Commission Letter (Feb 23, 2006)

0059-EX-PL-2006 Text Documents

Inmarsat, Inc.

2006-02-24ELS_74752

Federal Communications Commission Washington. D.C. 20554 February 23, 2006 Diane Cornell, Esq. Vice President, Government Affairs Inmarsat, Inc. 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1425 Arlington, Virginia 22209 Jennifer A. Manner, Esq. Vice President, Regulatory Affairs Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC 10802 Parkridge Boulevard Reston, Virginia 20191 Robert D. Power, Esq. Vice President, Regulatory Matters Mobile Satellite Ventures (Canada) Inc. 1601 Telesat Court Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KIB 5P4 Bruce D. Jacobs, Esq. David S. Konczal, Esq. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2300 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20037—1128 Re: Inmarsat, Inc. Application for New Experimental License File No. 0059—EX—PL—2006 Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC and Mobile Satellite Ventures (Canada) Inc. Informal Objection filed February 14, 2006 Dear Counsel: On February 7, 2006, Inmarsat, Inc. filed the above—referenced application for a new station license in the Experimental Radio Service ("ERS"). Inmarsat states that its parent company, Inmarsat plc, owns a fleet of L—band Mobile—Satellite Service ("MSS") satellites over which it offers the Broadband Global Area Network ("BGAN") service in other parts of the world. Inmarsat plans ultimately to offer BGAN service in the United States over the Inmarsat—4F2 satellite. By its application, Inmarsat seeks authority to operate four different types of mobile earth terminals in conjunction with the Inmarsat—4F2 satellite in order to allow Inmarsat, its manufacturers, distributors, and resellers to: (i) conduct technical demonstrations and testing of BGAN service and these terminals to ensure that performance is in

accordance with design specifications; (i1i) demonstrate performance of the terminals to prospective purchasers; and (i11) perform limited market studies.‘ On February 14, 2006, Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC and Mobile Satellite Ventures (Canada) Inc. (collectively, "MSV") jointly filed an informal objection to the grant of this application. Among other things, MSV alleges that one of the six L—band segments that Inmarsat proposes to use includes frequencies that are used by and were coordinated for use by MSV Canada under a 1999 spectrum sharing arrangement. MSV also alleges that Inmarsat has stated that "this proposed demonstration has been requested by a potential customer for the period of February 20 through March 3, 2006,"" which MSV concludes does not justify the two—year license term that Inmarsat seeks. As a result, MSV requests us to deny the application and "to accept applications for experimental authority to operate BGAN terminals with the Inmarsat 4F2 satellite only after the service and the satellite have been coordinated with MSV and MSV Canada.‘"" Alternatively, "[tlo the extent OET authorizes this experiment now despite the material risk of interference, MSV and MSV Canada urge OET to (i) exclude use of the [frequency] band segment coordinated for use by MSV Canada and (1) limit the duration of the tests to February 20 through March 3, 2006."" By amendment filed February 21, 2006, Inmarsat amended its application to change the band edge definitions of one of the band segments it wishes to use. We find this application amendment moots MSV‘s objection regarding the particular band segment coordinated for use by MSV Canada. In addition, on February 23, 2006, Inmarsat amended its application to reduce the requested license term from two years to six months. Based on our review of the Inmarsat application and after consultation with the International Bureau, we find that grant of the Inmarsat application with the following conditions would be consistent with the public interest. Inmarsat shall assure that adequate guard bands are provided between the band edges of its carriers and the band edges of MSV‘s operations in order to preclude the possibility of unacceptable interference to MSV‘s operations. Neither the aggregate uplink EIRP densities in the direction of any other L—band satellite serving the United States, nor the downlink EIRP densities at any geographical point within the United States, shall be increased as a result of the addition of experimental BGAN operations on the Inmarsat 4F2 satellite over those densities previously authorized on the Inmarsat 3F4 satellite, We also find that the Inmarsat application has justified its requested six—month license term. As we recited in the opening paragraph, supra, Inmarsat seeks to perform demonstrations and tests to ensure that performance is in accordance with design specifications, to demonstrate performance to prospective purchasers, and to perform limited market studies. These objectives are fully within the scope of the ERS.‘ As Inmarsat has further explained in requesting expedited consideration of its application, well ahead of its original plan for North American testing and demonstration, a federal government agency has requested Inmarsat to demonstrate its BGAN service during the February 20 through March 3, 2006 ‘ Inmarsat Application, File No. 0059—EX—PL—2006, Response to Question 7. * MSV states that Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC is the U.S. L—band Mobile Satellite Service ("MSS") licensee, and Mobile Satellite Ventures (Canada) Inc. is the Canadian L—band MSS licensee. > MSV Informal Objection filed February 14, 2006, at 2 (citing Inmarsat Application, Response to Question 7 at 1). * MSV Informal Objection filed February 14, 2006, at 2. * Id. 6 See Section 5.3 of the Commission‘s Rules, 47 C.FR. § 5.3. 2

timeframe. We find that this development cannot be read, as MSV apparently does, as reducing Inmarsat‘s need for its requested license term; it simply emphasizes the need for us to consider this matter promptly. The grant to Inmarsat is on an unprotected basis, and, like all Experimental Radio Service authorizations, is conditioned on not causing any harmful interference to other grantees.‘ We are also requiring Inmarsat to notify MSV prior to commencing experimental operations and to provide MSV with a point of contact for this purpose." Finally, we point out that Inmarsat‘s operations are required to comply with the general limitations on use set forth in Section 5.111 of the Commission‘s Rules." Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the February 14, 2006 informal objection filed jointly by Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC and Mobile Satellite Ventures (Canada) Inc. IS DENIED, and the application, as amended, of Inmarsat for a new station license in the Experimental Radio Service (File No. 0059—EX—PL—2006) IS GRANTED in accordance with the terms of this letter, and that Inmarsat, Inc. shall notify MSV prior to commencing operations and identify its point of contact. A new ERS station license will be issued to Inmarsat, Inc. under separate cover and will have a six month license term. Sincerely, Deputy Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology " See Section 5.85(c) of the Commission‘s Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 5.85(c). ® See Section 5.85(e) of the Commission‘s Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 5.85(e). ° 47 C.FR. § 5.111 (limitations include, among other things, transmitting for the minimum practical time and using every precaution to ensure that emissions will not cause harmful interference). 3


Document Created: 2006-02-24 07:56:07
Document Modified: 2006-02-24 07:56:07
© 2025 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC