[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 222 (Tuesday, November 18, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61448-61457]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30205]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 25
[CC Docket No. 92-297; FCC 97-378]
Ka-Band Satellite Application and Licensing Procedures
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: With this Report and Order, the Commission adopts licensing
qualification requirements and service rules for a new generation of
fixed-satellite service (``FSS'') systems in the Ka-band.1
These systems have the potential to provide a wide variety of broadband
interactive digital services in the United States and around the world
including: voice, data, and video; videoconferencing; facsimile;
computer access and telemedicine. The systems can provide direct-to-
home services, potentially allowing customers to participate in
activities from distance learning to interactive home shopping. The
rules established here provide guidelines for the new Ka-band satellite
systems to commence operation.
\1\ The term Ka-band generally refers to the space-to-earth
(downlink) frequencies at 17.7-20.2 GHz and the corresponding earth-
to-space (uplink) frequencies at 27.5-30.0 GHz, or the ``28 GHz
band.'' This Report and Order pertains only to U.S. commercial
satellite systems in the Ka-band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: The adopted rule changes will become effective January 20, 1998,
except Sec. 25.145(g), which will become effective upon OMB approval.
The Commission will publish a document announcing the effective date of
Sec. 25.145(g) following approval of the information collection request
by OMB. Comments are requested on the information collection concerning
Section 25.145(g) and may be filed on or before January 20, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Gilsenan, International
Bureau, Satellite Policy Branch, (202) 418-0757; Kathleen Campbell,
International Bureau, Satellite Policy Branch (202) 418-0753. For
additional information concerning the information collection contained
in this Report and Order contact Judy Boley at (202) 418-0214, or via
the Internet at jboley@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order in CC Docket No. 92-297; FCC 97-378, adopted October 9, 1997,
and released October 15, 1997. The complete text of this Report and
Order is available for inspection and copying during normal business
hours in the
[[Page 61449]]
FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C.,
and also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor,
International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street,
N.W., Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Section 25.143(g) contains an information collection which requires
OMB approval. In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. (PRA)), the Commission is planning to submit an
information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
for review and approval and is soliciting comments on the information
collection. The PRA requires the Commission to seek comment on new or
modified information collections for a sixty day period. Therefore, the
Commission is soliciting comment on the information collection
described below. Comments should address: (a) whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
OMB Approval No.: 3060-XXXX.
Title: Section 25.145(g)--Reporting Requirements.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: New.
Respondents: Businesses or other for profit, including small
businesses.
Number of Respondents: 20.
Estimated Time Per Response: The Commission estimates all
respondents will hire an attorney or legal assistant to complete the
form. The time to retain these services is 2 hours per respondent.
Total Annual Burden: 40 hours.
Estimated Costs Per Respondent: $300. This includes the charges for
hiring an attorney, legal assistant, or engineer at $150 an hour to
complete the submissions.
Needs and Uses: In accordance with the Communications Act, the
information collected will be used by the Commission to insure that
licensees are in compliance with the Commission's rules and policies
and will assist the Commission in determining whether operations are in
the public interest.
Summary of Report and Order
1. The Ka-band is allocated for fixed service, FSS, and mobile
service.2 In July 1995, the Commission adopted a Third
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing, among other things, a band
segmentation plan that was designed to accommodate both terrestrial and
satellite communication systems.3 Specifically, we proposed
discrete band segments for the operation of terrestrial Local
Multipoint Distribution Service (``LMDS''), GSO FSS, NGSO FSS, and
feeder links for certain ``Big LEO'' mobile-satellite service (``MSS'')
satellite systems. We also proposed to apply the existing rules for GSO
FSS systems in part 25 of the Commission's rules 4 to GSO
FSS systems that will use the 28 GHz band. We requested comment,
however, on whether specific rules, such as financial qualification
requirements, should be altered for Ka-band satellite systems and
whether any additional rules should be created for either GSO FSS
systems or NGSO FSS systems operating at Ka-band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 47 CFR 2.106. The 29.5-30.0 GHz band is also allocated
on a primary basis to the Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS); however,
in accordance with the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
Radio Regulation S5.529, use of the 29.5-30.0 GHz band by the MSS in
Region 2 is limited to satellite networks which are both in the FSS
and MSS.
\3\ See Rulemaking to Amend parts 1, 2, 21, and 25 of the
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, Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd
53 (1995), 60 FR 43470 (August 23, 1995) (Third NPRM).
\4\ See 47 CFR 25.114, 124.140, and 25.210.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. In July 1996, the Commission issued a First Report and Order and
Fourth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking adopting, among other things, a
final band plan for the Ka-band.5 This plan was the
culmination of months of discussions with interested parties and
filings in the proceeding since the release of the Third NPRM. The band
plan adopted provides a framework that accommodates all commercial
proposed services in discrete band segments and provides the
opportunity to offer innovative communications services to the public.
The plan designates 1000 MHz of primary and co-primary uplink spectrum
and 1600 MHz of primary and co-primary downlink spectrum to GSO FSS
systems; 500 MHz of primary uplink and 500 MHz of primary downlink
spectrum to NGSO FSS systems; and 1000 MHz of primary and co-primary
spectrum to LMDS. The Fourth NPRM proposing an additional 300 MHz for
LMDS at 31.0-31.3 GHz was also adopted.6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See In the Matter of Rulemaking to Amend parts 1, 2, 21, and
25 of the 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, First Report and Order and
Fourth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 19005 (1996), 61 FR
39425 (July 29, 1996) (Fourth Notice), 61 FR 44177 (August 28, 1996)
(Final Rule), (28 GHz First Report and Order). This decision is
subject to petitions for reconsideration. The band plan is depicted
graphically and discussed in more detail in para. para. 39-49,
infra.
\6\ See 28 GHz First Report and Order at Paras. 95-104.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The provisions set forth in part 25 of the Commission's rules,
in general, govern the licensing of the fixed-satellite service
systems. This includes commercial FSS systems in the Ka-band. The rules
impose fairly rigorous financial and technical requirements on
commercial FSS applicants. In this Report and Order, we modify these
rules to incorporate technical operations at the Ka-band. Further, the
part 25 FSS rules were developed in an environment where we regularly
receive more applications than we can accommodate. Here the GSO FSS
licensees have agreed to an orbital assignment arrangement that will
support them all, and we were able to accommodate one NGSO FSS system
with room for future entry. Accordingly, as discussed below, we believe
it is in the public interest to waive the financial qualification rule
sections in processing this round of Ka-band applications in order to
allow for maximum entry.
