Because the letter wasn't written asking about a 27" firearm......the determination request asked about a PISTOL.
Then there was no reason to list TWO qualifying features: 1) Under 26" and 2) actually concealed on the person.
I completely agree with you that there the phrase "actually concealed on the person" does not appear in the law.
It does appear in this letter. With the word "or" behind it.
The sentence can be broken into two parts because of the "or."
"A firearm of this type is properly classified an AOW if its overall length is less than 26 inches ..." (Totally agree. No confusion. The corollary to that is, a firearm of this type is NOT classified an AOW if its overall length is greater than 26".)
And:
"A firearm of this type is properly classified an AOW if ... it is actually concealed on the person."
If the firearm of this type is less than 26 inches overall, concealing it on the person is completely irrelevant. It is an AOW, period. There is no point in specifying a further qualification.
But they do. And they use "or," which illustrates that being less than 26 inches is not the only way such a firearm would become an AOW.
The only logical way to read that is, "if the firearm is GREATER than 26 inches overall, it can also be an AOW if it is actually concealed on the person."
That's not the law, precisely, but it is what they wrote.
...I keep re-reading this to see where my logic or comprehension of their clauses is flawed, and I don't see it. How do you dissect this paragraph and interpret the clause after "...OR if ..."?