Attachment 2003Globalstar-xpart

2003Globalstar-xpart

Ex PARTE PRESENTATION NOTIFICATION LETTER submitted by Globalstar

ex parte

2003-11-26

This document pretains to SAT-MOD-20020722-00112 for Modification on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATMOD2002072200112_805646

                                         1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004—2595 =           p202 624—2500 = £202 628—5116

crowellrgmoring
                                                                                                               ORIGINAL
  William D. Wallace
  (202) 624—2807
  wwallace@crowell.com
                                                                                                R ECE; X/E D



                                               November 26, 2003                                NoOvV 2 e 2003
                                                                               FEDEHAL COMMUN
                                                                                            ; !CAT]       ONS CommIsgioy
  Ms. Marlene H. Dortch                                                                     OFFICE OF ThE sEcaETARy    J
  Secretary                                                                        .
  Federal Communications Commission                            fint’*% BureaU
  445 Twelfth Street, SW                                        pEC @1m3
  Washington, DC 20554
                                                                          ¢+ °6t
                                                                              ¢i       2s
                                                                          UABNLOT

           RE:         File Nos: 183/184/185/186-SAT§/82?97; 182-SA%3P/LA-97(64)

                       IBFS Application    Fi Numbers::
                              pplication File                                                    | ~ ..@C@W@d*
                       SAT—LOA—19970926—00151—154                                               DEC 0 3 2003
                       SAT—LOA—19970926—00156                                                   Poli
                       SAT—AMD—200111083—0154                                          Intenagis,!,g;vnoh
                       SAT—MOD—20020717—00116—119                                                   Buregy
                       SAT—MOD—20020717—00107—110
                       SAT—MOD—20020722—00112

                       Call Signs S2320/82321/82322/82323/82824

  Dear Ms. Dortch:

         On November 26, 2003, the undersigned participated in a meeting with Paul
  Margie, Legal Advisor to Commissioner Michael J. Copps, to discuss Globalstar,
  L.P.‘s Emergency Application for Review of the International Bureau‘s
  Memorandum Opinion and Order, DA 03—328 (released Jan. 30, 2003), regarding
  the above—referenced applications.!

           The enclosed outline was distributed at the meeting. The presentation
  covered Globalstar, L.P.‘s arguments in its Emergency Application for Review.




      1 The International Bureau granted Globalstar, L.P.‘s request to change the ex
  parte status of these applications to permit—but—disclose on November 19, 2003.




                   Crowell & Moring LLP a www.crowell.com = Washington «= Irvine a London = Brussels


Ms. Marlene H. Dortch
November 26, 2003
Page 2 of 2


      Pursuant Section 1.1206(b)(2), an original and one copy of this letter and the
enclosure are provided for the public record.

                                                     Respectfully submitted,



                                                     William D. Wallace
                                                                                                 _


Enclosure

ce:   Paul Margie




              Crowell & Moring LLP a www.crowell.com a Washington a Irvine a London a Brussels


 GLOBALSTAR, LP.

Emergency Application for Review
       Request for Stay
     2 GHz MSS Licenses
  (File Nos. SAT—LOA—19970926—00151—154/156 etc.)


       GLP 2 GHz MSS Licenses

GLP was authorized to construct an NGSO
constellation and four GSO satellites.
GLP entered into a non—contingent satellite
construction contract with Space Systems/Loral
as of July 17, 2002, as required.
GLP requested modification of certain future
implementation milestones for the NGSO
constellation and three GSO satellites.
GLP explained unforeseeable circumstances
arising from the economic climate and its
financial restructuring.


           The Bureau‘s Decisions

The International Bureau (IB) denied the request for
milestone extension, categorizing GLP‘s reasons as
"business decisions."
Because GLP‘s non—contingent contract reflected the
proposed future milestones, the IB decided that the
contract did not satisfy the first milestone.
The IB refused to give GLP an opportunity to cure the
contract to bring the future milestones into compliance.
The IB decided that all five licenses (NGSO plus four
GSOs) were null and void.


The Bureau Failed to Explain Cancellation of
    the Domestic GSO Satellite License

«— The construction schedule for the domestic GSO
   satellite was in compliance with original
   milestone schedule.
  — The domestic GSO satellite would have used
    MSS frequencies on original timetable.


GLP Fulfilled the Requirement to Enter into
   a Non—Contingent Satellite Contract
« GLP had missed no milestone.
  — The Commission permits satellite licensees to
    submit non—contingent contracts that vary
    from the terms of license to meet the first
    milestone. E.g., Teledesic, LLC (IB 2002).
  — The IB cancelled GLP‘s licenses because
    GLP proposed to extend future milestones.


  GLP Could Have Reformed Contract and
            Met All Milestones

«— The IB refused to follow precedent that allows
  satellite licensees to cure contracts found
  deficient.
  — The Commission has repeatedly allowed
    licensees to cure contract deficiencies even
    when they submit no contract at all, as in
    Echostar Satellite Co. (1992) and NetSat 28
    Co. (IB 2001).


       he Bureau Applied a New Policy
  Retroactively in Violation of Due Process
«_ Well—established principles of due process
   dictate that the Commission must apply new
   policies on a prospective basis.
    — The IB applied a policy of not allowing an
      opportunity to cure a contract found deficient
      even though it is acceptable to meet the
      milestone schedule.
    — The IB explained its new policy six months
      after the GLP Order in The Boeing Company,
      DA 03—2073 (June 24, 2003).


   The Bureau Failed to Give Meaningful
 Consideration to GLP‘s Extension Request
«— The IB used the "business decision" label to
   avoid reviewing the facts and circumstances
   presented by GLP.
  — GLP was proceeding with construction
    despite the global telecommunications
    recession.
  — The IB ignored the Commission‘s own
    statements that satellite milestones should be
    considered in light of system complexity.


The Bureau Failed to Apply Relevant Facts
 to the Standard for Milestone Extensions

 GLP experienced unique circumstances as a
 result of being in Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
 GLP would have fulfilled purpose of milestones
 by using the 2 GHz MSS frequencies in the U.S.
 on the original milestone schedule.
 GLP clearly intended to move forward with its
 proposed 2 GHz MSS system, a factor that is
 critical to favorable milestone decisions (e.g., GE
 American Communications (IB 2001)).


The Automatic Stay Precluded Cancellation

«— The automatic stay in Section 362(a) of the U.S.
   Bankruptcy Code precludes "any act to obtain
   possession of property of the estate."
    — The regulatory exemption applies to protect
      public health and safety, and should be
      narrowly construed.
    — IB offered no regulatory reason to cancel
      domestic GSO satellite.


                                                  10


Grant of GLP‘s Modification Request Would
         Serve the Public Interest.
<«— GLP would serve the U.S. with 2 GHz MSS
    frequencies on schedule.
«— Capabilities of GLP‘s first—generation system
   would be fully utilized.
«_ As one of only three surviving MSS operators,
   GLP can be expected to continue service,
   particularly to rural and underserved areas.




                                                   11


      GLP Asks the Commission to:

Vacate the IB‘s Order;
Reinstate GLP‘s 2 GHz MSS licenses;
Grant the requested milestone modifications, or
grant GLP an opportunity to cure its contract;
Provide GLP an opportunity to reform its
contract to account for time lost by IB‘s unlawful
cancellation.



                                                     12



Document Created: 2019-04-14 19:05:30
Document Modified: 2019-04-14 19:05:30

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