Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09158
Jarod LSupportIndividual
Summary: The commenter supports the proposed electronic recordkeeping as an option for FFLs but opposes making it a mandated requirement due to concerns over data security and privacy. They note that while electronic records would improve business efficiency and space management, they prefer the security of paper records unless specific privacy and storage duration concerns are addressed.
I am in support of this as an alternative, but not as a mandated requirement. I feel that paper documentation is safer, there is less risk of the loss of a customer's PII, from the viewpoint of a concerned citizen the government has greater ease of access to digital records and they are more easily converted to a national registry, and I feel that the ability to "store" them off-site could lead to unintentional hosting of American PII overseas.
If those concerns are able to be addressed though, it would make FFL management much easier. Being able to access your customer's information in a searchable database is much easier. High volume FFLs would be able to dedicate the square footage they previously had reserved for record storage to improve business operations. This would be even better if it were to pass along with restricted storage length requirements, as I do not feel that any 4473 records need to be kept by the FFL beyond 10 years and A&D history should be limited to 20 years.