NIST Told Congress Microstamping Is Disputed Science — Not a Proven Crime Tool

NIST Deputy Director Craig S. Burkhardt wrote House Science, Space, and Technology Chairman Brian Babin on August 12, 2026. Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren was copied. AmmoLand recapped the letter Tuesday. The first paragraph is the one Sacramento will not quote: NIST has not conducted independent research in this area, and the agency currently has no active workstream on the topic. The letter is a synthesis of published studies from state agencies, academics, forensic groups, and advocates — not a new federal experiment.

Quote: “There is significant disagreement regarding the viability of this technology.” California and New Jersey state-led studies concluded it was viable, Burkhardt wrote, and significant concerns persist: durability after repeat firings, mark transfer that depends on the firearm and the ammunition, high susceptibility to tampering, and cost. There have been no large-scale independent blind studies that establish validity and error rates across a wide range of guns and ammunition. Microstamps on firing pins can be defaced with a sharpening stone, hammer, or small file; the firearm still works. Pins are replaceable. “No realistic mechanical mitigation strategy currently exists to address these modifications.” Some industry representatives view mandates as a “de facto ban.” After California’s earlier requirement, the approved-handgun roster dropped by approximately 50 percent, the letter says, citing industry sources.

That is not the same as “NIST proved it does not work.” It is the federal standards lab refusing to certify the sales pitch.

California’s next clock is Senate Bill 452, signed September 26, 2023. The Attorney General’s office found technological viability on July 18, 2025. Licensed dealers must ensure newly manufactured or delivered semiautomatic pistols are certified microstamping-enabled beginning January 1, 2028 — only if DOJ also finds commercial availability by July 1, 2027. NIST’s letter does not repeal that statute. It does strip the claim that the science is settled.