Attachment ex parte

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

IBFS_SATLOA2003060900113_637455

LAW OFFICES GOLDBERG, GODLES, WIENER & WRIGHT 1229 NINETEENTH STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036-2413 HENRY GOLDBERG (202) 4294900 JOSEPH A. GODLES TELECOPIER: JONATHAN L. WIENER (202) 429.491 2 LAURA A. STEFAN1 DEVENDRA (“DAVE”) KUMAR EX PARTE OR LATE FILED - e-mail: HENRIETTA WRIGHT general@ g2p2.com THOMAS G. GHERARDI, PC. website: www.92w2.com COUNSEL THOMAS S. TYCZ* SENIOR POLICY ADVISOR ‘NOT AN ATTORNEY November 16,2007 FILEDIACCEPTED BY HAND NOV 1 6 2007 Federal Communications Commission Offlce of the Secretary Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Re: Echostar Satellite L.L.C. File No. SAT-LOA-20030609-00113 Ex Parte Dear Ms Dortch: This is to inform you that, on November 15,2007, Robert Power of Telesat and Joseph Godles and the undersigned, representing Telesat, met with Angela Giancarlo of Commissioner McDowell’s office. The purpose of the -meetingwas to provide and discuss the attached handout dealing directly with the above referenced proceeding. Please direct any questions regarding this matter to the undersigned.

U I e I e sa t Application for Review Authorization granted to EchoStar for a “short-spaced” (tweener) DBS satellite at 86.5W Federal Communications Commission November 14/15, 2007

8 Background 8 ?b e / e's a 'b. .Echostar DBS satellite at 86.5OW would be short-spaced between two operational Telesat DBS satellites: Nimiq Iand Nimiq 2 are located at 91OW and 82OW respectively WNimiq 1 and Nimiq 2 have full-CONUS coverage consistent with the ITU Region 2 BSS Plan entries .Both Nimiq satellites have been previously approved by the FCC for U.S. services .Bell ExpressVu's DTH service occupies both satellites, and reaches 1.8 million subscribers in Canada

EchoStar Will Interfere With m Y I 5 Telesat iTe I e s a b, EchoStar itself “has concluded that tweener satellites . . . would pose si nificant interference risks to existing DBS services enjo ed by 9 mi lions of consumers.” EchoStar comments on tweener &RM, p. 6 (Dec. 12,2006) EchoStar also expressed “concern[] that the International Bureau’s - decision to proceed with granting two tweener a plications, including one to Echostar, did not sufficiently address kndamental tinterference issues.” EchoStar comments on’tweener NPRM, p. 3 Dec.12, 20 6). d The International Bureau has acknowled ed that “a number of a administrations includin Canada, woulC Y be affected by the EchoStar- 86.5W satellite.” EchoS ar grant, para. 16. EchoStar did not dis Ute the validit of Telesat’s analysis Y demonstrating that choStar will in erfere with Telesat EchoStar only claimed it could use beam shaping and power roll-offto reduce interference potential Telesat showed that these techniques do not work if there is co-coverage, as there is here 3

Echostar’s Application Should Have Been Dismissed Q 3 e 1 e s a t.. 25.1 14(d)(l3)(i) requires that the applicant provide a technical showing that the proposed system could operate satisfactorily if all systems in the BSS Plan were implemented. EchoStar did not make this showing and could not have made it 4

. . Conditioning Echostar's Grant on 8 sa Coordination with Telesat is Insufficient c i e / e's a t, In cases in which there are substantial interference questions, the Commission will not grant operating authority unless the applicant has coordinated with the affected system The International Bureau would not grant operating authority for a Loral Orion satellite at 12" W.L. because the satellite would interfere with a Eutelsat satellite at 12" W.L. that had ITU date priority (14 FCC Rcd 17665 (1999)) After Loral Orion and Eutelsat entered into a coordination aareement. the International Bureau authorized LoGI Orion to operate its satellite at 15" W.L. pursuant to the agreement (15 FCC Rcd 12419 (2000)) EchoStar has not coordinated with Telesat 5

0 cn L . 1 a a, a x S F L 0 1 S Q) 5- E Loo a, a L , 23) S m 0 S m 0 + SC S 0 30 m- 0 L 0 a, 1 S a, 1 m O C Z 3 O 'U L cn m 0 _L=- S 332 a, arn 0 -3 m- L U 0x2 2 W L wo e a

c F Conditioning Echostar’s Grant on Coordination with Telesat is Insufficient (cont.) CTe / e :S a’i, 9 At a minimum the Commission should clarify that Echostar will not be granted authority to operate prior to obtaining the agreement of affected administrations Ordering clauses in the EchoStar grant are ambiguous on this point Clarification will head off potential controversies with other administrations 7


Document Created: 2008-04-29 15:50:34
Document Modified: 2008-04-29 15:50:34
© 2025 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC