WPCW. 2MBVRKZ3|x7jC:, Xj\  P6G;XP"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4M (PCL) (Add) rm 8210HL4MPCAD.PRSXj\  P6G;\V ~XP2> K Z3|x"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4M (PCL) (Add) rm 8210HL4MPCAD.PRSx  @\V ~X@2 pvzpk`a8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  2 khv t a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# 2 )  f  a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# 2   _'a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 2Y)a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . 2 ga6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   2@?3 a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)Documentg2rev[PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:I\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>>>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\<?xxx,ix6X@`7X@?xxx,x `7X7nC:,|Xn4  pG;X7jC:,*9Xj\  P6G;XPW!@(#,*h@\  P6G;hP<R&HHH,>K,H6X@`7h@y.X80,*X\  P6G;P2a=5,*&a\  P6G;&PROS.WWB".i"cpw5959 :2TP_Server=internet.f X< !(#XU4  pQ|X# pph@hh Federal Communications Commission #o\  PC9XP# #XP\  P6Q9XP# 2#P  DA 97 é2018  T yxdddy T 2+Before the   Federal Communications Commission  X- Washington, D.C. 20554 #Xj\  P6G;9XP# TP  X-In the Matter ofR)hMM Docket No. 9647 R) OakhillJackson Economic Development R)  XO-T@hh ` ` xPCorporationxPR)  X8 -R)hpp  xx 0(#(#X Licensee of Station KOJC(FM)R) Cedar Rapids, IowaR) R) Order to Show Cause Why theR) License for Station KOJC(FM)R) Cedar Rapids, IowaR) Should Not Be RevokedR)  Xi-  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ă  X;-x Adopted: September 17, 1997 @hpp Released: September 19, 1997  X - By the Chief, Mass Media Bureau:      @x1. The Commission, by the Chief, Mass Media Bureau, acting pursuant to delegated  xauthority, has under consideration a Petition for Reconsideration timely filed on July 29, 1996,  xby OakhillJackson Economic Development Corporation ("Oakhill") and Friendship  xCommunications, Inc. ("Friendship"). Oakhill and Friendship request that the Commission (a)  X- x[reconsider its June 28, 1996, Order (DA 961048) revoking the KOJC(FM) license; and (b) grant  xthe application to assign the KOJC(FM) license from Oakhill to Friendship (File No. BALED XU-960607GZ). For the reasons that follow, we deny reconsideration.     ]x2. This proceeding began on March 19, 1996, when the Mass Media Bureau released its  X- x.Order to Show Cause and Hearing Designation Order, DA 96337 ("HDO"). The HDO ordered  xlOakhill to show cause why the license for KOJC(FM), Cedar Rapids, Iowa should not be  X - xNrevoked. The Commission's records indicated that KOJC(FM) had been off the air since  x\December 31, 1993, and had been off the air without authority since November 21, 1994. By  X"- x=Order, FCC 96M126, released May 24, 1996, Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Edward Luton  xterminated the hearing proceeding because Oakhill had failed to file the requisite notice of  xappearance. Pursuant to Section 1.92 of the Commission's Rules, Judge Luton also certified the  Xo%- x[case to the Commission. A copy of the ALJ's Order was mailed to Oakhill. Upon review of the  xfacts of the case, pursuant to delegated authority, the Bureau determined that Oakhill had no  x\intent to resume broadcast operations and had violated Sections 73.1740 and 73.1750 of the  xCommission's Rules. Accordingly, the Bureau concluded that Oakhill was not qualified to  X)- xremain the licensee of Station KOJC(FM), and it issued the Order which revoked the station'sX)0*0*0*'3'#X  X-license. Oakhill and Friendship seek reconsideration of the Bureau's Order.   x3. Reconsideration is appropriate where the petitioner shows either a material error or  xomission or raises additional facts not known or not existing until after the petitioner's last  X- xopportunity to present such matters. See WWIZ, Inc., 37 FCC 685, 686 (1964), aff'd sub nom.  X- x?Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966).  Xv- xApplying these standards, reconsideration of the Bureau's Order is not appropriate as discussed below.  X1-  Qx4. Oakhill observes that the Bureau's Order failed to consider the June 7, 1996,  X - xapplication to assign the KOJC(FM) license, as well as a June 18, 1996,  X <ԍ#XP\  P6Q9XP#A review of the Commission's files failed to reveal any correspondence from the Commission to Oakhill dated June 18, 1996. letter from the  xCommission and the licensee's response thereto, in which Oakhill explains the reasons for  xKOJC(FM)'s silence. Oakhill contends that had these matters been considered, revocation of its license for KOJC(FM) would not have occurred. We disagree.  X -  x5. As explained in the Bureau's Order, we concluded in light of the extended period of  xKOJC(FM)'s unauthorized silence, that Oakhill had no intent to resume broadcast operations.  xThis conclusion is further supported by Oakhill's failure to participate in the proceedings that  xresulted in its license revocation. Prior to its license being revoked, administrative proceedings  x>were held to determine if Oakhill was qualified to remain the licensee of KOJC(FM). Oakhill  X4- x.failed to file the requisite notice of appearance, which precipitated the ALJ's Order terminating  X- xthe hearing proceeding and certifying the case to the Commission. Other than file the noted  x-assignment application, after having waived the right to a hearing, Oakhill did nothing to indicate  xthat it intended to resume operations on KOJC(FM) or otherwise protect its license. The  x-submissions of Oakhill and Friendship do not alter the Bureau's assessment because they plainly  xadmit that Oakhill would not return the station to the air. Thus, although Friendship supposedly  X- xmakes a commitment in the assignment application to return the station to the air, the instant  X- xsituation is distinguishable from Southwestern Broadcasting Corporation, 11 FCC Rcd 14880  x(1996), where the licensee of a silent station participated in the hearing process; took affirmative  xsteps to resume broadcast operations during the pendency of the hearing process and did, in fact,  XN- xreturn the station to the air. See also, Keyboard Broadcasting Communication, 10 FCC Rcd 4489  X7- x(MMB 1995); Cavan Communications, 10 FCC Rcd 2873 (ALJ 1995); and David Lee  X - xCommunications, Inc., 9 FCC Rcd 1656 (ALJ 1994). Since Oakhill did not participate in the  xhearing process; took no steps to return KOJC(FM) to the air; and, in fact, did not do so, we  X-conclude that reconsideration of our Order revoking that license is not warranted.  X -  x6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED , that the petition for reconsideration filed July 29,  X!-1996, by OakhillJackson Economic Development Corporation IS HEREBY DENIE D .  X"- "Q%b0*0*0*'$"Ԍ X-  |x 7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED , that the application filed June 7, 1996, by Oakhill X- xzJackson Economic Development Corporation to assign the KOJC(FM) license to Friendship  X-Communications, Inc. , IS HEREBY DISMISSED as moot .   X-  x8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that a copy of this Order shall be sent by certified  xMail Return Receipt Requested to OakhillJackson Economic Development Corporation and to  Xv-Friendship Communications, Inc. X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: