"plans more study"? Hardly a no. They went on to say,
“After the close of the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process (for example, through additional proposals and opportunities for comment) before proceeding with any framework,”In the words of Bluto from Animal House, they're saying, "Over? Nothing is over until we decide it is".
What I'd like to add is that if I interpret this right, what Katie Pavlich posted last Friday says the exemption is gone now. I don't care if they say it's an unintended "publishing error" and if they refer back to the '05 document, what's in that 2014 regulation bulletin is published law. It means what it says and you can bet a bunch of judges would rule against it now. The only argument we have is that regardless of that exemption, the M855/SS109 bullet doesn't meet the legal definition of armor piercing they provide in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B).