Financial Qualifications
4. Historically, the Commission has fashioned financial
requirements for satellite services on the basis of entry opportunities
in the particular service being licensed. In cases where we can
accommodate all pending applications and future entry is possible, we
have not looked to current financial ability as a prerequisite to a
license grant. This is because the grant of an authorization to one
applicant will not prevent another qualified applicant from advancing
with a proposal for the same service.7 We ensure that
licensees timely build their systems by requiring them to meet
specified implementation milestones. In contrast, where applications
for satellites exceed the number of satellites
[[Page 61450]]
we can accommodate, we have adopted a standard that requires applicants
to demonstrate evidence of internal assets or committed financing
sufficient to cover construction, launch, and first year operating
costs of its entire system.8 This is based on our experience
that under-financed applicants have significant difficulty in the
capital markets in raising hundreds of millions of dollars needed to
construct and launch a satellite system, even with a license in
hand.9 Requiring evidence of full financing therefore
prevents a licensee from holding spectrum while it attempts to procure
financing, to the detriment of qualified applicants that can
immediately go forward with systems and provide service to the public.
We require FSS operators to meet this strict standard because the
number of applications we receive in the traditional C- and Ku-band FSS
frequencies regularly exceeds the number we can authorize.10
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See, e.g., Radiodetermination Satellite Service, 104 FCC 2d
650 (1986), 51 FR 18444 (May 20, 1986), as corrected, 51 FR 20975
(June 10, 1986) (Because all pending RDSS applicants could be
accommodated and future entry was possible, the Commission required
applicants to provide only a detailed business plan). See generally
Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies
Pertaining to a Mobile Satellite Service in the 1610-1626/2483.5-
2500 MHz Frequency Bands, Report and Order, at para. 26, 9 FCC Rcd
5936 (1994), 59 FR 53294 (October 21, 1994) (Big LEO Report and
Order).
\8\ See 47 CFR 25.140(b)-(e).
\9\ See, e.g., National Exchange Satellite, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 1990
(Com. Car. Bur. 1992); Rainbow Satellite, Inc., Mimeo No. 2584
(Com.Car. Bur., released Feb. 14, 1985); United States Satellite
Systems, Inc., Mimeo No. 2583 (Com.Car. Bur., released Feb. 14,
1985) (domestic satellite licenses declared null and void for
failure to begin implementation as required by license). In
addition, Geostar Corporation, a start-up company licensed in the
radiodetermination satellite service, declared bankruptcy nearly
five years after its licenses were issued. It had not built any of
its dedicated satellites.
\10\ Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite
Service, FCC 85-395, CC Docket No. 85-135 (released August 29,
1985), 50 FR 36071 (September 5, 1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. When we proposed to apply the existing FSS financial requirement
to 28 GHz FSS systems, the GSO applicants had not yet agreed to an
orbital assignment arrangement that would accommodate them all. In
light of their plan, we can grant all of the first round GSO FSS
applications, with other ``clear'' orbit locations remaining available
for additional GSO FSS satellites. Further, granting Teledesic's NGSO
FSS system application does not preclude future Ka-band NGSO FSS
systems. Thus, authorizing all proposed first-round systems does not
preclude use of this band by other applicants for FSS systems. We
therefore will waive the FSS financial requirement for first-round
applicants, as reflected in their individual licenses. We intend to
enforce system milestone schedules strictly to ensure that any
licensees who are not able to proceed do not continue to hold valuable
orbit and spectrum resources. Further, we emphasize that this waiver
applies to this processing group only, and that the application of our
financial requirements to any future Ka-band processing round will be
addressed in the context of that processing round.
Technical Qualifications
6. Applicants for satellite systems must also meet certain
technical qualification standards. The Ka-band offers several technical
advantages that allow for the implementation of broadband, high
capacity FSS applications that otherwise could not be provided in the
C- or Ku-bands. For example, the shorter wavelengths in this higher
frequency band support the use of transmit-receive earth station
antennas significantly smaller than those now in use. They also support
significantly smaller satellite spot beams that facilitate frequency
reuse, and wider bandwidth and high data rate services.11
However, operations at the Ka-band frequencies are also very
susceptible to rain fade and other atmospheric attenuations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., Comments of Hughes at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Many commenters urge the Commission to confirm that the
Commission's existing FSS technical requirements and policies apply to
satellite systems in the Ka-band.12 As indicated previously,
we will, in general, apply existing FSS rules, including technical
qualifications requirements, to commercial satellite systems in the Ka-
band. In the following text, we discuss modifications or clarifications
to several rules that we adopt to accommodate efficient and state-of-
the art use of the Ka-band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, e.g., Comments of GE at 20-21 and Hughes at 35-36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSO Specific Requirements
8. The Commission's rules currently require that an applicant for a
GSO FSS space station authorization demonstrate how the proposed space
station complies with 2 degree orbital spacing requirements. 47 CFR
25.140. In the Third NPRM, we proposed to apply 2 degree spacing to the
Ka-band and requested comment on this proposal. This proposal was
supported by several commenters.13 GE, in fact, suggested
that the Commission explore the possibility of 1 degree spacing in the
Ka-band.14 NetSat28, in contrast, argued that the
characteristics of this higher frequency band and the innovative
technology proposed for this band support a different approach to
orbital spacing, specifically, 8 degree spacing.15 However,
the orbit assignment plan submitted by the GSO applicants, including
NetSat28, spaces their satellites at 2 degree intervals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., Comments of Hughes at 35-36; GE Americom at 20.
\14\ Comments of GE at 20.
\15\ Reply Comments of NetSat28 at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. We believe it is in the public interest, as we establish the Ka-
band satellite service, to continue our policy of maximizing the number
of satellites that can be accommodated in orbit. If we were to move to
GSO orbital arc spacing greater than 2 degrees at this time, we would
not be able to accommodate all potential service providers in this
first processing round. By submitting a plan using 2 degree spacing,
the GSO satellite applicants suggest they can implement viable systems
with these spacings. Further, there is nothing in the record to support
a finding that one degree spacing, with its increased potential for
interference, is feasible at this time. Consequently, we will apply the
existing 2 degree spacing policy to U.S. licensed non-Government Ka-
band orbital assignments.
10. To accommodate maximum entry while facilitating efficient use
of in-orbit resources, we limit, in part 25, the number of orbit
locations a qualified FSS applicant may be initially
assigned.16 Historically, this limitation pertained to the
provision of domestic FSS in the United States, the objectives being to
avoid prematurely assigning an excessive number of orbital locations to
an existing licensee for expansion of its domestic system and to
promote entry opportunity in the bands.17 Many of the
systems proposed in the Ka-band propose to serve geographic areas
around the world. In addition, the applicants have also agreed to an
arrangement that accommodates all proposed satellites. We also licensed
thirteen different GSO FSS system providers in the band and expect that
there will be a mix of competitors for services in the band. We believe
it is in the public interest to allow these systems, especially those
proposing to serve different geographic areas, to proceed as proposed
at this point. Therefore, we will waive, for this processing round
only, any rules that limit the number of orbit locations that may be
assigned to any applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 47 CFR 25.140(f).
