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
100424 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

or on behalf of the transferee will be 

destroyed within 24 hours after the FFL 

receives a determination of ‘‘Proceed,’’ 

or ‘‘No Known Prohibitors: At least one 

state or local agency has not responded 

or cannot respond.’’ All other 

information, except the NTN and date, 

will be destroyed after not more than 90 

days from the date of inquiry. 

(2) * * * 

(i) In addition to denial information 

required by law to be shared with 

relevant local law enforcement 

authorities, information in the NICS 

Audit Log, including information not 

yet destroyed under § 25.9(b)(1)(iii), that 

indicates, either on its face or in 

conjunction with other information, a 

violation or potential violation of law or 

regulation, may be shared with 

appropriate authorities responsible for 

investigating, prosecuting, or enforcing 

such law or regulation; and 

* * * * * 

(3) Limitation on use. The NICS, 

including the NICS Audit Log, may not 

be used by any department, agency, 

officer, or employee of the United States 

to establish any system for the 

registration of firearms, firearm owners, 

or firearm transactions or dispositions, 

except with respect to persons 

prohibited from receiving or being 

transferred a firearm as described in 18 

U.S.C. 922(t). The NICS Audit Log will 

be monitored and reviewed on a regular 

basis to detect any possible misuse of 

NICS data. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. In § 25.10, revise paragraph (g) to 

read as follows: 

§ 25.10 Correction of erroneous system 

information. 

* * * * * 

(g) An individual may provide written 

consent to the FBI to maintain 

information about that individual in a 

Voluntary Appeal File to be established 

by the FBI and checked by the NICS for 

the purpose of preventing the future 

erroneous denial or extended delay by 

the NICS of a firearm transfer. Such file 

shall be used only by the NICS for this 

purpose. In accordance with 34 U.S.C. 

40901 and applicable regulations of this 

part, for persons under 21 years of age, 

entry into the Voluntary Appeal File 

may not prevent that transaction from 

being subject to additional delay as 

described in paragraph (2) of the 

‘‘Delayed’’ definition provided in § 25.2. 

The FBI shall remove all information in 

the Voluntary Appeal File pertaining to 

an individual upon receipt of a written 

request by that individual. However, the 

FBI may retain such information 

contained in the Voluntary Appeal File 

as long as needed to pursue cases of 

identified misuse of the system. If the 

FBI finds a disqualifying record on the 

individual after the individual’s entry 

into the Voluntary Appeal File, the FBI 

may remove the individual’s 

information from the file. 

* * * * * 

■ 9. In § 25.11, revise paragraph (b)(1) to 

read as follows: 

§ 25.11 Prohibited activities and penalties. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) State or local agencies’, FFLs’, or 

individuals’ purposefully furnishing 

incorrect information to the system to 

obtain a ‘‘Proceed’’ or ‘‘No Known 

Prohibitors: At least one state or local 

agency has not responded or cannot 

respond’’ response, thereby allowing a 

firearm transfer; 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 29, 2024. 

Merrick B. Garland, 

Attorney General. 

[FR Doc. 2024–28712 Filed 12–11–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FBI–159; AG Order No. 6099– 

2024] 

RIN 1110–AA35 

Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 

2022—Criteria for National Instant 

Criminal Background Check System 

(‘‘NICS’’) Background Checks of 

Firearm Handlers 

AGENCY: Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The United States Department 

of Justice (‘‘Department’’) proposes 

several amendments to regulations 

pertaining to the National Instant 

Criminal Background Check System 

(‘‘NICS’’ or ‘‘system’’) of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation (‘‘FBI’’). The 

proposed amendments implement parts 

of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act 

(‘‘BSCA’’), which, in relevant part, 

require the Attorney General to 

promulgate regulations authorizing 

certain Federal Firearm Licensees 

(‘‘FFLs’’ or ‘‘licensees’’) to use NICS for 

purposes of voluntarily conducting 

employment background checks relating 

to certain current or prospective 

employees. As this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) describes in 

more detail, the Department proposes 

allowing FFLs to use NICS for 

employment background checks of their 

‘‘firearm handlers’’ and other ‘‘eligible 

employees.’’ 

DATES: Written comments must be 

postmarked, and electronic comments 

must be submitted, on or before January 

13, 2025. Commenters should be aware 

the electronic Federal Docket 

Management System will not accept 

comments after 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time 

on the last day of the comment period. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 1110–AA35 or Docket 

No. FBI–159, by either of the following 

methods: 

D Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

D Mail: Charles Klebe, Assistant 

General Counsel, Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, Office of the General 

Counsel, Module C–3, 1000 Custer 

Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 

26306–0110; ATTN: Docket No. FBI– 

159. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and RIN 

(1110–AA35) or docket number (FBI– 

159) for this NPRM. In general, all 

properly completed comments received 

will be posted without change to the 

Federal eRulemaking portal, https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill 

A. Montgomery, NICS Business and 

Liaison Unit Chief, Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, Criminal Justice 

Information Services Division, NICS 

Section. Telephone: (304) 625–0606 

(this is not a toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

A. Comments Sought 

The Department welcomes public 

comments from any interested person 

on any aspect of the changes proposed 

in this rule. In particular, and as 

discussed in more detail in the parts of 

this preamble that describe specific 

changes, the Department seeks 

comments from the public on the 

proposed amendments to NICS 

regulations to allow FFLs, as required 

by Congress under BSCA, Public Law 

117–159, 136 Stat. 1313 (2022), to use 

NICS for purposes of conducting 

voluntary employment background 

checks of the FFLs’ current and 

prospective employees. The Department 

seeks comments regarding that use in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1