******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                                  July 9, 2007

   VIA CERTIFIED MAIL

   RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

   Mr. Lance McCuistion, d/b as

   LM Services and

   Scorpion Jammer Technology

   1224 West 96th Avenue

   Thornton, CO 80260-5467

   Re: File No. EB-05-SE-253

   Dear Mr. McCuistion:

   This is an official CITATION, issued to Mr. Lance McCuistion, d/b as LM
   Services and Scorpion Jammer Technology ("Scorpion") pursuant to Section
   503(b)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("Act") for
   marketing unauthorized radio frequency devices in the United States,
   specifically, the Scorpion "Ultimate" KA Jammer and Scorpion Jammer
   devices, in violation of Section 302(b) of the Act, and Section 2.803 of
   the Commission's Rules ("Rules"). In addition, you have failed to respond
   to directives of the Enforcement Bureau to provide certain information and
   documents. As explained below, future violations of the Commission's rules
   may subject your company to monetary forfeitures.

   On June 14, 2005, December 15, 2006, and January 25, 2007, staff from the
   Spectrum Enforcement Division observed on your website,
   www.scorpionjammers.com, that Scorpion was marketing the above-listed
   radio frequency devices. On July 2, 2007, staff from the Spectrum
   Enforcement Division observed that Scorpion was marketing the above-listed
   radio frequency devices on another website, www.activejammers.com.

   By Letter of Inquiry ("LOI") dated September 1, 2005, the Spectrum
   Enforcement Division of the Enforcement Bureau initiated an investigation
   into whether Scorpion is manufacturing and marketing in the United States
   unauthorized radio frequency devices, specifically, police radar jammers.
   In response to our LOI, we received a letter from Max McCuistion in which
   he stated that Lance McCuistion is Scorpion's sole proprietor and that
   Lance McCuistion conducts all business operations. The response also
   stated that any further request for information would have to be addressed
   to Lance McCuistion at Scorpion Jammer Technology, 1224 West 96th Avenue,
   Thornton, Colorado 80260. On February 5, 2007, the Spectrum Enforcement
   Division sent a second LOI to Scorpion, addressed to Lance McCuistion at
   the address provided by Max McCuistion. The February 5, 2007, LOI directed
   Scorpion to provide the answers to specific questions concerning its
   equipment and to provide samples of its devices for testing. Scorpion has
   neither provided a response to the questions posed, nor provided samples
   of the specified devices. United States Postal Service records show that
   the February 5, 2007, LOI was delivered to your address on February 10,
   2007.

   Section 302(b) of the Act provides that "[n]o person shall ... offer for
   sale, or ship devices or home electronic equipment and systems, or use
   devices, which fail to comply with regulations promulgated pursuant to
   this section." Section 2.803(a)(1) of the Rules, provides that:

   [N]o person shall sell or lease, or offer for sale or lease (including
   advertising for sale or lease), or import, ship, or distribute for the
   purpose of selling or leasing or offering for sale or lease, any radio
   frequency device unless ... [i]n the case of a device subject to
   certification, such device has been authorized by the Commission in
   accordance with the rules in this chapter and is properly identified and
   labeled as required by S: 2.925 and other relevant sections in this
   chapter.

   Pursuant to Section 15.201(b) of the Rules, intentional radiators must
   ordinarily be authorized in accordance with the certification procedure
   prior to marketing in the United States. It does not, however, appear that
   the jammer devices identified above are capable of receiving a grant of
   certification. In this regard, the stated purpose of police radar jammers
   is to block or interfere with licensed police communication. Such use is
   clearly prohibited by Section 333 of the Act, which prohibits any person
   from willfully or maliciously interfering with or causing interference to
   any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by the
   Commission. Thus, devices such as police radar jammers that intentionally
   interfere with licensed radio communications are not eligible for
   certification. Further, Section 2.803(g) of the Rules provides in
   pertinent part that:

   [R]adio frequency devices that could not be authorized or legally operated
   under the current rules ... shall not be operated, advertised, displayed,
   offered for sale or lease, sold or leased, or otherwise marketed absent a
   license issued under part 5 of this chapter or a special temporary
   authorization issued by the Commission.

   Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 403 of the Act, afford the Commission broad
   authority to investigate the entities it regulates. Section 4(i)
   authorizes the Commission to "issue such orders, not inconsistent with
   this Act, as may be necessary in the execution of its functions." Section
   4(j) states that "the Commission may conduct its proceedings in such
   manner as will best conduce to the proper dispatch business and to the
   ends of justice." Section 403 grants the Commission "full authority and
   power at any time to institute an inquiry, on its own motion, in any case
   and as to any matter or thing concerning which complaint is authorized to
   be made, to or before the Commission by any provision of this Act, or
   concerning which any question may arise under any of the provisions of
   this Act." Pursuant to this authority, we sent you LOIs (copies enclosed)
   directing you to provide certain information and documents on September 1,
   2005, and February 5, 2007. A representative of Scorpion, Max McCuistion,
   submitted an incomplete response to the September 1, 2007, LOI. As of this
   date, we have received no response to the February 5, 2007, LOI. Your
   partial response indicates that you received the first LOI. The certified
   mail tracking system provided by the United States Post Office indicates
   that you received the second LOI. Accordingly, we find that you violated
   Commission orders by failing to respond fully to Enforcement Bureau
   directives to provide certain information and documents.