\17\ See Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-
Satellite Service, 50 FR 36071 (September 5, 1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. We have long recognized the cost benefits in implementing
several service bands on a single space platform. Consequently, as we
do with C- and Ku-band satellites, we will permit Ka-band licensees to
build hybrid satellites where they are assigned to corresponding C- and
Ka-band, or Ku-band and Ka-band orbit locations,
[[Page 61451]]
provided all other technical and service requirements for the
particular band are met. Any licensee that wishes to consolidate co-
located satellites into a hybrid satellite must file an application to
modify its underlying licenses.
NGSO Specific Requirements
12. In the Third NPRM, we asked whether spectrum efficiency or
service availability standards should be adopted for NGSO FSS systems
in the Ka-band. Teledesic was the only party who filed timely comments
regarding NGSO FSS service rule issues.
13. Teledesic suggests that the Commission consider adopting some
minimum domestic and international geographic coverage requirements to
ensure that NGSO FSS satellite systems, which are inherently global in
nature, provide universal access throughout the U.S. and the
world.18 We agree that NGSO FSS systems are capable of
fostering a seamless global communications network and we believe that
it serves the public interest to adopt a coverage area requirement for
these systems. Consequently, we are adopting the same coverage
requirements for 28 GHz systems that we apply to ``Big LEO'' systems
operating in the 1610-1626.5 / 2483.5-2500 MHz bands.19
Specifically, we will require 28 GHz NGSO FSS systems to be capable of
serving locations as far north as 70 degrees latitude and as far south
as 55 degrees latitude for at least 75% of every 24-hour period. We
will also require 28 GHz NGSO FSS systems to be capable of providing
FSS on a continuous basis throughout the fifty states, Puerto Rico, and
the U.S. Virgin Islands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Comments of Teledesic at 28.
\19\ See Big LEO Report and Order at para. 24; 47 CFR
25.143(b)(2)(ii); (b)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. As always, we seek to foster a climate that maximizes
competition and promotes multiple entry of systems. Resolution 118
(WRC-95) requests that the ITU-R study, among other things, the sharing
between NGSO FSS networks in the Ka-band. ITU-R Working party-4A
studies have identified, and the Commission recognizes, two sharing
scenarios: (1) sharing between or among ``homogeneous'' NGSO FSS
systems, and (2) sharing between or among ``non-homogeneous'' NGSO FSS
systems. ``Homogeneous'' NGSO FSS systems are assumed to have orbits
with approximately the same altitude and high inclination angle.
Similar technical parameters are not assumed for ``non-homogeneous''
NGSO FSS systems. Under scenario (1), sharing between multiple
``homogeneous'' NGSO FSS systems is feasible by interleaving the
orbital planes of different NGSO FSS constellations. It may also be
possible to interleave satellites from different constellations within
the same orbital plane. Because each constellation's satellites are
separated spatially under scenario (1), there is no ``in-line''
interference between NGSO FSS systems, except near the polar regions.
This particular sharing scenario requires minimum interaction between
the different NGSO FSS systems. ITU-R studies assert that multiple
``homogeneous'' NGSO FSS systems can be accommodated using these
methods. However, it is important to note that sharing between or among
``homogeneous'' systems imposes similar uniform design constraints on
subsequent NGSO FSS systems implemented in the same frequency
bands.20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Design constraints include limitations on the number of
orbital planes, orbital plane inclination, orbit altitude, and earth
station antenna patterns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. A second sharing scenario exists between or among ``non-
homogeneous'' NGSO FSS systems. Because of the inherently large number
of orbital plane crossings, it is not possible to maintain spatial
separation between satellites in multiple NGSO FSS
constellations.21 Consequently, other types of mitigation
techniques (e.g., exclusion zones, satellite diversity, or high gain
antennas) would need to be employed by each NGSO FSS system. The
Commission also recognizes that further division of the spectrum, which
would result in a reduction of each system's capacity, is also a
feasible alternative if sharing proves to be unacceptable to any
particular NGSO FSS system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ ``In-line'' interference occurs when satellites from
separate NGSO FSS systems operate in the region where each system's
orbital planes cross.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. We are not now in a position to determine exactly how many non-
Government NGSO FSS systems, and in particular, how many ``non-
homogeneous'' type systems, will be able to operate in the 18.8-19.3/
28.6-29.1 GHz bands. Further, we note that many satellites undergo
design changes during implementation that could facilitate sharing
among systems. Additionally, second generation systems usually become
more efficient, further facilitating the operation of multiple systems.
Consequently, we will not now mandate any specific sharing principles
or mitigation techniques to be used in coordination between or among
non-Government NGSO FSS systems. However, we expect all non-Government
NGSO FSS systems to be responsible for some portion of the burden-
sharing. Specifically, we expect all NGSO FSS licensees to bear some
portion of the technical and operational constraints necessary to
accommodate multiple ``non-homogeneous'' NGSO FSS systems. In
apportioning burden, it may be appropriate to consider factors such as
whether a particular NGSO FSS satellite is already in-orbit and
operational. If NGSO FSS non-Government systems are unable to share
spectrum, another feasible alternative is to further divide the
spectrum designated in the United States for non-Government NGSO FSS
systems, between or among licensed operators. We will evaluate all
applications for NGSO FSS systems on a case-by-case basis, revisiting
the multiple entry issue, as necessary, as we gain more experience with
NGSO FSS systems.
Implementing the Band Plan Domestically
17. The 28 GHz band plan designates domestic licensing priority for
certain non-Government services or systems in specific band segments.
We designated co-frequency sharing between services or systems only in
band segments where the Commission and the parties concluded it is
technically feasible. In the 28 GHz Band First Report and Order we
further designated domestic licensing priority for certain types of
fixed-satellite services with respect to other types of fixed-satellite
services in specific band segments. For example, in the 28.35-28.60 GHz
band segments, GSO FSS systems have licensing priority over NGSO FSS
systems, and in the 28.6-29.1 GHz segment, NGSO FSS systems have
licensing priority over GSO FSS systems. This licensing priority
between systems in the same service has a similar interpretation as a
``secondary'' service with respect to a ``primary''
service.22 Accordingly, we will require any service provider
proposing to operate in a band segment in which it does not have
licensing priority, to operate on an unprotected non-interference basis
to the priority service. To ensure non-interfering operations, we will
require all secondary operators to submit to the
[[Page 61452]]
Commission a technical demonstration that it can operate on a non-
harmful interference basis to the type of satellite system with
licensing priority. This technical demonstration will be subject to
public comment before we authorize any secondary operations in the
bands. In addition, we will require secondary users to immediately
cease operations upon notification of harmful interference into any
service or system that has superior status or licensing priority in a
particular band segment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ``Secondary'' generally refers to a category of service
with respect to other radio services. Stations of a secondary
service shall not cause harmful interference to stations of primary
or permitted services; cannot claim protection from harmful
interference from stations of a primary or permitted service, but
can claim protection from harmful interference from stations of the
same or other secondary service(s) to which frequencies may be
assigned at a later date. See 47 CFR 2.104(d); 47 CFR 2.105(c)(3).
