The federal body armor bill draws its line at NIJ RF1. What RF1, RF2, RF3, HG1 and HG2 mean, which plates, helmets and shields would be covered, and why the threshold moves with NIJ.
The Aaron Salter, Jr., Responsible Body Armor Possession Act (H.R.3398 / S.4553) does not ban “body armor.” It bans civilian purchase, ownership and possession of enhanced body armor, a term the bill defines by ballistic performance: anything that meets or exceeds NIJ RF1. Everything below that line — handgun-rated soft armor — is outside the bill. Everything at or above it — rifle plates, rifle-rated helmets and shields, and any soft or flexible system that actually stops RF1 threats — is inside it.
1. The definition, word by word
“The term ‘enhanced body armor’ means body armor, including a helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds the ballistic performance of RF1 armor, determined using such standard as the National Institute of Justice has in effect at the time at which a person purchases, owns, or possesses such armor.” — S.4553 § 2(b), adding 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(39)
“Ballistic resistance … meets or exceeds.” The test is performance, not the label on the product, not the material, and not whether it was ever certified. An uncertified plate that defeats RF1 threats is covered; a plate marketed as “Level III” that does not would not be.
“Including a helmet or shield.” The bill expressly extends the term beyond torso armor.
“Such standard as the National Institute of Justice has in effect at the time.” The bill does not name NIJ 0101.07 or 0123.00. It adopts whatever NIJ publishes, now or later. If NIJ revises what RF1 means, the criminal threshold changes without a vote of Congress.
“Body armor” keeps its existing federal definition in § 921(a)(35): a product sold as personal protective body covering intended to protect against gunfire, whether worn alone or as part of another garment.
2. NIJ protection levels under 0123.00
NIJ now publishes protection levels and test threats separately from the body armor test method. NIJ Standard 0123.00 (October 2023; Addendum 1, October 31, 2024) specifies the levels and ammunition; NIJ Standard 0101.07 specifies how torso armor is tested against them. Level II and IIIA were replaced by HG1 and HG2 (handgun); Level III and IV were replaced by RF1, RF2 and RF3 (rifle), with RF2 a new intermediate level.
NIJ 0123.00 level | Replaces | Test threats (reference velocity) | Relation to the bill |
|---|---|---|---|
HG1 | Level II | 9mm Luger FMJ RN 124 gr (1,305 ft/s); .357 Magnum JSP 158 gr (1,430 ft/s) | Below threshold |
HG2 | Level IIIA | 9mm Luger FMJ RN 124 gr (1,470 ft/s); .44 Magnum SJHP (1,430 ft/s) | Below threshold |
RF1 | Level III | 7.62x51mm M80 ball 149 gr (2,780 ft/s); 7.62x39mm mild steel core, Type 56 (2,400 ft/s); 5.56x45mm M193 56 gr (3,250 ft/s) | At threshold: covered |
RF2 | New (market “III+”) | All RF1 threats plus 5.56x45mm M855 61.8 gr (3,115 ft/s) | Exceeds RF1: covered |
RF3 | Level IV | .30-06 M2 AP 165.7 gr (2,880 ft/s) only | See section 6 |
Reference velocities per NIJ 0123.00, Table 2; M80 mass per Addendum 1 (changed from 147 to 149 grains). Each level is a defined test, not a guarantee against every cartridge of the same caliber.
3. Which products would be covered
Product | Treatment under the introduced text |
|---|---|
HG1 or HG2 soft vest or panel (handgun-rated) | Not covered |
RF1 rifle plate (standalone or in-conjunction) | Covered |
RF2 rifle plate | Covered |
RF3 rifle plate | Covered in practice; formal question discussed in section 6 |
Uncertified plate that in fact defeats RF1 threats | Covered (performance, not certification, controls) |
Ballistic shield that defeats RF1 threats | Covered |
Ballistic helmet that defeats RF1 threats | Covered |
Handgun-rated helmet (tested to NIJ 0106.01/0108.01 Level IIIA) | Not covered |
Plate carrier with no ballistic inserts | Not covered (it is not body armor under § 921(a)(35)) |
Backpack insert at HG2 | Not covered; an insert that defeats RF1 threats would be |
4. Soft armor and flexible rifle armor
Material is not the line. A conventional HG2 soft panel is designed for handgun threats and is outside the bill. A flexible or soft-constructed system that actually meets RF1 performance would be inside it, and a rigid insert that does not reach RF1 would be outside it. As manufacturers bring lighter and more flexible rifle-threat systems to market, the share of “soft” products that fall inside the definition will grow.
