Attachment letter

letter

LETTER submitted by IB,FCC

letter

2008-04-21

This document pretains to SAT-AMD-20071215-00176 for Amended Filing on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATAMD2007121500176_636244

Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 April 2 1, 2008 James M. Talens, Esq. Counsel for ATCONTACT Communications, Inc. 60 17 Woodley Road McLean, VA 22 101 Re: ATCONTACT Communications, LLC SAT-AMD-2007 1215-00176 (Call Sign: S2680) Dear Mr. Talens: This letter refers to the above-referenced application filed by ATCONTACT Communications, LLC (ATCONTACT). In the application, ATCONTACT proposes to relocate its authorized satellite from its current location at 83" W.L. to the 87.2" W.L. orbital location, and add additional frequencies. Section 25.140(b) of the Commission's rules requires ATCONTACT to demonstrate that its proposed operations at the 87.2" W.L. orbital location are compatible with the Commission's two-degree spacing environment.* ATCONTACT provides this analysis using the SES Americom AMC-16 and Intelsat Galaxy 28 satellites, which are operating at the 85" W.L. and 89" W .L. orbital locations, respectively. To assist the Commission in processing this application, ATCONTACT should amend its application to include the following information: 1) Explain why the frequency band 18.8 GHz is used for the uplink calculations in Tables 1l b and 12b; 2) Explain why the calculations in Table 1l b are based on ATCONTACT'S proposed satellite at 87" W.L. instead of the requested 87.2" W.L. orbital location; 3) Explain why the space station transmit EIRP density in Tables 1 1a and 11b are different; 4) Explain why the earth station receive system noise temperature in Tables 1 la and 1l b are different; ' See ATCONTACT Communications LLC, Application File No. SAT-MOD-20070924-00130. 47 C.F.R. § 25.140(b)(2). See also Public Notice, International Bureau, Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. 5 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis. 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (Int'l Bur. 2004).

Explain why the uplink earth station transmit ElIRP density in Tables 11a and 11b are different; Explain why the uplink earth station transmit EIRP density in Tables 12a and 12b are different. The uplink earth station transmit EIRP density value listed for the ATCONTACT satellite in Table 12b should also be a value less than 9.9 dBW/40kHz (if that is the correct value in Table 1lb), based on an off-axis angle of 2 degrees; 7) After making corrections to Tables 1 1a, 1 1b, 12a and 12b, state whether the I,, IONo, and uplinWdownlink degradation values, when recalculated in Tables 1 1b and 12b, will still offer the positive link margin needed to prove successful operation can occur in a two degree environment. In amending this application, please take the appropriate steps to assure that the application is accurate and complete. ATCONTACT’S response must be filed with the Commission’s Secretary within 15 days of the date of this letter, with a courtesy copy to Kal Krautkramer of my staff. Failure to respond by this date will result in dismissal of this application. Please contact Kal at (202) 418-1335 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Robert G. Nelson Chief, Satellite Division International Bureau cc: Mr. David M. Drucker Manager, ATCONTACT Communications, LLC 2


Document Created: 2008-04-21 15:55:51
Document Modified: 2008-04-21 15:55:51
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC