Protection Enterprises LLC
Lco FirearmsWarning letter
This gun manufacturer was cited for 7 violations. The inspection resulted in a warning letter.
A warning letter is the least severe action the ATF can take against a licensee with compliance issues. The letter advises the licensee to comply with regulations.
ATF data indicates that this license is no longer active.
|Type||Manufacturer of firearms|
Compliance inspections are conducted by one or more ATF officers. After the lead investigator submits a recommendation, one or more ATF supervisors will review the inspection and either concur with or adjust the recommendation.
This page contains information about a single inspection conducted between 2015 and 2017. The ATF may have inspected this licensee before and/or after the inspection detailed here.
Officers spent a total of 20 hours conducting this inspection. 28 days passed between the assignment and the final review. The licensee received a final outcome of warning letter.
Hover over underlined text to see definitions of common terms.
Conduct full manufacturer of firearms inspection. Refer to IO Manual Chapter C - Firearms Inspections and FY 16 Domain Assessment. Ensure licensee has filed all AFMERs , if any are missing obtain them during inspection. Conduct 100% inventory and ATF Form 4473 review unless authorized in advanced by Area Supervisor and DIO .
ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION : A Warning Conference is warranted based licensee’s failure to obtain complete F4473 on 10% or more of total forms, failure to properly record any form of ID on 5% or more of total forms, and failure to conduct NICS on three individuals that were not prohibited (redacted.) Licensee had three (3) total acquisitions, four (4) total dispositions and four (4) ATF Forms 4473 reviewed for the inspection period. Licensee exhibited high error percentages for the violations cited based solely on the same mistakes being made in redacted forms cited. Traceability of firearms was not compromised due to firearm identification information being properly recorded in the acquisition and disposition record where said information was lacking on the respective ATF Form 4473. Licensee had conducted the background check for forms cited in violation 27 CFR 478.124 (c)(3)(iv) but recorded the NICS transaction number on a separate document, not in Block 21b on the ATF Form 4473 as required. An alternate recommendation is made for Violations, a Warning Letter only, and no recall inspection . IOI redacted instructed Richard Roberts on how to properly complete an ATF Form 4473, what is required to be in compliance regarding record keeping as a Type 07 Manufacturer of Firearms Licensee, and what is required to be in compliance with marking of manufactured firearms. Licensee stated he had a better understanding of the requirements after instruction by IOI redacted. It is felt ATF would be better served by issuing a Warning Letter to Licensee than pursuing a Warning Conference for the violations cited.
From October 24,2016 through October 27,2016 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Industry Operations Investigator redacted conducted a recall inspection on federal firearms licensee ( FFL ) Protection Enterprises, LLC. Licensee was cited for seven (7) violations of the Gun Control Act , most stemming from errors on ATF Forms 4473 ; notably, on redacted of the four (4) forms reviewed no information was completed in Sections B-D. When Considering percentages, violations merit a warning conference; however, it should be noted that: 1. Licensee only conducted four (4) ATF Forms 4473 in the past 12 months; 2. Licensee has had no traces; 3. Licensee had all information (including NICS information) for forms and all forms were immediately corrected. Therefore, a warning letter is recommended. Further, licensee is a manufacturer, which would require ATF to conduct inspections every three (3) to five (5) years regardless. Given the complete lack of business, a recall inspection would not be recommended at this time as it would potentially be a misuse of resources at this time.
Concur with alternate recommendation to issue a Warning Letter, although DIO believes a recall inspection is warranted within two to three years from the on-site end date of this inspection to ensure compliance and to verify the FFL is following instructions and guidance provided to him by IOI redacted.
If an inspection uncovers regulatory violations, the licensee receives a report outlining these violations. This section lists the violations found in the inspection, as well as a general description of each offense. More details on the nature of the licensee's specific violations may be found in the report PDF.
This licensee was cited for 7 violations.
|1||478.124(c)(1)||Failure to obtain a Form 4473 showing the transferee's name, sex, address, date and place of birth, and other required information. 🔗|
|2||478.124(c)(3)(i)||Failure to obtain identification from a transferee or document it on Form 4473. 🔗|
|3||478.124(c)(3)(iv)||Failure to record the date NICS was contacted and the NICS response on Form 4473. 🔗|
|4||478.124(c)(4)||Failure to record on Form 4473 the manufacturer, importer, type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of the firearm being transferred. 🔗|
|5||478.124(c)(5)||Failure of the licensee to sign or date a Form 4473. 🔗|
|6||18 USC 923(g)(5)(A)||Failure to submit record information required by the Attorney General. (This citation is often used to enforce the requirement for licensees in Southwest border states to report multiple sales of semi-automatic rifles.) 🔗|
|7||478.21(a)||Failure to provide all of the information called for in required forms. 🔗|
Source: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. About the data »