5. Helmets and shields: a threshold with no certification pathway
The bill measures helmets and shields against “RF1 armor” under the NIJ standard in effect. There is no such NIJ certification for helmets or shields. NIJ states that its Compliance Testing Program does not currently evaluate helmets or shields for compliance with NIJ standards. The legacy documents — NIJ Standard 0106.01 (ballistic helmets, 1981) and NIJ Standard 0108.01 (ballistic-resistant protective materials, 1985) — are test protocols manufacturers cite, not certification programs. Current procurement specifications have moved to ASTM E3368 for helmets and ASTM E3347 (with the E3141 test method) for shields, both approved in 2023–2024.
Consequence: a prosecutor, a laboratory and a court would have to decide, case by case, whether a given helmet or shield “meets or exceeds the ballistic performance of RF1 armor” using a torso-armor standard that does not define a helmet or shield test. The introduced text gives no method for doing so.
6. The RF3 problem
RF2 includes every RF1 test threat and adds M855; an RF2 plate therefore “exceeds” RF1 by definition. RF3 does not include the RF1 threats. RF3 armor is tested only against .30-06 M2 AP, and multi-hit performance is optional at RF3. In practice, plates that stop M2 AP stop M80, M193 and mild-steel-core 7.62x39, and a court would almost certainly treat RF3 as exceeding RF1. Formally, however, an RF3 certificate does not demonstrate RF1 performance, and the bill’s “meets or exceeds” language has no stated rule for it. Expect this to be one of the first interpretive questions if the bill advances.
7. Exceptions and penalties
Three exceptions: government (federal, state, local, tribal) purchase, ownership or possession; “covered law enforcement officers” (qualified and qualified retired officers under 18 U.S.C. §§ 926B–926C, including corrections officers); and armor lawfully possessed before enactment. A knowing violation is punishable by a fine, up to five years’ imprisonment, or both. For who is left out and what grandfathering does and does not cover, see Is Body Armor Being Banned in the United States?
8. Frequently asked questions
Would Level III plates be banned?
A plate that performs at RF1 (the successor to Level III) is covered. Certification under the older 0101.06 standard is not the test; actual RF1 performance is.
Would Level IV plates be banned?
In practical terms yes. Formally, RF3 testing does not include the RF1 threats; see section 6.
Would Level IIIA body armor remain legal?
Under the bill, yes. HG2 is handgun-rated and below the threshold. State law still applies.
Would bulletproof backpacks be affected?
Only if the insert actually defeats RF1 rifle threats. Typical HG2 inserts are outside the definition. NIJ does not certify backpack inserts.
Does RF1 mean the same thing as Level III?
RF1 replaced Level III, but the test threats differ: RF1 adds 7.62x39 mild steel core and 5.56 M193 to the 7.62x51 M80 threat that defined Level III.
Sources
S.4553 introduced text (definition at § 2(b)): govinfo.gov
NIJ Standard 0123.00, Specification for NIJ Ballistic Protection Levels and Associated Test Threats (October 2023): ojp.gov (PDF); summary page
NIJ Standard 0123.00 Addendum 1 (October 31, 2024): nij.ojp.gov (PDF)
NIJ Standard 0101.07, Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor (nij.ojp.gov)
NIJ / OJP statement that the Compliance Testing Program does not evaluate helmets or shields: ojp.gov
NIJ Standard 0106.01, Ballistic Helmets (1981): ojp.gov (PDF)
ASTM, shield standards E3141 and E3347 (2023, 2024): astm.org
Legal Disclaimer
This article does not establish whether any particular product is legally covered. Protection levels describe defined test performance only.
