$// Maria M. Ochoa (Lenoir NC) FM CP MM 90-430 FCC 94-337 //$ $/ 1.106 Petitions for Reconsideration /$ $/ 500.3210 Standing /$ ///newjob/// $///FCC 94-337 12-30-94///$ Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 22054 FCC 94-337 In re applications of ) MM Docket No. 90-430 ) MARIA M. OCHOA ) File No. BPH-890615ME ) FOOTHILLS BROADCASTING, INC. ) File No. BPH-890616MR ) For Construction Permit for a ) new FM station, Channel 277A, ) at Lenoir, North Carolina ) ORDER Adopted: December 22, 1994; Released: January 6, 1995 By the Commission; 1. This order dismisses as repetitious a Petition for Reconsideration filed January 27, 1994 by Maria M. Ochoa. In Maria M. Ochoa, 8 FCC Rcd 3135 (1993), the Commission found that Ochoa was not qualified to be a licensee and affirmed the Review Board's denial of her application. 7 FCC Rcd 6569 (Rev. Bd. 1992). Subsequently, the Commission denied a petition for reconsideration filed by Ochoa, but remanded for further proceedings concerning the qualifications of Foothills Broadcasting, Inc. 9 FCC Rcd 56 (1993). Ochoa now seeks reconsideration of the order denying her previous petition for reconsideration. 2. Ochoa argues that the Commission erred in relying on a witness who was biased because Ochoa had caused his salary to be cut and because he had a close relationship with a competing applicant. She further asserts that the Commission engaged in a post hoc rationalization concerning the ALJ's refusal to allow Ochoa to call a rebuttal witness. Ochoa also contends that the Commission should consider her arguments because, in light of the remand proceedings involving Foothills, the time is not yet ripe for her to appeal her disqualification in this proceeding. Foothills asserts that Ochoa's principal arguments were previously considered and rejected by the Commission, and that Ochoa's second petition for reconsideration should be dismissed. 3. The Commission previously denied a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Ochoa. Ochoa's instant petition is an unauthorized pleading which will be dismissed as repetitious pursuant to 47 C.F.R.  1.106(k)(3). Its current arguments concern matters that have already been fully considered in the Commission's decision and order denying reconsideration. 8 FCC Rcd at 3136-37  11-12, 17 and 9 FCC Rcd at 58 n.4. Ochoa's procedural argument is also without merit. She has exhausted her administrative remedies, and the time for appeal is now ripe. Warren Price Communications, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 6850 n.1 (1993). Ochoa also continues to have standing to participate with respect to the Foothills remand proceedings as long as she pursues her appellate rights concerning the denial of her application. 4. ACCORDINGLY IT IS ORDERED, That the Petition for Reconsideration filed January 27, 1994 by Maria M. Ochoa IS DISMISSED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William F. Caton Acting Secretary