Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Proposed Examiner Assignments

  1. #1

    Proposed Examiner Assignments

    Following are the proposed Examiner assignments scheduled to roll in November, 2013. It is hoped that even more Examiners will be brought on board as soon as a green light to post official vacancies is given. State Law assignments continue to remain a work-in-progress, as with two of the named Examiner(s) on-boarding next month (November).


    Jason Bowers TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    Terry Whittington NC, VA, WV . . . . . . . . . . .
    Nicole Dudash IL, IN, KY, OH . . . . . . . . .
    Christina Farris MI, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI, WY . . .
    Ann Feltner AZ, CA, NV, . . . . . . . . . .
    Jason Frushour AR, IA, KS, MO, NE, OK . . . .
    Albert Lamberger FL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    Eric Leber LA, MS, TN, . . . . . . . . . . .
    Daniel Parasky CT, DE, MA,MD,ME,NH,NJ,NY,PA,RI,VT
    Dana Pickles CO, NM, UT, . . . . . . . . . .
    Shannon Siviero AL, GA, SC, . . . . . . . . . . .
    Sandra Snook AK, HI, ID, OR, WA . . . . . .

    Jeff Folloder

    NFATCA Executive Director
    www.nfatca.org










  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Montana, USA
    Posts
    44
    I don't understand why ATF shuffles examiners around. Frushour used to be Montana's examiner, now it looks like it will be Farris.

    Examiners should be permanently assigned a specific set of states, learn the specific NFA related laws of those states, and keep abreast of any changes of the laws in those states. Maybe then they could spit out approvals faster.

    It's nice to dream, right?

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    172
    Why do they list states that are not free (i.e. non-NFA friendly)? I think the best job would be the examiner for CA, NY, HI and IL. All you would do is deny applications if you ever even got one and collect a pay check.

    I am actually curious if any of the examiners are collectors of NFA items themselves.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Montana, USA
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by jason8844 View Post
    Why do they list states that are not free (i.e. non-NFA friendly)? I think the best job would be the examiner for CA, NY, HI and IL. All you would do is deny applications if you ever even got one and collect a pay check.
    They still need to process Form 3s, I imagine.

    I am actually curious if any of the examiners are collectors of NFA items themselves.
    I've often pondered this.

  5. #5
    There are now *two* Examiner Supervisors:
    Ted Clutter
    Kim Ramsburg

    As for learning the laws, that area is being addressed by NFA Specialists:
    Andrew Ashton
    Jon Coleman
    Janice Fields
    Rob Howard
    Sara Jones
    Kenneth Mason
    Scott Robertson

    Amy Stely is the SOT Specialist.

    Assignments are based upon volume, aptitude, experience and learning curve. There are roughly a dozen contractors filling the role of Research Assistant to help out the Examiners.

    Jeff Folloder

    NFATCA Executive Director
    www.nfatca.org










  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by ExecDirector View Post
    There are now *two* Examiner Supervisors:
    Ted Clutter
    Kim Ramsburg

    As for learning the laws, that area is being addressed by NFA Specialists:
    Andrew Ashton
    Jon Coleman
    Janice Fields
    Rob Howard
    Sara Jones
    Kenneth Mason
    Scott Robertson

    Amy Stely is the SOT Specialist.

    Assignments are based upon volume, aptitude, experience and learning curve. There are roughly a dozen contractors filling the role of Research Assistant to help out the Examiners.
    There seems to be too many chiefs and not enough indians. Is it just me, or is having so many people "learning" the laws (which are fairly static in terms of NFA weapons) seem like a waste of manpower when it could be used for approving applications and helping out the overworked examiners?

  7. #7
    Actually, several folks have transitioned from Examiner to Specialist and all of them work collaboratively. Laws and their interpretations are in constant flux. Just figuring out the intricacies of Illinois SBR stuff gives me pause...

    Jeff Folloder

    NFATCA Executive Director
    www.nfatca.org










  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by ExecDirector View Post
    Actually, several folks have transitioned from Examiner to Specialist and all of them work collaboratively. Laws and their interpretations are in constant flux. Just figuring out the intricacies of Illinois SBR stuff gives me pause...
    I understand, but "collaboratively" does not mean that when things get really, really, really backlogged, Sara Jones examines Texas applications to help Jason Bowers catch up. Also, I know the Illinois SBR thing only deals with rifles for historical reenactments, so how many can there be? As for the laws being "in flux", As far as I can tell, there are not many NFA related bills in state legislatures at the moment and no NFA related court cases that deal with the interpretation of NFA law. If I am incorrect, I would be interested in reading about them if they could be provided. As it is, NFA law seems to be rather static to me, and unless there is some new SCOTUS case dealing with NFA weapons I am unaware of, I do not see the need to have almost as many "learners" as examiners.

    My frustrations are not with the good people at the NFA Branch. They are just doing the job they were hired to do and working within the infrastructure they were put in. In fact, I feel sorry for them. I know they are backlogged with applications that are piled up in boxes and have to deal with impatient NFA collectors, dealers and manufacturers. I am just frustrated with the whole process. I am not calling for repeals, or even removal of certain items that are regulated; I am just expecting the system to run more efficiently. For example, I already own suppressors, so why do they have to run the whole process on me again for the next suppressor? I mean, if I was a bad guy, why would I wait for the next suppressor to go on that crime spree when I already own some? They already have 12 fingerprint cards and 12 passport photos of me on file. They also have well over $1200 of my money and I have nothing to show for it in 10 months of waiting.

    I keep hearing that they claim the need more examiners, but yet they keep promoting people to "specialists" who learn the law when the law seems rather unchanged. I am fairly sure that most changes in the interpretation of NFA law would make big news in the gun community and on the NFA related forums.
    Last edited by jason8844; 10-31-2013 at 11:21 PM.

  9. #9
    Jason,
    It's not just NFA law that is changing. Remember that transfers to legal entities are now making up a HUGE portion of all transfers that come across the Examiners desks. Knowing whether a given trust, corporation or LLC is actually valid, properly constituted and constructed is a big deal. Each state maintains subtle nuance differences in what they do and do not allow... And states can and do change the rules on an ongoing basis. Multiply that by the number of lawyers, services and ugly cut and pastes that are contributing to the pile...

    I've seen trusts that were approved in the past get bounced now because... They are invalid. Did NFA Branch just not check before? Maybe. Are they actually taking the time to check all legal entities now? You bet. You go from a few 100 to 60,000 per year and the process is going to change.

    You didn't need a cadre of specialists before.

    Jeff Folloder

    NFATCA Executive Director
    www.nfatca.org










  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    6
    From the folks I have spoken to in different state, the growth in the use of trusts is due to the intransigence of some CLEOs who refuse to sign off on Form 4s.

    If NFA Branch changed the requirement from requiring sign-off to informing the CLEO (as with 03 FFLs), fewer people would see the need for an NFA trust.

    mbogo

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •