Attachment letter

letter

LETTER submitted by IB,FCC

letter

2008-04-21

This document pretains to SAT-MOD-20080226-00052 for Modification on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATMOD2008022600052_636246

Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 April 21,2008 James M. Talens, Esq. Counsel for ATCONTACT Communications, Inc. 601 7 Woodley Road McLean, VA 22 1 0 1 Re: ATCONTACT Communications LLC SAT-MOD-20080226-00052 (Call Sign: S2681) Dear Mr. Talens: This letter refers to the above-referenced application filed by ATCONTACT Communications, LLC (ATCONTACT). In the application, ATCONTACT proposes to relocate its authorized satellite from its current location at 121" W.L. to the 11 5.2" W.L. orbital location. Section 25.140(b) of the Commission's rules requires ATCONTACT to demonstrate that its proposed operations at the 1 15.2" W.L. orbital location are compatible with the Commission's two-degree spacing environment.' Specifically, Section 25.140(b)(2) requires applicants to submit an interference analysis demonstrating that the proposed satellite is compatible with authorized or proposed satellites. In instances where there are no authorized or proposed satellites, the applicant may use the technical data of its own satellite.* Because there are no authorized or proposed satellites within 2 degrees of ATCONTACT's proposed satellite, ATCONTACT uses the technical parameters of its own satellite in its analysis and assumes the adjacent satellite is operating at the 1 17" W.L. orbital location. To assist the Commission in processing this application, ATCONTACT should amend its application to include the following information: 1) Explain why the calculations in Table 12 are based on ATCONTACT's proposed satellite operating at 1 15" W.L. instead of the requested 1 15.2" W.L. orbital I ocat ion ; 2) Explain why the space station transmit EIRP density in Tables 1 1 and 12 are different; '47 C.F.R. tj 25.140(b)(2). See also Public Notice, International Bureau, Satellite Division Information: Clarification of 47 C.F.R. tj 25.140(b)(2), Space Station Application Interference Analysis, 19 FCC Rcd 10652 (Int'l Bur. 2004) (Clarzfication Public Notice). Clarification Public Notice.

3) Explain why the earth station receive system noise temperature in Tables 11 and 12 are different; 4) Explain why the uplink earth station transmit EIRP density in Tables 11 and 12 are different; 5) After making corrections to Tables 11 and 12, state whether the I,, IJN,, and uplinlddownlink degradation values, when recalculated in Table 12, still offer the positive link margin needed to prove successful operation can occur in a two degree environment. In amending this application, please take the appropriate steps to assure that the application is accurate and complete. ATCONTACT’s response must be filed with the Commission’s Secretary within 15 days of the date of this letter, with a courtesy copy to Kal Krautkramer of my staff. Failure to respond by this date will result in dismissal of this application. Please contact Kal at (202) 41 8-1335 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Robert G. Nelson Chief, Satellite Division International Bureau cc: Mr. David M. Drucker Manager, ATCONTACT Communications, LLC 2


Document Created: 2008-04-21 15:54:07
Document Modified: 2008-04-21 15:54:07
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC