Attachment opposition

This document pretains to SAT-LOI-20050312-00062 for Letter of Intent on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATLOI2005031200062_432957

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 ) In the Matter of ) ) SrecmunPiveLLC ) File Nos. SAT—LO20050312—00062 ) sAT—LON—20050312—00063 ) Petition for Declaratory Ruling ) call Signs: 269 To Serve the U.S. Market Using ) Fietsfted BSS Spectrum from the 114.5° W.L. ) Orbital Location ) MAY 1 8 2005 _ Policy Branch Intormatio OPPOSTTION To PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING Pursuant to Section 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 309,and Section 25.154 ofhe Commission‘s Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 25.154, EchoStar Satelte L.LC. (‘EchoStar®) hereby fils this Opposition t the Spectrum Five LLC (‘Spectrum Five") Petition for Declaratory Ruling To Serve the U.S. Market Using BSS Spectrum from the 114.5° W.L. Orbital Location. EchoStar has acknowledged the potential benefits from 4.5° orbital spacing for U.S. Direct Broadcast Satelte (*DBS")satelites. These benefis, however, depend on a crucial assumption ——that there would be no potential for unaceeptable levels ointerference from these so called "tweener" satelitesto existing U.S. DBS networks and their millions of subscribers. Recent developments have nowcalledthat assumption into serious question. In particular, the increasing importance of "tiple—feed" DBS antennas to EchoSter and U.S. DBS consumers in general has exacerbated the interference concemns associated with tweener satelites located in the vicinity of the prime CONUS DBS orbital slts. one eissorr vesnsos onzpu

Thus, before the Commission can authorize tweener satelites like those presented in Spectrum Five‘s applications for 114.5° W.L., it must frst establis technical rulesto ensure that these sateltes do notlimit the ability ofexisting DBS providerslike EchoStar to take advantage of such innovations as mult—feed antenns that will assist them to compete more effectively with large digital cable providers, comply with the local programming carriage requirements, recently imposed by law, and deliver greater consumer benefitsto the public." As the Commission is aware, EchoStar currently operates with significantly less available bandwidth than digital able providers. This hinders ts abilityto compete on an equal footing in the Multiple Video Program Distrbution (°MVPD®) market. As the 2004 MFPD Comperition Report recognizes, t "cable industry has upgraded almost 91 percent of its plant to 750 MHz There is also a serious question as to whether Spectrum Five has complied with the informational and technical requirements of the Commission‘s Rules. In finding Spectrum Five‘s predecessor Petition defective, the International Bureau concluded that it had not provided all of the information required under the Rules, such as a "sufficient technical showing that the proposed systems could operate satisictorly iall assignments in the Broadcasting—Satelite Service ("BSS") and feeder link Plans were implemented," in accordance with Section 25.114(d)(13)G). See Letter rom Fem J.Jarmulnck to Todd M. Stansbury, DA 05—354, File No. SAT—LOL20041228—00228 (Feb. 17. 2008) (‘Dismissal Lettr®). While Spectrum Five appears to have provide a partial interference analysis in its refiled Petition, it learly does not demonstrate that the proposed operation of ts tweener satelltes could operate satsfactorly iall U.S. assignments in the BSS and feeder link plans were implemented. For example, Spectrum Five identifies numerous test points that substantally exeeed the threshold change in overall equivalent protection margin (0.25 dB) tht trggers the agreement secking process under the ITU‘s rales. See Petition, Exhibi 1 to Technical Appendix, Attachment 2,at pp. 4—15. It simply is insufficient to assert, based upon these pretiminary results, that coordination will be "readily achievable." See Pettion at 6. Indeed, for some ofthe same reasons expressed in the Dismissal Lester, i«., thfailure t provide technical analyses demonstrating that the system‘s impoct [on] otherfrequencyassignments in the Region 2 Plan and any proposed modifications t the Region 2 Plan that have been received by the ITU/BR is neligible," the Bureau should onceagain dismiss the Petition as defective and unseceptable for fling. Dismissal Letter at 4. EchoStar reserves the right to make additional objections to the Petition. 23e one eisworr veansos on zm

capacity or higher."" EchoStar has significanty lesstotal bandwidth capacity to supply programming to ts customers. In addition, the recently enacted Satelite Home Viewer Extension and Resuthorization Act (°‘SHVERA") has complicated EchoStar‘s efforts to expand its available bandwidth capacity, by requiring carriage ofall local broadcaststations in any given market on a single dish." One result of this new requirementis that EchoStar is actively exploring the deployment of riple—feed antennas. EchoStaris specifically considering development of a triple—feed antenna that would enable ts subscribers to receive programming simultancously from DBSsatlltes located atthe 110¢,119°,and 129° W.L. orbital locations " While triple—feed antennas benefit consumers by allowing them to receive more programming on single dis, the use ofthese antennas also complicates the interference analysis fortweener satelitesthat would operate at orbialslotslocated within or adjacenttothe satellite are used by a triple—feed antenna. Owing precisely to these concems, EchoStar recently withdrew its pending applications for two tweener satelits atthe 96.5° and 123.5° W.L. orbital locations.® See Annual Assessment ofthe Status ofCompettion in the Marketfor the Delivery ofVideo Programming, MB Dockst No. 04—227, Eleventh Annual Report, PCC 08—13 9 14 (rel. Feb. 4, 2008) ("2004 MVPD Comperition Repor®) * See Section 203 of the Satelite Home View Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004. 47 U.S.C. §338. * In addition, EchoStar already usesa riple—feed antenna that operates with DBS satelltesat 110° W.L. and 119° W.L. and an FSS satelite at ither 105° W.L. or 121° W.L. DIRECTV currentlyoffersa consumertriple—feed antenna that receives programming from DIRECTV‘s DBS satelltes at the 101®, 110%, and 119° W.L. orbital locations. Consumers must use this triple—feed antennato get high bandwidth programming like DIRECTV‘s high—definition programming. See hitp:/\wiwdirects.com/DTVAPP/imagine/Imagine_Standard_Receiver.dsp. * See File Nos. SAT—LOA—20030606—00107 and SAT—LOA—20030605—00109. EchoStar did not withdraw its tweener stellite application for the 86.5° W.L.orbitallocation because there are no U.S. DBS satelites within 4.5° othis orbital location one essoor v«snsus orsern

EchoStar has not previously taken a position asto whether a rulemaking is appropriate and has expressed the view that the Commission‘s existing rules can accommodate the operation of tweeners subject to resolution of the technical issues. Based on its recent experience with developing new DBS triple—fed antennas, however, EchoStar now believes that a rulemaking proceeding is the appropriate forum for evalustingthe tchnical and interference issues associated with tweener satelites located near U.S. DBS orbita locations. Such a rulemaking proceeding would be a better forum to develop a comprehensive technical record in order to ensure thatthe operation oftweener sateliteswill notlimit the ability o existing DBS operators to provide high—quality service to U.S. consumers using triple—feed antennas from U.S. DBS orbital locations* For the foregoing reasons, EchoStar respectfully requests tht the Commission dismiss the Spectrum Five Petitionto provide BSS into the U.S.from the 114.5° W.L.orbitelocation without prefudice or defer ction on the Petition until the Commission concludes in rlemaking proceeding thatthe interference that may be caused by tweener satelites into U.S. orbital locations has been adequately addressed. See Inre Applications ofStocktolders ofRenaissance Communications Corp. and Tribure Co. For a TransferofControl ofRenaissance Communications Corp., 12 FCC Red 11866, 1 50 (1997) ("As the Supreme Court has stated, ‘rulemaking is generally a better, fire, and more effective method of implementinga new industrywide policy than is the uneven application of conditions in isolated {adjudicatory] proceedings." Similarly, initating a rulemaking or other open proceeding would be a ‘bette, fairer, more effective method: of implementing a modified newspaper cross—ownership rule or waiver policis than the would the ‘uneven‘ granting ofindividual waivers, such as the permanent one requested by Tribune.") 242 one eissoor vesnsosorszpn

Respectfully submitted, David K. Moskowitz los Executive Vice President & General Counse! Brendan Kasper EchoStar Satelite LL C. STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP 9601 South Meridian Boulevard 1330 Connectiout Avene, N. Englewood, CO 80112 Washington, D.C. 20036 (303)723—1000 (202) 429—3000 Counselfor EchoStar Satelite LLC May 16, 2005 oo eisioor sesnsosor en

peciaRation or Davip BaiR 1, David Bar, hereby declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws ofthe United States that the foregoing is tr and correct o the best of . information and behef Executed on May 16, 2005. David Bair Senior Vice President Space Programs and Operations EchoStar Satelite LL.C

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 hereby certify that, on this 16" day of May, 2005, a copy of the foregoing Opposition o DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC was served by email upon: Richard E. Wiley Todd M. Stansbury Wiley Rein & Ficlding LLP 1776 K Street, NW. Washington, DC 20006 Brendan Kasper 4


Document Created: 2005-05-18 12:51:27
Document Modified: 2005-05-18 12:51:27
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC