Attachment letter

letter

LETTER submitted by Pegasus

letter

2008-09-26

This document pretains to SAT-AMD-20080321-00080 for Amended Filing on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATAMD2008032100080_667830

ORIGINAL Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2300 N Street, NW I Washington, DC 20037-1122 I tel202.663.8000 I fax 202.663.8007 Tony Lin tel202.663.8452 tony.lin@pillsburylaw.com September 26,2008 Via Courier Marlene H. Dortch Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Re: DIRECTV Enterprises LLC File Nos. SAT-AMD-20080908-00166; SAT-AMD-20080321-00080; SAT-AMD-20080114-00017; SAT-AMD-2005 1118-00224; SAT- LOA- 19970605-00051 (Call Sign S2244) Dear Ms. Dortch: Pegasus Development DBS Corporation (“Pegasus”) hereby submits this letter regarding the above-referenced 17/24 GHz Broadcasting Satellite Service (“BSS”) application of DIRECTV Enterprises LLC (“DIRECTV”) to operate a satellite at the 118.4”Worbital location. The operations of the proposed DIRECTV satellite at that location would cause more interference to Pegasus’ proposed satellite at 115.0”W than if the DIRECTV satellite were located at precisely 119.0°W, contrary to the Commission’s rules. Accordingly, the Commission should not grant DIRECTV’s application unless DIRECTV further amends the application. On January 14,2008, DIRECTV applied to operate a 17/24 GHz BSS satellite at full power and with full interference protection at 118.4”W.’ Pegasus contemporaneously submitted a pending application to operate at full power and with See e.g., File No. SAT-AMD-20080114-00017 (Call Sign S2244), Application Narrative, at p. 5 (“DIRECTV proposes to operate [at the 118.4”Woffset location] at full power and with full interference protection.”); p. 11 (“DIRECTV is applying for an orbital location that is offset 0.6” from an Appendix F slot [and] seeks to operate at full power and with full interference protection). www.pillsburylaw.com

Marlene H. Dortch September 26,2008 Page 2 full interference protection at 115.0”W,2which is an Appendix F orbital l ~ c a t i o n . ~ Because the pending applications for adjacent satellites are considered simultaneously filed and Pegasus proposed to locate its satellite at an Appendix F location, while DIRECTV did not, the Commission’s rules prohibit the grant of the DIRECTV application for full power, full protection operations at 118.4”W.4 On August 1,2008, Pegasus submitted a letter to the Commission, inter alia, raising this issue? Recognizing this problem, DIRECTV amended its application to “ensure that [its proposed operations at 118.4”WI comply with the Commission’s rules governing how off-grid systems must operate in the presence of another system at the adjacent on-grid slot.”6 Specifically, DIRECTV proposed to remain at 118.4”W and reduce the peak EIRP of its system by 0.1 dB (i.e. from 63.0 dBW to 62.9 dBW).7 The power reduction, however, fails to ensure that the proposed DIRECTV satellite at 118.4”W will not cause more interference to Pegasus’ proposed satellite at See File No. SAT-AMD-20080114-00023 (Call Sign S2700), Application Narrative, at p. 20 (“Pegasus requests authority to operate the proposed satellites at full power with full interference protection (i.e. a full-power Appendix F space station) at the following orbital locations: 9 1.O”W, 1O7.O0W, and 115.0”W.”). Appendix F orbital locations range from 43”W to 179”W, inclusive, and are spaced four degrees apart. See In the Matter of The Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for the Broadcasting- Satellite Service at the 17.3-1 7.7 GHz Frequency Band and at the 17.7-17.8 GHz Frequency Band Internationally, and at the 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Band for Fixed Satellite Services Providing Feeder Links to the Broadcast-Satellite Service and for the Satellite Services Operating Bi- directionally in the 17.3-17.8 GHz Frequency Band, Report and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 8842, at Appendix F (2007) (‘‘I 7/24 GHz Order”); Order on Reconsideration, 22 FCC Rcd 17951, at Appendix B (2007) (“I 7/24 GHz Order on Reconsideration”). See 17/24 GHz Order on Reconsideration, at 7 26 (grant of an Appendix F satellite application will prevent the grant of a simultaneously filed full power, full interference protection application to operate a satellite at an offset location less than 4” away); 7 34 (establishing second filing window “in cases where an application for authority to operate at an offset location at h l l power conflicts with [a simultaneously filed] application for an Appendix F location”); 7 36 (“Any applicant proposing a full-power, offset space station that conflicts with an application for an adjacent Appendix F space station will have thirty days after the deadline for amended applications . . . to amend its application.”). See Letter from Bruce Jacobs to Marlene Dortch (August 1,2008). See File No. SAT-AMD-20080908-00 166, Application Narrative, at p.2. Id. at 3. www. piIlsburylaw.corn

Marlene H. Dortch September 26,2008 Page 3 115.0"W than if the DIRECTV satellite were located at precisely 119.O0W,as required by the Commission's rules? By Pegasus' calculations, DIRECTV must reduce peak EIRP of its proposed satellite by 2.5 dB. Pegasus agrees with DIRECTV that "[ulsing the standard ITU-R BO. 1213 reference antenna pattern at 17.5 GHz, a decrease in orbital spacing from 4.0" to 3.4" reduces off-axis protection to the adjacent satellite system from 23.5 dB to 21.8 dB - a difference of 1.7 dB (based on topocentric angle)."g Additionally, because DIRECTV's satellite, as originally proposed (File No. SAT-AMD-20080114-00017), has a peak power flux-density ("PFD") of -1 14.2 dBW/m2 /MHz," DIRECTV must further reduce peak EIRP by 0.8 dB in order to meet the Commission's PFD limits. See 47 C.F.R. 0 25.208(w). Accordingly, the total peak EIRP reduction must be 2.5 dB, not 0.1 dB as DIRECTV asserts. See e.g., 47 C.F.R. $8 25.140(b)(4)(applicant proposing to operate a satellite at an offset location must demonstrate that its proposed network will not cause more interference to adjacent satellite networks), 25.140(~)(3)(applicantproposing to operate at offset location must design satellite network to be capable of operating with adjacent 17/24 GHz BSS satellites less than four degrees away), 25.262(d)("Any U.S. licensee or permittee using a 17/24 GHz BSS space station that is located less than four degrees away from a prior-authorized 17/24 GHz BSS space station . . . : (1) may not cause any more interference to the adjacent satellite network than would be caused if the adjacent 17/24 GHz BSS space station were located four degrees away from the proposed space station; and (2) must accept any increased interference that results from the adjacent space station network ...."). File No. SAT-AMD-20080908-00166, Application Narrative, at p.3 n. 8. lo Pegasus calculated the PFD on the surface of the Earth using a 30 MHz noise bandwidth, rather than a 36 MHz transponder bandwidth, which DIRECTV incorrectly used. Additionally, Pegasus did not consider atmospheric losses in its computation, which DIRECTV did. As a general matter, Article 2 1 of the ITU Radio Regulations and the FCC's rules require the assumption of free-space propagation conditions in calculating PFD limits. Accordingly, by Pegasus' calculations, PFD (dBW/m2 /MHz) = EIRP-162.4 -10 log (30) = 63 -162.4 -14.8 = -1 14.2. While the FCC's rules do not expressly require the assumption of free space conditions for the 17.3-17.7 GHz band and the ITU PFD limits apply only to the 17.7-17.8 GHz band, even if atmospheric losses are considered, Pegasus estimates such losses to be at most 0.8 dB and not 1.6 dB as DIRECTV argues (using SatMaster software for 99.7% availability for the downlink to Miami, gaseous attenuation is 0.35 dB and scintillation is 0.45 dB), and under that assumption, DIRECTV would still need to reduce peak EIRP of its satellite by 1.7 dB not 0.1 dB, as it proposes. www.pillsburylaw.com

Marlene H. Dortch September 26,2008 Page 4 For these reasons, Pegasus requests that the Commission not grant DIRECTV's application for a 17/24 GHz BSS satellite at 118.4"W unless DIRECTV fbrther amends its application, consistent with the comments stated above. Very truly yours, Tony Lin www.piIIsburylaw.com 400946994~1 1 1 I' 1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Renee Williams, hereby certify that on this 26th day of September 2008 I served a true copy of the foregoing by first-class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following: Andrea Kelly* William M. Wiltshire Federal Communications Commission Michael D. Nilsson 445 Street, S.W. Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP Washington, D.C. 20554 1200 Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Counselfor DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC Renek Williams *By Hand Delivery


Document Created: 2008-10-01 15:04:42
Document Modified: 2008-10-01 15:04:42
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC