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

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

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
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
                            Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                      Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of                   )
                              )
Washington Broadcast Management Co., Inc.    )
                              )
Former Licensee, KBRO(AM)               )
Bremerton, Washington              )
                              )
For a Forfeiture                   )

                   MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


   Adopted:  August 12, 1999            Released:  August 13, 1999

By the Chief, Mass Media Bureau:

     1.  The Commission, by the Chief, Mass Media Bureau, acting pursuant to authority delegated by
Section 0.283 of the Commission's Rules, has before it a timely-filed petition for reconsideration of a
Forfeiture Order, DA 99-1230, released June 24, 1999.  In the Forfeiture Order, we concluded that
Washington Broadcast Management Co., Inc. ("WBM") willfully and repeatedly violated Section 310(d) of
the Communications Act and Sections 73.3540 and 73.1125 of the Commission's Rules.  

     2.  After having carefully reviewed the petition for reconsideration, we conclude that it raises no
new matter warranting a cancellation or reduction of the forfeiture.  Rather, the petition merely reargues
matters which we have already considered and addressed.  Therefore, denial is warranted.  See WWIZ,
Inc., 37 FCC 685 (1964), aff'd sub nom. Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965), cert.
denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966).  

     3.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that the petition for reconsideration IS DENIED.


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




                         Roy J. Stewart
                         Chief, Mass Media Bureau