Hardee, Christopher E.Warning letter
This gun manufacturer was cited for 5 violations. The inspection resulted in a warning letter.
A warning letter is the least severe action the ATF can take against a licensee with compliance issues. The letter advises the licensee to comply with regulations.
|Type||Manufacturer of firearms|
|Expiry||Jun 1, 2021|
Compliance inspections are conducted by one or more ATF officers. After the lead investigator submits a recommendation, one or more ATF supervisors will review the inspection and either concur with or adjust the recommendation.
This page contains information about a single inspection conducted between 2015 and 2017. The ATF may have inspected this licensee before and/or after the inspection detailed here.
Officers spent a total of 76 hours conducting this inspection. 243 days passed between the assignment and the final review. The licensee received a final outcome of warning letter.
Hover over underlined text to see definitions of common terms.
Conduct Firearms Complaince Investigation
The violations cited during the investigation resulted in a recommendation of Viols , WC with WL and Recall due to the licensee's failure to properly mark firearms manufactured, and due tot he licensee's failure to record the manufacture of firearms from receivers in Acquisition and Disposition ( A&D ) record book. However, an alternate recommendation is being made based on the following factors 1) No onsite investigation of the licensee had been conducted by ATF since the original qualification investigation in 2012 2) The missing required markings did not adversely affect the ability to trace the firearms manufactured. All firearms manufactured by the licensee were assembled on finished receivers acquired from other licensees, and the licensee adopted the name, serial number, and model from the original manufacturer. The licensee also manufactured these firearms using barrels that were properly and conspicuously marked with the caliber of each firearm. Due to the presence of these required markings each firearm could be traced from the original manufacturer, through the licensee's required records, and to the original purchaser. During the investigation, Mr. Hardee stated he was not aware he would need a marking variance due to; he thought all markings from the receivers could be adopted, and was not aware of the requirement to make the name, city, and state of his business on the firearms. 3) The failure to record the manufacture of firearms did not adversely affect the ability to trace the firearms manufactured. All firearms were acquired from other licensees as receivers and the acquisition was properly recorded in the A&D Records. Upon manufacturing these firearms; the completed firearms were transferred to non-licensees and the disposition was recorded with the required information. During the investigation, Mr. Hardee stated that he simply misunderstood the requirement to record the receiver's disposition once the manufacture/assembly process was completed and the acquisition of the completed firearm manufactured. After Mr. Hardee received further instructions on completing the A&D record book; Mr. Hardee stated he will ensure all acquisitions and dispositions will be entered appropriately. 4) Mr. Hardee expressed willingness to comply with all regulations. He stated that he does not plan to manufacturer any more firearms until he has the necessary means to mark the completed firearms. Mr. Hardee made the necessary corrections to the A&D record book to show the correct disposition of the receivers manufactured into completed firearms and the acquisition of the completed firearm; as well as moving the final disposition diagonally from the appropriate acquisition.
Name of Entity - Hardee, Christopher FFL /COMP - 1-57-03731 Lead - Dionne Holtgrewe Narrative: A firearms compliance investigation was conducted. The licensee was cited accordingly. IOI redacted offered an alternate recommendation of Viols WL ONLY and Recall . AS redacted has reviewed the inspection and concurs with the issuance of a warning letter, however does not believe a recall inspection is needed. The licensee is not a volume manufacturer and resources we can used elsewhere. Last Inspection Date: 4/15/16 E-mailed to FEL Actions-Charlotte Examiner redacted
Concur with the assigned lOI’s alternate recommendation for a warning letter due to the volume of sales and limited nature of the violations.
If an inspection uncovers regulatory violations, the licensee receives a report outlining these violations. This section lists the violations found in the inspection, as well as a general description of each offense. More details on the nature of the licensee's specific violations may be found in the report PDF.
This licensee was cited for 5 violations.
|1||478.21(a)||Failure to provide all of the information called for in required forms. 🔗|
|2||478.92(a)(1)(ii)(C)||Failure by a manufacturer or importer to mark frames or receivers with its name and the name of the foreign manufacturer if applicable. 🔗|
|3||478.92(a)(1)(ii)(D)||Failure by a manufacturer or importer to mark frames or receivers with the city and state where the manufacturer is located. 🔗|
|4||478.123(a)||Failure by a manufacturer to maintain an accurate record of firearms manufactured or acquired. 🔗|
|5||478.123(b)||Failure by a manufacturer to maintain an accurate record of dispositions to other licensees. 🔗|
Source: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. About the data »