FCC Web Documents citing 25.140

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-113A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-113A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-113A1.txt
  • Revoke at 10. Consequently, U.S. priority status at 47� W.L. is not currently at risk. Columbia Petition to Revoke at 7-9, citing Establishment of Satellite Systems Providing International Communications, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 84-1299, 101 FCC 2d 1046, 1174 (1985) (Separate Systems Order), recon. 61 R.R.2d 649 (1986), further recon. 1 FCC Rcd 439 (1986), 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e); Columbia Application at 3-4, 15-16. See Orion Satellite Corp., Application for Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Separate International Satellite Communications System, Order and Authorization, 10 FCC Rcd 12307 (Int'l Bur. 1995). Loral Petition at 6. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f); Separate Systems Order, 101 FCC 2d at 1174-75 (para. 261). Separate Systems Order, 101 FCC 2d at 1174 (para.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2689A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2689A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2689A1.txt
  • Program to Implement the Provision of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, 2 FCC Rcd (``Fee Collection Order''), clarified on recon., 3 FCC Rcd 5987 (1988); Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1985, Pub L. No. 99-272 5002(e), (f), 100 Stat. 82, 118-21 (1986). See 47 U.S.C. 158(d)(2) and 47 CFR 1.1117. See also, 47 CFR 25.114, 25.117, 25.118, and 25.140]. Jackson Radio Works, Inc. - Request for waiver of late charge penalty for the late payment of regulatory fees for Jackson Radio Works, Inc. at Jackson, MI. Denied. (October 18, 2000). [See 47 CFR 1.1164(b)]. KAPS Radio - Request for waiver of the late charge penalty for late payment of FY 1998 regulatory fees for KAPS at Mount Vernon, WA.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2796A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2796A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2796A1.txt
  • services they choose, subject to the licensee obtaining applicable international approvals and authorizations by other administrations to provide service to, from, or within their respective territories. Therefore, all FSS licensees in the Ka-Band are permitted to provide any combination of domestic and international services without obtaining separate approval from the Commission for specific service areas. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. �� 25.140(c), 25.142(a)(4). See, e.g., Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies Pertaining to a Mobile Satellite Service in the 1610-1626.5/2483.5-2500 MHz Frequency Bands, CC Docket No. 92-166, Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 5936, 5948-50 �� 26-30 (1994), on recon., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 12861 (1996). Id. at 5948 � 26. See Rulemaking to Amend
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2796A1_Erratum.doc
  • services they choose, subject to the licensee obtaining applicable international approvals and authorizations by other administrations to provide service to, from, or within their respective territories. Therefore, all FSS licensees in the Ka-Band are permitted to provide any combination of domestic and international services without obtaining separate approval from the Commission for specific service areas. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. �� 25.140(c), 25.142(a)(4). See, e.g., Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies Pertaining to a Mobile Satellite Service in the 1610-1626.5/2483.5-2500 MHz Frequency Bands, CC Docket No. 92-166, Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 5936, 5948-50 �� 26-30 (1994), on recon., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 12861 (1996). Id. at 5948 � 26. See Rulemaking to Amend
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2835A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2835A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-2835A1.txt
  • FCC Rcd at 24176 (para. 191) (financial qualification showing is not required for in-orbit satellite); Telesat November 28 ex parte statement at 1. When Telesat filed its original Permitted List request, it had not yet launched ANIK F1. At that time, Telesat sought waiver of the requirement to provide the detailed financial information set forth in Sections 25.114(c)(13), 25.114(c)(17), and 25.140 of the Commission's rules. Telesat Petition at 4. Because Telesat subsequently launched ANIK F1 on November 20, 2000, it no longer needs to demonstrate financial qualifications, and its petition for waiver is moot. First ANIK E1 and E2 Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 3653 (para. 13). The DISCO II Order also observed that the Commission generally requires a space station
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1241A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1241A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1241A1.txt
  • (para. 6). See Columbia Modification Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 15570 (para. 8). For more on the Commission's orbital assignment policy, see Establishment of Satellite Systems Providing International Communications, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 84-1299, 101 FCC 2d 1046, 1174 (1985) (Separate Systems Order), recon. 61 R.R.2d 649 (1986), further recon. 1 FCC Rcd 439 (1986), 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). Columbia Modification Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 15570 (para. 8), citing Orion Satellite Corp., Application for Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Separate International Satellite Communications System, Order and Authorization, 10 FCC Rcd 12307 (Int'l Bur. 1995) (1995 Loral Order). Columbia Modification Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 15570 (para. 8). Columbia Modification Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 15570 (para.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1427A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1427A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1427A1.txt
  • Orbital Reply at 5-6. Orbital Reply at 4-5. Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 85-135, FCC 85-395, 58 Rad. Reg. 2d 1267, 1278 (para. 78) (released Aug. 29, 1985). Loral Application, Exh. 5. Columbia Southern Hemisphere Order at paras. 6-7. Columbia 1998 Modification Order, 13 FCC Rcd 17772. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(a)(2). See also Columbia Communications Corporation, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 15 FCC Rcd 15566, 15569 (para. 6) (Int'l Bur., 2000) (Columbia 2000 Modification Order) (denying Columbia's application to add Ku-band authority to its C-band license at the 47� W.L. orbit location because it would be inconsistent with Loral's authority at that location); 47 C.F.R. � 25.273(a)(3) (prohibiting transmissions that cause unacceptable
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1681A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1681A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1681A1.txt
  • 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services, Third Report and Order, FCC 97-378, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997)(``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, at �17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order''). Ka-Band
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1682A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1682A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1682A1.txt
  • Commission's Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''), 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order at � 17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order'').
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1683A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1683A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1683A1.txt
  • the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Service, Third Report and Order, (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''), 12 FCC Rcd. 22310 (1997), Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, DA 01-1693, at � 17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1686A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1686A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1686A1.txt
  • the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services, Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997) (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, at �17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order''). Ka-Band
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1687A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1687A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1687A1.txt
  • 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services, Third Report and Order, FCC 97-378, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997)(``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, at �17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order''). Ka-Band
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1688A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1688A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1688A1.txt
  • GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''), Third Report and Order, FCC 97-378, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997). Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, at � 17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (Two-Degree Spacing Order).
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1689A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1689A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1689A1.txt
  • to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services, FCC 97-378, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997) (Ka-Band FSS Rules Order); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (released May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, at �17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order''). Ka-Band
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1690A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1690A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1690A1.txt
  • Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''), 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997), Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). DISCO II, 12 FCC Rcd at 24107-56 (competition considerations), 24157-59 (spectrum availability), and 24169-72 (national security/law enforcement issues). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). Wait Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir.1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion see Second Round GSO-Band Assignment Order at � 17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order''). Ka-Band
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1691A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1691A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1691A1.txt
  • Commission's Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''), 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320, � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order at � 17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (``Two-Degree Spacing Order'').
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1692A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1692A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1692A1.txt
  • GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''), Third Report and Order, FCC 97-378, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997). Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, DA 01-1693, at � 17. Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d (P&F) 577, 589 (1983) (Two-Degree
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1693A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1693A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1693A1.txt
  • adopted in 1983, was designed to accommodate the maximum number of satellites communicating in the C- and Ku- frequency bands, so that the increasing demand for satellite services could be met. The Commission's rules require that an applicant for a GSO FSS space station authorization demonstrate how the proposed space station complies with two-degree orbital spacing requirements. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140. In the Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, we found it was in the public interest to continue our policy of maximizing the number of satellites that can be accommodated in-orbit, by applying two-degree spacing to U.S.-licensed, commercial Ka-band satellites. We continue to apply that policy in this Second Round. Qualifications Requirements All of the licensing qualification requirements and service rules that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1694A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1694A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-1694A1.txt
  • the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed Satellite Services, Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997) (``Ka-Band FSS Rules Order''); Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-172 (rel. May 25, 2001) (order on petitions for clarification or reconsideration). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1157 (D.C. Cir. 1969). Ka-Band FSS Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320 � 24. For a more detailed discussion, see Second Round GSO Assignment Order, at � 17. These were the 113� W.L., 83� W.L., and 112� E.L. orbit locations. See TRW Application at 8-9. See Letter from
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2040A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2040A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2040A1.txt
  • 16, 2001, we placed both of EUTELSAT's petitions on public notice. See Report No. SAT-00064, released Feb. 16, 2001. See AB-1 Satellite at 12.5� W.L. Petition at 2. Id. at 2, 6. Id. Attached to its petition is a completed FCC Form 312, Attachment A (Technical Information), and Attachment B (Financial Information). See e.g., 47 C.F.R �� 25.114, 25.137, and 25.140. See AB-2 Satellite at 8� W.L. Petition at 2. Id. Id. Attached to its petition is a completed FCC Form 312, Attachment A (Technical Information), and Attachment B (Financial Information). See e.g., 47 C.F.R �� 25.114, 25.137, and 25.140. DISCO II Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 24107-56 (paras. 30-145). Id. at 24157-59 (paras. 146-50). Id. at 24159-69 (paras. 151-74). Id.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2614A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2614A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2614A1.txt
  • that KaStarCom should not be assigned any orbital locations within that portion of the geostationary satellite orbital arc that is capable of serving the contiguous United States. Pegasus raises these same issues in its Petition to Deny KaStarCom's amendment. These issues were addressed in the Second Round GSO Orbital Assignment Order. DirectCom and Pegasus also argue that pursuant to Section 25.140(e), the rule that limits the number of orbital locations that may be assigned to each applicant, the Bureau should limit KaStarCom to two orbital locations in each frequency band. We also addressed this argument in the Second Round GSO Assignment Order. In that Order, the Bureau waived Section 25.140(e), for the Second Round applicants because an assignment plan was adopted
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2633A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2633A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2633A1.txt
  • 1988 Orbit Assignment Order, 3 FCC Rcd at 6976 n.31; GE Americom Replacement Order, 10 FCC Rcd at 13775-76 (para. 6). Columbia Application at 5. See, e.g., 1988 Orbit Assignment Order, 3 FCC Rcd at 6975 (Table of Orbital Assignments in Appendix to the Order). Columbia 1998 Modification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 17776 (para. 11). 47 C.F.R. �� 25.114, 25.140. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(c). Columbia Application at 8-10. See also Columbia Opposition at 14-17. GE Annual Report, 1999, at 55, attached to September 25 Letter. Columbia Application at 8. Columbia Application at 11. Loral Petition at 2, citing Columbia 1998 Modification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 17777-78 (paras. 15, 17). Loral Petition at 2-3; Loral Reply at 1-4. Columbia Opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2633A1_Erratum.doc
  • 1988 Orbit Assignment Order, 3 FCC Rcd at 6976 n.31; GE Americom Replacement Order, 10 FCC Rcd at 13775-76 (para. 6). Columbia Application at 5. See, e.g., 1988 Orbit Assignment Order, 3 FCC Rcd at 6975 (Table of Orbital Assignments in Appendix to the Order). Columbia 1998 Modification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 17776 (para. 11). 47 C.F.R. �� 25.114, 25.140. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(c). Columbia Application at 8-10. See also Columbia Opposition at 14-17. GE Annual Report, 1999, at 55, attached to September 25 Letter. Columbia Application at 8. Columbia Application at 11. Loral Petition at 2, citing Columbia 1998 Modification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 17777-78 (paras. 15, 17). Loral Petition at 2-3; Loral Reply at 1-4. Columbia Opposition
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2733A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2733A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-2733A1.txt
  • the basic qualifications of the transferors, LMGT and TRW. 2. Transferees As to the qualifications of the transferees, Section 310(d) requires that the Commission consider the qualifications of the proposed transferee as if the transferee were applying for the license directly under Section 308 of the Act. The basic qualification requirements for FSS space station licenses are contained in Section 25.140 of our rules. These rules describe the legal, technical, and financial criteria we use to evaluate an applicant's qualifications to hold FSS space station licenses. We note that no party has challenged the basic qualifications of the transferees in this case (i.e., LMGT, TRW, LSAT Astro, and Telespazio). We have already determined that LMGT and TRW are qualified to hold
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-288A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-288A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-288A1.txt
  • the technical requirements of Part 25. We find that the technical requirements of Part 25 do not apply to SDI's operations. Because SDI will operate in frequency bands allocated to U.S. Government use, we conclude that it must comply with the technical requirements that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has adopted for those bands. 3. Financial Qualifications Section 25.140(c) of the Commission's rules requires space station license applicants to demonstrate that they have the financial resources to launch a satellite and to operate it for one year. SDI requests a waiver of the financial qualification requirement. SDI argues that we should not require it to demonstrate that it has the financial resources to launch a satellite because the TDRSS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-514A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-514A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-514A1.txt
  • 27, 2000, counsel for Columbia reported that Columbia had executed a construction contract and was proceeding with construction of the proposed replacement satellite at its own risk. Counsel maintained that prompt action on the application was needed to facilitate Columbia's plans to market follow-on services to customers. No one opposes the application. III. Discussion 5. Financial and legal qualifications. Section 25.140 of the Commission's rules requires an applicant for a space station license in the Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) to demonstrate that it is financially qualified to proceed expeditiously with the construction, launch, and operation of the proposed satellite facilities. The applicant can demonstrate financial qualification by showing that the value of its current assets and operating income, or the current
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1068A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1068A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1068A1.txt
  • Replacement Satellite and to operate it at 85� W.L., 10 FCC Rcd 13775 (Int'l Bur. 1995) (citations omited). Columbia Communications Corporation, Authorization to Launch and Operate a Geostationary C-Band Replacement Satellite in the Fixed-Satellite Service at 37.5� W.L., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 20176 (Int'l Bur. 2001). GE Americom, 10 FCC Rcd at 13776. 47 C.F.R. �� 25.114, 25.140. 47 C.F.R. � 25.114. PanAmSat's application shows it has current assets of $373 million and net operating income of $122 million, and that Hughes Electronics Corp. has current assets of $4.1 billion to finance the estimated cost of $205 million for the Galaxy VIII(I)-R satellite. PanAmSat Application, Exhibit 2 and supplemental electronic filing of March 8, 2002. 47 C.F.R. �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1256A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1256A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1256A1.txt
  • on a non-harmful interference basis relative to the compliant U.S.- licensed services. We will remove these conditions from earth stations communicating with NSS-7 if New Skies undertakes the same two commitments with respect to coordination with future two-degree compliant satellites we imposed in the New Skies ORBIT Act Compliance Order. Accordingly, we grant New Skies a conditional waiver of Sections 25.140(b)(2), 25.210(a), 25.211(a), 25.210(i). We place NSS-7 on the Permitted Space Station List. Thus, routinely licensed earth stations, that is, those designated to communicate with ``ALSAT,'' or all U.S.-licensed satellites, may communicate with NSS-7 in the conventional C-and Ku-bands at 3700-4200/5925-6425 MHz and 11.7-12.2/14.0-14.5 GHz without further Commission action, to provide fixed-satellite service (except for direct-to-home service) pursuant to conditions in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1287A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1287A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-1287A1.txt
  • GE-2 Replacement Satellite and to operate it at 85� W.L., 10 FCC Rcd 13775 (Int'l Bur. 1995) (citations omited). Columbia Communications Corporation, Authorization to Launch and Operate a Geostationary C-Band Replacement Satellite in the Fixed-Satellite Service at 37.5� W.L., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 20176 (Int'l Bur. 2001). GE Americom, 10 FCC Rcd at 13776. 47 C.F.R. ��25.114, 25.140. An applicant relying on internal financing must submit a balance sheet documenting current assets and operating income sufficient to cover its costs. Current assets -- which include cash, inventory, and accounts receivable -- provide a general measure of a company's ability to raise funds on the basis of its on-going operations. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.114(c)(13). See Amendment of Parts
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3373A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3373A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3373A1.txt
  • thus we find TRW is qualified as the transferor. 2. Transferee As to the qualifications of the transferee, Section 310(d) requires that the Commission consider the qualifications of the proposed transferee as if the transferee were applying for the license directly under Section 308 of the Act. The basic qualification requirements for FSS space station licenses are contained in Section 25.140 of our rules. These rules describe the legal, technical, and financial criteria we use to evaluate an applicant's qualifications to hold FSS space station licenses. In addition, under the Commission's Title III public interest review, the Commission considers the character qualifications of an applicant or licensee. To this end, the Commission has determined that, in deciding character issues, it will
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3490A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3490A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-3490A1.txt
  • Order requires that space station operators not licensed by the Commission meet the same legal, financial, and technical qualifications required of U.S.-licensed space station operators. Nothing in the record raises concerns about Telesat's legal qualifications to provide satellite services in the United States. Telesat has requested a waiver of the financial demonstration requirement in Sections 25.114(c)(13) and (17), 25.137(b) and 25.140 of the Commission's rules. Financial Qualifications In the DISCO II Order, the Commission exempted in-orbit, non-U.S. space station systems from financial qualification requirements, reasoning that "where the foreign satellite is already in-orbit, there is no concern about whether the prospective entrant is financially capable of building and launching its system." Although Anik F2 is not yet in orbit, Telesat asserts
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-127A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-127A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-127A1.txt
  • includes requirements for the timely construction and operation of earth stations. By reducing the likelihood that resources will be allocated to ``phantom'' ventures, section 25.133 assures that unnecessary costs were not imposed on other services that would have been limited by the need for coordination to reduce interference with systems that are, in fact, not implemented. 7. Space Stations: Sections 25.140 through 25.148 include conditions to facilitate coordination to avoid harmful interference to other systems. These sections also outline conditions for qualification as an applicant, which enhances the likelihood that the proposed systems will be constructed, launched and operated if licensed. These conditions reduce the likelihood that unnecessary costs will be imposed on other services through coordination to reduce interference. Section
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1526A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1526A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1526A1.txt
  • time DBAC filed its application, the Nimiq 2 satellite was not operational, and was scheduled for launch in the first quarter of 2003. Thus, ordinarily, DBAC would need to supply the financial information required by our rules. Although DBAC provided Telesat Canada's 2000 Annual Report and Third Quarter 2001 Financial Statement, it seeks a waiver of Sections 25.137(b), 24.114(c)(17), and 25.140 should the Commission determine that the information supplied does not satisfy the requirements of these sections. DBAC argues that ``rigid application'' of these rules would serve no purpose, since there is little likelihood of spectrum warehousing because Canada has exclusive rights to the DBS frequencies at issue (i.e., ``there would be no preclusive effect on the ability of new entrants
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-1526A1_Erratum.doc
  • time DBAC filed its application, the Nimiq 2 satellite was not operational, and was scheduled for launch in the first quarter of 2003. Thus, ordinarily, DBAC would need to supply the financial information required by our rules. Although DBAC provided Telesat Canada's 2000 Annual Report and Third Quarter 2001 Financial Statement, it seeks a waiver of Sections 25.137(b), 24.114(c)(17), and 25.140 should the Commission determine that the information supplied does not satisfy the requirements of these sections. DBAC argues that ``rigid application'' of these rules would serve no purpose, since there is little likelihood of spectrum warehousing because Canada has exclusive rights to the DBS frequencies at issue (i.e., ``there would be no preclusive effect on the ability of new entrants
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2274A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2274A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2274A1.txt
  • in the conventional Ku-band. Nevertheless, we include in this Order a condition that earth station operators are not authorized to communicate with Spacecom's AMOS-2 satellite in the extended Ku-band frequencies to avoid confusion and to ensure that all prospective customers have adequate notice of the terms of Spacecom's access into the U.S. market using AMOS-2. 47 C.F.R. �� 25.114 and 25.140. AMOS-2 Permitted List Petition, Attachment B. AMOS-2 Permitted List Petition, Attachment A, at (4). See International Bureau Announced Process for Providing Service Under Global International Section 214 Authorizations Using Approved Non-U.S.-Licensed Satellite Systems Listed on the Permitted Space Station List, Public Notice, DA 99-2844 (released Dec. 17, 1999). (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 03-2274 Federal Communications Commission DA 03-2274 ]
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2274A1_Erratum.doc
  • in the conventional Ku-band. Nevertheless, we include in this Order a condition that earth station operators are not authorized to communicate with Spacecom's AMOS-2 satellite in the extended Ku-band frequencies to avoid confusion and to ensure that all prospective customers have adequate notice of the terms of Spacecom's access into the U.S. market using AMOS-2. 47 C.F.R. �� 25.114 and 25.140. AMOS-2 Permitted List Petition, Attachment B. AMOS-2 Permitted List Petition, Attachment A, at (4). See International Bureau Announced Process for Providing Service Under Global International Section 214 Authorizations Using Approved Non-U.S.-Licensed Satellite Systems Listed on the Permitted Space Station List, Public Notice, DA 99-2844 (released Dec. 17, 1999). (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 03-2274 Federal Communications Commission DA 03-2274 ]
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2624A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2624A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-2624A1.txt
  • or launched because construction of the EchoStar 9/Telstar 13 satellite is complete, a launch reservation has been obtained, and Loral is authorized by Papua New Guinea to use the ITU C-band filing at the 121� W.L. orbital location. We will treat Loral's petition as a request for waiver of the financial demonstration requirement in Sections 25.114(c)(13) and (17), 25.137(b), and 25.140 of the Commission's rules. Commission rules may be waived if there is ``good cause'' to do so. Generally, the Commission may grant a waiver of its rules in a particular case if the relief requested would not undermine the policy objective of the rule in question and would otherwise serve the public interest. We conclude that there is good cause
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3217A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3217A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3217A1.txt
  • II, 12 FCC Rcd at 24104 (para. 25). DISCO II, 12 FCC Rcd at 24112 (para. 39); 24157 (para. 143). See http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm (a list of WTO members). See also http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/telecom_e/telecom_commit_exem pt_list_e.htm (a list of WTO members that made market-access commitments, with links to each member's schedule of commitments and Article II exemptions). See paras. 11-13, infra. See 47 CFR � 25.140(b)(2). 47 C.F.R. � 25.210(e) and (g). 47 C.F.R. � 25.210(e). Section 25.210(g) defines full-frequency reuse for international FSS satellite service as follows: (1) Satellites must employ polarization discrimination so that, through the use of dual polarization, they shall be able to reuse both the uplink and downlink frequency band assignments; and (2) Satellites must be configured so that all assigned
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3863A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3863A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3863A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit International Bureau Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2) Space Station Application Interference Analysis Public Notice No: SPB-195 DA 03-3863 December 3, 2003 The Commission requires all applications for space station licenses to be substantially complete when they are filed. Applications that are not substantially complete are returned to the applicant without further processing. The Commission's Part 25 Rules set forth various information requirements that applicants must provide in
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3893A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3893A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3893A1.txt
  • namely to minimize the overall number of earth stations in order to limit the areas in which future terrestrial fixed service would be precluded.'' If EchoStar intends to provide domestic service in this band, it must request the appropriate waivers and provide justification that adherence to the Commission policy is unnecessary or counter to the public interest. Additionally, under Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules all new applications for launch and operational authority for space stations in the FSS are required to provide an interference analysis to the Commission for review. In a public notice released on December 3, 2003, we clarified our requirement for the submission of the space station application interference analysis. To allow us to complete our review
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3894A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3894A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-3894A1.txt
  • namely to minimize the overall number of earth stations in order to limit the areas in which future terrestrial fixed service would be precluded.'' If EchoStar intends to provide domestic service in this band, it must request the appropriate waivers and provide justification that adherence to the Commission policy is unnecessary or counter to the public interest. Additionally, under Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules all new applications for launch and operational authority for space stations in the FSS are required to provide an interference analysis to the Commission for review. In a public notice released on December 3, 2003, we clarified our requirement for the submission of the space station application interference analysis. To allow us to complete our review
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4043A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4043A1.txt
  • year in its First Space Station Reform Order. See Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, IB Docket No. 02-34, 18 FCC Rcd 10760, 10852 (para. 244) (2003). In its Modification Application, NetSat does not submit the two-degree spacing interference analysis required by Section 25.114(c)( 17) and 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. $9 25.114(c)( 17) and 25.140(b)(2). Under the Commission rules, an applicant for space station authorization in the fixed-satellite service must demonstrate the compatibility of its proposed system two degrees away from any authorized space station, and should provide details of its proposed radiofrequency carriers which it believes should be taken into account in this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1095A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1095A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1095A1.txt
  • licenses to be substantially complete when they are filed. Applications that are not substantially complete are returned to the applicant without further processing. The Commission's Part 25 Rules set forth various information requirements that applicants must provide in their space station applications. In particular, for applicants requesting launch and operating authority for space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS), Sections 25.140 and 25.114 of the Commission's rules require, among other things, an interference analysis. The interference analysis must demonstrate that the proposed FSS satellite system will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment. On December 3, 2003, the International Bureau released a Public Notice clarifying the types of showings that must be provided and stating that applications filed after
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1386A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1386A1.txt
  • and the 18.8-19.3 GHz band for its GSO FSS downllnk operations, both on a secondary basis. contactMEO Amended Application, p. 3. ' 47 C.F.R. 9 25.1 12. 47 C.F.R. 9 25.145(~)(3). contactMEO application, Exhibit, FCC Form 3 12. 47 C.F.R. 0 25.145(~)(3). 4 Second, the Commission's two-degree spacing policy for GSO satellites applies to space stations in the Ka-band. Section 25.140(b)(2)of the Commission's rules requires an interference analysis demonstrating that the proposed GSO FSS satellite system will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment.6 This analysis shows the potential for interference into and from carriers of adjacent satellites spaced two-degrees away from the proposed satellite. The International Bureau recently released a public notice clarifying the types of showings that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1387A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1387A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1387A1.txt
  • amendments it filed on March 12, 2004, that the technical information contained in the amendments ``replaces, in its entirety, the technical information'' in the initial applications. However, in each case, Northrop Grumman failed to submit a two-degree spacing interference analysis for its GSO FSS network operating in the 37.5-42.0 GHz and 47.2-50.2 GHz frequency bands (V-Band) as required by Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Consequently, the amendments as well as the underlying applications are defective with respect to the V-band portion of each GSO FSS application under Section 25.114(b) of the Commission's rules, and must be returned pursuant to Section 25.112(a). Accordingly, we dismiss, to the extent indicated, the following amendments and underlying applications: File No. Location/ Call Sign Proposed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1387A1_Erratum.doc
  • amendments it filed on March 12, 2004, that the technical information contained in the amendments ``replaces, in its entirety, the technical information'' in the initial applications. However, in each case, Northrop Grumman failed to submit a two-degree spacing interference analysis for its GSO FSS network operating in the 37.5-42.0 GHz and 47.2-50.2 GHz frequency bands (V-Band) as required by Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. Consequently, the amendments as well as the underlying applications are defective with respect to the V-band portion of each GSO FSS application under Section 25.114(b) of the Commission's rules, and must be returned pursuant to Section 25.112(a). Accordingly, we dismiss, to the extent indicated, the following amendments and underlying applications: File No. Location/ Call Sign Proposed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1391A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1391A1.txt
  • later rescinded by delegated authority. See letter dated April 13, 2004 from Bill Howden, Chief, Satellite Analysis Branch, FCC, to Bruce Henoch, Assistant General Counsel, Telenor (April 1 3`h, 2004 Letter). In response to Telenor's STA Letter, the FCC's Satellite Analysis Branch assigned a new file number to the most recent STA request: SES-STA-20040506-00652. See Clarification of 47 C.F.R. 0 25.140(b)(2) Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice NoSPB-195, DA 03-3863 (rel. Dec. 3,2003). 4 deadline, Telenor is ordered to follow the procedures listed in the Commission's rules regarding service termination, including customer notification requirements. See 47 C.F.R. 6 63.7 1? Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 0 309(c)(2)(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and 47 C.F.R. $6 25.120 and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1708A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1708A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1708A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DA 04-1708 Report No. SPB-207 June 16, 2004 International Bureau Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2) Space Station Application Interference Analysis The Commission requires all applications for space station licenses to be substantially complete when they are filed. Applications that are not substantially complete are returned to the applicant without further processing. The Commission's Part 25 Rules set forth various information requirements that applicants must provide in their space station applications. Applicants requesting launch and operating
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1722A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1722A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1722A1.txt
  • geostationary satellite orbit, fixed-satellite service (GSO FSS) satellites using NGSO FSS Ka-band spectrum. contactMEO's application was dismissed on two grounds. First, contactMEO failed to comply with Section 25.145(c)(3) of the Commission's rules. This rule requires non-geostationary satellite system applicants, such as contactMEO, to ``submit a casualty risk assessment if planned post-mission disposal involves atmospheric re-entry of the spacecraft.'' Second, Section 25.140(b)(2)of the Commission's rules requires an interference analysis demonstrating that the proposed GSO FSS satellite system will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment. Pursuant to a recently released Public Notice, applicants were provided guidance on the submission of the two-degree interference analysis and notified that failure to submit a two-degree analysis would render the application incomplete. contactMEO failed
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1725A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1725A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1725A1.txt
  • to as the Global EHF Satellite Network (GESN). Northrop Grumman's applications were dismissed in part on two grounds. First, Northrop Grumman failed to comply with Section 25.145(c)(3) of the Commission's rules. This rule requires non-geostationary satellite system applicants, such as Northrop Grumman, to ``submit a casualty risk assessment if planned post-mission disposal involves atmospheric re-entry of the spacecraft.'' Second, Section 25.140(b)(2)of the Commission's rules requires an interference analysis demonstrating that the proposed GSO FSS satellite system will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment. Pursuant to a recently released Public Notice, applicants were provided guidance on the submission of the two-degree interference analysis and notified that failure to submit a two-degree analysis would render the applications incomplete. Northrop Grumman
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1755A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1755A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1755A1.txt
  • process. Thus, the Commission further emphasized in that Order that non-U.S.-licensed satellite operators seeking access to the U.S. market by filing earth station applications or petitions for declaratory Ruling to be added to the Permitted List will be required to provide the same technical information regarding the foreign satellites as U.S. satellite license applicants provide for proposed U.S. satellites. Sections 25.140 and 25.114 of the Commission's rules require applicants requesting launch and operating authority for space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS), to provide, among other things, a 2-degree interference analysis. The interference analysis must demonstrate the compatibility of the applicant's proposed satellite ``2 degrees from any authorized space station.'' Such a showing is required, among other reasons, because the Commission's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2614A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2614A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2614A1.txt
  • at 24112 (para. 25). DISCO II, 12 FCC Rcd at 24112 (para. 39); 24157 (para. 143). (a list of WTO members that made market-access commitments, with links to each member's schedule of commitments and Article II exceptions.). DISCO II, 12 FCC Rcd at 24161-63 (paras. 154-59). For more information regarding the Commission's two-degree spacing policy, see, See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140; Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d 577 (released Aug. 16, 1983); summary printed in Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48 F.R. 40233 (Sept. 6, 1983) (Two Degree Spacing Order). Assignment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2985A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2985A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-2985A1.txt
  • each transmission direction at 101� W.L. (10.70-10.75 GHz and 11.2- 11.45 GHz (downlink) and 12.75-13.0 GHz and 13.15-13.2 GHz (uplink). On March 10, 2004, EchoStar filed a petition for reconsideration of the EchoStar Dismissal Letter. 5. On April 23, 2004, the Satellite Division dismissed MSV's February 2004 Amendment because it did not contain an interference analysis as required by Section 25.140(b) (2) of the Commission's rules. Section 25.140(b) (2) requires an interference analysis demonstrating that a proposed FSS satellite system operating in geostationary-satellite orbit (GSO) and providing FSS service, such as the feeder link portion of MSV's system, will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment. Pursuant to a December 13, 2003 Public Notice, applicants were provided guidance on
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3162A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3162A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3162A1.txt
  • rel. January 23, 2004. See First Space Station Reform Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 10776-67 (para. 7). See First Space Station Reform Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 10804-18 (paras. 108-50). 47 C.F.R. �25.158(b)(3). 47 C.F.R. �25.156(a). 83W Application at p. 6. See Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, Report and Order, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See 47 C.F.R. �25.140(b)(2). 83W Application at Attachment A, pp.18-19. 47 C.F.R. � 25.210(f). See First Space Station Reform Order 18 FCC Rcd at 18860 (para. 263). 47 C.F.R. � 25.210(f). 83W Application at Attachment A, p. 1. 83W Application at p. 8. 47 C.F.R. ��2.106 and 25.202(a)(1). Allocation of a given frequency band to a particular service on a primary basis entitles operators
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3163A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3163A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3163A1.txt
  • January 23, 2004. See First Space Station Reform Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 10776-67 (para. 7). See First Space Station Reform Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 10804-18 (paras. 108-50). 47 C.F.R. �25.158(b)(3). 47 C.F.R. �25.156(a). 121W Application at p. 6. See Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, Report and Order, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140 (b)(2). See also 109W Application at Section A.22, p. 19-20. 109W Application at 19. 109W Application at 19. 47 C.F.R. � 25.210(f). See First Space Station Reform Order 18 FCC Rcd at 18860, para. 263. 47 C.F.R. � 25.210(f). 109W Application at 12-13. 109W Application at p. 8. 47 C.F.R. ��2.106 and 25.202(a)(1). Allocation of a given frequency band to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3164A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3164A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3164A1.txt
  • United States does not have jurisdiction to terminate operations over foreign satellites, such as Telstar 13, it was necessary to specify the conditions of Telstar 13's access to the U.S. market. That is not the case here. 121W Application at p. 6. See Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, Report and Order, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). 47 C.F.R. �25.140 (b)(2). 47 C.F.R. �25.210(f). See First Space Station Reform Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 18860 (para. 263). 47 C.F.R. �25.210(f). 121W Application at p. 8. 47 C.F.R. ��2.106 and 25.202(a)(1). Allocation of a given frequency band to a particular service on a primary basis entitles operators to protection against harmful interference from stations of ``secondary'' services. Further, secondary services cannot
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3164A1_Erratum.doc
  • United States does not have jurisdiction to terminate operations over foreign satellites, such as Telstar 13, it was necessary to specify the conditions of Telstar 13's access to the U.S. market. That is not the case here. 121W Application at p. 6. See Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, Report and Order, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). 47 C.F.R. �25.140 (b)(2). 47 C.F.R. �25.210(f). See First Space Station Reform Order, 18 FCC Rcd at 18860 (para. 263). 47 C.F.R. �25.210(f). 121W Application at p. 8. 47 C.F.R. ��2.106 and 25.202(a)(1). Allocation of a given frequency band to a particular service on a primary basis entitles operators to protection against harmful interference from stations of ``secondary'' services. Further, secondary services cannot
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-4056A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-4056A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-4056A1.txt
  • Koichiro Matsufuji, Space Communications Corporation (April 22, 2004); Letter from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, Int'l. Bur., FCC to David K. Moskowitz, EchoStar Satellite Corp. (Dec. 8, 2003); Letter from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, Int'l. Bur., FCC to Kalpak Gude, PanAmSat Licensee Corp. (Oct. 22, 2003). See International Bureau Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2) Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (2004); International Bureau Clarifies Direct Broadcast Satellite Space Station Application Processing Rules, Public Notice, 19 FCC Rcd 1346 (2004) (DBS Public Notice); International Bureau Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2) Interference Analysis, Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (2003). In this regard, EchoStar's reliance on Salzer
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1115A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1115A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1115A1.txt
  • complete when filed. As the Commission noted, these procedures and rules will enable it to establish satellite licensees' operating rights clearly and quickly and, as a result, allow licensees to provide service to the public much sooner than might be possible under the previous licensing procedures. Intelsat's modification did not include all the information required under Section 25.114. Specifically, Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules requires an interference analysis demonstrating that the proposed GSO FSS satellite system will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment. In its application, Intelsat provided an interference analysis reflecting three operational satellites within +/- 3 degrees of the 150.5� E.L. orbital location. These satellites included MEASAT, a C/Ku band satellite located at the 148�
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1492A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1492A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1492A1.txt
  • LLC, File No. SAT-AMD-20040209-00014 (Feb. 9, 2004). Joint Opposition at 1. DIRECTV comments at 1-2. MSV Response at 4. See Letter to Lon C. Levin, Vice President, Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC, DA 04-1095 (Apr. 23, 2004) ("MSV Dismissal Letter''). Public Notice, SPB-195, International Bureau Clarification of C.F.R. 47 C.F.R. 25.140 (B)(2) Space Station Application Interference Analysis, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (Dec. 3, 2003). Id. Public Notice, SPB-207, 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (June 13, 2004) See Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 18133 (Int'l Bur. 2004). See Application of Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, File No. SAT-AMD-20040928-00192 (Sept. 28, 2004). See Public Notice, Report No. SAT-00248 (Oct. 8,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1492A1_Erratum.doc
  • LLC, File No. SAT-AMD-20040209-00014 (Feb. 9, 2004). Joint Opposition at 1. DIRECTV comments at 1-2. MSV Response at 4. See Letter to Lon C. Levin, Vice President, Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC, DA 04-1095 (Apr. 23, 2004) ("MSV Dismissal Letter''). Public Notice, SPB-195, International Bureau Clarification of C.F.R. 47 C.F.R. 25.140 (B)(2) Space Station Application Interference Analysis, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (Dec. 3, 2003). Id. Public Notice, SPB-207, 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (June 13, 2004) See Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, Order, 19 FCC Rcd 18133 (Int'l Bur. 2004). See Application of Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, File No. SAT-AMD-20040928-00192 (Sept. 28, 2004). See Public Notice, Report No. SAT-00248 (Oct. 8,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1910A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1910A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1910A1.txt
  • page 2. See Letter from Paula P. Ma'u, Deputy Secretary, Prime Minister's Office, Kingdom of Tonga, to Thomas Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC (October 25, 2004) (``Tonga Open Skies October 2004 Letter''). See DISCO II Order at 24131, paras. 82-83. See DISCO II Order, at 24131, paras. 82-83. Id. Id. at 24161-63, paras. 154-59. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140; Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d 577 (1983); summary printed in Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See Assignment of Orbital Locations to Space Stations in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-22A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-22A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-22A1.txt
  • operation of earth stations. By reducing the likelihood that resources will be allocated to ``phantom'' ventures, section 25.133 assures that unnecessary costs were not imposed on other services that would have been limited by the need for coordination to reduce interference with systems that are, in fact, not implemented. 7. Subpart B - Applications and Licenses - Space Stations: Section 25.140 provides for the general qualifications required of fixed-satellite space station licensees including procedures to facilitate coordination to avoid harmful interference. Sections 25.142 through 25.149 provide licensing procedures for particular services or classes of satellites. Subpart B -- Applications and Licenses - Processing of Applications and Forfeiture, Termination, and Reinstatement of Station Authorizations: Sections 25.150 through 25.163 include well-defined procedures for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2424A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2424A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2424A1.txt
  • astronomy service in the 6650-6675.2 MHz frequency band. (c) Compliance with Commission Technical Requirements-Two Degree Spacing 16. The Commission's licensing policy for GSO satellites is predicated upon two-degree orbital spacing between satellites. This policy permits the maximum use of the geostationary-satellite orbit. On June 16, 2004, the Commission issued a Public Notice in which the Commission provided clarification of Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's Rules, concerning space station application interference analysis requirements. In the Public Notice, the Commission expressly stated that Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's Rules applies to ``[a]ny geostationary satellite orbit space station application for operation in any FSS frequency band.'' Since Lockheed requested FSS allocated spectrum for its feeder uplinks, we found that this request rendered this rule
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-2424A1_Erratum.doc
  • astronomy service in the 6650-6675.2 MHz frequency band. (c) Compliance with Commission Technical Requirements-Two Degree Spacing 16. The Commission's licensing policy for GSO satellites is predicated upon two-degree orbital spacing between satellites. This policy permits the maximum use of the geostationary-satellite orbit. On June 16, 2004, the Commission issued a Public Notice in which the Commission provided clarification of Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's Rules, concerning space station application interference analysis requirements. In the Public Notice, the Commission expressly stated that Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's Rules applies to ``[a]ny geostationary satellite orbit space station application for operation in any FSS frequency band.'' Since Lockheed requested FSS allocated spectrum for its feeder uplinks, we found that this request rendered this rule
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-3227A1.txt
  • � 1.3; see also WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972) (WAIT Radio). Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (Northeast Cellular). WAIT Radio, 418 F.2d at 1159; Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166. WAIT Radio, 418 F.2d at 1157. Id. at 1159. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140; Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d 577 (1983); summary printed in Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See Assignment of Orbital Locations to Space Stations in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-451A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-451A1.txt
  • the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. Q 25.137(b), states that applications for earth stations seeking to access a non-U.S.- licensed satellite, such as the JCSAT-lB, must include the same information as required in Section 25.1 14(c) for the foreign space station.* ARTEL did not supply link budgets or a two-degree spacing interference analysis for JCSAT-1B as required by Sections 25.114(~)(17) and 25.140 of the rules, 47 C.F.R. $8 25.1 14(c)(7) and 25.140. Further, it did not submit Schedule S, as required by Section 25.114(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 0 25.1 14(a). Thus, we have no technical information before us on which to make a determination as to whether JCSAT-1B can operate compatibly with other satellites authorized to serve the United
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1909A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1909A1.txt
