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

In re Applications of           )
                                )
Citicasters Co.                 )
(Assignor)                      )
                                )
and                             )  File No. BALH-990208GR
                                )  
CXR Holdings, Inc.              )
(Assignee)                      )
                                )
For Assignment of License of    )
Station WDUV(FM), New Port Richey, Florida)
                                )
and                             )
                                )
Clear Channel Broadcasting Licenses, Inc.)
(Assignor)                      )
                                )
and                             )  File No. BALH-990208GP
                                )  File No. BALH-990208GQ
CXR Holdings, Inc.              )
(Assignee)                      )
                                )
For Assignment of Licenses of   )
Station WFJO(FM), St. Petersburg, Florida)
Station WHPT(FM), Sarasota, Florida)
                                )


                  MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


   Adopted: October 28, 1999            Released: October 29, 1999 


By the Chief, Mass Media Bureau:

1.   The Commission, by the Chief, Mass Media Bureau, acting pursuant to delegated authority, has under
consideration: (1) our decision in Shareholder's of Jacor Communications, Inc.("Shareholder's of Jacor"),
14 FCC Rcd 6867 (1999); (2) a Petition for Reconsideration of part of that decision filed June 1, 1999 by
WGUL-FM, Inc. ("WGUL"); (3) responsive pleadings.  For the reasons that follow, we dismiss WGUL's
petition.  

2.   In Shareholder's of Jacor we concluded, inter alia, that a pleading styled as a Petition to Deny the
above-captioned assignment applications, filed March 29, 1999 by WGUL, was not a Petition to Deny because
it was not supported by affidavit or declaration under oath, as required by 47 U.S.C.  309(d)(1).  See also
47 C.F.R.  73.3584.  After considering WGUL's March 29, 1999 pleading as an informal objection, see 47
C.F.R.  73.3587, we granted the subject assignment applications.  On reconsideration, WGUL argues that
its March 29th pleading should have been treated as a Petition to Deny, because the Commission could have
taken official notice of facts sufficient to establish that grant of the proposed assignments would not serve the
public interest, convenience and necessity, since it would allow the proposed assignee in the transaction to
achieve "overwhelming dominance" in the relevant market. 

3.   The charges in WGUL's Petition to Deny included, for example, allegations concerning real-party-in-
interest issues and "oligopolistic advertising practices."  However, WGUL failed to offer any supporting
documentation whatsoever for its charges, which were themselves vague and without reference to specific
names, call signs, dates or other pertinent information.  Contrary to the "official notice" argument in the Petition
for Reconsideration, the Commission has no ability or obligation to look behind such generalizations. 

4.   WGUL has failed to demonstrate, on reconsideration, that affidavits were unnecessary to support its
March 29th pleading because of the official notice provision in 47 U.S.C.  309(d).  Therefore, since no
affidavits supported the March 29th pleading, we properly found that it was not a Petition to Deny.  As an
informal objector, WGUL lacks standing to bring the instant petition because it is not a "party to the
proceeding" within the meaning of Section 405 of the Communications Act and Section 1.106 of the
Commission's Rules.  Moreover, WGUL's Petition for Reconsideration has not demonstrated that its interests
were adversely affected by our decision in Shareholder's of Jacor, nor has it demonstrated why it was not
possible for it to meet the requirements necessary to participate as a petitioner to deny in the earlier stages of
the proceeding.   Other aspects of WGUL's Petition for Reconsideration - - for example, its contention that the
Commission's definition of "market" is flawed and its contention that the failure to take into account station
class in conjunction with numerical station limits - - are raised for the first time on reconsideration, even though
WGUL had full opportunity to present these arguments prior to issuance of the underlying decision.  Hence,
we find that WGUL has not complied with the procedural requirements of Section 1.106.  See Montgomery
County Broadcasting Corp., 65 FCC 2d 876, 877 (1977); 47 C.F.R.  1.106.  

5.   Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration filed June 1, 1999 by WGUL-FM,
Inc. IS DISMISSED.


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 


                         Roy J. Stewart
                         Chief, Mass Media Bureau