Gun ownership state audits and registration audits were conducted by state and local police, under the direction of local chief law enforcement officers. Chief law enforcement officers could not simply turn over the results of these audits to the ATF. Rather, the chief law enforcement officers were required to conduct the audits and forward the results to the ATF for a determination of whether a Form 5 would be issued. After receiving a Form 5, the chief law enforcement officer was required to forward that form to the owner of the firearm in question. Finally, firearm owners were given 30 days to send a response to the Form 5 to the ATF. After receiving the owner's response, the ATF would determine whether it would reclassify the firearms in question. See Fanning, 75 F.3d at 406. If the ATF decided not to reclassify the firearms in question, it was then the owner's responsibility to send the ATF a copy of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer's report and the owner's response. See id. If the owner did not timely send the ATF a copy of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer's report and owner's response, the ATF would consider the firearms in question to be unlawful. See id. The chief law enforcement officer, and not the ATF, was given control over the registration and ownership checks at the local level. "The [chief law enforcement officer's] decision to issue a Form 5 or not, and the procedures to be followed in conducting audits of gun ownership, were all left up to the chief law enforcement officer." Id. at 406. Each state was given the responsibility of deciding whether a handgun dealer could be within the confines of a local jurisdiction. See id. The ATF established some guidelines for local officials conducting the checks to follow. First, local officials were required to have a plan of action in place to provide an effective and meaningful registration scheme. See id. These plans had to include a program to periodically update gun registration lists, provide for the coordination of investigations and audits, and provide a record keeping system that provided for the retention of evidence. See id. Second, local officials were to make every reasonable effort to ensure the accuracy of the records used to determine the firearms owners in their jurisdiction. See id. Finally, the chief law enforcement officer of each jurisdiction was given the responsibility to identify persons who willfully make false or fictitious statements when asked whether they own a firearm or intend to acquire a firearm. See id. State and local police were to be on notice that the ATF would be requiring audits, and had established guidelines for these audits. To enable local officials to fulfill the requirements of the Gun Control Act, the ATF provided Local and State Law Enforcement Agencies with a Gun Owner's Guide. See 27 C.F.R. § 178.121 (1997). This guide contained a procedure to assist local law enforcement officials in identifying those individuals who willfully made false statements when asked about the ownership of firearms. See id. 2. The Interim Rules A number of problems were identified with the current registration system. The existing system had not been implemented in all localities across the country. There was a broad disparity in gun registration requirements, registration procedures, and registration rates. See 63 Fed. Reg. at 12284. Firearms owners were, in some localities, required to register at least seven times a year, while in other localities firearms owners were required to register only once a year. See id. Further, there was confusion as to whether there were separate firearms registration requirements in different jurisdictions, and confusion as to the procedures for registering a firearm in a jurisdiction. See id. Following these findings, the ATF "determined that the existing uncoordinated system for regulating the interstate traffic in firearms [was] *837 in need of reorganization." Id. To facilitate the regulation of interstate traffic in firearms, the ATF established interim firearm transfer requirements and guidelines for the transfer of firearms in § 925(d). See id. The interim rules became effective on May 19, 1998. See id. The interim rules were to remain in effect until the Secretary of the Treasury promulgated permanent regulations. See id. at 12284. The interim rules have since expired. See 72 Fed. Reg. 27,986, 27,987 (May 19, 2007). B. The Permanent Rule After finding problems with the interim rules, the ATF revisited the task of regulating the transfer of firearms and re-issued proposed permanent rules on November 4, 2001. See Final Rule, 66 Fed. Reg. 56,600 (Nov. 4, 2001). The notice initiating the rule making requested comments from the public, law enforcement agencies, gun dealers and owners, and other interested persons regarding the proposed changes. See id. at 56,600. The notice explained that the purpose of the proposed rules was to "improve the administration of the Federal firearms laws and to collect information on the interstate firearms traffic that will assist in assessing the effectiveness of such laws." Id. at 56,601. In order to achieve the goal of a single national firearms registry and a unified system for regulating the transfer of firearms across state lines, the ATF proposed to make a number of changes to the system. The ATF explained that the proposed permanent rules would create a "single national firearms registry" comprised of a set of "identification and transfer records for firearms." Id. at 56,603. The ATF noted that "the [National Instant Criminal Background Check] database would be used by federal, state, and local authorities to facilitate the enforcement of current firearms laws." Id. The proposed permanent rules would further be used "to implement and enforce the firearms laws of the United States, as they apply to the acquisition, transfer, receipt, shipment, importation and exportation of firearms." Id. The proposed rules would be enforced by gun dealers, law enforcement agencies, and courts. See id. Finally, the ATF recognized that the new rules, if enacted, "could affect public safety by providing law enforcement with the best available means for keeping firearms out of the hands of prohibited persons." Id. For example, the ATF specifically pointed out that the proposed rules would require the fingerprinting of all gun dealers, all dealers who store firearms for another person, all importers and manufacturers, and all manufacturers and importers of pistol-caliber weapons. See id. The ATF also recognized that the new rules would require the reporting of information regarding the name, age, and home address of all firearms buyers, as well as the name and age of all juvenile purchasers. See id. The ATF concluded that the proposed rules would help "to deter violent crime, to assist law enforcement in investigating crime, and to assist law enforcement efforts to combat the illegal firearms and explosives market." Id. The proposed rules were available to the public for review and comment. See id. Further, the proposed rules were promulgated following a rule making proceeding, held by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. See id. The proposal drew 120 comments, including five comments from the National Rifle Association and four comments from the National Shooting Sports Foundation. See id. In each instance, the comments accepted the requirement of fingerprinting by gun dealers, but objected to the requirement of fingerprinting by other firearms sellers. See id. The ATF responded to these comments. See Final Rule, 66 Fed. Reg. 56,643-51 (Nov. 4, 2001). The *838 ATF acknowledged that it expected most, if not all, firearms dealers would retain a customer's finger-prints. See id. at 56,648. This would be an important tool for gun dealers to store a customer's data if that customer had been convicted of a crime. See id. The proposed rules also addressed privacy concerns of firearms owners. See id. at 56,651. The proposed rules explained that "the need for the information exists to assist law enforcement officers in determining if a person is licensed or exempt from licensing, and to determine the validity of the firearms transaction." Id. The proposed rules stated that the information was also "necessary to determine if an individual should be entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System." Id. The ATF explained that fingerprinting of all firearm sales at the point of sale was not required under the new rules. See id. at 56,646. The ATF noted that the new rules had, in fact, eliminated the requirement that all gun buyers submit to fingerprinting as part of the firearms transaction. See id. This was a change from the current system in which gun dealers' employees would collect the fingerprints of individuals purchasing a firearm. See id. The new rules merely required a buyer to submit a fingerprint card to the buyer's state of residence. See id. The ATF explained that the state of residence would be given a choice in what type of form to use to collect the fingerprints. See id. The ATF continued that the state of residence could choose to collect fingerprints on the background check form. See id. C. Federal Firearms Law The Gun Control Act provides a framework for the regulation of firearms at the federal level. The Act provides for a system of federal registration and licensing of firearms manufacturers and dealers. See 18 U.S.C. § 923. There is no general federal registration of firearms. Instead, Congress has authorized the Attorney General to create systems of federal registration of specific firearms. See id. In creating the Federal Firearms License System ("FFL"), the ATF must submit a statement to Congress certifying that the data collection systems proposed will serve the purposes of the Gun Control Act. See id. § 923(g)(1)(B). Congress further set up the authority for the ATF to