Attachment reply

This document pretains to SAT-LOA-20030609-00113 for Application to Launch and Operate on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATLOA2003060900113_438208

RECEIVED Before the JuN 1 3 2005 reprRaL conmuNicaTions commission Waskington. n.cfiweived Fatent issen * mfi:&@w * In the Materof jun 2 0 200 mrench EchoSuer Sareite LLC. mfi;fi,g:m-mflaom-m 13 Applieation to Constmct, Launch & Operate a DBS Satelte (DBS®) Athe 86.5° WL Orbitl Location REPLY OF TELESAT CANADA "Telesat Canada (*Telesa")hereby file ts esponse to the Consolidated Reply to Oppositions and Comments ofEchouar Satllte L.LC.("EchoStar®) in the above captined proceeding. In that Reply, EchoStar appears to supeest that, given the disruptivinerference concemsraised by other prtie, Teleatincluded, ts Applieation tuse the 86.5° WL. orbtal positin for DBS serviceshould no longer be considered on ts own butintead folded into a broadefulemaking addresing so—called "tweener steliteisues", should the Commission decide t nitistesuch a proceeding. Telesat welcomes EchoStar‘s apparent acknowledgmentthat its Applicationto use the 86.5° W.L. DBS posiion is premature, bt emains ofthe view that the HchoStar Applicaton should be denied ouvight HEchoStar observes tht,in the Telesat Oppositon to is Application, the concems expressed over a DBS satelite locted at 865* W L. relate to the ability oconsumers o uilize dal—feed anternaswith the existng Telesat DBS satelites t the $2° and 91° W L. posiions. And while EchoStar found tat ... these concems doillstatethe benefit ofproceeding by meansoa rilemaking on the questions elted o 4.5" degree orbital spacing" instead, pparently, ofconsideringthis Applieationon thestrengths o ts own merits or ack thereof— EchoStar merelystatesthat these concems could be addressed by a coordination condition "so Tong as th plans ofTelesat and ExpressVdo not implieate use oftiplefeed" anternas." (EchoStarat2) Later on that same page, EchoStar further observes tht "{nJether Telest nor ExpressVmentions any planto use triple—feed antennas®,and then concludes: "Nevertheless, EchoStar blieves thatthe concems reised by Telesat and ExpressVa regarding iterferenceto existing Canadion DBS opertions,furter

wunderscore the need for the Commissionto inarulemalking on the tweener satellite issuesto determineamong othe things, whether theinteference that may be caused by tweenersatelites in existing DBS networks would be acceptable and if so, whethertechnical rles can be etablshed to ensure tht these satelites do nt limit th ablity ofexisting DBS provider o ake advantage ofsuch innovations astriple—feed antennas.Ifthe Commission does initite such arulemaking proceeding, EchoStar believes hat ts scope could appropriately encompass theissue owhether a DBS stelite at the 86.5° W.L. orbital location can be compatibly operated with existing DBS sateites." (EchoStarat23) In response, Tlesat would firt note that, if EchoSta believed that th"dual—feed antenna" issue could be simply resolved by a coordination condition it is curious hatthey would go on to state thatthese concems "underscorethe need" for the Commision o initate a comprchensiverulemaking proceeding. Indeed, as Telest observed n is Oppositon at page4, on March 31, 2008, EchoSta itelf acknowledged n a leterto the Commission hat "pon further study,45 spacing between U.S. DBS satelltes raises cetain echnicl dificultes, especillyfor ‘muhiple feed" arth tation dishes(Le., those designed t receve programming eedsfrom more han one sateliteat a time"" (emphasis added) This descries exnctly the situstion Telesatand BellExpressVa ar in with the current Nimig DBS satelitsat 82° and 91° wi? 1t s also common knowledge in theindustry thatTelesat was awarded the Canadlian suthorization for development of th 72.5" WL. DBS positon in December 2003 and is curenty operating an iterim satlite in that posiionto allow the U.S. ervice provider DirecTV to provide a DTH servics io the US., untl a new satelite can be constucted and placed into serviceat that posiion bythe end of2008. One ofthIndustry Canada Conditions oficence for "Telesat o use this position requiresthat a minimum of 50 percent othe capacity on the new satelite beretained for Canadian broadcasting undert us untl the linch ofthatsatelte, and that Telesaintiata call fr intrest t determine Canadian needs fothisreained capocit.® It stands treason thata Canadian broadeastig Tcensee willhavean interest in otsining at leas a portion ofthis additional capacity at 72.5° W.L.to ue in conjunction with the networks atthe EhS lene o FCC Re: Repot No. SPB—196 Reduced Spacing Detween US. DBS Satlites (aed Mr.31,2009) * rurbermore, thesesteites have bee designed o providcoveragofhe U.S.and hav been approved ty the Commiion orthe delivery ofDTH sevices wihi he US. See Diptal BroodbndApplicions C Orde, DA €2—1526 (May 7,2008) ile No. SEs—11G—20020109—00002. * see Condin 3 ©)oh Industy Conada Condiions oficencefr Telest Conada (elesa) 12 GH: 158 Srelite Gperatngat72.3Orkrl Postio, pstd on Indusy Conada‘s Svateis webute t htpi/stategitigccxepic/nternetinant—gst nslensD]879hi#Approvasintrincipl.

91982 ° W.L. posiions, thus making a "rilefeed"anterna network a very real possblit. By EchoStar‘s own admission,thabiliy to successfully coordinate a tweener sstlite network in these circomstances is questionable: "EchoStar speeifiall argued [in connection withthe Spectrum Five Pettion for a Declaratory Ruling to servethe U.S. market using BSS spectrum from the 114.5° W.L.location) that the potenial benefts fom 4.5° orbital spocing depend on crucial assurption— that there would be no potentil for unaceeptable Tevels ofinterference from these s—called‘tweenerstelites t existing U.S. DBS networks and theirmilions of subscribers EchoSar further pointed out that recent developments,including the increasing importance of "iiple—feed" DBS antennas to U.S. DBS consumers, have broughtthat assumptionint serious question:"(Echotarar2) Other EchoStar comments in the parile Spectrum Five tweener appliation proceeing are similaly revealing. For exarmple, EchoStar states at page 3 n ts Oppostion t the Spectrum Five application‘ that it ecently withdrew ts own pending pplications fortwo tweener satelites at the 96.5° and 123.5° orbtal ocations because ofhesetpes ofinterference concems, butin a featmotestates that it did not wihdraw itstweener appliation forthe $6.5° W.L. position "secause thereare no U.S. DBS sateltes within4.5 degrees ofhis loction"" Tt is truthat there are no U.S. DBS satelites within 45 degrees otis location — rather therearetwo Telesat Canadianicensed DBS satelites spoced £.5 degrees on ether sideofthis position, witha thid "Telest Canadian—Heensed slotat72.5° W.L. The exact same interference concems threfore arise, and should have csused EchoSta to wthdraw this hird tweener appliation. In te absence ofa valuntary withdrawal, the Commission should akthe appropriatactionand deny the application Further, lsewhere in ts Opposition to the Spectrum Five tweener sppliation, EchoStar sures: "There is also a srlous questionas to whether Spectram Five has complied with the informational and echnical requirements othe Commission‘s Rules. In finding Spectrum Five‘s predecessor Pttion defective, the Inermational Bureau concluded that it hadnot provided al oftheinformation required underthe Rules such as a‘suffcient technicl showing thath proposed systems could operte satisfactory fallassignments in the Broadcasing—SateliteService (‘BSS")and feedeink Plans were implemented," in aecordance wth Section 25.114(0)(13)(). See Leter fom Fem J Jarmulnck to Todd M. Stunsbary, DA 05—354, File No. SAT—LOT—20041228—00228 (Feb, 17. 2005) (‘Dismiseal Letter}. While Spectrum Five appears o have provide[si}a partialinerference * Echoat, Oppostton o Ptionor Declretery Ruling,File No SAT—LOL—20080312:00062 and SAT— Lo—200s0312.00063,May16,2008. "Tid,fomoteS.

analysis n its refled Patiton, it learly does not demonstratetht theproposed operation ofits tweener satelfites could operte satisfictorly ifall US. assignment n the BSS and feeder link plans wereimplemented. For example, Spectrum Five idetifies numerous tet points tht substantally exceed the threshold change n oventl equivalentprotection margin (0.28 dB) that triggers the agreementsecking process under the ITU‘s rules.... t simply is insoficient to asset, based upon these preliminary resul,tht coordintion willbe ‘readily achievable." ... Indeed,for some ofhe sameresons expressed in the Dismissal Lerter, , the filure t provide technical anlyses demonstrating that the system‘s impoct[on] ther frequency assignments in the Region 2 Pln and any proposed modifictions to the Region 2 Plan tht have been received by the NTUMBR is neeligile,[sc] the Bureau should once again dismiss te Petion as defective and uniceeptableforfling."" EchoSfar‘s own tweener stelite applieation fothe 865* WL. posiion is open to the exsct same crtiisms,including glossing over th signficance ofthe OEPM triggers caused by its proposed system and thfalire to demonstrae thatthe proposed system‘simpact on allother frequency assignments in the BSS Region 2 Plan is negligible, prticularly in regad to Canada‘s Plan entrics t 91°, 82 and 72.5° W.L. Following EchoSta‘s logic, ts 86.5° W.L. tweener spplication should similarly be disnissed as defetiveand unsceeptable forfling. EchoStar‘s apporent sugaestion that ts Application need no longer be considered on its ovn,but could intead be folded ina broader rulemaking addressing on "tweener stelite issues", should also be denied or diamissed. There is now ample evidence on the record demonstrting that the Application i defective and should be denied outright. Indeed, EchoStar‘s own actions(e, withdrawal ofitstweener appliations at 96.5" and 123.5° W.L) and arguments in other proceedings (eg.opposition t the Spectrum Five tweener application at 114.5° WL.) fully support the view that operation ofan EchoStar tweener DBS satelliteatthe 86.5° W.L. positin would be seriously diruptive to Telesar‘s exiting DBS satelite operations and their future development, and should therefore be denied.

For ll of the bove reasons, Telesaturges the Commission o deny the EchoStar Application for use of the 86.5° W.L. posiion. Respectfill sutenited, pod— Telest Canad Robet Power Director, Repultory & Govermment nitatives 1601 Telesat Count Otawa, Onurio Canada,KIB 5B4 June 13, 2008

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, Kim Riddick, do hereby certify that a copy ofthe foregoing Reply of Telesat Canada was served by first—class mail, postage prepaid on this 13th day of June 2005 to the following: Pantelis Michalopoulos David K. Moskowitz Philip L. Malet Senior Vie President and General Counsel Steptoe & Johnson LLP EchoStar Satellite Corporation 1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW 5701 South Santa Fe Washington, DC 20036—1795 Littleton, CO 80120 David R. Goodfriend Director, Legal and Business Affairs EchoStar Satellite Corporation 1233 20" Street, NW Suite 701 Washington, DC 20036


Document Created: 2005-06-21 14:47:30
Document Modified: 2005-06-21 14:47:30
© 2025 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC