Skip to main content
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Search form
Search
Main menu
Who We Are
About
Executive Staff
Organization Structure
Our History
Remembering Waco
Contact
Hotlines
Licensing Services
Media Contacts
For Victims & Witnesses
Careers
Special Agent
IO Investigator
Attorneys
Professional/Technical
Locations
HQ Offices
Field Divisions
Local Offices
International
What We Do
Mission Areas
Firearms
Explosives
Arson
Alcohol & Tobacco
Regulations
Laws
Regulations
Federal Register
Rulings
News
Advisories
Press Releases
Social Media
Media Contacts
Laboratories
Fire Research
Forensics
Firearms Examiners Academy
Laboratory Resources
Most Wanted
Reward Notices
Resources
Download Forms
Order Paper Forms
Photo Galleries
Firearms Gallery
K-9 Gallery
Publications
FOIA Library
Fact Sheets
Regulations Library
Q&A
Firearms
Explosives
Careers
Data & Statistics
U.S. Firearms Trace Data
U.S. Firearms Commerce Report
AFMER
You are here
Home
ATF Ruling 2016-5 Guidance - Marking Variance for Government Defense Contractors
Answers to questions about marking variances for destructive device munitions manufactured as part of a valid United States Government (USG) contract.
Why is ATF issuing this guidance for Ruling 2016-5?
Pursuant to ATF Ruling 2016-5, how should the alternate markings be applied to satisfy the requirements of, and comply with, the existing United States Government (USG) contract?
How must the markings be applied to the destructive device munitions?
Are there any other marking requirements?
What information must be supplied to ATF prior to engaging in the manufacturing process?
What, if anything, can be done with the destructive devices that are ultimately rejected from a USG contract or are overages from a USG contract?
Does the marking variance extend to sub-contractors associated with the contract?
When is a subcontractor considered “a party” to “an existing USG contract” for purposes of ATF Ruling 2016-5?
Does the marking variance extend to any Foreign Military Sale (FMS) customers included in those DOD USG contracts?
Can the manufacturer submit additional lot numbers, if needed, as a result of lot “slippage” or a change in lot number mid-production due to unforeseen issues? If so, how should this be done?