As a general matter, the Commission does not coordinate secondary
operations with respect to primary or permitted services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Further, all licensees must coordinate with the U.S. Government
systems authorized in the 17.80-20.20 GHz band, in accordance with U.S.
footnote 334 in the Table of Frequency Allocations. U.S. footnote 334
reads as follows: ``In the band 17.80-20.20 GHz, Government space
stations and associated earth stations in the fixed-satellite (space-
to-Earth) service may be authorized on a primary basis. For a
Government geo-stationary satellite network to operate on a primary
basis, the space station shall be located outside the arc measured from
East to West, 70 deg. W to 120 deg. W. Coordination between Government
fixed-satellite systems and non-Government systems operating in
accordance with the United States Table of Frequency Allocations is
required.'' 23
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See 47 CFR 2.106 U.S. footnote 334.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. The 18.8-19.3 GHz band is designated for non-Government NGSO
FSS use on a co-primary basis with the fixed service and with
Government services. We require NGSO FSS systems to coordinate with any
existing and future point-to-point fixed systems in the
band.24 We also designated NGSO FSS on a secondary priority
basis in the 17.7-18.8 and 19.7-20.2 GHz band segments. As a secondary
user, NGSO FSS operators shall not cause harmful interference to
stations of a primary service, or higher priority FSS system, nor can
they claim protection from harmful interference from stations of a
primary service, or higher priority FSS system. NGSO FSS systems must
also coordinate with the Government systems operating in the band 18.8-
19.3 GHz in accordance with U.S. footnote 334.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ We note, however, that in a separate proceeding we have
relocated a fixed service, the Digital Electronic Message Service
(``DEMS'') from the 18.82-18.92 and 19.16-19.26 GHz bands to the
24.25-24.45 and 25.05-25.25 GHz bands. See Amendment of the
Commission's Rules to Relocate the Digital Electronic Message
Service From the 18 GHz band to the 24 GHz band and To Allocate Band
For Fixed Service, 12 FCC Rcd 3471 (1997), 62 FR 24576 (May 6,
1997). This Order is subject to petitions for reconsideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earth Station Licensing
20. We anticipate making changes to our existing part 25
requirements for earth stations in the C- and Ku-bands to take into
account operations at Ka-band. In fact, four GSO satellite applicants
have submitted a petition for rulemaking to the
Commission.25 The Petitioners request that the Commission
institute a rulemaking proceeding to revise part 25 of the Commission's
rules, 47 CFR Sec. 25.101, in order to provide for the routine
licensing of large numbers of small antenna earth stations operating in
the 19.7-20.2/29.5-30.0 GHz bands for GSO FSS. Teledesic supports the
Petition and further suggests the scope of the rulemaking be expanded
to include the entire available Ka-band frequencies.26
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Routine Licensing of Large Numbers of Small Antenna
Earth Stations Operating in the Ka-Band, Petition for Rulemaking,
RM-9005, submitted December 20, 1996, by: GE, Loral, Lockheed Martin
and Hughes.
\26\ See Comments of Teledesic at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inter-Satellite Service
21. Many system proponents in the Ka-band propose to use inter-
satellite service (ISS) frequencies to interconnect satellites within
their respective networks.27 These proposed bands include
the 22.55-23.55 GHz/32.0-33.0 GHz/54.25-58.2 GHz and 59-64 GHz bands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Applications of EchoStar, Ka-Star, Lockheed Martin,
Hughes, Loral, Comm. Inc., and Teledesic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. One licensee, Hughes, proposes to use the 22.55-23.55 GHz and
32.0-33.0 GHz bands for some of its inter-satellite links. These bands
are shared on a co-equal basis with U.S. Government operations. In
addition, one of the ``Big LEO'' systems is licensed to operate inter-
satellite links in the 22.55-23.55 GHz band. Any 28 GHz systems
licensed to operate inter-satellite links in these bands would be
required to coordinate with U.S. Government systems through the
Frequency Assignment Subcommittee (FAS) of the Inter-Governmental Radio
Advisory Committee (IRAC) and with other non-Government licensees in
the band. At this time, we defer action on any authorizations in the
22.55-23.55 and 32.0-33.0 GHz bands until we receive more information
on the specific frequencies Hughes needs for its system and we have
coordinated with the Government.
23. The Commission and the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA), which has primary jurisdiction over
Government use of spectrum, have had discussions regarding the
potential for interference that would be associated with non-Government
GSO or NGSO FSS operations in the 54.25-58.2 GHz and 59-64 GHz bands.
The 54.25-58.25 GHz band appears more promising for the inter-satellite
service to support non-Government GSO FSS operations. We are also
working with NTIA to develop a U.S. proposal to WRC-97 for an
allocation in the 65-71 GHz band for inter-satellite service links for
both GSO and NGSO FSS systems.28 We are optimistic that we
will obtain sufficient spectrum internationally to support Ka-band
system inter-satellite link operations. Nevertheless, we did not delay
issuing licenses pending the allocation of suitable spectrum for inter-
satellite links. Once suitable spectrum is available, we will require
licensees to apply for operating authority on specific operating
frequencies. Further, because licensees will not be able to proceed
beyond the initial phases of construction until the inter-satellite
link issues are resolved, we did not impose any system implementation
milestones until we grant authority to launch and operate individual
systems using specific inter-satellite link spectrum. We will hold all
licensees to the strict milestone schedule discussed above, once the
respective inter-satellite frequencies are authorized. In the interim,
all licensees are free to begin construction at their own risk. We
recently waived the construction permit requirement for space stations.
This decision, effective April 21, 1997, means that applicants no
longer need Commission authorization in order to build their proposed
satellites. Any construction prior to obtaining an operating license
is, however, solely at the applicant's own risk and will not predispose
the Commission to grant it launch and operating authority.29
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See ``United States Proposals No. 209 and No. 210 for the
Work of the Conference'' (August 1997).
\29\ See Streamlining the Commission's Rules and Regulations for
Satellite Application and Licensing Procedures, Report and Order, 11
FCC Rcd 21581 (1996), 62 FR 5924 (February 14, 1997) (Part 25
Streamlining).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Rules
24. In our DISCO I Order, we determined that all fixed-satellite
operators in the C-band and Ku-band could elect to operate on a common
carrier or non-common carrier basis.30 We see no reason to
treat satellite
[[Page 61453]]
operators in the Ka-band any differently. The Commission traditionally
has evaluated requests to operate on a non-common carrier basis using
the analysis set forth in National Association of Regulatory Utility
Commissioners v. FCC,31 (NARUC I). Under NARUC I, we may
regulate an entity as a private carrier unless: (1) there is or should
be any legal compulsion to serve the public indifferently; or (2) there
are reasons implicit in the nature of the service to expect that the
entity will in fact hold itself out indifferently to all eligible
users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See In the Matter of Amendment to the Commission's
Regulatory Policies Governing Domestic Fixed Satellites and Separate
International Satellite Systems and DBSC Petition for Declaratory
Rulemaking Regarding the Use of Transponders to provide
international DBS Service, 11 FCC Rcd 2429, 2436 (1996), 61 FR 9946
(March 12, 1996) (DISCO I Order).
\31\ National Ass'n of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. FCC,
525 F.2d 630 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 992 (1976); 47
U.S.C. Sec. 153(44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. Several of the Ka-band FSS applicants propose to operate all
services on a non-common carrier basis.32 Regarding the
first prong of NARUC I, we do not see any legal compulsion to require
any space station licensee in the Ka-band to operate on a non-common
carrier basis. We have already determined there is sufficient
competitive capacity available in the C-and Ku-bands to assure the U.S.
public ample access to fixed-satellite services.33 In
addition, we have licensed thirteen GSO FSS systems and one NGSO FSS
system in the Ka-band which propose to offer a wide variety of
broadband voice, data and video services to the U.S. domestic consumer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ But see EchoStar Satellite Corporation Application for
Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Ka-Band Satellite
System in the Fixed-Satellite Service, Order and Authorization, DA
97-969, (released May 9, 1997). EchoStar proposes to operate its
system on a common carrier basis.
\33\ See DISCO I Order at para. 46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. Regarding the second prong of NARUC I, we find there is little
likelihood that such Ka-band licensees will hold themselves out
indifferently to serve the public. New Ka-band offerings can be
tailored to provide a broad array of specialized communications
services ranging from videoconferencing to telemedicine; and these
services may be styled to accommodate highly individualized methods of
operation and demands of potential customers. We believe permitting Ka-
band licensees to offer services on a non-common carrier basis is in
the public interest.
Implementation Milestones
27. We will require each GSO FSS licensee to begin construction of
its first satellite within one year of grant, to begin construction of
the remainder within two years of grant, to launch at least one
satellite into each of its assigned orbit locations within five years
of grant, and to launch the remainder of its satellites by the date
required by the International Telecommunication Union to assure
international recognition and protection of these
satellites.34 For NGSO FSS systems, we adopt the same
implementation schedule as we did for the Big LEOs.35
Specifically, we will require NGSO FSS licensees to begin construction
of its first two satellites within one year of the unconditional grant
of its authorization, and complete construction of those first two
satellites within four years of that grant. Construction for the
remaining authorized operating satellites in the constellation must
begin within three years of the initial authorization, and the entire
authorized system must be operational within six years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ ITU Regulations require that all satellites must be brought
into use no later than six years from the date on which the Appendix
4 information for that satellite was filed. However, a request for a
three-year extension of time may be granted. The Appendix 4
information for 28 GHz GSO systems was filed in November 1995.
Therefore, all satellites we have authorized to operate in the 28
GHz spectrum must be launched by November 2004.
\35\ See Big LEO Report and Order at para. 189.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporting Requirements
28. We will also follow the new part 25 rules for reporting
requirements for FSS systems.36 Specifically, a licensee
will be required to file an annual report with the Commission
describing: the status of satellite construction and anticipated launch
dates, including any major problems or delays encountered; a listing of
any non-scheduled transponder (GSO FSS) or satellite (NGSO FSS) outages
for more than 30 minutes; and the cause(s) of such outages; and a
detailed description of the utilization made of each transponder (GSO
FSS) or satellite (NGSO FSS) on each of the in-orbit
satellites.37
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See Part 25 Streamlining, supra, n. 29.
\37\ See 47 CFR Sec. 25.210(j)(1)(2)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Operations
29. The United States is under a treaty obligation, in connection
with its membership in the ITU, to coordinate all U.S. authorized
services internationally. The ITU's coordination procedures are
intended to ensure that the operations of one country's satellites do
not cause or receive harmful interference to or from the operations of
another country's satellites. The procedure for effecting coordination
of a satellite system is a three-step process consisting of (1) advance
publication, where a country makes known its plans to implement a
satellite system at particular frequencies and orbital parameters
(e.g., location), (2) coordination, where technical agreements are
negotiated and reached among countries to ensure interference-free
operations of the planned satellites, and (3) notification, where the
frequency assignment is recorded in the ITU's Master International
Frequency Register. Once these processes have been completed, a
satellite system is entitled to international recognition and is
protected against interference from all existing and future satellites.
30. We have advance published GSO and NGSO FSS systems and have
initiated coordination with the ITU. We have also submitted
notification information for a NGSO FSS system.38 To
facilitate these processes, we will continue to require licensees to
provide us with all of the information required to complete the
coordination and notification process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Because coordination procedures were not in place for NGSO
FSS satellite systems at the time the Appendix 3 information was
filed, it was possible for certain NGSO FSS and NGSO MSS feeder link
systems to move from the advance publication (step 1) process to the
notification (step 3) process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. The NTIA may authorize Government GSO FSS and NGSO FSS
operations on a primary basis in the band 17.8-20.2 GHz in accordance
with US footnote 334. Where international coordination is required for
these Government systems, the NTIA will separately coordinate the
Government GSO and NGSO operations in accordance with the appropriate
ITU regulations.
32. Because the 28 GHz band is allocated and used worldwide for a
variety of technically incompatible terrestrial and satellite services,
we expect that international coordination of our 28 GHz band non-
Government systems will be complex. Specifically, the 27.5-30.0/17.7-
20.2 GHz bands are allocated domestically and internationally to the
fixed service, which includes LMDS, and to the FSS, which includes both
GSO and NGSO operations. MSS system feeder link operations may also be
provided under FSS allocations. As we discussed previously in paragraph
6, we have determined the only way to address these conflicting
allocations and proposed usage was to adopt a band plan that, in
essence, divides the 27.5-30.0/17.7-20.2 GHz band into several band
segments, each of which is to be used primarily for LMDS, GSO FSS, NGSO
FSS, or MSS feeder link operations.39 As explained below, we
believe it is in the public interest to use this plan as the basis for
coordinating U.S. licensed 28 GHz band satellite systems
internationally. We outline herein the procedures we intend to
[[Page 61454]]
follow for coordinating U.S.-licensed non-Government satellite systems
with each other in other parts of the world. In addition, we outline
the procedures we will generally follow when coordinating U.S.-licensed
non-Government 28 GHz satellite systems with both satellite and
terrestrial systems licensed by other countries. At the same time, we
recognize that other countries are able to implement their systems in
accordance with their domestic requirements and the International Radio
Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Report and Order, Paras. 39-49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. Because we have licensed multiple non-Government 28 GHz
satellite systems and several of these systems are designed to operate
on a global basis, we will likely be faced with the responsibility of
coordinating the international operations of two or more non-Government
satellite systems with each other.40 The record in this
proceeding does not support a finding that sharing between ubiquitous
non-Government GSO and NGSO FSS systems is technically feasible at this
time without mitigation.41 This was the impetus for adopting
a band sharing plan at 28 GHz that designated separate band segments
for primary GSO FSS, NGSO FSS and feeder link operations. Due to the
potential coordination difficulties that may lead to delay of services,
we believe it is in the public interest to require U.S. non-Government
licensees to operate in accordance with our 28 GHz band plan throughout
the world, with certain exceptions as described below. Without such a
requirement, we believe we would jeopardize the successful operation of
these systems outside of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ This does not include the coordination of earth stations
accessing U.S.-licensed systems, since these earth stations belong
to the administration where the earth station is located.
\41\ However, satisfactory ways of co-frequency sharing by NGSO
FSS and GSO FSS networks can be found where the burden is placed on
either the GSO or NGSO network. Mitigation techniques to reduce
interference can be evaluated through the coordination process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. In the Big LEO proceeding, where we also adopted service rules
for U.S. global satellite systems, we did not require non-Government
licensees to operate in accordance with the domestic band plan outside
the United States.42 This approach resulted in significant
delay in the implementation of their systems, however. Eventually, the
Big LEO licensees determined that in order for each system to operate
on a global basis without coordination conflicts amongst themselves,
the best way was to conform their international operations to the
domestic band plan set out in the Big LEO Report and Order. Our
experience in the Big LEO proceeding leads us to believe that it is in
the public interest to adopt a policy now for coordination of these
U.S. licensed global non-Government systems in the 28 GHz band to
ensure that coordination can proceed and services can be provided to
the public in a timely manner.43
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See Big LEO Report and Order at para. 231.
\43\ See ex parte filing of Lockheed Martin filed (May 7, 1997)
at 8, supporting this policy: ``Now that the 28 GHz band plan has
been adopted in the United States, the Commission staff is
considering applying the same frequency plan, including specific
licensing priorities (i.e., ``primary'' and ``secondary''
designation), to the operation of U.S. licensed satellites abroad.
Lockheed Martin supports the adoption of such measures.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. While we envision coordinating U.S. licensed non-Government
systems in accordance with the 28 GHz band segmentation plan throughout
the world, we recognize that there will be some exceptions. For
example, due to the need to accommodate non-U.S. satellite systems that
had entered into the ITU advance publication, coordination and
notification processes before the U.S. systems, the United States has
negotiated agreements with other administrations to permit operation of
specific satellite systems in certain geographic areas in frequency
bands that are not entirely in conformance with the U.S. 28 GHz band
plan. Accordingly, we will adhere to any coordination or consultation
agreements that were initiated before the 28 GHz band plan was adopted
in July 1996. In addition, these non-conforming arrangements could
potentially impact how we decide to coordinate U.S. non-Government
satellite systems in other portions of the 28 GHz band. For example, we
may seek to make up for some of the spectrum ``lost'' to these systems
in the agreement in other portions of the band. We anticipate that
these deviations from our band plan will be the rare exception for the
implementation of the U.S. band plan by U.S. non-Government satellite
system licensees worldwide.
36. Last, the U.S. band plan does not distinguish between GSO and
NGSO FSS systems as secondary users to LMDS in the 27.5 to 28.35 GHz
uplink band. Rather, generic FSS is designated as the secondary service
in the U.S. We envision only limited FSS uplink operations, such as
gateway operations, will be able to operate on a non-interference basis
to LMDS in the United States. In those cases where other countries use
the 27.5-28.35 GHz band segment for FSS, we intend to provide U.S. non-
Government GSO FSS systems with coordination priority over U.S. non-
Government NGSO FSS systems in this band. This is because the U.S. band
plan designates the corresponding downlink frequency band at 17.7-18.8
GHz on a priority basis to the GSO FSS, with NGSO FSS operations on a
non-interference basis only to any service or system that has superior
status or licensing priority. If the uplink frequencies are not treated
in a similar manner, the downlink designation would be meaningless. We
do not believe this to be the intended result of the band plan. We will
therefore give priority to U.S. GSO systems vis-a-vis U.S. NGSO systems
at 27.5-28.35 GHz.
37. Therefore, as the coordinating administration for these
systems, we will require any U.S. non-Government satellite system
operating inconsistently with the U.S. 28 GHz band plan--and, by
definition, its coordinated parameters--to cease operations if it
causes harmful interference to any U.S. non-Government system operating
in conformance with the U.S. band plan for non-Government systems, or
to any U.S. Government system operating in accordance with US footnote
334. (The non-Government band plan is not applicable for GSO and NGSO
Government operations which are authorized on a primary basis across
the 17.8-20.2 GHz band.)
38. In coordinating U.S.-licensed non-Government systems with
systems of other Administrations, we will, as always, follow the
applicable coordination procedures set out in the ITU Radio Regulations
for the particular band segment being coordinated. For example,
satellite system coordination may implicate ITU Radio Regulation No.
S22.2 (2613) for instances where NGSO FSS systems and GSO FSS systems
are proposed. This regulation applies in certain segments of the 28 GHz
band and requires, in those bands, that NGSO FSS systems cease or
reduce to a negligible level their operations whenever there is
unacceptable interference caused to a GSO FSS system. Consequently, in
coordinating and consulting U.S. non-Government FSS systems with other
countries' FSS systems in bands where this provision applies, we expect
that consultations or coordinations between administrations will result
in operational or technical considerations which will prevent
unacceptable interference to GSO FSS systems. In bands where there is a
primary allocation to the fixed service and FSS, we will coordinate
U.S. satellite system operations on an equal basis to the fixed
stations, consistent with established ITU Radio Regulations and
Recommendations.
[[Page 61455]]
39. The Commission can authorize operations of satellite systems in
the United States only. Operation and use of these systems in
geographic areas outside the United States requires appropriate
authorizations from other countries in which the U.S. licensee wishes
to operate earth stations. In order to ensure that Ka-band satellite
service is truly global, we adopt limitations on Ka-band licensees'
ability to enter into exclusive arrangements with other countries
concerning communications to or from the United States similar to those
in place for Big LEO systems.44 An exclusive agreement may
foreclose other FSS licensees from serving a foreign market, preventing
that licensee from providing global service. Further, such an
arrangement may be inconsistent with our band plan. We intend to
construe the restrictions on exclusionary arrangements bearing in mind
that spectrum coordination and availability in particular countries may
limit the number of systems that can provide service to that country.
Nevertheless, our intent will be to further the implementation and use
of multiple satellite systems in other administrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See 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 band, Memorandum Opinion and Order,
11 FCC Rcd 12861 (1996) at Paras. 54-55, 61 FR 9944 (March 12,
1996); 47 CFR 25.143(h) (prohibiting Big LEO licensees from entering
into exclusive arrangements to serve particular countries).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Requirements
40. To discourage speculators and to prevent unjust enrichment of
those who do not implement their proposed systems, we adopt a rule that
prohibits any Ka-band licensee from selling a bare license for a
profit. This provision is not intended to prevent the infusion of
capital by either debt or equity financing. Nevertheless, any such
transaction will be monitored to ensure that it does not constitute an
evasion of the anti-trafficking provision.45
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See Big Leo Report and Order at para. 203; 47 CFR
Sec. 25.143(h) (prohibits Big LEO licensees from selling a bare
license for profit).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
41. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
(RFA),46 an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
was incorporated in the Third NPRM in this proceeding. The Commission
sought written public comment on the proposals in the Third NPRM,
including comment on the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA), concerning the Third Report and Order, conforms to the
RFA.47
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. Sec. 601 et
seq., has been amended by the Contract with America Advancement Act
of 1996, Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of
the CWAAA is The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
of 1996 (SBREFA).
\47\ See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Need for and Objectives of the Third Report and Order
42. In this decision, the Commission, adopts licensing
qualification rules and service rules for fixed-satellite service
systems in the Ka-band. The purpose of this action is to help launch a
new broadband satellite service well-suited to compete in the domestic
and global marketplace. In order to ensure the rapid and successful
implementation of new FSS systems in the Ka-band, the Commission has
used the existing FSS system rules as a foundation and has modified
these rules to the extent necessary to reflect the nature of operations
at Ka-band. The decision promotes efficiency in licensing and use of
the electromagnetic spectrum. In addition we expect that the licensing
framework we have set out for the Ka-band will aid in the development
of competitive and innovative satellite systems.
II. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
43. No comments were received specifically in response to the IRFA.
However, in order to minimize any barriers for entry into this new
satellite market for small entities, Commission staff spent months
encouraging and working with all of the commercial GSO FSS applicants
to reach agreement on an orbital assignment plan to accommodate all
first-round applicants. As discussed in the Third Report and Order, the
applicants did reach agreement regarding orbit locations. Therefore we
are able to waive our financial qualification requirement and not look
to current financial ability as a prerequisite to a license grant. By
licensing all current commercial system applicants, we enable small
entities and start-up companies the opportunity to compete in the
capital intensive satellite industry.
III. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
Rules Will Apply
44. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities
applicable to satellite service licensees. Therefore, the applicable
definition of small entity is the definition under the Small Business
Administration (SBA) rules applicable to Communications Services ``Not
Elsewhere Classified.'' This definition provides that a small entity is
expressed as one with $11.0 million or less in annual
receipts.48 According to the Census Bureau data, there were
a total of 848 communications services in operation in 1992 that fall
under the category of Communications Services, Not Elsewhere
Classified. Of those, approximately 775 reported annual receipts of
$9,999 million or less and qualify as small entities.49 The
census report does not provide more precise data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 13 CFR 121.201, Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
Code 4899.
\49\ 1992 Economic Census Industry and Enterprise Receipts Size
Report, Table 2D, SIC 4899 (U.S. Bureau of the Census data under
contract to the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business
Administration).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
45. Describing and estimating the number of small entities these
rules will impact is made difficult by a number of factors. First of
all, information from the Satellite Industry Association and financial
analysts who specialize in this market indicate there are few firms
that could be traditionally thought of as small businesses. They point
to the fact that this is a capital intensive industry that requires
``significant partner funding and/or contract commitments prior to
approaching commercial financing sources.'' 50 In addition,
estimates of employment in the commercial satellite service industry,
another measure of small business status, can vary widely.51
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See ``Financing the Final Frontier: Funding Commercial
Space Activities'' Bear Stearns, Global Space & Satellite Finance
Report.
\51\ For example, American Mobile Satellite Corp is reported to
have 45 employees by the Satellite Industry Association; 317
employees by Satellite Industry Analyst ``BZW.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
46. Space Stations (Geostationary). Commission records reveal that
there are 37 space station licensees. We do not request nor collect
annual revenue information, and thus are unable to estimate the number
of geostationary space stations that would constitute a small business
under the SBA definition.
47. Space Stations (Non-Geostationary). There are six Non-
Geostationary Space Station licensees, of which only one system is
operational. We do not request nor collect annual revenue information,
and thus are unable to estimate the number of non-geostationary space
stations that would constitute a small business under the SBA
definition.
48. We have also recently authorized thirteen commercial GSO FSS
satellite systems in the Ka-band and one
[[Page 61456]]
commercial NGSO FSS system to construct, launch, and operate in the Ka-
band, conditioned on compliance with the licensing and service rules we
adopt in this Third Report and Order. Therefore there are no small
businesses currently providing these types of broadband interactive
services in the Ka-band.
IV. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements
49. The Commission's existing rules in part 25 on FSS operations
contain reporting requirements for FSS systems. In this Third Report
and Order, we adopt no new reporting requirements for FSS operations in
the Ka-band and state that we will follow the new part 25 rules for
reporting requirements for FSS systems.52 These requirements
are specifically stated in paragraph 60 of the Third Report and Order.
It is likely that the entities filing the reports will require no
professional skills for the preparation of such requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See Part 25 Streamlining, n. 29, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Burden on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
50. As part of our licensing qualifications standard for the FSS,
the Commission has in the past applied rigorous financial qualification
standards when the authorization of one applicant will not prevent
another qualified applicant from going forward with a proposal in the
same service. In the Third NPRM we proposed to apply the existing FSS
rules to the Ka-band, including this strict financial standard. Several
of the experienced and well financed satellite service providers such
as Hughes Communications, GE Americom and Loral supported this proposal
as a way to get service to the public in an efficient manner.
51. In order to minimize any barriers for entry into this new
satellite market for small entities, Commission staff spent months
encouraging and working with all of the commercial GSO FSS applicants
to reach agreement on an orbital assignment plan to accommodate all
first-round applicants. As discussed in the Third Report and Order, the
applicants did reach agreement regarding orbit locations. Therefore we
are able to waive our financial qualification requirement and not look
to current financial ability as a prerequisite to a license grant. By
licensing all current commercial system applicants, we enable small
entities and start-up companies the opportunity to compete in the
capital intensive satellite industry.
VI. Report to Congress
52. The Commission shall send a copy of this Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, along with this Third Report and Order, in a
report to Congress pursuant to the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801(a)(1)(A). A copy of
this FRFA will also be published in the Federal Register.
Ordering Clauses
53. Accordingly, It is ordered that part 25 of the Commission's
rules are amended as set forth below and will become effective January
20, 1998, with the exception of Sec. 25.145(g), which will become
effective upon OMB approval. This action is taken pursuant to Sections
4 and 303 (r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 47 U.S.C.
Secs. 154, 303(r), and Section 201(c) of the Communications Satellite
Act of 1962, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 721(c).
List of Subjects in 47 CFR 25
Satellites.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
Rule Changes
PART--25 SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 25.101 to 25.601 issued under Sec. 4, 48 Stat.
1066, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154. Interpret or apply secs. 101-104,
76 Stat. 419-427; 47 U.S.C. 701-744; 47 U.S.C. 554.
2. Section 25.145 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 25.145 Licensing conditions for the Fixed-Satellite Service in
the 20/30 GHz bands.
(a) Except as provided in Sec. 25.210(b), in general all rules
contained in this part apply to Fixed-Satellite Service in the 20/30
GHz bands.
(b) System License. Applicants authorized to construct and launch a
system of technically identical non-geostationary satellite orbit
satellites will be awarded a single ``blanket'' license covering a
specified number of space stations to operate in a specified number of
orbital planes.
(c) In addition to providing the information specified in
Sec. 25.114, each non-geostationary satellite orbit applicant shall
demonstrate the following:
(1) That the proposed system be capable of providing fixed-
satellite services to all locations as far north as 70 deg. latitude
and as far south as 55 deg. latitude for at least 75% of every 24-hour
period; and
(2) That the proposed system is capable of providing fixed-
satellite services on a continuous basis throughout the fifty states,
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, U.S.
(d) Considerations involving transfer or assignment applications.
(1) ``Trafficking'' in bare licenses issued pursuant to paragraph (b)
of this section is prohibited, except with respect to licenses obtained
through a competitive bidding procedure.
(2) The Commission will review a proposed transaction to determine
if the circumstances indicate trafficking in licenses whenever
applications (except those involving pro forma assignment or transfer
of control) for consent to assignment of a license, or for transfer of
control of a licensee, involve facilities licensed pursuant to
paragraph (b) of this section. At its discretion, the Commission may
require the submission of an affirmative, factual showing (supported by
affidavits of a person or persons with personal knowledge thereof) to
demonstrate that no trafficking has occurred.
(3) If a proposed transfer of radio facilities is incidental to a
sale of other facilities or merger of interests, any showing requested
under paragraph (d)(2) of this section shall include an additional
exhibit which:
(i) Discloses complete details as to the sale of facilities or
merger of interests;
(ii) Segregates clearly by an itemized accounting, the amount of
consideration involved in the sale of facilities or merger of interest;
and
(iii) Demonstrates that the amount of consideration assignable to
the facilities or business interests involved represents their fair
market value at the time of the transaction.
(e) Prohibition of certain agreements. No license shall be granted
to any applicant for a space station in the fixed-satellite service
operating in the 20/30 GHz band if that applicant, or any persons or
companies controlling or controlled by the applicant, shall acquire or
enjoy any right, for the purpose of handling traffic to or from the
United States, its territories or possession, to construct or operate
space segment or earth stations, or to interchange traffic, which is
denied to any other United States company by reason of any concession,
contract, understanding, or working arrangement to which the Licensee
or any persons or
[[Page 61457]]
companies controlling or controlled by the Licensee are parties.
(f) Implementation milestone schedule. Each GSO FSS licensee in the
20/30 GHz band will be required to begin construction of its first
satellite within one year of grant, to begin construction of the
remainder within two years of grant, to launch at least one satellite
into each of its assigned orbit locations within five years of grant,
and to launch the remainder of its satellites by the date required by
the International Telecommunications Union to assure international
recognition and protection of those satellites. Each NGSO FSS licensee
in the 20/30 GHz band will be required to begin construction of its
first two satellites within one year of the unconditional grant of its
authorization, and complete construction of those first two satellites
within four years of that grant. Construction of the remaining
authorized operating satellites in the constellation must begin within
three years of the initial authorization, and the entire authorized
system must be operational within six years.
(g) Reporting Requirements. All licensees in the 20/30 GHz band
shall, on June 30 of each year, file a report with the International
Bureau and the Commission's Columbia Operations Center, 9200 Farm House
Lane, Columbia, MD 21046 containing the following information:
(1) Status of space station construction and anticipated launch
date, including any major problems or delay encountered;
(2) A listing of any non-scheduled space station outages for more
than thirty minutes and the cause(s) of such outages; and
(3) Identification of any space station(s) not available for
service or otherwise not performing to specifications, the cause(s) of
these difficulties, and the date any space station was taken out of
service or the malfunction identified.
3. Section 25.210 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (c)
through (j) as paragraphs (e) through (l); redesignating paragraph (b)
as paragraph (c); and adding new paragraphs (b) and (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 25.210 Technical requirements for space stations in the Fixed-
Satellite Service.
* * * * *
(b) All space stations in the Fixed-Satellite Service in the 20/30
GHz band shall use either orthogonal linear or orthogonal circular
polarization. Those space stations utilizing orthogonal linear
polarization shall also comply with paragraph (a) of this section.
* * * * *
(d) All space stations in the Fixed Satellite Service in the 20/30
GHz band shall employ state-of-the-art full frequency reuse either
through the use of orthogonal polarizations within the same beam and/or
through the use of spatially independent beams.
* * * * *
4. Section 25.204(g) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 25.204 Power limits.
* * * * *
(g) All earth stations in the Fixed Satellite Service in the 20/30
GHz band shall employ uplink adaptive power control or other methods of
fade compensation such that the earth station transmissions shall be
conducted at the power level required to meet the desired link
performance while reducing the level of mutual interference between
networks.
[FR Doc. 97-30205 Filed 11-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
