Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of	)

)

Nevada Wireless	)

)

Petition for Reconsideration, Motion for	)

Set Aside, and Motion for Stay of	)

Public Notice DA 97-1627	)

and	)

Petition for Reconsideration, Motion for	) Set Aside, and Motion for Stay of	)

Public Notice DA 97-1672	)

)

800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Auction	)

Upper 200 Channels	)

ORDER

Adopted: July 21, 1999	Released: July 22, 1999

By the Deputy Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau:

We have before us two Petitions for Reconsideration, two Motions for Set Aside, and two Motions for Stay filed by Nevada Wireless with respect to two Public Notices released by the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau ("Bureau") on July 30, 1997 and August 6, 1997, respectively. (We refer collectively to "Petitions for Reconsideration," "Motions for Set Aside," and "Motions for Stay.") For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss Nevada Wireless's Petitions for Reconsideration, Motions for Set Aside, and Motions for Stay as moot.

On July 30, 1997, the Bureau released a Public Notice announcing the auction date and filing deadlines for the auction of the upper 200 channels of the 800 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) service (Auction No. 16), which was scheduled to begin October 28, 1997. Subsequently, on August 6, 1997, the Bureau released a Public Notice announcing auction procedures for the same auction. On August 6, 1997, Nevada Wireless submitted a Petition for Reconsideration, a Motion for Set Aside, and a Motion for Stay of the July 30th Public Notice. On August 13, 1997, Nevada Wireless submitted a Petition for Reconsideration, a Motion for Set Aside, and an Emergency Motion for Stay of the August 6th Public Notice.

Nevada Wireless challenges the two Public Notices on various grounds. For example, Nevada Wireless claims that both Public Notices are defective for including specific information that Nevada Wireless considers violative of the Commission's rules and for failure to include other information that it believes the Commission's rules require. Ultimately, Nevada Wireless contends that its participation in the 800 MHz SMR auction in the face of its numerous objections to the July 30th Public Notice and the August 6th Public Notice would deprive it of its right to due process under the Fifth Amendment.

Despite its pre-auction objections, Nevada Wireless was a high bidder on 16 licenses in the 800 MHz SMR auction. Therefore Nevada Wireless's Petitions for Reconsideration, Motions to Set Aside, and Motions for Stay are moot and we find it unnecessary to consider Nevada Wireless's arguments. Moreover, we note that Nevada Wireless may not request a set aside, pursuant to Section 1.113 of the Commission's rules. Set aside actions must be made by the Commission, or its delegated authority, on its own motion.

IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 0.131 and 0.331 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.131 and 0.331, that Nevada Wireless's Petitions for Reconsideration, Motions for Set Aside, and Motions for Stay of the July 30th Public Notice and August 6th Public Notice ARE DISMISSED as MOOT.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Gerald Vaughan

Deputy Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau