In re Beckman Kirkland & Whitney

                                                 UNITED                                                 STATES OF AMERICA 

                                                                     Before                                                                     the

                                    SECURITIES            AND            EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 
Release No. 56399 / September 13, 2007 
ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT 
Release No. 2679 / September 13, 2007 
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING 
File No. 3-12760 
In the Matter of 
Beckman Kirkland & Whitney, 
James M. Kirkland, CPA, and 
Robert J. Whitney, CPA, 
Respondents. 
ORDER INSTITUTING PUBLIC 
ADMINISTRATIVE AND CEASE-AND-
DESIST PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO 
SECTIONS 4C AND 21C OF THE 
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 
AND RULE 102(e) OF THE 
COMMISSION’S RULES OF PRACTICE, 
MAKING FINDINGS, AND IMPOSING 
REMEDIAL SANCTIONS AND A 
CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER 
I.                                                                             
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate that 
cease-and-desist proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Beckman Kirkland & 
Whitney, James M. Kirkland, CPA, and Robert J. Whitney, CPA (collectively “Respondents”) 
pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and that 
public administrative proceedings be, and herby are, instituted against Beckman Kirkland &  
Whitney pursuant to Section 4C
1
 of the Exchange Act and Rule 102(e)(1)(iii) of the  
Section 4C provides, in relevant part, that: 
The  Commission  may  censure  any  person,  or  deny,  temporarily  or  permanently,  
to  any  person  the  privilege  of  appearing  or  practicing  before  the  Commission  in  
any way, if that person is found . . . to have willfully violated, or willfully aided 
and abetted the violation of, any provision of the securities laws or the rules and 
regulations thereunder. 
1 

Commission’s Rules of Practice.
2
                                                                            II.                                                                            
In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondents have submitted an 
Offer of Settlement (“Offer”) which the Commission has determined to accept.  Solely for the 
purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the 
Commission, or to which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the 
findings herein, except as to the Commission’s jurisdiction over them and the subject matter of 
these proceedings, which are admitted, Respondents consent to the entry of this Order Instituting 
Public Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Sections 4C and 21C of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 102(e) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 
Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order (“Order”), as 
set forth below. 
III. 
On the basis of this Order and Respondents’ Offer, the Commission finds
3
 that: 
A.        RESPONDENTS        
1. Beckman Kirkland & Whitney (the “Firm”) is a California partnership and a 
public accounting firm headquartered in Agoura Hills, California.  The Firm audited The 
Flamemaster Corporation’s financial statements for the company’s 2003 fiscal year ended 
September 30, 2003.  The firm resigned as The Flamemaster Corporation’s independent auditor 
on May 5, 2004. 
2. James M. Kirkland, CPA (“Kirkland”), age 46, is a certified public accountant 
licensed in the state of California since 1993.  Kirkland was the engagement partner in 
connection with the Firm’s audit of The Flamemaster Corporation’s financial statements for the 
company’s 2003 fiscal year ended September 30, 2003.   
3. Robert J. Whitney, CPA (“Whitney”), age 45, is a certified public accountant 
licensed in the state of California since 1990.  Whitney was the reviewing partner in connection 
with the Firm’s audit of The Flamemaster Corporation’s financial statements for the company’s 
2 
Rule 102(e)(1)(iii) provides, in relevant part, that: 
The Commission may censure a person or deny, temporarily or permanently, the 
privilege  of  appearing  or  practicing  before  it  in  any  way  to  any  person  who  is  
found . . . to have willfully violated, or willfully aided and abetted the violation of 
any   provision   of   the   Federal   securities   laws   or   the   rules   and   regulations   
thereunder. 
3 
The findings herein are made pursuant to Respondents’ Offer of Settlement and are not 
binding on any other person or entity in this or any other proceeding. 
2


2003 fiscal year ended September 30, 2003.  
B.        FACTS        
1. The Flamemaster Corporation (“Flamemaster”) is a corporation with its 
headquarters in Sun Valley, California. Flamemaster’s common stock traded on the pink sheets 
and was registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act until 
May 26, 2005, when the company filed a Form 15 with the Commission to terminate the 
registration of its stock. For its fiscal year ended September 30, 2003, Flamemaster reported 
revenues of $5.1 million and total assets of $7.4 million.   
2. Flamemaster has at all relevant times been an issuer as defined by the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Act”). 
3. The Firm audited Flamemaster’s 2003 financial statements included in 
Flamemaster’s annual report for fiscal year 2003 on Form 10-KSB, filed with the Commission 
on December 19, 2003.  As part of that audit, the Firm prepared and issued an audit report dated 
December 8, 2003 (the “Flamemaster audit report”), which the company included in its 2003 
Form 10-KSB.  Flamemaster paid the Firm $25,800 for the audit work.
4 
4. At the time the Firm issued the Flamemaster audit report, it was not registered 
with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the “Board”), as required by Section 
102(a) of the Act. 
5. Kirkland was the engagement partner on the Firm’s audit of Flamemaster’s 2003 
financial statements, and Whitney was the reviewing partner on the audit.  Kirkland and Whitney 
participated in the preparation and issuance of the Flamemaster audit report. 
6. By order dated June 8, 2005, the Board accepted an offer of settlement made by 
the Firm and disapproved an application for registration it had submitted based in part on the 
Firm’s violation of Section 102(a) of the Act in issuing the Flamemaster audit report.
5
 The order 
effectively prevented the Firm from becoming registered with the Board until after October 1, 
2005.
6
  Kirkland and Whitney have only worked as accountants through the Firm since before 
4 
During the course of the Commission’s investigation, the Firm voluntarily reimbursed 
Flamemaster $25,800 in audit fees.  In view of the Firm’s reimbursement, the Commission is not 
ordering disgorgement in this matter. 
5 
PCAOB Release No. 2005-012 (June 8, 2005).  The order also found that the Firm’s 
issuance of the Flamemaster audit report violated Board Rule 2100, which implemented Section 
102(a) of the Act. Id. 
6 
The order states that with respect to any new registration application the Firm submits 
after October 1, 2005, the Board will not issue a notice of hearing to determine whether to 
approve or disapprove such application based solely on the violations subject to the Board’s 
order. Id.  The Board noted in its order that it had received a registration application from the 
Firm on December 30, 2003.  The Board issued a Notice of Hearing on that application dated 
3


the Board’s order and have not otherwise been associated with a public accounting firm 
registered with the Board. 
C. VIOLATIONS 
1. Section 102(a) of the Act provides that “it shall be unlawful for any person that is 
not a registered public accounting firm to prepare or issue, or to participate in the preparation or 
issuance of, any audit report with respect to any issuer.”
7 
2. The provisions of Section 102(a) of the Act became effective on October 22, 
2003.
8 
3. Based on the conduct described above, the Firm willfully
9
 violated Section 102(a) 
of the Act. 
4. Based on the conduct described above, Kirkland and Whitney caused the Firm’s 
violation of Section 102(a) of the Act. 
D.        FINDINGS        
Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds that the Firm willfully violated Section 
102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and that Kirkland and Whitney caused the Firm’s 
violation of Section 102(a) of the Act. 
February 2, 2004. In response, the Firm requested a hearing but then, withdrew its application 
before a determination by the Board.  Id. 
7 
A violation of the Act or any rule that the Board issues under the Act is treated for all 
purposes in the same manner as a violation of the Exchange Act, including with respect to 
penalties. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 15 U.S.C.A. § 7202(b)(1) (West 2002). 
8 
Section 102(a) became effective “[b]eginning 180 days after the date of the determination 
of the Commission under Section 101(d)” of the Act that the Board was prepared to undertake its 
statutory responsibilities. The Commission made the required determination on April 25, 2003.  
See
 Order Regarding Section 101(d) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Securities Act Release 
No. 8223, Exchange Act Release No. 47746, 2003 WL 1956164  (Apr. 25, 2003). 
9 
“Willfully” as used in this Offer means intentionally committing the act that constitutes 
the violation. There is no requirement that the actor also be aware that he is violating a rule or 
statute.  See
 Wonsover v. SEC, 205 F.3d 408, 414 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Tager v. SEC, 344 F.2d 5, 8 
(2d Cir. 1965). 
4


E. UNDERTAKING 
Respondents undertake not to request, demand, or accept, directly or indirectly, any 
compensation from Flamemaster in connection with the audit work associated with the Flame- 
master report.  In determining whether to accept the Offer, the Commission has considered this 
undertaking. 
IV. 
 In view of the foregoing, the Commission deems it appropriate to impose the sanctions 
agreed to in Respondents’ Offer. 
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, effective immediately, that: 
1. Beckman Kirkland & Whitney 
A. The Firm shall cease and desist from committing or causing any violations 
and any future violations of Section 102(a) of the Act. 
B. The Firm is censured. 
C. The Firm may practice before the Commission as an independent accountant 
provided that: 
1. It is registered with the Board in accordance with the Act, and such 
registration continues to be effective; and 
2. It has submitted to the Commission staff (attention: Office of the 
Chief Accountant) the Board’s letter notifying the Firm that its registration application has been 
approved. 
2. James M. Kirkland, CPA 
A.            Kirkland            shall            cease            and desist from committing or causing any violations 
and any future violations of Section 102(a) of the Act. 
B. Kirkland may practice before the Commission as an independent accountant 
provided that: 
1. The public accounting firm with which he is associated is 
registered with the Board in accordance with the Act, and such registration continues to be 
effective; and 
2. He has submitted to the Commission staff (attention: Office of the 
Chief Accountant) the Board’s letter notifying the public accounting firm with which he is 
associated that its registration application has been approved. 
5


3. Robert J. Whitney, CPA 
A.            Whitney            shall            cease and desist from committing or causing any violations 
and any future violations of Section 102(a) of the Act. 
B.            Whitney            may            practice            before the Commission as an independent accountant 
provided that: 
1. The public accounting firm with which he is associated is 
registered with the Board in accordance with the Act, and such registration continues to be 
effective; and 
2. He has submitted to the Commission staff (attention: Office of the 
Chief Accountant) the Board’s letter notifying the public accounting firm with which he is 
associated that its registration application has been approved. 
By the Commission. 
       Nancy M. Morris
       Secretary 
6

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 Before the

   SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 


SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 
Release No. 56399 / September 13, 2007 

ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT 
Release No. 2679 / September 13, 2007 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING 
File No. 3-12760 

In the Matter of 

Beckman Kirkland & Whitney, 
James M. Kirkland, CPA, and 
Robert J. Whitney, CPA, 

Respondents. 

ORDER INSTITUTING PUBLIC 
ADMINISTRATIVE AND CEASE-AND
DESIST PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO 
SECTIONS 4C AND 21C OF THE 
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 
AND RULE 102(e) OF THE 
COMMISSION’S RULES OF PRACTICE, 
MAKING FINDINGS, AND IMPOSING 
REMEDIAL SANCTIONS AND A 
CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER 

I. 

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate that 
cease-and-desist proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Beckman Kirkland & 
Whitney, James M. Kirkland, CPA, and Robert J. Whitney, CPA (collectively “Respondents”) 
pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and that 
public administrative proceedings be, and herby are, instituted against Beckman Kirkland &  
Whitney pursuant to Section 4C1 of the Exchange Act and Rule 102(e)(1)(iii) of the  

Section 4C provides, in relevant part, that: 

The Commission may censure any person, or deny, temporarily or permanently, 
to any person the privilege of appearing or practicing before the Commission in 
any way, if that person is found . . . to have willfully violated, or willfully aided 
and abetted the violation of, any provision of the securities laws or the rules and 
regulations thereunder. 

1 



Commission’s Rules of Practice.2

 II. 

In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, Respondents have submitted an 
Offer of Settlement (“Offer”) which the Commission has determined to accept.  Solely for the 
purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the 
Commission, or to which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the 
findings herein, except as to the Commission’s jurisdiction over them and the subject matter of 
these proceedings, which are admitted, Respondents consent to the entry of this Order Instituting 
Public Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Sections 4C and 21C of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 102(e) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 
Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order (“Order”), as 
set forth below. 

III. 

On the basis of this Order and Respondents’ Offer, the Commission finds3 that: 

A. RESPONDENTS 

1. Beckman Kirkland & Whitney (the “Firm”) is a California partnership and a 
public accounting firm headquartered in Agoura Hills, California.  The Firm audited The 
Flamemaster Corporation’s financial statements for the company’s 2003 fiscal year ended 
September 30, 2003.  The firm resigned as The Flamemaster Corporation’s independent auditor 
on May 5, 2004. 

2. James M. Kirkland, CPA (“Kirkland”), age 46, is a certified public accountant 
licensed in the state of California since 1993.  Kirkland was the engagement partner in 
connection with the Firm’s audit of The Flamemaster Corporation’s financial statements for the 
company’s 2003 fiscal year ended September 30, 2003.   

3. Robert J. Whitney, CPA (“Whitney”), age 45, is a certified public accountant 
licensed in the state of California since 1990.  Whitney was the reviewing partner in connection 
with the Firm’s audit of The Flamemaster Corporation’s financial statements for the company’s 

2 Rule 102(e)(1)(iii) provides, in relevant part, that: 

The Commission may censure a person or deny, temporarily or permanently, the 
privilege of appearing or practicing before it in any way to any person who is 
found . . . to have willfully violated, or willfully aided and abetted the violation of 
any provision of the Federal securities laws or the rules and regulations 
thereunder. 

3 The findings herein are made pursuant to Respondents’ Offer of Settlement and are not 
binding on any other person or entity in this or any other proceeding. 

2




2003 fiscal year ended September 30, 2003.  

B. FACTS 

1. The Flamemaster Corporation (“Flamemaster”) is a corporation with its 
headquarters in Sun Valley, California. Flamemaster’s common stock traded on the pink sheets 
and was registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act until 
May 26, 2005, when the company filed a Form 15 with the Commission to terminate the 
registration of its stock. For its fiscal year ended September 30, 2003, Flamemaster reported 
revenues of $5.1 million and total assets of $7.4 million.   

2. Flamemaster has at all relevant times been an issuer as defined by the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Act”). 

3. The Firm audited Flamemaster’s 2003 financial statements included in 
Flamemaster’s annual report for fiscal year 2003 on Form 10-KSB, filed with the Commission 
on December 19, 2003.  As part of that audit, the Firm prepared and issued an audit report dated 
December 8, 2003 (the “Flamemaster audit report”), which the company included in its 2003 
Form 10-KSB.  Flamemaster paid the Firm $25,800 for the audit work.4 

4. At the time the Firm issued the Flamemaster audit report, it was not registered 
with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the “Board”), as required by Section 
102(a) of the Act. 

5. Kirkland was the engagement partner on the Firm’s audit of Flamemaster’s 2003 
financial statements, and Whitney was the reviewing partner on the audit.  Kirkland and Whitney 
participated in the preparation and issuance of the Flamemaster audit report. 

6. By order dated June 8, 2005, the Board accepted an offer of settlement made by 
the Firm and disapproved an application for registration it had submitted based in part on the 
Firm’s violation of Section 102(a) of the Act in issuing the Flamemaster audit report.5  The order 
effectively prevented the Firm from becoming registered with the Board until after October 1, 
2005.6  Kirkland and Whitney have only worked as accountants through the Firm since before 

4 During the course of the Commission’s investigation, the Firm voluntarily reimbursed 
Flamemaster $25,800 in audit fees.  In view of the Firm’s reimbursement, the Commission is not 
ordering disgorgement in this matter. 

5 PCAOB Release No. 2005-012 (June 8, 2005).  The order also found that the Firm’s 
issuance of the Flamemaster audit report violated Board Rule 2100, which implemented Section 
102(a) of the Act. Id. 

6 The order states that with respect to any new registration application the Firm submits 
after October 1, 2005, the Board will not issue a notice of hearing to determine whether to 
approve or disapprove such application based solely on the violations subject to the Board’s 
order. Id.  The Board noted in its order that it had received a registration application from the 
Firm on December 30, 2003.  The Board issued a Notice of Hearing on that application dated 

3




the Board’s order and have not otherwise been associated with a public accounting firm 
registered with the Board. 

C. VIOLATIONS 

1. Section 102(a) of the Act provides that “it shall be unlawful for any person that is 
not a registered public accounting firm to prepare or issue, or to participate in the preparation or 
issuance of, any audit report with respect to any issuer.”7 

2. The provisions of Section 102(a) of the Act became effective on October 22, 
2003.8 

3. Based on the conduct described above, the Firm willfully9 violated Section 102(a) 
of the Act. 

4. Based on the conduct described above, Kirkland and Whitney caused the Firm’s 
violation of Section 102(a) of the Act. 

D. FINDINGS 

Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds that the Firm willfully violated Section 
102(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and that Kirkland and Whitney caused the Firm’s 
violation of Section 102(a) of the Act. 

February 2, 2004. In response, the Firm requested a hearing but then, withdrew its application 
before a determination by the Board.  Id. 

7 A violation of the Act or any rule that the Board issues under the Act is treated for all 
purposes in the same manner as a violation of the Exchange Act, including with respect to 
penalties. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 15 U.S.C.A. § 7202(b)(1) (West 2002). 

8 Section 102(a) became effective “[b]eginning 180 days after the date of the determination 
of the Commission under Section 101(d)” of the Act that the Board was prepared to undertake its 
statutory responsibilities. The Commission made the required determination on April 25, 2003.  
See Order Regarding Section 101(d) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Securities Act Release 
No. 8223, Exchange Act Release No. 47746, 2003 WL 1956164  (Apr. 25, 2003). 

9 “Willfully” as used in this Offer means intentionally committing the act that constitutes 
the violation. There is no requirement that the actor also be aware that he is violating a rule or 
statute.  See Wonsover v. SEC, 205 F.3d 408, 414 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Tager v. SEC, 344 F.2d 5, 8 
(2d Cir. 1965). 

4




E. UNDERTAKING 

Respondents undertake not to request, demand, or accept, directly or indirectly, any 
compensation from Flamemaster in connection with the audit work associated with the Flame- 
master report.  In determining whether to accept the Offer, the Commission has considered this 
undertaking. 

IV. 

 In view of the foregoing, the Commission deems it appropriate to impose the sanctions 
agreed to in Respondents’ Offer. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, effective immediately, that: 

1. Beckman Kirkland & Whitney 

A. The Firm shall cease and desist from committing or causing any violations 
and any future violations of Section 102(a) of the Act. 

B. The Firm is censured. 

C. The Firm may practice before the Commission as an independent accountant 
provided that: 

1. It is registered with the Board in accordance with the Act, and such 
registration continues to be effective; and 

2. It has submitted to the Commission staff (attention: Office of the 
Chief Accountant) the Board’s letter notifying the Firm that its registration application has been 
approved. 

2. James M. Kirkland, CPA 

A. Kirkland shall cease and desist from committing or causing any violations 
and any future violations of Section 102(a) of the Act. 

B. Kirkland may practice before the Commission as an independent accountant 
provided that: 

1. The public accounting firm with which he is associated is 
registered with the Board in accordance with the Act, and such registration continues to be 
effective; and 

2. He has submitted to the Commission staff (attention: Office of the 
Chief Accountant) the Board’s letter notifying the public accounting firm with which he is 
associated that its registration application has been approved. 

5




3. Robert J. Whitney, CPA 

A. Whitney shall cease and desist from committing or causing any violations 
and any future violations of Section 102(a) of the Act. 

B. Whitney may practice before the Commission as an independent accountant 
provided that: 

1. The public accounting firm with which he is associated is 
registered with the Board in accordance with the Act, and such registration continues to be 
effective; and 

2. He has submitted to the Commission staff (attention: Office of the 
Chief Accountant) the Board’s letter notifying the public accounting firm with which he is 
associated that its registration application has been approved. 

By the Commission. 

       Nancy  M.  Morris
       Secretary  

6