   The record before us indicates that Scorpion apparently is and has been
   marketing the Scorpion "Ultimate" KA Jammer and Scorpion Jammer devices.
   Accordingly, it appears that Scorpion has violated Section 302(b) of the
   Act and Section 2.803 of the Rules by marketing the devices, which are not
   eligible for a grant of equipment certification because they are intended
   to interfere with licensed police radar, in violation of Section 333 of
   the Act. Furthermore, Scorpion apparently violated Commission orders by
   failing to respond to Enforcement Bureau directives to provide certain
   information and documents.

   A party may not ignore the directives in a Bureau inquiry letter. You are
   again ordered, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j) and 403 of the Act, to
   provide the information sought by our letter of February 5, 2007. You must
   provide this information within 14 days of the date of this citation. If
   sent by mail, this information should be sent to Susan Stickley, Spectrum
   Enforcement Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
   Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., Room 3-A463, Washington, D.C. 20554.
   Scorpion must also transmit a copy of this information via facsimile to
   202-418-7290.

   If, after receipt of this citation, Scorpion  violates the Communications
   Act or the Commission's rules in any manner described herein, including
   the continued marketing of police radar jammer devices and the continued
   failure to respond to the letter of inquiry issued by the Spectrum
   Enforcement Division, the Commission may impose monetary forfeitures not
   to exceed $11,000 for each such violation or each day of a continuing
   violation.

   If you choose to do so, you may respond to this citation within 30 days
   from the date of this letter either through (1) a personal interview at
   the Commission's Field Office nearest to your place of business, or (2) a
   written statement. Your response should specify the actions that Scorpion
   is taking to ensure that it does not violate the Commission's rules
   governing the manufacturing and marketing of police radar jamming devices
   in the future.

   Your nearest Commission field office is the Denver Field Office.   Please
   call Susan Stickley at 202-418-0871 if you wish to schedule a personal
   interview. You should schedule any interview to take place within 14 days
   of the date of this letter. You should send any written statement within
   14 days of the date of this letter to:

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   Federal Communications Commission

   445-12th Street, S.W., Rm. 3-C366

   Washington, D.C. 20554

   Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. S: 552(a)(e)(3), we are informing
   you that the Commission's staff will use all relevant material information
   before it, including information that you disclose in your interview or
   written statement, to determine what, if any, enforcement action is
   required to ensure your compliance with the Communications Act and the
   Commission's rules.

   The knowing and willful making of any false statement, or the concealment
   of any material fact, in reply to this citation is punishable by fine or
   imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. S: 1001.

   Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.

   Sincerely,

   Kathryn S. Berthot

   Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division

   Enforcement Bureau

   Enclosures

   47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5).

   Our information indicates that Scorpion may have discontinued
   manufacturing and marketing radio frequency devices designated as the
   Phantom RCD and the Phantom RDC XP. If Scorpion is continuing to market
   the Phantom RCD and/or the Phantom RCD XP, this citation also applies to
   those devices.

   47 U.S.C. S: 302a(b).

   47 C.F.R. S: 2.803.

   "Marketing is defined as "sale or, or offering for sale or lease,
   including advertising for sale or lease, or importation, shipment, or
   distribution for the purpose of selling or leasing or offering for sale or
   lease." 47 C.F.R. S: 2.803(e)(4).

   Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Deputy Chief, Spectrum Enforcement
   Division, to Max McCuistion, Scorpion Jammer Technology (September 1,
   2005).

   Based on your website, it appears that you have manufactured similar
   devices in the past:

   We are the manufacturer of the Phantom "RCD," Phantom XP and Scorpion
   Active Radar Jammers. Lance McCuistion has been involved in the production
   of these units since they started out being made by Phantom Technology in
   1996. Lance acquired the sole rights to keep producing the "active" radar
   jamming product called the Phantom after Phantom Technology went out of
   business. Now we have upgraded the old technology to manufacture the most
   powerful jammer yet capable of beating the new digital radar guns that
   have hit todays highways called the "Scorpion."

   However, we currently do not have sufficient evidence to confirm the
   manufacture of the noted models.

   Letter from Max McCuistion, Customer Service, Scorpion Jammer Technology,
   to Federal Communications Commission (Letter undated, received September
   26, 2005).

   Letter from Kathryn S. Berthot, Chief, Spectrum Enforcement Division,
   Enforcement Bureau, to Lance McCuistion, Scorpion Jammer Technology
   (February 5, 2007).

   47 C.F.R. S: 2.803(a)(1).

   47 C.F.R. S: 15.201(b).

   47 U.S.C. S: 333.

   47 C.F.R. S: 2.803(g).

   47 U.S.C. S:S: 154 (i), 154 (j) and 403.

   See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589,
   7591 (2002). In SBC Communications, the Commission assessed a $100,000
   forfeiture against a carrier for its willful refusal to supply a sworn
   declaration in response to an Enforcement Bureau letter of inquiry. The
   Commission stated: "[T]he order here was squarely within the Commission's
   authority and, in any event, parties are required to comply with
   Commission orders even if they believe them to be outside the Commission's
   authority." Id. at 7591.

   See 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(b)(3).

   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-2994

   2

   Federal Communications Commission DA 07-2994

                       FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

                            WASHINGTON, D.C.  20554