Attachment reply

reply

REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERA submitted by Mobile

reply

2005-07-19

This document pretains to SAT-LOA-19980702-00066 for Application to Launch and Operate on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATLOA1998070200066_445997

                                                 Before the
                                                                           ORI@iAeD
                                 Federal Communications Commission                   juL 1 9 2005
                                         Washington, D.C. 20554                                          y
                                                                                edun Communiceton ConBson
In the Matter of                                                                       ottce t Seruett
Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC               File No. SAT—LOA—19980702—00066
                                                       File No. SAT—AMD—20001214—00171
Appliation for Authority to Launch and                 File No. SAT—AMD—20010302—00019
Operate an L—band Mobile Satellite Service             File No. SAT—AMD—20031118—00335
Satellite at 101° W.L.                                 File No. SAT—AMD—20040209—00014
                                                       File No. SAT—AMD—20040928—00192

         Reply to Opposition to Petition for Clarification or Partial Reconsideration
        Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC (*MSV") hereby files this Reply to the
Opposition ofPanAmSat Corporation ("PanAmSat") and SES Americom, Inc. (°SES")! to
MSV*s Petition for Clarification or Partial Reconsideration ("Petition")" ofthe International
Bureau‘s ("Bureau‘") decision granting MSV a license for a next—generation L—band Mobile
Satelite Service (*MSS") satellite at 101°W ("MSV—1")." In its Petition, MSV asked the Bureau
to clarify that the rule requiring Fixed Satellite Service ("FSS") satelltes to operate with £0.05°
East—West station keeping does not apply to MSV—1, an MSS satellte, and that MSV is thus
permitted to operate MSV—1 with +0.1° East—West station keeping box subject to coordination
with other operators at 101°W.* PanAmSat and SES object t this request, arguing that MSV—1


‘ See Opposition of PanAmSat Corporation and SES Americom, Inc., File Nos. SAT—LOA—
19980702—00066 et al. (July 7, 2005) ("Opposition").
* See MSV, Petition for Clariication and Partial Reconsideration, File Nos. SAT—LOA—
19980702—00066 et al (June 22, 2008) (*Periion").
* See Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC, Order and Authorization, DA 05—1492 (May 23,
2005) (°MSV—1 Decision").
* As MSV has explained previously, the unique mass of ts satelite and the significant solar
pressure on the satellite necessitates a wider station keeping box than other satelltes. See MSV,
Response, File No. SAT—AMD—20040928—00192 (January 10, 2005), at 3—4 and Technical
Appendix.


should operate with +0.05° East—West station keeping because it will include an FSS payload for
feeder links. Opposition at 2.
       PanAmSat and SES fail o recognize or address that the Commission has already
considered in a rulemaking the issue of whether to require MSS satelltes to operate with +0.05°
East—West station keeping." In June 2004, the Commission adopted a decision in which it
decided not to impose this requirement on MSS satellites.® The Commission acknowledged that
MSS satellites include an FSS payload for feeder link operations but stllrefrained from
imposing £0.05° East—West station keeping on MSS satelites." As such, there is no rule

requiring MSS satellites to operate with £0.05° East—West station keeping.
       Despite the unsubstantiated claims of PanAmSat and SES, MSV‘s requested clarification
will not result in harmful interference or an overlap with the station—keeping volume ofother
satelltes. MSV is asking the Bureau to clarify that MSV can operate MSV—1 with +0.1° East—
West station keeping provided MSV coordinates with operators at 101°W. Any issues pertaining
to harmfulinterference or overlap of station—keeping volume can be resolved during coordination
among the affected operators."




5 See Mitigation ofOrbital Debris, Notice ofProposed Rulemaking, TB Docket No. 02—34, FCC
02—80, 17 FCC Red 5586 (2002).
* See Mitigation ofOrbital Debris, Second Report and Order, 1B Docket No. 02—54, FCC 04—130
(June 21, 2004),at § 44 (*We decline, at this time, to adopt changes to Section 25.210() to
specify a longitudinal tolerance of+0.05° for all space stations, including MSS and remote
sensing space stations.")
" 1.
* MSV notes that there are no satelltes using MSV‘s Appendix 30B Ku—band frequencies within
over 5 degrees of 101°W; thus, PanAmSat‘s and SES‘s claims of "harmful interference"
resulting from a widerstation keeping box are unfounded.


       For the foregoing reasons, MSV asks that the Bureau deny the Opposition of PanAmSat
and SES and proceed to issue MSV‘s requested clarification.

                                   Respectfully submitted,



LC Xber
Bruce D. Jacobs
                                                 £2%—/Z&~
                                                 Tennifer A. Manner
David S. Konczal                                 Vie President, Regulatory
PILLSBURY WiNTHROP                               MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES
       SHAW PITTMAN LLP                           SUBSIDIARY LLC
2300 N Street, NW                                10802 Parkridge Boulevard
Washington, DC 20037—1128                        Reston, Virginia 20191
(202) 663—3000                                   (703) 390—2700

Dated: July 19, 2005


                                CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

         1, Sylvia A. Davis, a secretary with the law firm ofPillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
LLP, hereby certify that on this 19th day ofJuly 2005, served a true copy of the foregoing by
first—class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following:

Thomas Tycz*                                     Cassandra Thomas*
International Bureau                             International Burcau
Federal Communications Commission                Federal Communications Commission
445 12® Street, SW                               445 12" Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                             Washington, DC 20554
Fem Jarmulnel®                                   Robert Nelson®
International Bureau                             Interational Bureau
Federal Communiations Commission                 Federal Communications Commission
445 12® Street, SW.                              445 12® Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                             Washington, DC 20554
Steve Spacth®                                    Kalpak Gude
International Bureau                             Vice President & Associate General Counsel
Federal Communications Commission                PanAmSat Corporation
445 12® Street, SW.                              1801 K Street, N.W,, Suite 440
Washington, DC 20554                             Washington, DC 20006
Pantels Michalopoulos                            Naney J. Eskenazi
Steptoe & Johnson LLP                            Vice President & Associate General Counsel
1330 Connectiout Avene NW.                       SES Americom,Inc.
Washington, D.C. 20036                           Four Research Way
                                                 Princcton, NJ 08540
Counsel for EchoStar Satllite LLC



                                                Sylg:a    tk        4‘
*By hand delivery

Deesmens: isusst i



Document Created: 2005-07-28 16:31:24
Document Modified: 2005-07-28 16:31:24

© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC