Attachment LeoSat FCC 18-164.pd

LeoSat FCC 18-164.pd

ORDER submitted by by the Commission

FCC 18 164

2018-11-19

This document pretains to SAT-PDR-20161115-00112 for Petition for Declaratory Ruling on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATPDR2016111500112_1578222

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) LeoSat MA, Inc. ) IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20161115-00112 ) Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning U.S. ) Call Sign S2979 Market Access for the LeoSat Ka-band Low- ) Earth Orbit Satellite System ) ORDER AND DECLARATORY RULING Adopted: November 15, 2018 Released: November 19, 2018 By the Commission: Chairman Pai and Commissioners O’Rielly, Carr, and Rosenworcel issuing separate statements. I. INTRODUCTION 1. In this Order and Declaratory Ruling, we grant the request of LeoSat MA, Inc. (LeoSat) for a declaratory ruling concerning access to the U.S. market using its proposed non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite system for the provision of fixed-satellite service (FSS).1 In granting LeoSat’s request, we address concerns expressed by commenters seeking various conditions on the grant and address two pleadings filed as Petitions to Deny.2 Grant of those parts of LeoSat’s petition that were accepted for filing will facilitate LeoSat’s provision of new and innovative satellite broadband services in the United States, including high-speed connectivity for enterprises and underserved communities.3 1LeoSatMA, Inc., Petition for a Declaratory Ruling Granting Access to the U.S. Market, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR- 20161115-00112 (filed Nov. 15, 2016) (LeoSat Petition or Petition). 2See Telesat Petition to Deny (filed June 26, 2017); ViaSat Petition to Deny or Impose Conditions (filed June 26, 2017) (ViaSat Petition to Deny). 3 The International Bureau deferred a determination concerning the acceptability for filing of the 19.3-19.6 GHz band because NGSO operations in this frequency band were at the time limited to feeder links for Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS) space stations. See 47 CFR 2.106, footnote NG166; see also Applications Accepted for Filing; Cut- off Established for Additional NGSO-like Satellite Applications or Petitions for Operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz, 13.85-14.0 GHz, 18.6-18.8 GHz, 19.3-20.2 GHz, and 29.1-29.5 GHz Bands, Public Notice, DA 17-524 (IB rel. May 26, 2017) (May 2017 PN). Subsequently, NG166 and the Ka-band Plan were modified to allow NGSO FSS operations at 19.3-19.4 GHz, but not at 19.4-19.6 GHz (where NGSO operations remain limited to MSS feeder links). See Update to Parts 2 and 25 Concerning Non-Geostationary, Fixed-Satellite Service Systems and Related Matters, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 32 FCC Rcd 7809 (2017) (NGSO FSS Report and Order). As a result, the Bureau accepted for filing LeoSat’s request to operate at 19.3-19.4 GHz, but kept in a deferred status that portion of LeoSat’s petition that requested authority for NGSO FSS operations in the 19.4-19.6 GHz and a waiver of the rules’ limitation on those frequencies to MSS feeder links. See Satellite Policy Branch Information: Space Station Applications Accepted for Filing, Public Notice, Report No. SAT-01325 (Sat. Div. rel. June 29, 2018) (June 29, 2018 PN). The International Bureau also deferred consideration of similar types of requests (and associated waivers) by several other NGSO applicants and petitioners in this processing round to use other bands for operations that the relevant band allocation did not cover. See Space Exploration Holdings, LLC Application For Approval for Orbital Deployment and Operating Authority for the SpaceX NGSO Satellite System, Memorandum Opinion, Order and Authorization, FCC 18-38, para. 1 n.1 (rel. Mar. 29, 2018) (SpaceX Order); O3b Limited, Request for Modification of U.S. Market Access for O3b Limited’s Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit System in the Fixed-Satellite Service and in the Mobile-Satellite Service, Order and Declaratory Ruling, FCC 18-70, para. 1 n.1 (rel. June 6, 2018) (O3b Order); Karousel Satellite LLC, Application for Authority to Launch and

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 II. BACKGROUND 2. Petition. On November 15, 2016, LeoSat filed a petition for declaratory ruling concerning access to the U.S. market for a proposed NGSO FSS satellite system.4 The proposed LeoSat system consists of 78 high-throughput, low-Earth orbit satellites (plus six in-orbit spare satellites) in six orbital planes, inclined at 90 degrees, with an orbit having an approximate altitude of 1,400 kilometers.5 LeoSat seeks to access the U.S. market in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 18.8-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth), 27.5-29.1 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency bands.6 LeoSat states that it will operate its system under filings made by France with the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and that LeoSat plans to obtain an authorization for its system from the Netherlands.7 Due to its operation in polar orbits, the LeoSat system will provide coverage of the underserved polar regions, as well as provide access to new broadband services for remote and underserved communities in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.8 As part of its petition for U.S. market access, LeoSat seeks waivers of certain Commission rules.9 (Continued from previous page) Operate a Non-Geostationary Earth Orbit Satellite System in the Fixed Satellite Service, Memorandum Opinion, Order and Authorization, FCC 18-125, para. 3 n.7 (rel. Aug. 16, 2018) (Karousel Order). These pending requests and associated waivers will be addressed, if needed, in a future order. We note that SpaceX has withdrawn its request to operate in the deferred band, so no further action is needed. See Letter from William M. Wiltshire, Counsel for SpaceX, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, IBFS File No. SAT-LOA-20170726-00110 (dated July 17, 2018). 4 The Commission developed the market access procedure we follow here to facilitate the participation of non-U.S.- licensed satellite systems in the FCC licensing process, even though such systems do not seek a U.S. space station license. As such, favorable action on such a request is in the nature of a policy statement or declaratory ruling with respect to the availability of spectrum and other public interest considerations for future licensing of U.S. earth stations that would operate with the non-U.S.-licensed space station. See Amendment of the Commission’s Regulatory Policies to Allow Non-U.S. Licensed Satellites to Provide Domestic and International Service in the United States, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 24094, 24106, para. 29, 24173-74, paras. 184-88 (1997) (1997 Report and Order). In addition to the present petition, LeoSat must file, and the Commission must approve, corresponding earth station applications before LeoSat may provide its proposed services in the United States. 5 LeoSat Petition at 2-6. 6 The LeoSat Petition was filed as part of a processing round for additional NGSO-like applications and petitions in the Ku- and Ka-band frequencies requested by WorldVu Satellites Limited (OneWeb). OneWeb Petition Accepted for Filing, IBFS File No. SAT-LOI-20160428-00041; Cut-Off Established for Additional NGSO-Like Satellite Applications or Petitions for Operations in the 10.7-12.7 GHz, 14.0-14.5 GHz, 17.8-18.6 GHz, 18.8-19.3 GHz, 27.5- 28.35 GHz, 28.35-29.1 GHz, and 29.5-30.0 GHz Bands, Public Notice, 31 FCC Rcd 7666 (IB Sat. Div. Jul. 15, 2016). Eleven additional applications and petitions were filed for NGSO-like satellite systems, including the LeoSat Petition. Under the Commission’s rules, the term “Ku-band” includes both the “conventional Ku-band” (11.7-12.2 GHz and 14.0-14.5 GHz) and the “extended Ku-band” (10.95-11.2 GHz, 11.45-11.7 GHz, and 13.75-14.0 GHz). 47 CFR § 25.103. The term “Ka-band” refers to the 18.3-18.8 GHz, 19.7-20.2 GHz, 28.35-28.6 GHz, and 29.25-30.0 GHz frequency bands, also known as the “conventional Ka-band,” which the Commission has designated as primary for GSO FSS operation. See 47 CFR § 25.103. LeoSat does not seek U.S. market access in any Ku-band frequencies. The LeoSat system will also have four optical inter-satellite links per satellite. LeoSat Petition at 4. 7The LeoSat satellite system is registered pursuant to ITU filings made by France under MCSAT-2 LEO-2. LeoSat Petition at 3, Attach A., Technical Annex to Supplement Schedule S, at 21-22; October 20 Letter at 2, n.5. ); see also Letter from Phillip R. Marchesiello and Lynne M. Montgomery, Counsel for LeoSat MA, Inc., to Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC at 2 (filed May 15, 2017) (May 15 Letter) (changing the country of authorization from France to the Netherlands). Letter from Phillip R. Marchesiello and Lynne M. Montgomery, Counsel for LeoSat MA, Inc., to Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC at 2 (filed Oct. 20, 2017) (October 20 Letter). 8 LeoSat Petition at 5. 2

