*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 14044.doc*
 PUBLIC  NOTICE  FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION  445  TWELFTH  STREET,  S.  W.  WASHINGTON,  D.  C.  20554  DA  02-  38  News  media  information  202/  418-  0500  Fax-  On-  Demand  202/  418-  2830  Internet:  http://  www.  fcc.  gov  ftp.  fcc.  gov 
 Released:  January  9,  2002 
 WIRELESS  TELECOMMUNICATIONS  BUREAU  APPROVES  REQUEST  FOR  DISMISSAL  OF  PETITION  FOR  DECLARATORY  RULING 


 On  September  22,  2000,  Pacific  Wireless  Technologies,  Inc.  (Pacific),  filed  a  Petition  for 
 Declaratory  Ruling  (Petition)  requesting  that  the  Commission  clarify  the  meaning  of  section  90.621(  b)(  2) 
 of  the  Commission’s  rules  1  regarding  the  appropriate  geographic  separation  for  800  MHz  co-  channel 
 licensees  in  Northern  California.  On  March  9,  2001,  the  Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau  (Bureau) 
 issued  a  Public  Notice  seeking  comment  on  Pacific’s  Petition.  2  The  Bureau  received  initial  comments 
 from  Nextel  Communications,  Inc.  (Nextel),  3  Applied  Technology  Group,  Inc.  4  and  James  A.  Kay,  Jr.  5 
 On  April  11,  2001,  Pacific  filed  Reply  Comments.  6 


 On  December  20,  2001,  Pacific  filed  a  Request  for  Dismissal  of  Pleadings  and  Termination  of 
 Proceeding  (Request  for  Dismissal).  Pacific  seeks  dismissal  of  its  Petition  and  termination  of  the 
 proceeding  due  to  changed  circumstances  resulting  from  the  Bureau’s  November  16,  2001  consent  to  the 
 assignment  of  virtually  all  of  Pacific’s  800  MHz  authorizations  to  Nextel.  7  Pacific  indicated  that  closing 
 on  the  underlying  Nextel  transaction  would  occur  on  or  about  December  21,  2001,  8  and  that  the  facilities 
 for  which  co-  channel  protection  was  sought  would  be,  at  the  time  of  closing,  assigned  and  thus  licensed  to 
 Nextel.  Accordingly,  Pacific  states  that  its  Petition  would  be  moot.  9 


 1  47  C.  F.  R.  §  90.  621(  b)(  2). 
 2  See  Public  Notice,  “Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau  Seeks  Comment  on  Pacific  Wireless 
 Technologies,  Inc.  Petition  for  Declaratory  Ruling,”  DA  01-  623  (CWD  rel.  March  9,  2001).  In  the  Public  Notice, 
 the  Bureau  noted  that  Pacific’s  request  for  clarification  regarding  rule  section  90.  621(  b)(  2)  stemmed  from 
 negotiations  between  Pacific  and  Nextel  pursuant  to  section  90.699  of  the  Commission’s  rules.  See  47  C.  F.  R. 
 §  90.  699. 


 3  See  Comments  of  Nextel  Communications,  Inc.,  filed  March  30,  2001. 


 4  See  Comments  of  Applied  Technology  Group,  Inc.,  filed  March  23,  2001. 
 5  See  Comments  of  James  A.  Kay,  Jr.,  filed  March  28,  2001. 
 6  See  Reply  Comments  of  Pacific  Wireless  Technologies,  Inc.,  filed  April  11,  2001. 
 7  See  Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order,  DA  01-  2685  (WTB  rel.  November  16,  2001). 
 8  See  Request  for  Dismissal  at  2. 
 9  Id. 
1
 2 
 We  have  reviewed  Pacific’s  Request  for  Dismissal  and,  given  the  changed  circumstances 
 involving  Pacific  and  Nextel,  find  that  a  grant  of  Pacific’s  request  is  in  the  public  interest.  We  therefore 


 dismiss  Pacific’s  Petition  for  Declaratory  Ruling  and  terminate  this  proceeding.  This  action  is  taken 
 pursuant  to  delegated  authority  under  Section  0.331  of  the  Commission’s  rules.  10 


 Action  by  Deputy  Chief,  Commercial  Wireless  Division,  Wireless  Telecommunications  Bureau. 
 For  further  information,  contact  Donald  Johnson,  Commercial  Wireless  Division,  at  (202)  418-  7444. 


 10  47  C.  F.  R  §  0.331. 
2