********************************************************    
                         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                )
                                )
JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT    )       Case No. 97F001
                                )
Finder's Preference Request     )
Regarding Station WNIT929       )
Morristown, New Jersey          )


                             ORDER 


   Adopted:  August 31, 1999            Released:  September 1, 1999

By the Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau:

                         I. INTRODUCTION

     1.  On August 25, 1997, Radio Team, Inc. (Radio Team) filed a petition for reconsideration (Petition)
of the July 25, 1997, dismissal of its finder's preference request targeting Station WNIT929, Morristown, New
Jersey.  For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the July 25, 1997, action and dismiss the Radio Team
Petition.

                          II. BACKGROUND

     2.  In 1991, the Commission established the finder's preference program to augment its compliance
review efforts in the private land mobile radio service.  The program was fashioned to provide incentives for
individuals to survey licenses assigned in the 220-222 MHz, 470-572 MHz and 800-900 MHz bands in order
to identify licensees who had failed to construct, place in operation or continue to operate their stations. 
Specifically, if an entity demonstrated that an existing license in the above-referenced bands had cancelled
automatically for failure to comply with the Commission's Rules, then that entity was entitled to obtain a
preference for use of the licensed frequencies in the assigned area.

     3.  On July 15, 1996, Marina Concrete, Inc. (Marina Concrete) filed a finder's preference request
targeting Station WNIT929.  In its request, Marina Concrete provided prima facie evidence that Station
WNIT929, licensed to Jersey Central Power & Light Company (Jersey Central), had not been in operation for
over one year and was, therefore, in violation of Section 90.157(b) of the Commission's Rules.  Specifically,
the frequency pair for Station WNIT929 (898/937.9625) was extensively monitored and no activity was found. 
Furthermore, the target licensee failed to file an opposition.  For these reasons, the former Office of Operations,
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau), cancelled Jersey Central's license and awarded a dispositive
finder's preference to Marina Concrete on November 11, 1996.  On October 10, 1996, Radio Team filed the
second finder's preference request against Station WNIT929.  On July 25, 1997, the Bureau's, Public Safety
and Private Wireless Division (Division) dismissed Radio Team's finder's preference request based on the  prior
award to Marina Concrete.  On August 25, 1997, Radio Team filed the Petition seeking reinstatement of its
finder's preference request.  

                         III. DISCUSSION 

     4.   First, Radio Team argues that its finder's preference request should be reinstated, because Marina
Concrete never filed an application for authorization (formerly FCC Form 600) following the award of its
dispositive preference.  We disagree.  In adopting the finder's preference program the Commission clearly
expressed that the program was not offered on an unrestricted basis; rather, the underlying premise of the
finder's preference program, as discussed above, was to supplement the Commission's compliance efforts. 
"A finder targeting an expired license prior to its deletion from our database merely duplicates our established
reassignment procedures whereas, as noted in the Order, the finder's program is designed to supplement our
efforts."  Therefore, once the Commission institutes a compliance investigation, based either on a finder's
preference request or on the Commission's own compliance efforts, a subsequent finder's preference request
can not be processed and will be returned to the finder.  Radio Team is correct in its assertion that Marina
Concrete never filed an application for authorization for the frequency pair in question, nevertheless, the target
licensee was already under investigation by the Commission.  Therefore, this frequency was not a proper
subject of another subsequent finder's request.  As a result, the Division's dismissal of Radio Team's request
was appropriate.  
     5.  Radio Team also contends that, because Jersey Central's license was never deleted from the
Commission's databases, the licensee remained subject to an additional finder's preference request.  In fact,
Jersey Central's license was cancelled on November 22, 1996.   However, after a dispositive preference is
granted, we have generally delayed removal of the target license from the Commission's database until the
finder's application for authorization is processed.  The purpose of this hold on the defunct target license is to
prevent a frequency coordinator from unknowingly reassigning the target frequency to a third party.  Moreover,
the license for Station WNIT929 has continued to remain on the Commission's database only because of the
pendency of this proceeding.  We, therefore, affirm the dismissal of Radio Team's finder's preference request
and deny its petition for reconsideration. 

               IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDERING CLAUSES

     6.  For the reasons discussed above, the dismissal of Radio Team's finder's preference request against
Station WNIT929 is AFFIRMED.

     7.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 405 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 405 and Section 1.106 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.106,
that the petition for reconsideration filed by Radio Team is DENIED.

     8.  This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the
Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.131, 0.331.

                              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




                              D'wana R. Terry
                              Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division
                              Wireless Telecommunications Bureau