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 3. Comments. Several parties filed pleadings in response to the public notice of LeoSat’s Petition. Telesat Canada (Telesat) and ViaSat, Inc. (ViaSat) filed pleadings captioned as petitions to deny the LeoSat Petition.10 Space Exploration Holdings, LLC (SpaceX) filed comments expressing concerns regarding sharing with LeoSat’s operations.11 Space Norway requests that the Commission require LeoSat, through a condition on its authorization, to implement mechanisms to avoid in-line interference with highly elliptical orbit systems such as Space Norway’s system.12 Other parties filed comments expressing concerns regarding all NGSO FSS applicants’ compliance with single-entry and aggregate equivalent power-flux density (EPFD) limits in ITU Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations.13 SES and O3b requested that any grant to LeoSat be subject to standard conditions, including those that were placed on O3b’s initial grant of U.S. market access as well as other NGSO FSS systems.14 Spire Global requested that LeoSat provide more information on its orbital debris mitigation plans including how it would avoid collisions with or operational impacts on Spire’s NGSO system during deorbit of the LeoSat satellites.15 LeoSat opposed the petitions to deny and responded to the comments.16 4. NGSO FSS Report and Order. In September 2017, following the close of the comment cycles in this proceeding, the Commission adopted the NGSO FSS Report and Order updating several rules and policies governing NGSO FSS systems.17 Among other changes, the Commission adopted equivalent power-flux density (EPFD) limits on NGSO FSS systems operating in portions of the 17.8- 20.2 GHz and 27.5-30.0 GHz frequency bands in order to protect GSO FSS networks.18 The NGSO FSS Report and Order also adopted changes to the Ka-band Plan, the U.S. non-federal Table of Frequency Allocations and the spectrum sharing rules, among other things. The Commission also adopted a more flexible milestone schedule for NGSO constellations and eliminated the international geographic (Continued from previous page) 9 LeoSat requests a waiver of the Commission’s Ka-band Plan and Section 2.106 of the Commission’s rules to allow for non-conforming use of the 17.8-18.6 GHz and 19.3-20.2 GHz bands, as well as a waiver of the NGSO band segmentation rule in Section 25.157(e) of the Commission's rules. LeoSat Petition at 13-15. 10 See generally, Telesat Petition to Deny; ViaSat Petition to Deny or Impose Conditions. 11SpaceX Comments at 2-6 (filed June 26, 2017); see also, SES S.A. and O3b Limited Comments at 6-7 (filed June 26, 2017) (stating that, in the NGSO NPRM proceeding, it “. . . urged the Commission to reject arguments that ITU priority should determine sharing status among NGSO systems authorized to serve the U.S. market”). 12 See generally, Space Norway Comments (filed June 26, 2017). 13Hughes Comments at 2-3 (filed June 26, 2017); SES and O3b Comments at 3-6; SES and O3b Reply at 1-4 (filed July 14, 2017); see generally, ViaSat Petition to Deny; ViaSat Reply. See also Letter from Brennan T. Price, Senior Principal Engineer, Regulatory Affairs, EchoStar Corporation, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated Aug. 2, 2017) (supporting the Commission’s proposal to adopt aggregate EPFD limits for NGSO systems in the Ka-band and arguing that the Commission should condition the NGSO FSS operations on compliance with those limits); Letter from Brian D. Weimer, Counsel for WorldVu Satellites Limited (OneWeb), to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated Sept. 10, 2017) (discussing the importance of complying with the EPFD limits adopted by the ITU for NGSO FSS constellations and raising concerns about LeoSat’s EPFD demonstrations) (OneWeb Sept. 10 Letter); Letter from Phillip R. Marchesiello and Lynne M. Montgomery, Counsel for LeoSat MA, Inc., to Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC (dated Sept. 19, 2017) (responding to OneWeb’s ex parte letter regarding LeoSat’s EPFD demonstrations). 14 SES and O3b Comments at 8-10; SES and O3b Reply at 9-10. (filed July 14, 2017). 15 See generally, Spire Global Comments (filed June 26, 2017). 16 See generally, LeoSat Opposition and Response (filed July 7, 2017). 17 See generally NGSO FSS Report and Order, supra, note 3. 18 Id. at 7820-21, paras. 35-36. 3

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 coverage requirement. These changes are now in effect.19 III. DISCUSSION 5. After review of the record, we conclude that grant of the LeoSat Petition will serve the public interest, subject to the requirements and conditions specified herein. Below, we address the various outstanding issues raised by commenters on the LeoSat Petition.20 We also address LeoSat’s waiver requests. Where appropriate, we defer matters of general applicability to ongoing or potential future rulemakings. 6. ITU Coordination. In its Petition to Deny, Telesat observes that international coordination will be required between the LeoSat system and its own NGSO FSS system.21 Telesat argues that, at a minimum, any grant to LeoSat should be conditioned upon compliance with this international obligation. In response, LeoSat supports a condition, similar to the condition in the OneWeb Order, to comply with international coordination obligations.22 The Commission recently declined to adopt Telesat’s proposal to tie coordination obligations and licensing conditions directly to ITU filing dates by awarding priority according to those dates,23 and accordingly we deny Telesat’s petition insofar as it reiterates Telesat’s ITU filing date priority proposal. We include a condition requiring LeoSat, like all other NGSO FSS operators, to comply with the spectrum sharing requirements specified in Section 25.261 of the Commission’s rules with respect to any other NGSO system licensed or granted U.S. market access pursuant to the processing rounds in which LeoSat participated.24 Since LeoSat filed its Petition, the Commission adopted changes to Section 25.261 that replaced the avoidance of in-line interference methodology for triggering spectrum division (absent coordination) with a default spectrum splitting sharing mechanism that is triggered when the change in system noise temperature caused by interference, or ΔT/T, exceeds a threshold of 6 percent.25 However, we note that outside the United States (i.e., when communications to or from U.S. territory are not involved) the coexistence between LeoSat’s operations and operations of a system that received a grant for access to the U.S. market is governed only by the ITU Radio Regulations as well as the regulations of the country where the earth stations are located and is not subject to Section 25.261. Additionally, we include a condition, which was also included in the OneWeb Order, that provides that when Section 25.261 is not applicable, LeoSat, when coordinating with other systems, is required to comply with the ITU Radio Regulations.26 19 See 82 FR 59972 (Dec. 18, 2017); 83 FR 22391 (May 15, 2018) (announcing effective date of May 31, 2018, for all remaining rules that were subject to OMB approval). 20SES and O3b requested that the Commission include in any LeoSat grant, standard operating conditions, and specifically several of the same grant conditions included in O3b’s initial grant of market access. See SES and O3b Comments at 8-10. To the extent that the LeoSat Petition raises the same concerns as other authorized NGSO FSS systems, we impose substantially identical conditions on LeoSat as we did in those orders, including O3b’s recent grant. In addition, since O3b’s initial market access grant, the Commission has adopted revisions to its rules and policies governing NGSO FSS systems. The conditions herein are consistent with these rule changes. 21See generally, Telesat Petition to Deny; Telesat Reply (filed July 14, 2017); see also International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Radio Regulations, No. 9.12 (requiring coordination of certain NGSO systems), No. 9.53 (requiring both parties in coordination to “make every possible mutual effort to overcome [coordination] difficulties, in a manner acceptable to the parties concerned”), No. 11.42 (requiring the immediate cessation of harmful interference actually caused to a recorded assignment with which coordination is required but has not been effected). 22 LeoSat Opposition and Response (dated July 17, 2017) at 10-11. 23 NGSO FSS Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 7825-26, para. 50. 24 See OneWeb Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 5377, para. 23(k); see also infra, para. 23. 25 NGSO FSS Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 7825, para. 49. 26OneWeb Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 5376, para. 23(a). Compliance with ITU coordination procedures is a requirement of the ITU Radio Regulations, which hold the force of treaty to which the United States is a party. Compliance with the ITU Radio Regulations is a typical condition of both U.S. space station licenses and grants of U.S. market 4

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 7. EPFD Analysis. Some commenters suggest that the EPFD analysis provided by LeoSat is insufficient and that the Commission should request a supplemental EPFD analysis.27 We disagree. We find that LeoSat’s demonstrations in its Petition and associated filings are sufficient to justify grant of its request for U.S. market access. Furthermore, LeoSat has provided a revised EPFD analysis using ITU- approved software.28 To ensure that LeoSat will satisfy its EPFD obligations going forward, we condition this grant on LeoSat receiving a favorable or “qualified favorable” rating of its EPFD demonstration by the ITU prior to initiation of service. Review by the ITU of LeoSat’s compliance with ITU EPFD limits, using methods now approved by the ITU,29 will provide sufficient assurances, beyond the other technical demonstrations that LeoSat has already provided, that LeoSat will comply with the EPFD limits specified in Article 22 of the Radio Regulations. 8. In addition, as a condition to this grant of U.S. market access, LeoSat must communicate the ITU finding to the Commission and submit the files containing the data used as input to the ITU validation software. We find such a requirement satisfies the concerns of GSO FSS operators who request verification, either by the Commission or third parties, of the complete set of input information used for the EPFD showing to the ITU. Submission of the data input files used for the ITU validation of Article 22 limits will allow such verification, either by the Commission or third parties. 9. As we did in other recent grants for NGSO FSS,30 we are permitting LeoSat to operate up to the PFD and EPFD levels specified in applicable regulations, rather than the levels associated with specific demonstrations in its application. We find this flexibility is warranted given the preliminary nature of the system design, the fact that this grant is conditioned on LeoSat’s satisfaction of the ITU’s EPFD assessment and the condition that LeoSat cooperate with other NGSO operators to meet limits for aggregate EPFD. We therefore reject ViaSat’s arguments that LeoSat should be limited to the levels used in the EPFD demonstration in its application and deny this portion of ViaSat’s Petition to Deny.31 10. Orbital Debris Mitigation. An applicant for a space station authorization must submit a description of the design and operational strategies that it will use to mitigate orbital debris, including a statement detailing post-mission disposal plans for space stations at the end of their operating life.32 LeoSat included a preliminary orbital debris mitigation plan in its application, which contains a post- mission disposal plan to place the satellites into a higher orbit above 2000 km or a lower orbit in which atmospheric reentry would occur in less than 25 years.33 Thereafter, LeoSat made supplemental filings in response to the Satellite Division’s request for additional information regarding its orbital debris mitigation plan.34 (Continued from previous page) access. See 47 CFR § 25.111(b); see also, e.g., Inmarsat Mobile Networks, Inc., Application to Operate a Fixed- Satellite Service Gateway Earth Station Facility in Lino Lakes, Minnesota with the Inmarsat-5 F2 Space Station, Order and Authorization and Declaratory Ruling, 30 FCC Rcd. 2770, 2784, para. 41c (IB 2015). 27 See Hughes Comments at 2-3; see generally, OneWeb Sept. 10 Letter. 28 See May 15 Letter, Attach. A, Results of ITU Software EPFD Analysis. 29 See Letter from Francois Rancy, Director, ITU Radiocommunication Bureau, to Administrations of ITU Member States, “Examinations under Resolution 85 (WRC-03)” (Dec. 6, 2016), https://www.itu.int/md/R00-CR-CIR- 0414/en. 30 See generally, OneWeb Order, Space Norway Order; Telesat Canada Order; SpaceX Order. 31 ViaSat Petition to Deny at 3-8. Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Second Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 11567, 11619 (2004) (Orbital Debris 32 Mitigation Order); 47 CFR § 25.114(d)(14). 33 See LeoSat Petition, Attach. A, Technical Annex to Supplement Schedule S, at 22-24. 34See Letter from Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC, to Joseph C. Anders, LeoSat MA, Inc. (filed Mar. 15, 2017) (March 15 Letter); May 15 Letter at 3-5; Letter from Phillip R. Marchesiello 5

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 11. In their comments, Spire Global (Spire) and SpaceX raise concerns about LeoSat’s post- mission disposal plans. Specifically, Spire asserts that more information is needed regarding those NGSO applications, including LeoSat’s, with post-mission disposal plans through atmospheric re-entry so that existing operators can assess the risk from those disposals.35 SpaceX questions whether LeoSat’s proposal to dispose the satellites at a higher altitude that results in an orbital lifetime in excess of 100 years would hinder space safety and the public interest.36 With regard to Spire, LeoSat argues that the requested information would not be useful because Spire’s space stations would be unable to implement any collision avoidance maneuvers.37 LeoSat also disagrees with SpaceX, arguing that LeoSat’s satellite disposal plans are consistent with the Orbital Debris Mitigation Order and the Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines of the Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS Guidelines) and the Inter- Agency Debris Coordination Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines (IADC Guidelines).38 12. LeoSat indicates that its orbital debris mitigation plan is a preliminary assessment pending the final constellation design.39 Accordingly, we condition40 grant of the LeoSat Petition on LeoSat presenting, and the Commission granting, a modification of this market access grant to include a final orbital debris mitigation plan.41 With respect to the disposal operations LeoSat is considering using an orbit above its operational orbit, we provide some additional information that LeoSat should consider in finalizing its plans. First, as SpaceX correctly observes, satellites left at higher altitudes will remain in orbit indefinitely. Removal from orbit is preferable. While the U.S. Government Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices,42 developed during the 1990s, recognize disposal to a region above LEO as an option, the IADC Guidelines do not recognize this option.43 As a general matter, it would be prudent to consider disposal of LEO spacecraft to a higher orbit as a disfavored option. In any event, the plan submitted for consideration should include the following information regarding post-mission disposal: (1) if the generally disfavored option of disposing of the satellites to a higher orbit is selected, specify the disposal orbit altitude or range of altitudes and discuss the long-term stability of the disposal orbits selected; and (2) if disposing of the satellites through atmospheric reentry, provide a human casualty risk assessment. In either case, additional discussion of measures to avoid collisions during disposal (Continued from previous page) and Lynne M. Montgomery, Counsel for LeoSat MA, Inc., to Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC at 1-2 (May 22 Letter), Attach. A at 1; October 20 Letter at 3-4. 35 Spire Global Comments at 2-5 (filed June 26, 2017). 36 SpaceX Comments at 7-8. 37 LeoSat Opposition and Response at 17 n.53. 38LeoSat Petition at 18 (citing Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Second Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 11567, 11601- 02, para. 84; IADC Guidelines at 6, 9-10, § 3.3.2, § 5.3.2). 39 See May 15 Letter at 4-11. 40In light of limited information provided concerning debris mitigation plans and the status of review by the Netherlands, we do not reach a conclusion at this time as to whether LeoSat has demonstrated that it is subject to direct and effective oversight by the Netherlands concerning orbital debris mitigation. See May 15 Letter; May 22 Letter. LeoSat may renew this request in connection with the modification application required in paragraph 21(o), by providing additional information concerning its debris mitigation plans and the scope and status of review by the Netherlands. 41The International Bureau has previously required applicants to file a modification application including updated orbital debris mitigation information in some instances. See Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems Corp., Order and Authorization, 24 FCC Rcd 2230, 2263-64, para. 102 (IB 2009) (Northrop Grumman Order); ContactMEO Communications, LLC, Order and Authorization, 21 FCC Rcd 4035, 4052-53, para. 47 (IB 2006). 42The U.S. Government Standard Practices were adopted in response to an interagency U.S. Government report published in November 1995. See generally, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Interagency Report on Orbital Debris (1995). 43 IADC Guidelines at 6, 9-10, § 3.3.2, § 5.3.2. 6

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 operations should be included. In addition, the updated plan should address whether, at LeoSat’s operational orbit, physical coordination with any other system will be necessary, and in particular with respect to the Globalstar system, which operates at an altitude of 1414 km. LeoSat should also provide information concerning the method or methods it will use to avoid self-collision during polar crossings. 13. Matters Broadly Applicable to NGSO FSS Applications. Hughes urges the Commission to adopt mechanisms for ensuring that aggregate EPFD limits are met by all NGSO systems authorized in the United States.44 ViaSat questions the sufficiency of the EPFD limits proposed by the Commission to protect GSO systems from harmful interference and requests that each NGSO operator be held jointly and severally liable for harmful interference caused to GSO systems until the Commission adopts adequate aggregate EPFD limits and enforcement mechanisms.45 Space Norway requests that grant of LeoSat’s application be conditioned on LeoSat’s implementation of mechanisms to avoid in-line interference with highly elliptical orbit NGSO systems, such as that proposed by Space Norway.46 SpaceX argues that LeoSat lacks a substantive showing that its system will be able to share spectrum efficiently and equitably with other Ka-band NGSO systems.47 Spire states that the Commission should condition grant of these applications on the outcome of future rulemakings, specifically if the Commission adopts any new orbital debris requirements.48 14. All of these comments relate to issues of general applicability and several of these issues were addressed in the NGSO FSS Report and Order adopted in September 2017.49 ViaSat has sought reconsideration of the Commission’s decision to adopt EPFD limits in the 27.5-28.6 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz uplink bands.50 Those arguments will be addressed in the context of that petition for reconsideration. To the extent that commenters here have raised any other issues of general applicability that are pending in any ongoing Commission rulemaking proceedings, we defer consideration of such issues to those proceedings, and condition grant of the LeoSat Petition on their outcome, based on the record in those proceedings.51 15. We note that as with our other recent authorizations of NGSO FSS systems, grant of the LeoSat Application will not prejudge any decision, including a contrary action, in any future rulemaking 44 Hughes Comments at 3. 45 ViaSat Petition to Deny. 46 Space Norway Comments at 3-5. 47 SpaceX Comments at 1-6. 48 Spire Global Comments at 2-5. 49See generally NGSO FSS Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 7820, para. 35 (addressing concerns of compliance with aggregate EPFD limits by affirming that the Commission will require NGSO FSS licensees to comply with aggregate EPFD limits, and may intervene if operators cannot agree among themselves how to ensure the aggregate limits are met), 7820, para. 35 (acknowledging ViaSat’s concern that EPFD limits in the 17.8-30 GHz range were not developed with the most advanced modern GSO networks in mind, but concluding that it would not be advisable to remain without such EPFD limits in our rules pending the proposal and development of new EPFD limits), 7824- 25, paras. 47-48 & n.111 (noting Space Norway concern for protection of highly elliptical systems and concluding that the required good faith coordination among NGSO FSS systems “also offers the best means to mitigate potentially unequal burdens for . . . those in highly elliptical orbits”), id. (noting SpaceX proposal to encourage efficient spectrum use among NGSO FSS systems, but finding the record insufficient to adopt a requirement at the time). 50 Petition for Reconsideration of ViaSat, Inc., IB Docket No. 16-408 (filed Jan. 17, 2018). 51 We note that this condition addresses several comments that requested that grant of the LeoSat Petition be conditioned on compliance with certain pending and future rulemakings. See SpaceX Comments at 6; Spire Global Comments at 5; ViaSat Petition to Deny at 9. To the extent that commenters believe that their concerns are not already addressed by ongoing rulemakings, we remind commenters that they have the option to file petitions for rulemaking with the Commission. 7

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 proceedings.52 Rather, decisions of general applicability in such proceedings will be based on the totality of comments and proposals in those proceedings, including LeoSat’s. Accordingly, in addition to being subject to any future proceedings, LeoSat would have to comply with any new orbital debris requirements.53 16. Radio Astronomy. The transmission of out-of-band signals into allocated radio astronomy bands can cause interference to radio astronomy observations. We also note that radio astronomy as a service frequently makes use of observations (passive) in bands not allocated to the radio astronomy service. This practice is a result of scientifically valuable signals being subject to the Doppler Effect and shifted in frequency outside radio astronomy-allocated bands. Although not a condition to this authorization, LeoSat should be aware of these facts and contact the National Science Foundation Spectrum Management Unit (esm@nsf.gov) to assist with coordination and information on radio astronomy sites. In the bands in question, the relevant sites are the Green Bank Telescope, the Very Long Baseline Array, and the Very Large Array.54 17. Earth-Exploration Satellite Service/Space Research Service. The band 18.6 – 18.8 GHz includes a primary allocation to the Earth-exploration Satellite Service and Space Research Service for passive sensing, and excessive unwanted energy into this band from the proposed adjacent bands could cause interference to these services. All emissions into this band within the United States from adjacent bands should comply with the relevant limits found in the Commission’s rules. Emissions in 18.6-18.8 GHz outside the United States should comply with the power flux-density limits in No. 21.16.2 of Article 21 of the ITU Radio Regulations. 18. Waiver Standard. LeoSat seeks waivers of certain Commission rules.55 Generally, the Commission may waive any rule for good cause shown.56 Waiver is appropriate where the particular facts make strict compliance inconsistent with the public interest.57 In making this determination, we may take into account considerations of hardship, equity, or more effective implementation of overall policy on an individual basis.58 Waiver is therefore appropriate if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule and such deviation will serve the public interest.59 We address the specific requests for waivers below. 19. Waivers for Frequency Use. LeoSat requests waivers of the U.S. Table of Frequency Allocations (Table) and the Ka-band plan to perform NGSO FSS operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz and 19.3-20.2 GHz bands.60 LeoSat’s proposed operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6- 20.2 GHz bands are now in conformance with the Table and the Ka-band plan as revised in the NGSO 52See, e.g., NGSO FSS R&O; Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz for Mobile Radio Services, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 31 FCC Rcd 8014 (2016); Expanding Flexible Use in Mid-Band Spectrum Between 3.7 and 24 GHz, Notice of Inquiry, 32 FCC Rcd 6373, 6377, n.14 (2017). 53See Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space Age, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 18-159 (rel Nov. 19, 2018). 54 See 47 CFR § 2.106, footnote US131, for locations of these radio astronomy observatories. 55 See supra, note 9. 56 47 CFR § 1.3. 57 Northeast Cellular Tel. Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990). 58WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166. 59 Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166. 60LeoSat Petition at 13. See also 47 CFR §§ 2.102(a), 2.106. Non-Federal operations in this band are subject to coordination with Federal systems. 47 CFR § 2.106, n.US334. 8

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 FSS Report and Order.61 NGSO FSS operations are allowed in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6-20.2 GHz bands on a secondary basis, subject to certain power limits.62 Thus, LeoSat’s requests for waivers concerning NGSO FSS operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6-20.2 GHz bands are dismissed as moot.63 20. Waiver of Band-Splitting Procedure. LeoSat requests a waiver of Section 25.157(e) to permit it to share the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 19.7-20.2 GHz, 27.5-28.6 GHz, and 29.5-30 GHz bands with other NGSO FSS operators through avoidance of interference events, rather than by assignment of only a portion of these bands.64 At the time of filing of the LeoSat Petition, Section 25.157(e) provided for “available spectrum” to be “divided equally” among the applications granted as the result of a processing round.65 This rule presumed that NGSO operators could not use the same frequencies without causing harmful interference to each other, and therefore must be assigned discrete segments of the requested band. After the filing of the LeoSat Petition, the Commission adopted changes that apply a spectrum sharing mechanism to all NGSO FSS systems that have sharing capabilities (e.g., directional earth station antennas), regardless of the frequency bands used.66 Accordingly, LeoSat’s request for waiver of Section 25.157(e) is no longer needed and is dismissed as moot. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES 21. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Declaratory Ruling filed by LeoSat MA, Inc. and accepted for filing IS GRANTED IN PART and DISMISSED as MOOT IN PART, as set forth in this Order and Declaratory Ruling, pursuant to Section 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 303(r) and Section 25.137(c) of the Federal Communications Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 25.137(c). 22. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this grant of U.S. market access is subject to the following requirements and conditions: a. Prior to initiation of service, LeoSat must obtain from the Radiocommunication Agency Netherlands an authorization for deployment and space operations. LeoSat must file evidence in IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20161115-00112 demonstrating grant of any such authorizations within five business days of action by the Radiocommunication Agency Netherlands. Thereafter, this grant will remain effective only to the extent that launch and space operations continue to be authorized by the Radiocommunication Agency Netherlands under the Netherlands Space Activities Law. b. Communications between U.S.-licensed earth stations and LeoSat space stations must comport with all existing and future space station coordination agreements reached by the Netherlands and/or France, with other administrations. In the absence of a coordination agreement, such communications must comport with applicable provisions of the ITU Radio Regulations. c. Space-to-Earth operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 18.8-19.4 GHz, and 19.6-20.2 GHz frequency bands must complete coordination with U.S. Federal systems, in accordance with footnote US334 to the United States Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 CFR § 2.106, prior to being used. The use of space-to-Earth operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 18.8-19.4 GHz, and 19.6-20.2 GHz bands must be 61 NGSO FSS Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 7840, 7850. 62Id. at 7812, 7813, 7815-16, paras. 7, 9-10, 19, 21. We note that any blanket-licensed earth stations in the bands 17.8-18.3 GHz, 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6-19.7 GHz will operate on a secondary basis to fixed services. 47 CFR § 25.115(f)(2). 63 We do not address LeoSat’s request for a waiver to operate in the 19.4-19.6 GHz band. See supra, note 3. 64 See LeoSat Petition at 14-15 and Attach A., Technical Appendix to Supplement Schedule S at 18. 65 47 CFR § 25.157(e). 66NGSO FSS Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 7826, para. 52 (applying the newly adopted Section 25.261 to NGSO FSS systems in any frequency band). 9