  • temporarily operate the Intelsat 601 satellite in the C-band (5850-6425 MHz and 3625 - 4200 MHz), and Ku-band (14.0-14.5 GHz, 10.95-11.2 GHz, 11.45-11.7 GHz) frequencies at the 63.65� E.L. orbital location. Intelsat was granted a waiver of Section 25.114(d)(4) of the Commission's rules, and waivers of Part 25 originally granted to the Intelsat 601 spacecraft, specifically the waivers of Sections 25.140(b)(2), 25.202(g), 25.210(a)(1), 25.210(a)(3), 25.210(c),25.210(i), and 25.211(a) of the Commission's rules. SAT-STA-20060905-00097E Effective Date: 09/18/2006 Withdrawn Special Temporary Authority Inland Northwest Space Alliance S2358 SAT-T/C-20060517-00062E Effective Date: 09/21/2006 TO: No. of Station(s) listed:2 Motient Corporation Grant of Authority FROM: Current Licensee: SkyTerra Communications, Inc. Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC Transfer of Control Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC See Memorandum Opinion and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2322A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2322A1.txt
  • MHz and 3625-4200 MHz), and Ku-band (14.0-14.5 GHz, 10.95-11.2 GHz, 11.45-11.7 GHz) frequencies at the 63.65� E.L. orbital location. The Division also granted Intelsat's request for waiver of Section 25.114(d)(4) of the Commission's rules and its request that the Part 25 waivers originally granted to the Intelsat 601 spacecraft continue to apply at 63.65� E.L., specifically the waivers of Sections 25.140(b)(2), 25.202(g), 25.210(a)(1), 25.210(a)(3), 25.210(c),25.210(i), and 25.211(a) of the Commission's rules. S2693 SAT-RPL-20060119-00005E Effective Date: 11/16/2006 Grant of Authority Replacement Satellite Application (no new frequency) DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC Nature of Service:Other On November 16, 2006, the Satellite Division granted, subject to conditions, the remaining portion of DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC's (DIRECTV) application to construct, launch, and operate a direct broadcast satellite, DIRECTV
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2488A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2488A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2488A1.txt
  • III, Historical and Statutory Notes). First Loral Application at Exhibit C. First Loral Application at Exhibit C. First Loral Application at last page. Id. Second Loral Application at Attachment 1. Id. Second Loral Application at Attachment 2. Id. Second Loral Application at Attachment 3. Id. Id. DISCO II Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 24161-63, paras. 154-59. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140; Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d 577 (1983); summary printed in Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See Assignment of Orbital Locations to Space Stations in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2545A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2545A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2545A1.txt
  • spectrum reservation holders, ICO and TMI Communications, in the 2 GHz Mobile Satellite Service. See Use of Returned Spectrum in the 2 GHz Mobile Satellite Service Frequency Bands, Order, IB Docket Nos. 05-220 and 05-221, 20 FCC Rcd 19696 (2005) (Petitions for Reconsideration pending). ICO Modification Application, Attachment B at 16; ICO Amended Application at 3. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2). ICO Modification Application, Attachment B at 16; ICO Amended Application at 3. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.143(b)(2). ICO's proposed satellite will provide coverage to all 50 states as well as to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. ICO Modification Application, Attachment B at 13. ICO Modification Application at 4. 47 C.F.R. � 25.202(g) (telemetry, tracking, and telecommand functions for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-325A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-325A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-325A1.txt
  • a country attempts to accommodate the maximum number of systems possible to provide a particular service in order to maximize entry and competition in its satellite service market. See 2002 International Bureau Biennial Review Staff Report, 18 FCC Rcd 4196, 4199 para. 6 (2002). Loral Application at Attachment A. Id. Id. Id. at 24161-63, paras. 154-59. See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140; Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d 577 (1983); summary printed in Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See Assignment of Orbital Locations to Space Stations in the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-864A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-864A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-864A1.txt
  • March Amendment). contactMEO March Amendment, at 16, 17. contactMEO March Amendment, at 5. Letter to David M. Drucker, Manager, contactMEO Communications, LLC, from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC, dated May 18, 2004, 19 FCC 8867 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur. 2004) (May 18 Letter). 47 C.F.R. � 25.145(c)(3). See Communications LLC, Amended Application, File No. SAT-AMD-20031030-00317. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2). May 18 Letter, at 2. Letter to David M. Drucker, Manager, contactMEO Communications, LLC from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC, dated June 16, 2004, 19 FCC Rcd 8867 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur. 2004) (June 16 Letter). Public Notice, International Bureau Satellite Division Information, Report No. SPB-208, Orbital Debris Mitigation: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. sections 25.143(b), 25.145(c)(3), 25.146(i)(4) and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-864A1_Erratum.doc
  • March Amendment). contactMEO March Amendment, at 16, 17. contactMEO March Amendment, at 5. Letter to David M. Drucker, Manager, contactMEO Communications, LLC, from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC, dated May 18, 2004, 19 FCC 8867 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur. 2004) (May 18 Letter). 47 C.F.R. � 25.145(c)(3). See Communications LLC, Amended Application, File No. SAT-AMD-20031030-00317. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2). May 18 Letter, at 2. Letter to David M. Drucker, Manager, contactMEO Communications, LLC from Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC, dated June 16, 2004, 19 FCC Rcd 8867 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur. 2004) (June 16 Letter). Public Notice, International Bureau Satellite Division Information, Report No. SPB-208, Orbital Debris Mitigation: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. sections 25.143(b), 25.145(c)(3), 25.146(i)(4) and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-865A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-865A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-865A1.txt
  • systems cannot operate on a secondary basis to NGSO FSS systems without establishing an appropriate interference protection level for NGSO FSS operations). EchoStar Petition, at 9. 47 C.F.R. � 25.111. 47 C.F.R. � 25.112(a)(1). EchoStar Satellite LLC, Order on Reconsideration, 19 FCC Rcd 24953, 24958 (Int'l Bur. 2004). Public Notice, International Bureau, Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R � 25.140(B)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (Int'l Bur. 2003). EchoStar Petition, at 10. 47 C.F.R. � 25.156(a). (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 06-865 Federal Communications Commission DA 06-865 �@��� ) * ( ) * k p x � ` � � h� h�B h�P h�? h�? h�? h�? h�? h�? h�P � � �@��� � @& D
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-118A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-118A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-118A1.txt
  • the Bureau conducted a DISCO II analysis only for Telesat's Ku-band operations over ANIK F3. Accordingly, in this Order, we must conduct a complete DISCO II analysis for Telesat's proposed C-band FSS operations over ANIK F3. DISCO II, 12 FCC Rcd at 24161-63 (paras. 154-59). EchoStar Blanket Authorization Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 20089-90 (para. 16). See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140; Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184, 54 Rad. Reg. 2d 577 (released Aug. 16, 1983); summary printed in Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48 F.R. 40233 (1983). See Assignment of Orbital Locations to Space
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1362A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1362A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1362A1.txt
  • frequency band used by the Inmarsat-3F4 satellite as 6454.4-6456.6 MHz. Thus, we cannot determine the exact bands in which the earth station will operate. Further, earth station operators seeking to add a non-U.S.-licensed satellite as a point of communication are required to provide all the information for that satellite that is required of U.S. satellite license applicants. Sections 25.114(d)(7) and 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. ��25.114(d)(7) and 25.140(b)(2), require applicants to submit an interference analysis to demonstrate that the proposed system is compatible with any space station operating 2 degrees away from the proposed space station. Telenor's interference analysis is based on a maximum EIRP of 78 dBW. However, in response to item E48 of Schedule B in its
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3055A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3055A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3055A1.txt
  • Intelsat North America indicates that its proposed use of the 11.7-11.95 GHz band in Region 1 and 3 does not conform to the ITU Table of Frequency Allocations. Intelsat North America therefore seeks a waiver of Sections 2.106 (U.S. Table of Allocations), 25.112(a)(3) (applications considered defective if it requests authority for operations not allocated under the ITU Radio Regulations), and 25.140(b)(2) (requirement to provide a ``2 degree'' interference analysis) of the Commission's rules. The modification application was placed on Public Notice and no comments were filed. III. DISCUSSION For the reasons discussed below, we grant Intelsat North America's modification request and authorize Intelsat North America to operate the INTELSAT 709 in the 11.7-11.95 GHz frequency band, on a non-harmful interference basis,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4895A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4895A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4895A1.txt
  • which they propose to be offset. Each Applicant must provide the appropriate technical showings to support its proposed operations. The amended application must include a complete FCC Form 312 and Schedule S, and all the pertinent information requested in Section 25.114(d) of the Commission's rules. Among other things, applicants are required to submit the appropriate interference analysis described in Section 25.140(b), and to demonstrate compliance with Section 25.140(c) of the Commission's rules. Applicants are also required to demonstrate compliance with Section 25.210(i)(2) and Sections 25.262(a), (b) or (e) of the Commission's rules, as appropriate. In addition, applicants are required to demonstrate that they comply with the power flux density limits in new Section 25.208(w), or, if they do not, to demonstrate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4968A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4968A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4968A1.txt
  • the application is defective with respect to completeness of answers or informational showings, is internally inconsistent, or does not substantially comply with the Commission's rules unless a waiver of the rules is requested. In its application, ATCONTACT failed to demonstrate that its proposed operations at the 87.2� W.L. orbital location are compatible with the Commission's two-degree spacing environment. Specifically, Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules requires applicants to submit an interference analysis showing the compatibility of its proposed system two degrees from any authorized space station. ATCONTACT's application failed to include a two-degree analysis showing its compatibility with Intelsat's Galaxy 28 satellite, which is authorized to operate at the 89� W.L. orbital location. Consequently, we return ATCONTACT's application as defective. We
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-675A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-675A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-675A1.txt
  • and operation of earth stations. By reducing the likelihood that resources will be allocated to ``phantom'' ventures, section 25.133 assures that unnecessary costs are not imposed on other services that would have been limited by the need for coordination to reduce interference with systems that are, in fact, not implemented. Subpart B - Applications and Licenses - Space Stations: Section 25.140 provides for the general qualifications required of fixed-satellite space station licensees including procedures to facilitate coordination to avoid harmful interference. Sections 25.142 through 25.149 provide licensing procedures for particular services or classes of satellites. Subpart B -- Applications and Licenses - Processing of Applications and Forfeiture, Termination, and Reinstatement of Station Authorizations: Sections 25.150 through 25.163 include well-defined procedures for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2284A1.txt
  • four items of information. It also stated that failure to do so will result in dismissal of the modification application. On September 17, 2008, ASL filed the requested amendment, File No. SES-AFS-20080917-01215. The amendment, however, contains only two of the four required items of information. In particular, the amendment does not contain an interference analysis, in accordance with 47 C.F.R. �25.140(b)(2), or a description of the types of services to be provided, including transmission characteristics and link performance analysis, in accordance with 47 C.F.R. �25.114(d)(4). Consequently, pursuant to Section 25.112(c) of the Commission's rules, �25.112(c), we dismiss the modification application, and the associated amendment, as incomplete without prejudice to refiling. As noted in our May 22, 2008 letter, we recognize that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-946A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-946A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-946A1.txt
  • in the United States after review of those specifications. Thus, NHK need not provide any additional technical information for Superbird-B2. The information currently on file for JCSAT-1B, however, was submitted before information filing requirements for non-U.S.-licensed earth stations were codified and does not include all currently required information. It does not include, for example, the interference analysis required by Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), to demonstrate that the satellite system is two-degree compliant. It also does not include the polarization information specified in Section 25.210(i) of the rules, 47 C.F.R. �25.210(i), to demonstrate that space station antenna provides a cross-polarization isolation of at least 30 dB within its primary coverage area. Further, it does not include
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1132A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1132A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1132A1.txt
  • 25.223(b) of the Commission's rules. It also states it will reduce the downlink Effective Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) levels of its transmissions so that the corresponding power flux density (PFD) limits produced at the earth's surface will be below the limits specified in Sections 25.208(c) and 25.208(w) of the Commission's rules. Intelsat provided an interference analysis as required by Section 25.140(b)(4)(iii), demonstrating that its proposed space station will not cause more interference to the adjacent 17/24 GHz BSS satellite networks operating in compliance with the technical requirements of this rule, than if its space station were located at the 95� W.L. Appendix F orbital location. Intelsat calculated its required PFD reduction based on the geocentric angular separation between its proposed orbital
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1132A1_Rcd.pdf
  • in Section 25.223(b) of the Commission's rules.22Italso states it will reduce the downlink Effective Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) levels of its transmissions so that the corresponding power flux density (PFD) limits produced at the earth's surface will be below the limits specified in Sections 25.208(c) and 25.208(w) of the Commission's rules.23 10. Intelsat provided aninterference analysis as required by Section 25.140(b)(4)(iii), demonstrating that its proposed space station will not cause more interference to the adjacent 17/24 GHz BSS satellite networks operating in compliance with the technical requirements of thisrule, than if its space station were located at the 95� W.L. Appendix F orbital location.24Intelsat calculated its required PFD reduction based on the geocentric angular separation between its proposed orbital location and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1624A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1624A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1624A1.txt
  • Commission has no technical concerns regarding an application. For example, when reviewing the merits of one of Intelsat North America LLC's (Intelsat) 17/24 GHz BSS space station applications after it was accepted for filing, the Bureau determined that a slight change was required in Intelsat's methodology for calculating its power levels. Specifically, in the interference analysis showing required by Section 25.140(b) of the Commission rules, Intelsat calculated its required PFD reduction based upon the geocentric angular separation between its proposed orbital location and the nearest adjacent Appendix F location. We found, however, that because the consumer antennas in this service will be located on the Earth's surface, topocentric angular separations should be used in making the PFD reduction calculations. The technical
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1624A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Commission has no technical concerns regarding an application. For example, when reviewing the merits of one of Intelsat North America LLC's (Intelsat) 17/24 GHz BSS space station applications after it was accepted for filing, the Bureau determined that a slight change was required in Intelsat's methodology for calculating its power levels. Specifically, in the interference analysis showing required by Section 25.140(b) of the Commission rules, Intelsat calculated its required PFD reduction based upon the geocentric angular separation between its proposed orbital location and the nearest adjacent Appendix F location.65We found, however, that because the consumer antennas in this service will be located on the Earth's surface, topocentric angular separations should be used in making the PFD reduction calculations.66The technical information provided
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-428A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-428A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-428A1.txt
  • NGSO bond to cover the entire system; (2) a waiver of Section 25.156(d)(3) to allow the Commission to consider both the NGSO and GSO components concurrently and the V-band and Ka-band components concurrently; (3) a waiver of Section 25.202(g) to place its on-orbit TT&C links in the Ka-band rather than in both Ka- and V-band; (4) a waiver of Section 25.140(b)(2), to the extent necessary, to allow increased-power operations in the 18.8-19.3 GHz and 28.6-29.1 GHz bands consistent with a four-degree orbital spacing regime; (5) a waiver of the Commission's Ka-band Plan to operate its NGSO satellites in the 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz frequency bands on a secondary or ``non-unacceptable interference basis''; and (6) a waiver of the Commission's Ka-band
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1106A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1106A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1106A1.txt
  • respect to completeness of answers or informational showings, is internally inconsistent, or does not substantially comply with the Commission's rules unless a waiver of the rules is requested. In its application, SES Americom failed to demonstrate that its proposed C-band telecommand and telemetry operations at the 67� W.L. orbital location are compatible with the Commission's two-degree spacing environment. Specifically, Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules requires applicants to submit an interference analysis showing the compatibility of its proposed system two degrees from any authorized space station. SES Americom's application failed to include a two-degree analysis with respect to its proposed C-band telecommand and telemetry operations. In its application, SES Americom contends that because it only seeks to utilize the C-band telecommand
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1106A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Order, the Commission affirmed the policies embodied in this rule by continuing to require applications to be substantially complete when filed. See 7979 Federal Communications Commission DA 10-1106 In its application, SES Americom failed to demonstrate that its proposed C-band telecommand and telemetry operations at the 67� W.L. orbital location are compatible with the Commission's two-degree spacing environment. Specifically, Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules requires applicants to submit an interference analysis showing the compatibility of its proposed system two degrees from any authorized space station.4SES Americom's application failed to include a two-degree analysis with respect to its proposed C-band telecommand and telemetry operations. In its application, SES Americom contends that because it only seeks to utilize the C- band telecommand
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1067A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1067A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1067A1.txt
  • Fixed-Satellite Service, Order and Authorization, 11 FCC Rcd 13788, 13790, � 6 (1996). Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, IB Docket No. 02-34, 18 FCC Rcd 10760, 10872, � 300 (2003) (``Space Station Licensing Reform Order''); International Bureau Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, Report No. SPB-207, 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (Int'l Bur., Sat. Div., 2004); Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, No. SPB-195, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (2003). 47 C.F.R. � 25.114(c)(4)(iii). LOI at 13. Id. at 13-14. See Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1, 2, 21, and 25 of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1067A1_Rcd.pdf
  • Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, Order and Authorization, 11 FCC Rcd 13788, 13790, � 6 (1996). 22Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, IB Docket No. 02-34, 18 FCC Rcd 10760, 10872, � 300 (2003) ("Space Station Licensing Reform Order");International Bureau Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, Report No. SPB-207, 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (Int'l Bur., Sat. Div., 2004); Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, No. SPB-195, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (2003). 2347 C.F.R. � 25.114(c)(4)(iii). 24LOI at 13. 25Id. at 13-14. 8524 Federal Communications Commission DA 11-1067 secondary designation for GSO FSS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1162A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1162A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1162A1.txt
  • as unacceptable for filing any earth station application that is not substantially complete, contains internal inconsistencies, or does not substantially comply with the Commission's rules. Overon's application has the following deficiencies, which renders the application unacceptable and subject to dismissal: Applicants requesting operating authority for space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) must provide an interference analysis pursuant to Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2). The interference analysis must demonstrate that the proposed FSS satellite system will be compatible with a two-degree orbital spacing environment. On December 3, 2003, the International Bureau released a Public Notice clarifying the types of showings that must be provided and stating that applications filed after December 3, 2003 that do not
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1162A1_Rcd.pdf
  • to return as unacceptable for filing anyearth station application that is not substantially complete, contains internal inconsistencies, or does not substantiallycomplywith the Commission's rules. Overon's application has the following deficiencies, which renders the application unacceptable and subject to dismissal: 1. Applicants requesting operating authority for space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) must provide an interference analysis pursuant to Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2). The interference analysis must demonstrate that the proposed FSS satellite system will be compatible with a two-degree orbital spacing environment.On December 3, 2003, the International Bureau released a Public Notice clarifying the types of showings that must be provided and stating that applicationsfiled after December 3, 2003 that do not contain this
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-339A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-339A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-339A1.txt
  • complete Schedule S for the non-U.S.-licensed space station. NewCom's application, as amended, has the following deficiencies, which renders the application unacceptable and subject to dismissal. NewCom did not provide the information required by items S13(a-o), S15(e), S15(i-k) of Schedule S. Applicants requesting operating authority for space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) must provide an interference analysis pursuant to Sections 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules 47 C.F.R. �� 25.140(b)(2). The interference analysis must demonstrate that the proposed FSS satellite system will be compatible with the Commission's two-degree orbital spacing environment. On December 3, 2003, the International Bureau released a Public Notice clarifying the types of showings that must be provided and stating that applications filed after December 3, 2003 that do
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-339A1_Rcd.pdf
  • a complete Schedule S for the non-U.S.-licensed space station. NewCom's application, as amended, has the following deficiencies, which renders the application unacceptable and subject to dismissal. 1.NewCom did not provide the information required by items S13(a-o), S15(e), S15(i-k) of Schedule S. 2.Applicants requesting operating authority for space stations inthe Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) must provide an interference analysis pursuant to Sections 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules 47 C.F.R. �� 25.140(b)(2). The interference analysis must demonstrate 1On October 27, 2010, NewCom filed an amendment to this application, seeking authority to add emission designators and to reduce the power flux density levels provided in its original application. See IBFS No. SES- AFS-20101027-01351. 2If NewCom refiles an application identical to the one dismissed, with the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-861A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-861A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-861A1.txt
  • by 0.44 dB. However, Spectrum Five's assertion is based on an erroneous reading of the rules and the DIRECTV RB-2 Order, as we explain below. In arguing that DIRECTV RB-2's authorized power violates Commission rules, Spectrum Five conflates two Commission rules: (1) Section 25.208(w), which contains PFD limits for 17/24 GHz BSS space stations in specified regions, and (2) Section 25.140(b)(4)(iii), which requires 17/24 GHz applicants proposing space stations at offset locations to demonstrate that their operations will not cause more interference to any current or future 17/24 GHz BSS space station that is in compliance with Part 25 than would be caused if the offset operations were located at the precise Appendix F orbital location. In conflating the two rules,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-95-1972A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-95-1972A1.txt
  • parameters and terms of this authorization. 11. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order shall be effective upon adoption this 14th day of September, 1995. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Scott Blake Harris Chief, International Bureau IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDERING CLAUSES 8. AT&T is legally, technically, financially, and otherwise qualified to launch and operate its proposed Telstar 402R satellite pursuant to Part 25.140 of the Commission's rules.12 Thus, we find that grant of this application for an emergency replacement satellite, pursuant to Section 309 of the Communications Act,13 will serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity. Grant of the application is also consistent with the Commission's policy to approve emer gency replacement satellites following a launch failure.14 9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1938A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1938A1.txt
  • the financial community to obtain the requisite financing for its system. Orion asserted that this uncertainty was compounded by the Commission's "DISCO I Notice" which was issued while its application was Orion Satellite Corporation, 6 F.C.C. Red. 4201 (1991). See also Orion Satellite Corporation, 5 F.C.C. Red. 4937 (1990); Orion Satellite Corporation, 101 F.C.C.Zd 1302 (1985). See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b) and (f). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(c) ancT(d). 20435 pending.6 In this Notice, the Commission proposed to eliminate the regulatory distinctions between U.S. international separate satellite systems and domsats. Among other things, the Commission proposed to apply the one-stage "domsat" financial requirements to separate system applicants, who had, until then, been permitted to demonstrate their financial qualifications in two stages.7 1.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1939A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1939A1.txt
  • support GE-5.13 Furthermore, contrary to AT&T's assertion, our rules do not require General Electric to make an explicit commitment to the project. Rather, the financial qualification rules require an applicant to submit evidence of a parent's commitment only when the applicant is "owned by more than one corporate parent."14 Accordingly, in our May 7 Order, we found GE 9 47C.F.R. �25.140(g). 10 AT&T cites 47 C.F.R. � 25.114(c)(17) & (18) and 25.140(b)(2), (c), & (d). 11 47 C.F.R. � 140(c). 12 See 41 C.F.R. � 25.140(d). 13 We have frequently noted that GE's qualifications are a matter of record. See, e.g., Cornel Corporation, 9 F.C.C. Red. 5775, 5776 (1994); GTE Spacenet Corporation, 9 F.C.C. Red. 1271 (1994); GE American Communications, Inc.,,3
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1942A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1942A1.txt
  • also provide incidental coverage to Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. 11 AT&T was granted approval to purchase Alascom, and its interest in the Aurora II/Satcom C-5 satellite, on August 1, 1995. See Alascom Inc., 11 F.C.C. Red. 734 (1995). Telstar 6 is being planned as a replacement for Aurora II, which will reach its end-of-Iife in 2001. 12 47 C.F.R. �25.140(g). 13 See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b). ' 15040 not want to delay authorization of needed satellite capacity pending resolution of this issue, we deferred consideration of AT&T's request to replace Aurora II.14 In doing so, we recognized that the Aurora II/Satcom C-5 satellite is scheduled to reach its end-of-life in 2001. Given the two to three year construction period for
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1943A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-1943A1.txt
  • HCG's and NEC's comments here. 5 The maximum EIRP level here is relatively high, therefore, we expect EchoStar to coordinate the operation of its Ku-band transponders with licensees of adjacent satellites. 6 EchoStar's Minor Amendment, dated September 22, 1995. modified its cost estimate from S352.4 million, cited in its April 29, 1994 application, to $270.7 million. 7 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). 8 See 41 C.F.R. �25.140(b). 20447 proposed satellite construction, launch, and first-year operating costs.9 Because Echostar's financial demonstration was incomplete we granted EchoStar, in our May 7 Order, an authorization to construct, launch, and operate each of its two proposed in-orbit satellites, FSS-1 and FSS-2, conditioned on it providing additional financial information. 6. Our rules stipulate that an applicant may
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-495A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-495A1.txt
  • a proposal to replace a satellite at the end of its life with a new hybrid, we should consider it outside the current domestic fixed-satellite processing round.4 Discussion 3. We agree that GE should now receive authority to replace Spacenet 3 with GE-4. GE is legally, technically, financially, and otherwise qualified to construct, launch, and operate GE-4, pursuant to Section 25.140 of our rules.5 Moreover, we routinely authorize replacement satellites at their present locations without a processing round when no new orbital locations are involved.6 This ensures continuity of service to customers and eliminates any need for them to repoint their antennas. Additionally, there are no "practical, policy, technical, or other relevant" factors that would preclude authorization.7 Finally, based on GE's
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-708A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-708A1.txt
  • and direct to home services. Discussion 5. In this first Ka-band processing round, we have a sufficient number of orbital locations available to accommodate all applicants proposing global systems with satellite locations in the 62 W.L. to 175.25 E.L. region of the orbital arc. Consequently, we will waive our FSS financial qualification requirements for these satellites.5 See 47 C.F.R. � 25.140. 6. In this Order, we assign each applicant proposing satellites in the 62 W.L. to 175.25 E.L. region, as pan of a global system, to orbital locations as specified in the appendix. Because all of the GSO applicants in this portion of the GSO arc agreed to these specific orbit locations, we will entertain requests for changes in the orbital
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-713A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-96-713A1.txt
  • orbital arc without causing interference problems. Consequently, we see no reason to continue to designate specific portions of the arc for high-power-density satellites. We will, however, continue to consider the technical characteristics of all satellites and their interference potential when assigning satellites to adjacent locations. B. Qualification Requirements 8. The basic qualification requirements for domsat licenses are contained in Section 25.140 of our rules.10 These rules describe the legal, technical, and financial criteria we use to evaluate an applicant's qualifications to hold a license. In developing our assignment plan, we have evaluated each pending application to determine whether it complies with Section 25.140. As we will explain in more detail in our forthcoming opinions on each application, EchoStar and Orion have
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-125A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-125A1.txt
  • replacement authorizations. 3 See In the Matter of Assignment of Orbital Locations to Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service. DA 96-713 (released May 7, 1996)fl996 FSS Orbital Assignment Plan): AT&T Corp. DA 96-1942 (released November 21, 1996). 4 See 1996 FSS Orbital Assignment Plan; Loral Space and Communications. Ltd.. DA 96-1941 (released November 21, 1996). 5 47 CFR � 25.140 (0, (g). Section 25.140 provides that new entrants may be assigned up to two hybrid (C/Ku-Band) orbital locations in any processing round. Existing licensees are limited to one hybrid orbital location. 926 __ Federal Communications Commission DA 97-125 will waive our cut-off rules to permit continued consideration of the applications filed by AT&T.6 6. Discussion Alien Ownership. Loral proposes to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-1407A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-1407A1.txt
  • PanAmSat's balance sheet for the period ending September 30, 1996 lists marketable securities in the amount of $372 million. These securities consist of extremely low risk financial instruments, including U.S. government T-bills and other debt securities issued by U.S. government agencies.13 10 PanAmSat's amendment was placed on public notice on March 5, 1997. No comments were received. " 47C.F.R. � 25.140 (c). 12 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. CC Docket 92-76, FCC 93-28, released February 10, 1993. 13 See Consolidated Response of PanAmSat to Replies of Hughes and GE in File Nos. 105/108-SAT- AMEND-96 which includes an Affidavit from Patrick J. Costello, PanAmSat Corporation's Chief Financial Officer concerning these marketable securities. 4746 PanAmSat notes that the only reason they do not qualify
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-2566A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-2566A1.txt
  • to cover its costs. We note that since the Galaxy 8 satellite will be providing international service only, the use of the 11.45-11.7 GHz band is consistent with Non-Government ("NG") footnote NG104 to the Table of Frequency Allocations that limits the use of the bands 10.7-11.7 and 12.75-13.25 GHz in the fixed- satellite service to international systems. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140 (c). Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. CC Docket 92-76, FCC 93-28, released February 10, 1993. 20347 9. PanAmSat is a public company. Hughes Electronic Corporation ("HE"), an aerospace, electronics manufacturing, and satellite communications company formerly known as GM Hughes Electronics Corporation, indirectly owns over 70% of the issued and outstanding stock of PanAmSat. HE is, in turn, wholly-owned by General Motors
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-501A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-97-501A1.txt
  • not, in the fourteen months since it filed the request for additional time to submit its financial showing, provided any additional documentation of its financial qualifications. Consequently, we will not issue VITA a license for VITASAT-2. IV. CONCLUSION 52. VITA is legally, technically, financially and otherwise qualified to. construct, launch and operate its replacement satellite VITAS AT-1R pursuant to Section 25.140 of the Commission's rules. Thus, we find that grant of VITA's request for a replacement satellite will serve the public interest and is consistent with the Commission's policy to approve replacement satellites following a launch failure. Grant is consistent with the Commission's policy to approve emergency replacement satellites following a launch failure. Implementation of the VITA system will provide low-cost
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-99-134A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-99-134A1.txt
  • 309 of the Communications Act20 the Commission shall determine whether the public interest, convenience and necessity will be served by the granting of such application.21 Thus, in order to grant Columbia's applications to launch and operate satellites in the 47 W.L. and 172 E.L. orbital locations, we must find that the grant would serve the public interest.22 In addition, Section 25.140 of the Commission's rules requires an application for space station authorization in the fixed satellite service to demonstrate that it is financially, legally, technically and otherwise qualified to proceed expeditiously with the construction, launch, and/or operation of each proposed space station facility immediately upon grant of the requested authorization.23 Alternatively, an applicant may request a waiver of the financial qualification
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235832A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235832A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-235832A1.txt
  • any prescribed form but should be complete in all pertinent details. Applications for new space station authorizations other than authorizations for the Direct Broadcast Service (DBS) and Digital Audio Radio Satellite (DARS) service must be filed electronically through the International Bureau Filing System (IBFS). In Appendix B of the First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Sections 25.140(e), (f), and (g) are removed and reserved. In Appendix B of the First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Section 25.149 is renumbered Section 25.165. The language of this rule is not changed. Also, references to Section 25.149 in paragraphs 350, 351, and 352 of the First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239842A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-239842A1.txt
  • EchoStar confirms that it will accept different orbital locations for its system than the locations identified as "preferred" in its original application. EchoStar identifies two alternative orbital locations (the 83� W.L. and 121� W.L. locations) or any available location in the 83�-121� W.L. arc. In addition, EchoStar no longer requires a waiver of the Commission's financial qualification rules at �� 25.140(b)-(d). EchoStar withdraws its waiver request. EchoStar also withdraws its request for a limited waiver of the Table of Allocations to allow uplink FSS transmissions in the 13.75-14.0 GHz band. The Commission has allocated the 13.75-14.0 GHz band to the fixed-satellite service and a waiver is no longer required. Page 1 of 2 For more information concerning this Notice, contact the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243431A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243431A1.txt
  • See WRC 2000 Final Acts, Resolution 542, "Appendices S30 and S30A Region 1 and 3 Plans and Associated List of Additional Uses." 10 I . AMERICOM expects that it will be able to reach successful agreements with affected administration^?^ IV. APPLICANT OUALIFICATION SES AMERTCOM is a fully qualified Commission licensee. The Commission does not apply the financial requirements of Section 25.140 of its Rules to DBS applications.26 V. TYPE OF OPERATIONS SES AMERICOM intends to operate AMC-14 on a non-broadcast, non- common carrier basis. SES AMERICOM will provide transponder capacity - through negotiated, individualized transactions - to third parties that will, in turn, use that capacity to provide service directly to the general public. 25 As noted above, the Commission has
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244685A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-244685A1.txt
  • See WRC 2000 Final Acts, Resolution 542, "Appendices S30 and S30A Region 1 and 3 Plans and Associated List of Additional Uses." 10 I . AMERICOM expects that it will be able to reach successful agreements with affected administration^?^ IV. APPLICANT OUALIFICATION SES AMERTCOM is a fully qualified Commission licensee. The Commission does not apply the financial requirements of Section 25.140 of its Rules to DBS applications.26 V. TYPE OF OPERATIONS SES AMERICOM intends to operate AMC-14 on a non-broadcast, non- common carrier basis. SES AMERICOM will provide transponder capacity - through negotiated, individualized transactions - to third parties that will, in turn, use that capacity to provide service directly to the general public. 25 As noted above, the Commission has
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255607A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255607A1.txt
  • amended by SES-AMD-20040921-01406, IS DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling, because the Loral application as amended is incomplete. It does not demonstrate that HISPASAT-1C is designed to operate within a +/-0.05 degree station-keeping tolerance as set forth in Section 25. 114 (c)(9) of the Commission's rules nor does it include a two-degree spacing interference analysis as required by Section 25.114(c)(17) and 25.140 of the rules. E040105 SES-LIC-20040210-00282 LORAL SPACECOM CORPORATION ( DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION ) This application SES-LIC-20040210-00282, as amended by SES-AMD-20040921-01406, IS DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling, because the Loral application as amended is incomplete. It does not demonstrate that HISPASAT-1C is designed to operate within a +/-0.05 degree station-keeping tolerance as set forth in Section 25. 114 (c)(9) of the Commission's rules
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260721A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-260721A1.txt
  • frequency bands, from 157.0 E.L. to 178.0 E.L. This modification will be effective on September 16, 2005. Intelsat expects to have the INTELSAT 604 satellite at the 178.0 E.L. location in January/February 2006. Intelsat requests that the waivers granted to the INTELSAT 604 spacecraft at the 157.0� E.L. location continue to apply at 178.0� E.L., specifically, the waivers of Sections 25.140(b)(2), 25.202(g), 25.210(a)(1), 25.210(a)(3), 25.210(c), 25.210(i) and 25.211(a). Page 2 of 2
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267556A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-267556A1.txt
  • will enable Intelsat to eliminate intrasystem interference being experienced by a customer on the INTELSAT 906 satellite currently operating at 64.15 E.L., collocated with the INTELSAT 601 satellite. Intelsat also requests a waiver of Section 25.114(d)(4) of the Commission's rules. Additionally, Intelsat requests that the Part 25 waivers originally granted to the INTELSAT 601 spacecraft, specifically the waivers of Sections 25.140(b)(2), 25.202(g), 25.210(a)(1), 25.210(a)(3), 25.210(c), 25.210(i), and 25.211(a) of the Commission's rules[1] continue to apply at the 63.65� E.L. orbital location. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] See Application of Intelsat LLC, For Authority to Operate, and to Further Construct, Launch, and Operate C-band and Ku-band Satellites that Form a Global Communications System in Geostationary Orbit, Memorandum Opinion, Order and Authorization, 15 FCC Rcd 15460
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268008A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268008A1.txt
  • Union (ITU) Regions 1 and 3 to provide fixed-satellite service on a non-harmful interference basis, in order to support U.S. Government operations in the Middle East. Intelsat requests that the Commission waive Sections 25.112(a)(3) and 2.106 (Table of Frequency Allocations) of its rules to permit non-conforming use of the 11.7-11.95 GHz frequency band. Additionally, Intelsat requests a waiver of Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules. KS35 SAT-MOD-20061003-00116E Modification 10/03/2006 10:18:25:01600 Date Filed: Intelsat North America LLC Page 1 of 2 For more information concerning this Notice, contact the Satellite Division at 202-418-0719; TTY 202-418-2555. Intelsat North America LLC (Intelsat) has filed an application for the modification of its license for the MARISAT-F2 satellite to enable it to provide UHF space segment
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272174A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-272174A1.txt
  • proposed 119� W.L. orbital location to the 125� W.L. orbital location; to add Ka-band GSO links in the 28.35-28.6 GHz, 29.25-30 GHz, 18.3-18.8 GHz, and 19.7-20.2 GHz bands; to increase power levels in the 18.8-19.3 GHz and 28.6-29.1 GHz bands to levels consistent with a four-degree orbital spacing framework; and to update ownership information. NGST requests a waiver of Section 25.140(b)(2) of the Commission's rules to the extent necessary to allow the increased-power operations in the 18.8-19.3 GHz and 28.6-29.1 GHz bands. Finally, NGST withdraws its request for a waiver of Section 25.202(g) of the Commission's rules to allow transfer-orbit and emergency-mode on-orbit TT&C links in the 4/6 GHz ("C Band"), choosing instead to conduct such TT&C operations in the Ka
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275582A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275582A1.txt
  • Section 2.106 of the Commission's rules (barring GSO-FSS operation in the 10.7-11.7 GHz and 12.75-13.25 GHz bands except for international systems), (2) footnote 2 of Section 25.202(a)(1) of the rules (reiterating the restriction in Footnote NG104), (3) Section 25.202(g) (requiring TT&C to be conducted at the edges of the operator's licensed frequency bands), and, to the extent necessary, (4) Section 25.140(b)(2) (requiring applicants for FSS operating authority to submit an interference analysis with respect to adjacent satellites at two degrees of orbital separation), (5) Section 25.210(j) (GSO station-keeping requirement), (6) Section 25.280(b)(4) (requiring GSO satellites in inclined orbits to maintain the authorized longitudinal position in the geostationary arc), and (7) completion requirements for Schedule S to FCC Form 312. Page 1
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296819A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296819A1.txt
  • Service (BSS) payload on its satellite. The satellite is capable of operating in the 24.75-25.25 GHz (Earth-to-space) and 17.3-17.8 GHz GHz(space-to-Earth) frequency bands. SES Americom does not seek operational authority for this 17/24 GHz BSS payload at the 101� W.L. orbital location. To the extent necessary, with respect to the 17/24 GHz BSS payload, SES Americom seeks waivers of Sections 25.140(b) and (c), 25.165(a), 25.210(f), and 25.114(d)(3). SES Americom states that it intends to file another application for purposes of obtaining authority to conduct in-orbit testing of the 17/24 GHz BSS payload at another location. S2740 SAT-STA-20100219-00031 E Special Temporary Authority 02/19/2010 18:35:57:26000 Date Filed: DISH Operating L.L.C. DISH Operating L.L.C. requests special temporary authority for a period of 180 days,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-287A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-287A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-287A1.txt
  • its licenses permit flexibility to operate on both a private and common carrier basis. Further, the applicant states that its anticipated ownership structure comports with Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act. Finally, Intelsat LLC requests waivers of a number of rules in order to accommodate existing design and operation of the INTELSAT system. The applicant requests waivers of: (1) Section 25.140(b)(2), requiring a demonstration of capability to operate with two-degree geostationary satellite orbit (``GSO'') spacing and interference protection; (2) Section 25.140(f), prohibiting authorization of an additional GSO location when the applicant has two or more unused orbital positions in a frequency band; (3) Section 25.202(a)(1), specifying the frequency bands covered by Part 25 of our rules; (4) Section 25.202(g), requiring telemetry,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-437A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-437A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-437A1.txt
  • Act allows us to balance the unique history INTELSAT and concerns of its members with the goal of Section 644(b). PanAmSat has offered nothing concrete that persuades us that the balance our decision struck in any way violates Section 644(b) or could be deemed and abdication of our responsibilities. Unused Orbital Locations 15. In the Licensing Order, we waived Section 25.140(f) of the Commission Rules, which limits to one the number of orbit locations a licensee may be assigned beyond any current authorizations. As a result, we issued satellite licenses to Intelsat LLC at six currently ``unused'' orbital locations that are now held by INTELSAT under ITU procedures. The orbital locations are scheduled to be put in use over the next
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A1.txt
  • placed on carriers and the Commission. All of the parties that commented on this issue support the staff recommendation. We also accept staff's recommendation that we consider amending, as part of the detariffing process, the rule relating to the filing of contracts between carriers. In addition, we accept staff's recommendation that we review the financial qualification rules contained in section 25.140 to determine if those rules are still necessary, or if a different showing of financial qualifications might be appropriate. Staff also recommends that we consider repealing or modifying several other rules, and we accept those recommendations here. We agree to consider repealing section 25.141 because the Commission reallocated radio-determination satellite service spectrum (RDSS) to the Mobile Satellite Service (MSS), and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-456A2.txt
  • fixed satellite service (FSS) operators and mobile satellite service providers (MSS), to discuss satellite space station licensing. Input from these industry meetings will be useful in the Bureau's new initiatives. Parts 23, 25 and 100 The staff recommends that the Commission consider repealing section 25.141 and subpart H of its rules. The staff also recommends that the Commission review sections 25.140 and 25.144 of its rules. Section 25.140 requires that each applicant for a fixed satellite service (FSS) authorization demonstrate that it is legally, financially, technically and otherwise qualified to proceed expeditiously with the construction, launch and/or operation of each proposed space station immediately after the grant of the requested authorization. If the Commission determines that financial qualifications are still necessary,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-134A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-134A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-134A1.txt
  • demonstrate, on the basis of the documentation contained in its application, that it is financially qualified to meet the estimated costs of the construction and launch of all proposed space stations in its system and the estimated operating expenses for one year after the launch of the initial system. Financial qualifications must be demonstrated in the form specified in � 25.140(c) and (d). In addition, applicants relying on current assets or operating income must submit evidence that those assets are separate and apart from any funding necessary to construct or operate any other licensed satellite system. Failure to make such a showing will result in the dismissal of the application. (n) Replacement of Space Stations within the System License Term. Licensees
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-228A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-228A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-228A1.txt
  • arguments concerning the rigidity with which we currently administer the two-step standard are moot. Such systems will have to meet the one-step standard, which Orion argues that we administer more leniently. In any event, Orion is correct that we do not require applicants under the one-step standard for domsats to certify the balance sheets they submit with their applications. Section 25.140(c) of the rules requires applicants to submit their financial-qualification showing under an affidavit that the information in the showing is true to the best of the applicant's knowledge and belief. Furthermore, under Section 1.52 of our rules, the signature of the applicant or its lawyer upon a submission has the effect of a certification by the signing party that the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-110A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-110A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-110A1.txt
  • to submit FCC Form 312 and provide a narrative with pertinent details as required by Section 25.114(c)(1)-(21). We stated that information required by Part 25 is more comprehensive and specific than what is required under Part 100 and will allow the Commission to better evaluate each application. We also proposed not to apply the FSS financial qualification requirements in Section 25.140 to DBS applications. The Notice also sought comment on whether DBS applicants should supply any additional technical information that is not required for other satellite services. We received no comment on application requirements and we conclude that consolidating the rules will ensure uniformity and consistency with other satellite services. We find that applying the procedures in Section 25.114 of the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-284A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-284A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-284A1.txt
  • be controlled by New EchoStar post-merger, would completely eliminate competition in the satellite broadband market. The Applicants have not, according to the Opponents, demonstrated that all this capacity is necessary to offer a viable broadband satellite service and that such results are clearly inconsistent with the Commission's policies against warehousing of spectrum and orbital slots and in violation of Section 25.140(e) and (f) of the Commission rules. The Applicants respond that the proposed merger is not contrary to Commission spectrum policies. Particularly, they claim the proposed merger would allow for the elimination of duplicative use of the spectrum, clearly one of the Commission's key spectrum objectives. They contend that the proposed merger will have pro-competitive, not anti-competitive, effects in the MVPD
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-30A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-30A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-30A1.txt
  • documentation contained in its application, that it is financially qualified to meet the estimated costs of the construction and/or launch and any other initial expenses of all proposed space stations in its system and the estimated operating expenses for one year after the launch of the proposed space station(s). Financial qualifications must be demonstrated in the form specified in � 25.140(c) and (d). In addition, applicants relying on current assets or operating income must submit evidence that those assets are separate and apart from any funding necessary to construct or operate any other licensed satellite system. Failure to make such a showing will result in the dismissal of the application. Replacement of Space Stations within the System License Term. Licensees of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-45A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-45A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-45A1.txt
  • pursuant to this section may be assigned no more than one additional orbital location beyond its current authorizations in each frequency band in which it is authorized to operate, provided that its in-orbit satellites are essentially filled and that it has no more than two unused orbital locations for previously authorized but unlaunched satellites in that band." 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). See e.g., Second Round Assignment of Geostationary Satellite Orbit Locations to Fixed Satellite Service Space Stations in the Ka-band, Order, 16 FCC Rcd 14389, 14396 (para. 19) (Int'l Bur., 2001) (Second Round Ka-band Orbital Assignment Order). 47 C.F.R. 73.5008(c); Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act -- Competitive Bidding for Commercial Broadcast and Instructional Television Fixed Service Licenses, Memorandum
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-102A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-102A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-102A1.txt
  • the U.S. market. If the transferee or assignee is not licensed by or seeking a license from a country that is a member of the World Trade Organization for services covered under the World Trade Organization Basic Telecommunications Agreement, the non-U.S.-licensed satellite operator will be required to make the showing described in paragraph (a) of this Section. 13. Amend � 25.140 by revising paragraph (b) and removing and reserving paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows: � 25.140 Qualifications of fixed-satellite space station licensees. * * * * * (b) Each applicant for a space station authorization in the fixed-satellite service must demonstrate, on the basis of the documentation contained in its application, that it is legally, technically, and otherwise
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-102A1_Erratum.doc
  • the U.S. market. If the transferee or assignee is not licensed by or seeking a license from a country that is a member of the World Trade Organization for services covered under the World Trade Organization Basic Telecommunications Agreement, the non-U.S.-licensed satellite operator will be required to make the showing described in paragraph (a) of this Section. 13. Amend � 25.140 by revising paragraph (b) and removing and reserving paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows: � 25.140 Qualifications of fixed-satellite space station licensees. * * * * * (b) Each applicant for a space station authorization in the fixed-satellite service must demonstrate, on the basis of the documentation contained in its application, that it is legally, technically, and otherwise
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-154A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-154A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-154A1.txt
  • Calculation of power flux density levels within each coverage area and of the energy dispersal, if any, needed for compliance with �25.208, for angles of arrival other than 5�, 10�, 15�, 20�, and 25� above the horizontal. (6) Public interest considerations in support of grant; (7) Applications for authorizations for fixed-satellite space stations shall also include the information specified in �25.140; (8) Applications for authorizations in the Mobile-Satellite Service in the 1545-1559/1646.5-1660.5 MHz frequency bands shall also provide all information necessary to comply with the policies and procedures set forth in Rules and Policies Pertaining to the Use of Radio Frequencies in a Land Mobile Satellite Service, 2 FCC Rcd 485 (1987) (Available at address in �0.445 of this chapter.); (9)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-154A1_Erratum.doc
  • Calculation of power flux density levels within each coverage area and of the energy dispersal, if any, needed for compliance with �25.208, for angles of arrival other than 5�, 10�, 15�, 20�, and 25� above the horizontal. (6) Public interest considerations in support of grant; (7) Applications for authorizations for fixed-satellite space stations shall also include the information specified in �25.140; (8) Applications for authorizations in the Mobile-Satellite Service in the 1545-1559/1646.5-1660.5 MHz frequency bands shall also provide all information necessary to comply with the policies and procedures set forth in Rules and Policies Pertaining to the Use of Radio Frequencies in a Land Mobile Satellite Service, 2 FCC Rcd 485 (1987) (Available at address in �0.445 of this chapter.); (9)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-217A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-217A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-217A1.txt
  • Order and Authorization, DA 97-1366, 12 FCC Rcd 9651 (Int'l Bur. 1997) (``Constellation License Order''). See id. at 9651. Although Constellation's petition for reconsideration refers to a deployment scheme involving a total of 54 satellites, Constellation has not requested a modification of its license to authorize such a system. See id. at 9656. See also 47 C.F.R. �� 25.143(b)(3) and 25.140(c) and (d) (2002) (requiring Big LEO applicants to demonstrate that they could meet the costs of building and launching all proposed system space stations and meet operating expenses for one year after the launch of the first satellite). See id. at 9656. See id. See id. at 9661. See id. Section 25.143(e)(2) of the Commission's rules requires Big LEO licensees,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-130A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-130A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-130A1.txt
  • via a system of satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications." Small Business Administration, 1997 NAICS Definitions, NAICS 513340. 13 C.F.R. � 121.201, NAIC code 517410 (changed from 513340 in October 2002). U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of Organization),'' Table 4, NAICS code 513340 (issued October 2000). Id. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140-146 (requiring applicants in various satellite services to demonstrate technical qualifications as a prerequisite to receiving Commission authorization for space station operations). 5 U.S.C. � 603(c)(1) - (c)(4). 47 C.F.R. � 25.140-146 (requiring applicants in various satellite services to demonstrate technical qualifications as a prerequisite to receiving Commission authorization for space station operations). See Second Report and Order at para. 91.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-174A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-174A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-174A1.txt
  • space station to accept any increased interference from the full-power Appendix F or full-power offset space station than would be caused if the proposed reduced-power space station were located four degrees away. Finally, we also add Section 25.262(e), which requires reduced-power satellites to accept any increased interference from 17/24 GHz BSS space stations operating in conformance with our rules. Section 25.140(b). Section 25.140(b) of our rules addresses the interference analysis that must be submitted with each 17/24 GHz BSS application. As with all FSS space station applications, 17/24 GHz BSS applicants are required to submit an interference analysis demonstrating the compatibility of their proposed system with satellite networks operating at the two nearest adjacent orbital locations. Under the uniform four-degree spacing
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-76A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-76A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-76A1.txt
  • 307, 309 and 332, unless otherwise noted. 4. Amend Section 25.114 by revising paragraph (d)(7) and adding paragraphs (d)(15) and (d)(16) to read as follows: � 25.114 Applications for space station authorizations. * * * * * (d) * * * (7) Applicants for authorizations for space stations in the fixed-satellite service must also include the information specified in �� 25.140(b)(1) and (2) of this Part. Applicants for authorizations for space stations in the 17/24 GHz broadcasting-satellite service must also include the information specified in �� 25.140(b)(1) and (3) of this Part. * * * (15) Each applicant for a space station license in the 17/24 GHz BSS shall include the following information as an attachment to its application: (i) Except
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-20A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-20A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-20A1.txt
  • Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service, and for Fixed Satellite Service, Third Report and Order, CC Docket No. 92-297, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997) (Ka-band Service Rules Third Report and Order). Ka-band Service Rules Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22319-20 (paras. 21-23). See also International Bureau, Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (Int'l Bur. 2003) (First Interference Analysis Public Notice) (clarifying two-degree spacing analysis required for Ka-band satellite license applications). See, e.g., Orion Network Systems, Inc., Application for Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Ka-Band Satellite System in the Fixed-Satellite Service, Order and Authorization, 12 FCC Rcd 23027 (Int'l Bur.,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-20A1_Rcd.pdf
  • to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service, and for Fixed Satellite Service, Third Report and Order, CC Docket No. 92-297, 12 FCC Rcd 22310 (1997) (Ka-band Service Rules Third Report and Order). 16 Ka-band Service Rules Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22319-20 (paras. 21-23). See also International Bureau, Satellite Division Information:Clarification of 47C.F.R. � 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, Public Notice, 18 FCC Rcd 25099 (Int'l Bur. 2003) (First Interference Analysis Public Notice) (clarifying two-degree spacing analysis required for Ka-band satellite license applications). 17 See, e.g.,Orion Network Systems, Inc., Application for Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Ka-Band Satellite System in the Fixed-Satellite Service, Order and Authorization, 12 FCC Rcd 23027 (Int'l Bur.,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-21A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-21A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-21A1.txt
  • Intent may amend its request by submitting an additional Letter of Intent. Such additional Letters of Intent will be treated on the same basis as amendments filed by U.S. space station applicants for purposes of determining the order in which the Letters of Intent will be considered relative to other pending applications. * * * * * 13. In � 25.140, revise the section heading and paragraph (a) to read as follows: � 25.140 Qualifications of Fixed Satellite Service and 17/24 GHz broadcasting-satellite service space station licensees. (a) License applications for new fixed-satellite space stations shall comply with the requirements established in Report and Order, CC Docket No. 81-704 (available at the address in � 0.445 of this chapter). Such applications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-21A1_Rcd.pdf
  • requirements); and 25.148(b) (proposing to replace "satellite station" with "space station") in Appendix A. 15SeeSections 25.259 and 25.260 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 25.259, 25.260. 16Seeproposed revisions to 47 C.F.R. �� 25.259 and 25.260 in Appendix A. 17See proposed revisions to 47 C.F.R. �� 25.117 and 25.272(a) in Appendix A. 18See proposed revisions to 47 C.F.R. �� 25.109, 25.140(a), 25.146(e), 25.203(g)(2) and (g)(4) in Appendix A. See also proposed revision of Section 25.276(c) (replacing cite to Commission Order with cross-reference to rule section). 19See proposed revisions to 47 C.F.R. �� 25.146(a)(1)(i) and (iii), 25.146(a)(2)(i) and (iii), 25.146(b)(1)(i) and (iii), and 25.146(i)(3) in Appendix A. See also proposed revisions to 47 C.F.R. � 25.115(a)(3) in Appendix A (filing requirement made
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-96-279A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-96-279A1.txt
  • We affirm the Bureau's decision. We perceive no violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Constellation Order appropriately compared the Bell Atlantic letter to the letter found satisfactory to meet our financial qualifications rule in the National Exchange 1' These requirements, and the documentation necessary to establish they have been met, are outlined in greater detail at 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(c) and (d). See also 47 C.F.R. � 25.143(b)(3); Big LEO Order at 35. 12 Constellation Order at H 15. 18507 case. Constellation itself had identified the case in its pleadings as a relevant Commission precedent, and Constellation concedes that it had actual notice of the text of that letter. Furthermore, the Constellation Order embodies an administrative adjudication, and "agency adjudication
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-98-26A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-98-26A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-98-26A1.txt
  • should be applied to subscription services offered from U.S.-licensed satellites. Application requirements � 100.13. We propose to eliminate the DBS-specific application requirements of Section 100.13. Instead, we propose to adopt the application, processing, and licensing requirements of Part 25 for DBS services, including new FCC Form 312, where applicable. We also propose not to apply the financial requirements of Section 25.140, that now apply to FSS and other Part 25 satellite services, to DBS applications. The competitive bidding process we use to resolve mutually exclusive DBS applications achieves the same goal as the financial qualifications requirements of Section 25.140, namely, assigning spectrum to those most likely to make efficient use of it. We propose to standardize the DBS application process by
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00456.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00456.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00456.txt
  • placed on carriers and the Commission. All of the parties that commented on this issue support the staff recommendation. We also accept staff's recommendation that we consider amending, as part of the detariffing process, the rule relating to the filing of contracts between carriers. In addition, we accept staff's recommendation that we review the financial qualification rules contained in section 25.140 to determine if those rules are still necessary, or if a different showing of financial qualifications might be appropriate. Staff also recommends that we consider repealing or modifying several other rules, and we accept those recommendations here. We agree to consider repealing section 25.141 because the Commission reallocated radio-determination satellite service spectrum (RDSS) to the Mobile Satellite Service (MSS), and
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/biennial2000report.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/biennial2000report.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/biennial2000report.txt
  • fixed satellite service (FSS) operators and mobile satellite service providers (MSS), to discuss satellite space station licensing. Input from these industry meetings will be useful in the Bureau's new initiatives. Parts 23, 25 and 100 The staff recommends that the Commission consider repealing section 25.141 and subpart H of its rules. The staff also recommends that the Commission review sections 25.140 and 25.144 of its rules. Section 25.140 requires that each applicant for a fixed satellite service (FSS) authorization demonstrate that it is legally, financially, technically and otherwise qualified to proceed expeditiously with the construction, launch and/or operation of each proposed space station immediately after the grant of the requested authorization. If the Commission determines that financial qualifications are still necessary,
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/15/releases/fc970070.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/15/releases/fc970070.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/15/releases/fc970070.wp
  • of earth station antenna performance standards. 25.133 Period of construction; certification of commencement of operation. Federal Communications Commission FCC 97-70 77 25.134 Licensing provision of very small aperture terminal (VSAT) networks. 25.135 Licensing provisions for earth station networks in the non-voice, non- geostationary mobile-satellite service. 25.136 Operating provisions for earth station networks in the 1.6/2.4 GHz mobile-satellite service. SPACE STATIONS 25.140 Qualifications of domestic fixed-satellite space station licensees. 25.141 Licensing provisions for the radiodetermination satellite service 25.142 Licensing provisions for the non-voice, non-geostationary mobile-satellite service. 25.143 Licensing provisions for the 1.6/2.4 GHz mobile-satellite service. 25.144 Licensing provisions for the 2.3 GHz satellite digital audio radio service. PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS 25.150 Receipt of applications. 25.151 Public notice period. 25.152 Dismissal and return
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00456.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00456.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2000/fcc00456.txt
  • placed on carriers and the Commission. All of the parties that commented on this issue support the staff recommendation. We also accept staff's recommendation that we consider amending, as part of the detariffing process, the rule relating to the filing of contracts between carriers. In addition, we accept staff's recommendation that we review the financial qualification rules contained in section 25.140 to determine if those rules are still necessary, or if a different showing of financial qualifications might be appropriate. Staff also recommends that we consider repealing or modifying several other rules, and we accept those recommendations here. We agree to consider repealing section 25.141 because the Commission reallocated radio-determination satellite service spectrum (RDSS) to the Mobile Satellite Service (MSS), and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Orders/1999/da992816.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Orders/1999/da992816.txt
  • (citations omitted). See 47 C.F.R. � 25.119 and Ka-Band Service Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22339. Petition to Deny or Defer of Pegasus Development Corporation, filed August 23, 1999, at 6; Pegasus Oct. 27th Response at 3. KaSTAR Opposition to Petition to Deny, at 10. Opposition of DirectCom Networks, Inc., filed September 7, 1999 at 2. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f). See Ka-band Service Rules Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22320. See Comments filed in response to Public Notice, Report No. SAT-00012 (rel. March 16, 1999). Ka-Band Service Rules Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 22312. Federal Communications Commission DA 99-2816 Federal Communications Commission DA 99-2816 X Y � b | � b -
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Orders/2000/da000113.doc
  • Revoke at 10. Consequently, U.S. priority status at 47� W.L. is not currently at risk. Columbia Petition to Revoke at 7-9, citing Establishment of Satellite Systems Providing International Communications, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 84-1299, 101 FCC 2d 1046, 1174 (1985) (Separate Systems Order), recon. 61 R.R.2d 649 (1986), further recon. 1 FCC Rcd 439 (1986), 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(e); Columbia Application at 3-4, 15-16. See Orion Satellite Corp., Application for Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Separate International Satellite Communications System, Order and Authorization, 10 FCC Rcd 12307 (Int'l Bur. 1995). Loral Petition at 6. 47 C.F.R. � 25.140(f); Separate Systems Order, 101 FCC 2d at 1174-75 (para. 261). Separate Systems Order, 101 FCC 2d at 1174 (para.
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Orders/2000/fcc00287.doc
  • its licenses permit flexibility to operate on both a private and common carrier basis. Further, the applicant states that its anticipated ownership structure comports with Section 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act. Finally, Intelsat LLC requests waivers of a number of rules in order to accommodate existing design and operation of the INTELSAT system. The applicant requests waivers of: (1) Section 25.140(b)(2), requiring a demonstration of capability to operate with two-degree geostationary satellite orbit (``GSO'') spacing and interference protection; (2) Section 25.140(f), prohibiting authorization of an additional GSO location when the applicant has two or more unused orbital positions in a frequency band; (3) Section 25.202(a)(1), specifying the frequency bands covered by Part 25 of our rules; (4) Section 25.202(g), requiring telemetry,
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Orders/2000/fcc00302.doc
  • agreement has been reached in the 2 GHz MSS processing round. MCHI Comments at 18. See, e.g., Big LEO Report & Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 5939 � 2. See Section III.B.7., infra. See Notice, 14 FCC Rcd at 4847 � 5. See Big LEO Report & Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 6023 � 230. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. �� 25.140(c), 25.142(a)(4). See, e.g., Big LEO Report & Order, 9 FCC Rcd at 5948-50 �� 26-30. Id. at 5948 � 26. Notice, 14 FCC Rcd at 4856 � 24. Id. See Celsat Comments at 20-23 & Reply at 24; Constellation Comments at 3-4; Globalstar Comments at 6-8 & Reply at 19; ICO Comments at 5-6; MCHI Comments at 22; see also
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/1999/pnin9052.pdf
  • 54.25-58.2 GHz band. Operational TT&C is proposed in the NGSO Ka-band. Proposed services are non-common carrier and include voice, video and audio teleconferencing, high speed data interaction, general multimedia services and mobile (telecommuting) services. In addition, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 1.3, @Contact has requested a waiver of the financial requirements showing of Section 25.140(b)-(e). S2221 SAT-LOA-19971222-00223 PANAMSAT CORPORATION Launch and Operating Authority Original File No. 53-SAT-P/LA-98. Complete system description for six satellites proposed in File Nos. 52/53/54/55/56/57-SAT-P/LA-98; IBFS Nos. SAT-LOA-19971222-00228, 223, 224, 226, 227, 225, respectively. PanAmSat Corporation has filed an application to launch and operate six Ka-band satellites to operate with PanAmSat's other Ka-band satellites in a global Ka-band satellite system. PanAmSat proposes
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2003/dd031203.html
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit __________________________________________________________________ fcclogo Daily Digest Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., SW Washington, D.C. 20554 Vol. 22 No. 229 News media information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 202/418-2555 December 3, 2003 __________________________________________________________________ THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- PUBLIC NOTICES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Report No: SPB-195 Released: 12/03/2003. CLARIFICATION OF 47 C.F.R. SECTION 25.140(B)(2) SPACE STATION APPLICATION INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS. (DA No. 03-3863). IB. Contact: Robert Nelson at (202) 418-2341 [1]DA-03-3863A1.doc [2]DA-03-3863A1.pdf [3]DA-03-3863A1.txt Report No: SES-00556 Released: 12/03/2003. SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES Accepted for Filing. IB. Contact: (202) 418-0719, TTY: (202) 418-2555 [4]DOC-241817A1.pdf [5]DOC-241817A1.txt Report No: SES-00557 Released: 12/03/2003. SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES INFORMATION Actions Taken. IB. Contact: (202) 418-0719, TTY: (202) 418-2555 [6]DOC-241820A1.pdf [7]DOC-241820A1.txt Report No:
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2004/dd040617.html
  • non-commercial trial of VOIP services. (Dkt No. 99-200). Action by: Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau. Adopted: 06/16/2004 by ORDER. (DA No. 04-1721). WCB [34]DA-04-1721A1.doc [35]DA-04-1721A1.pdf [36]DA-04-1721A1.txt ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, RELEASED JUNE 16, 2004, DID NOT APPEAR IN DIGEST NO. 112: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- PUBLIC NOTICES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Report No: SPB-207 Released: 06/16/2004. INTERNATIONAL BUREAU SATELLITE DIVISION INFORMATION: CLARIFICATION OF 47 C.F.R. 25.140(B)(2) SPACE STATION APPLICATION INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS. (DA No. 04-1708). IB. Contact: Robert Nelson at (202) 418-2341 [37]DA-04-1708A1.doc [38]DA-04-1708A1.pdf [39]DA-04-1708A1.txt Report No: SPB-208 Released: 06/16/2004. INTERNATIONAL BUREAU SATELLITE DIVISION INFORMATION ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION: CLARIFICATION OF 47 C.F.R. SECTIONS 25.143(B), 25.145(C)(3), 25.146(I)(4) AND 25.217(D) REGARDING CASUALTY RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SATELLITE ATMOSPHERE RE-ENTRY. (DA No. 04-1724). IB. Contact: Sankar Persaud at (202) 418-2441, email:
• http://www.fcc.gov/Document_Indexes/International/2003_index_IB_Public_Notice.html
  • [57]DA-03-3884A1.pdf [58]DA-03-3884A1.txt DOC-241934 POLICY BRANCH INFORMATION. Satellite Space Applications Accepted for Filing. Report Number: SAT-00180 12/05/2003 [59]DOC-241934A1.pdf [60]DOC-241934A1.txt DA-03-3878 INTERNATIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS GRANTED. Report Number: TEL-00738 12/04/2003 [61]DA-03-3878A1.pdf [62]DA-03-3878A1.txt DOC-241817 SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES. Accepted for Filing. Report Number: SES-00556 12/03/2003 [63]DOC-241817A1.pdf [64]DOC-241817A1.txt DOC-241820 SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES INFORMATION. Actions Taken. Report Number: SES-00557 12/03/2003 [65]DOC-241820A1.pdf [66]DOC-241820A1.txt DA-03-3863 CLARIFICATION OF 47 C.F.R. SECTION 25.140(B)(2) SPACE STATION APPLICATION INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS. Report Number: SPB-195 12/03/2003 [67]DA-03-3863A1.doc [68]DA-03-3863A1.pdf [69]DA-03-3863A1.txt DA-03-3842 INTERNATIONAL BUREAU HOSTS DESIGN SESSIONS FOR THE NEW, ENHANCED FILING SYSTEM, MYIBFS 12/01/2003 [70]DA-03-3842A1.doc [71]DA-03-3842A1.pdf [72]DA-03-3842A1.txt DOC-241747 STREAMLINED INTERNATIONAL APPLICATIONS ACCEPTED FOR FILING. Report Number: TEL-00736S 11/28/2003 [73]DOC-241747A1.pdf [74]DOC-241747A1.txt DOC-241748 NON STREAMLINED INTERNATIONAL APPLICATIONS ACCEPTED FOR FILING. Report Number: TEL-00737NS 11/28/2003 [75]DOC-241748A1.pdf [76]DOC-241748A1.txt DOC-241527 SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
• http://www.fcc.gov/Document_Indexes/International/2004_index_IB_Public_Notice.html
  • notice, DA 04-1698, released June 14, 2004, and includes a table of the 06/17/2004 [500]DA-04-1698A1_Erratum.doc [501]DOC-248493A1.doc [502]DOC-248493A1.pdf [503]DOC-248493A1.txt DOC-248439 SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES. Re: Satellite Radio Applications Accepted for Filing. Report Number: SES-00613 06/16/2004 [504]DOC-248439A1.pdf [505]DOC-248439A1.txt DOC-248441 SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES INFORMATION. Re: Actions Taken. Report Number: SES-00614 06/16/2004 [506]DOC-248441A1.pdf [507]DOC-248441A1.txt DA-04-1708 INTERNATIONAL BUREAU SATELLITE DIVISION INFORMATION: CLARIFICATION OF 47 C.F.R. ? 25.140(B)(2) SPACE STATION APPLICATION INTERFERENCE ANALYSIS. Report Number: SPB-207 06/16/2004 [508]DA-04-1708A1.doc [509]DA-04-1708A1.pdf [510]DA-04-1708A1.txt DA-04-1724 INTERNATIONAL BUREAU SATELLITE DIVISION INFORMATION ORBITAL DEBRIS MITIGATION: CLARIFICATION OF 47 C.F.R. SECTIONS 25.143(B), 25.145(C)(3), 25.146(I)(4) AND 25.217(D) REGARDING CASUALTY RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SATELLITE ATMOSPHERE RE-ENTRY. Report Number: SPB-208 06/16/2004 [511]DA-04-1724A1.doc [512]DA-04-1724A1.pdf [513]DA-04-1724A1.txt DA-04-1689 WRC-07 ADVISORY COMMITTEE - MEETINGS OF THE INFORMAL WORKING GROUPS 06/14/2004 [514]DA-04-1689A1.doc [515]DA-04-1689A1.pdf
• http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form312/312Fill.pdf
  • using Form 312 Main Form. Applications for assignments and transfers of control of space station licenses should also include Schedule A. Only the Main Form is needed to submit ownership information. All additional required space station information such as business plans, technical descriptions, etc. should be provided in a narrative form attached to the Form 312 Main Form. See Part 25.140, et al., of the FCC's Rules and Regulations concerning the filing requirements for space station applications. Earth Station Amendments. All amendments to pending earth station applications should include FCC Form 312 Main Form and Schedule B. Applicants may incorporate by reference those data items not being changed. (See instructions for incorporation by reference.) FCC Form 312 -Instructions February 1998 --
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/echostar-directv/genmot2_reply022502.pdf
  • controlled by others to ensure that the merger will not "stifle" competition in providing broadband services.269 Moreover, as explained above, SPACEWAY only has access to only two full-CONUS slots and EchoStar has access to at most three such slots, not three and five, respectively, as Pegasus and NRTC claim.270 Pegasus and NAB also argue that merger approval would violate Section 25.140(e) of the Commission's Rules, which limits the number of FSS orbital slots to two per applicant.271 This argument is without merit. The Commission has never held that Section 25.140(e) operates to preclude a merger that results in a transfer of control over orbital slots.272 It does not. In any event, the Commission has never applied this rule to 269 See
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/echostar-directv/nab2_petition020402.pdf
  • id. � 38. Moreover, "it is relatively easy [in the CMRS market] for existing competitors to add capacity in response to any price increase, and therefore firms cannot profitably reduce output and sustain a high price for a significant period of time." Id. � 45. The same obviously cannot be said for the DBS market. 344 See 47 C.F.R. �� 25.140(e), (f). 112 in the bands."345 Significantly, the Commission has waived these regulations where license applicants "agreed to an arrangement that accommodated all pending applications for space stations, and left room for additional assignments."346 The proposed transaction, of course, leaves no room for additional assignments, and, indeed, creates an insurmountable barrier to entry into the DBS market.347 In short, the Commission
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/echostar-directv/national_petdeny020402.pdf
  • Hughes,180 the proposed Merger would violate Commission rules. As noted above, the combined entity would control six full-CONUS Ka-band slots -- 83o W.L., 99o W.L., 101o W.L., 103o W.L., 113o W.L. and 121o W.L. -- along with 22 non-CONUS slots. Commission rules prohibit the assignment of additional Ka-band satellites to licensees that are not using their initially-assigned satellites. Specifically, Section 25.140(f) states that: Each applicant found to be qualified pursuant to this section may be assigned no more than one additional orbital location beyond its current authorizations in each frequency band in which it is authorized to operate, provided that its in-orbit satellites are essentially filled and that it has no more than two unused orbital locations for previously authorized but
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/echostar-directv/pegasusbrief_020402.pdf
  • will acquire from Hughes Electronics and PanAmSat, and the fleet of C-Band satellites owned by Hughes.189 The transfer applicants have failed to demonstrate that it needs all this capacity to offer a viable broadband satellite service. Indeed, New EchoStar's acquisition of this spectrum is clearly inconsistent with the Commission's policies against the warehousing of spectrum and orbital slots underlying Sections 25.140(e) & (f) of the Commission's rules.190 Section 25.140(e) provides that applicants for authorizations in the fixed satellite service only will be 187 See In re KaStarCom. World Satellite, LLC, Order and Authorization, DA 01-1687, 2001 WL 876975 (I.B. 2001) (authorizing KaStarCom to use 111� W.L.). 188 Second Round Ka-Band GSO Assignment Order, supra, at Appendix. See also In re Celsat