If this comes to pass it would be so freakin’ cool.
I really love me some M-14. The TRW made sample I was issued for a time was one hell of a shooter.
I can’t help but wonder at what their permanent modifications will entail. Will they be swapping out the original receivers for semi only receivers? If so will those be forged or cast? I would want more details before I laid down my money.
ETA: The more I think about this the more I suspect they will be swapping out the serialized receiver. Thereby making the “once a machine gun, always a machine gun” standard inapplicable. With a swapped receiver these essentially become assembled “parts kit” guns.
Swapping the receivers out would be a work-around to the machine-gun issue. This would really mean they were “building” new guns put of parts on new receivers like they are doing with the new CMP Garands. This basically puts them on the same level as Fulton Armory (for example) or an early Springfield Armory rifle back when they used a lot of GI parts.
However, if that is what they are doing then wouldn’t it have been better for the announcement to say that CMP was starting production of new rifles using GI parts on a new receiver?
Another possibility is that ATF is reconsidering the “once a machine gun” standard - at least in this specific situation. Which brings up the question - is the standard a statutory law, or just an ATF rule? If it is a rule, then maybe a more friendly administration is altering the rule. After all, at one time the ATF wanted an LEO sign-off on MG transfers, but that was eventually changed.
If the rule is being waived in this case, CMP could just mill the selector shaft off the receiver and toss the full-auto parts, leaving them with an original GI receiver that would appeal to collectors. And such a gun would in no way be convertible back into class three status, at least by any standard means.
And while typing this I did think of one more scenario. All the M-14s were built before 1986, and while they are not in the NFA registry per se, they are accounted for in government records.
What if the guns are to be sold as NFA items with the $200 transfer fee? In this case the modification into semi-auto would be more for optics, to avoid the accusation that the government was putting machine guns into civilian hands.
This is all speculation on my part. We will just have to wait for further details. Interesting that they are talking about this happening rather soon - they might have been keeping the whole thing under wraps until the process was finalized, to avoid drawing attention from the anti-gun crowd, who would jump all over the idea.
I remember that when the CMP was given permission to sell 1911s the internet had people claiming that the CMP would be releasing “nontrackable” war weapons into civilian hands.
We will see what happens. But man, I would sure love to have an original M-14, even though I have no real need for one.
Never been an M14 guy, but that would be nice to have an option for a real one instead of Springfield’s garbage.
To me at least; I have an M1A from Springfield, which if the recievers are being swapped kind of puts me at having two of the nearly same rifles, which, yes, one for my Son would be nice but;
The Magazines, parts and stocks would be a very nice thing to have access to. I would like a GI Fiberglass stock, a lifetime supply of parts and we can fill the back of my Taco with magazines.
After that, yeah I would like a GI M1A but, my guess is when making Garand recievers a light bulb went off and these will be built on recivers we built at the CMP. But a “Parts Kit” I could send to Smith Enterprises, Yeah, here’s my credit card.
Update.
Go to the 4:30 mark he is claiming it is a fifteen minute job to convert them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4YJqWs5cr0
Maybe they are hoping a lot of people will get intrested in shooting before the Chinese invade us?
Guess it depends on what he has in mind. Military M-14s could have the selector switch removed and a lock installed that left the full auto capability there if the armorer reinstalled the selector switch. But that would not be considered permanently altered. by the ATF.
My guess is that they would need to mill off the shaft that holds the selector mechanism, leaving a receiver that would be like an M1-A. I am not a machinist, so I have no idea how long that would take, but if set up to do on a mass scale I can see it taking just a few minutes.
I did not watch the whole video - just forwarded to the mark you suggested. He may well be right, but I doubt he has any more real information that we do. But somehow, he turned this sparse info into a 9-minute video. Strikes me as borderline click bait to try to get some ad revenue.
But of course, I am speculating here too I admit. But at least you do not have to sit through any ads to get my uninformed opinions 
As to myself, I have an older M1-A that was made way back when SA still used a lot of GI parts, and I don’t think I have fired it in over two decades - so as I said, I really do not need an M-14 for shooting.
But the historian in me would love to have one as an artifact - just because.
I’ve got everything back to an 03A3 and at one point I was looking in to writing a book on the Main Battle Rifles of the Allies and Axis and compare the rifles to the Economic situation of the Nation that produced it pre WWII.
Pretty obscure topic but, for the most part the comparison comes about because of the econmic events that caused that particular Rifle.
Everyone of those Nations could have made a single excellent Battle Rifle but, what happens to the quality and reliability when you need 100,000 battle rifles. What pressures do cost influence and what compromises they were willing to make.
Unforunatly I will never be an Author.
Properly done, that
Properly done - with years of research - that could be a dissertation-level study. But most dissertations do not get read by very many people. A lower-level study might attract some interest among hobbyists, but they will want cheaper prices and thinner books.
But it would be interesting if properly done. Take for example your 03-A3. The US had the industrial capacity to devote an assembly line to manufacture a weapon that was never meant to be more than a substitute standard for units far down the supply chain, or who would be unlikely to see much combat. I imagine a lot of 03-A3s ended up in the small-arms lockers on ships. issued to MPs, or used for lend-lease. Pictures of US infantry using them are not very common.
My Ex Father in Law did Close Air Support as a Navy Guy in the Pacific for the Marines. Now to say this Guy was short, was only half of the story.
He had a Picture of him holding an issued 03A3 with the bayonet attatched and it was looked 2 inches of being taller than him. His Helmet looked like a Mop bucket. I mean this Guy was tiny but he was a hell of a Guy.
It’s a Hell of a thing when you like your inlaws more than your Wife.