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


                                )
In the Matter of                )
                                )
                                )
AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE       )  File No. D111260
                                )
                                )
for Reinstatement and Renewal of )
Authorization to operate under Call Sign   )
WPAP622 in Portland, Oregon in  )
the 800 MHz band                )


                    ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION


   Adopted:  September 22, 1999         Released:  September 23, 1999


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

                         I.  INTRODUCTION

     1.  In this Order on Reconsideration, we consider the request for reconsideration of
American Medical Response ("AMR") for reinstatement and renewal of authorizations for
channels associated with operations under Call Sign WPAP662.  For the reasons discussed
below, we deny AMR's petition for reconsideration.

                         II.  BACKGROUND

     2.  On September 26, 1992, Buck Medical Service, Inc. ("Buck Medical") received an
authorization for land mobile radio operations under Call Sign WPAP662 on 853.01250 MHz
General Category channels.  On July 14, 1997, AMR acquired the license authorization for the
channels associated with Call Sign WPAP662 via assignment from Buck Medical Service, Inc. 
The license authorizing operation on these two 800 MHz General Category channels indicated
an expiration date of September 26, 1997.  Because AMR failed to renew its license, the license
expired on September 26, 1997 and subsequently was removed from the Commission's
licensing database on December 10, 1997.  



     3.  On June 22, 1998, AMR submitted an application for reinstatement and renewal of
station authorization.  On August 27, 1998, this application for reinstatement was returned to
AMR because the application did not provide the necessary frequency coordination and
antenna information.  On September 8, 1998, AMR resubmitted its appication for reinstatement
and renewal.  On October 9, 1998, the Licensing and Technical Analysis Branch ("Branch") of
the Public Safety and Private Wireless Division ("Division") dismissed AMR's application.  On
November 9, 1998, AMR filed its petition for reconsideration of the Branch decision.

                         III.  DISCUSSION

     4.  AMR raises several issues for our consideration.  AMR objects to the expiration date
of its license, the renewal notification procedure, and the dismissal of its reinstatement
application.

     A.  License Term

     5.  In its petition for reconsideration, AMR argues that its license authorization was
improperly scheduled to expire on September 26, 1997.  As a general matter, station licenses in
the private land mobile radio licenses are issued for a term of five years.  The original license
for Station WPAP662 was issued to Buck Medical on September 26, 1992.  AMR acquired the
station authorized under Call Sign WPAP662 from Buck Medical via an assignment application
approved by the Commission on July 14, 1997.  As a station authorized for private land mobile
radio services, the license term for WPAP662 was a five-year term.   

     6.  The Commission's Rules distinguish the types of authorizations that would result
from an assignment application, and the specific authorization received depends upon the type
of service.  Former Section 1.924(a)(1) of the Commission's Rules provides that the new owner
must apply for assignment of the existing authorization in accordance with the rules under
which the station is authorized (emphasis added).  Conversely, former Section 1.924(a)(2) of
the Commission's Rules provides that the new owner of an acquired amateur, maritime,
aviation or personal station must apply for a new license (emphasis added).  In this instance, a
private land mobile radio operation may be assigned, and the new owner must apply for the
existing authorizations.  In the case of Call Sign WPAP662, the existing authorization had an
expiration date of September 26, 1997.  Consequently, AMR's receipt of the September 26, 1997
expiration date for Call Sign WPAP662 was proper and in accordance with the Commission's
Rules. 

     B.  Renewal Notice

     7.  Further, AMR alleges that the Branch improperly sent a renewal notice to Buck
Medical, a "former licensee."  AMR argues that the Branch should have sent the renewal notice
to AMR because the assignment application was on file with the Commission.  As a courtesy,
the Branch attempts to notify license holders of the upcoming expiration date of their license
authorizations by sending the licensee a renewal notification letter.  Approximately ninety
days prior to license expiration, the Branch sent Buck Medical, the licensee of record, a renewal
notice for the authorization associated with Call Sign WPAP662.  AMR did not become the
licensee of record until the assignment application was granted by the Branch on July 14, 1997. 
As a result, Buck Medical, and not AMR, was the proper entity to receive the renewal notice
when it was transmitted on or about June 26, 1997.  

     8.  Further, regardless of which entity was the actual recipient of the renewal notice at
issue, the failure to receive a renewal notice does not absolve a licensee of its responsibility to
renew its license in a timely fashion and in compliance with the Commission's Rules.  Section
90.127 of the Commission's Rules provides that ". . . applications for renewal should be filed no
more than ninety days nor less than thirty days prior to the end of the license term . . ." 
However, almost ten months beyond the time frame provided by the Commission's Rules,
AMR requested renewal of its license on June 22, 1998.  Accordingly, we find that AMR failed
to renew its license in accordance with the Commission's Rules for license renewal.

     C.  Opportunity to Renew

     9.  AMR argues that it ". . . never had a legitimate opportunity to renew its license . . ." 
We disagree.  When the assignment of Call Sign WPAP662 was granted, a license was issued to
AMR, and on its face, the license clearly indicated that the expiration date for the authorization
was September 26, 1997.  As stated previously herein, it is incumbent upon the licensee to
renew its license in a timely manner.  Here, AMR received a grant of assignment on July 14,
1997 and had until August 26, 1997 to file an application to renew its license in compliance with
Section 90.127(b) of the Commission's Rules.  In addition, former Section 90.149 of the
Commission's Rules provides that licensees have an additional thirty days after the expiration
of the license term to apply for reinstatement of its expired license.  So, not only did AMR fail
to renew timely, it failed to take advantage of the opportunity to file a reinstatement
application to have its license reinstated.  Thus, we conclude that AMR had ample opportunity
to renew or request reinstatement of its license within the guidelines established by
Commission's Rules. 

     D.  Reinstatement of License

     10.  As previously stated, licensees have an additional thirty days after the expiration of
the license term to apply for reinstatement of its expired licenses.  This section continues by
stating that the license will automatically cancel if an application for reinstatement is not
received within thirty days following expiration of the license term.  On June 22, 1998, AMR
submitted its letter requesting accommodation for its failure to file a timely renewal
application.  Clearly, this letter comes well after the end of the reinstatement period.  As a
result, the license cancelled automatically on September 26, 1997 and could not be reinstated at
the later date of June 22, 1998 as requested by AMR.

                         IV.  CONCLUSION

     11.  We affirm the Branch's decision to deny the application to reinstate and renew Call
Sign WPAP662.  Accordingly, we deny AMR's request for reconsideration.

                       V.  ORDERING CLAUSES

     12.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 4(i) and 405 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 405 and Sections 1.106, 1.931,
2.105 and 90.7 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.106, 1.931, 2.105, 90.7 the request for
reconsideration filed by American Medical Response on November 9, 1998 to reinstate and
renew license authorization IS DENIED.

     13.  This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Section 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