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 in accordance with any signed coordination agreement between LeoSat and U.S. Federal operators. Two weeks prior to the start of any operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 18.8-19.4 GHz, and 19.6-20.2 GHz bands, LeoSat must provide contact information for a 24/7 point of contact for the resolution of any harmful interference to Jimmy Nguyen, Email: Jimmy.Nguyen@us.af.mil. d. Operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency band are authorized up to the power flux-density limits in Article 21 of the ITU Radio Regulations, and up to the equivalent power flux-density requirements of Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations, as well as Resolution 76 (Rev. WRC-15) of the ITU Radio Regulations. e. Operations in the 17.8-18.3 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency band are on a secondary basis with respect to the fixed service. f. Operations in the 18.8-19.3 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency band are authorized up to the power flux-density limits in Article 21 of the ITU Radio Regulations. g. The power flux-density at the Earth’s surface from out of band emissions into the frequency band 18.6-18.8 GHz must comply with the power flux-density limit in No. 21.16.2 of Article 21 of the ITU Radio Regulations. h. Operations in the 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6-19.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency bands are authorized up to the power flux-density limits in Article 21 of the ITU Radio Regulations that govern NGSO FSS systems in the 17.7-19.3 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency band. Operations in the band 19.3- 19.4 GHz and 19.6-19.7 GHz are on a secondary basis with respect to the GSO FSS. Blanket authorized earth stations in the 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6-19.7 GHz operate on a secondary basis with respect to the fixed service. i. Operations in the 19.7-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency band are authorized up to the equivalent power-flux density limits in Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations, as well as Resolution 76 (Rev. WRC-15) of the ITU Radio Regulations. j. In the 27.5-28.6 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency bands reception is permitted at levels up to the applicable equivalent power flux-density requirements of Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations. k. Operations in the 27.5-28.35 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency band are secondary with respect to Upper Microwave Flexible Use Service (UMFUS) operations, except for FSS operations associated with earth stations authorized pursuant to 47 CFR § 25.136 and will comply with any determinations set forth in the Spectrum Frontiers Proceeding (GN Docket No. 14-177).67 l. Operations in the 28.35-28.6 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency bands are on a secondary basis with respect to GSO FSS operations. m. Prior to initiation of service, LeoSat must receive a favorable or “qualified favorable” finding in accordance with Resolution 85 (WRC-03) with respect to its compliance with applicable equivalent power flux-density limits in Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations. LeoSat must communicate the ITU finding to the Commission and submit the files containing the data used as input to the ITU validation software, unless they have been submitted before and do not need any update. See also 47 CFR § 25.146(c). n. LeoSat must cooperate with other NGSO FSS operators in order to ensure that all authorized operations jointly comport with the applicable limits for aggregate equivalent power flux- density in the space-to-Earth direction (EPFDdown) contained in Article 22 of the ITU Radio Regulations, as well as Resolution 76 (WRC-03) of the ITU Radio Regulations. 67 See generally, Spectrum Frontiers R&O and FNPRM; Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz For Mobile Radio Services, Second Report and Order, Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 32 FCC Rcd 10988 (2017). 10

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 o. LeoSat must coordinate physical operations of spacecraft with any operator using similar orbits, for the purpose of eliminating collision risk and minimizing operational impacts. The orbital parameters specified in this grant are subject to change based on such coordination. p. Upon finalization of its space station design and prior to initiation of service to and from the United States, LeoSat must seek and obtain the Commission’s approval of a modification containing an updated description of the orbital debris mitigation plans for its system, as discussed in paragraph 11 above. q. This grant of U.S. market access and any earth station licenses granted in the future are subject to modification to bring them into conformance with any rules or policies adopted by the Commission in the future. r. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that LeoSat must comply with the sharing of ephemeris data procedures described in Section 25.146(e) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 25.146(e). 23. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that operations must comply with spectrum sharing procedures among NGSO FSS space stations specified in 47 CFR § 25.261 with respect to any NGSO system licensed or granted U.S. market access pursuant to the processing rounds initiated in Public Notice, DA 16-804 and Public Notice, DA 17-524. Spectrum sharing between LeoSat’s operations and operations of U.S. licensed NGSO systems, or NGSO systems granted U.S. market access, where such operations do not include communications to or from U.S. territory, are governed only by the ITU Radio Regulations and are not subject to Section 25.261. 24. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this authorization does not address the provision of any Direct-to-Home (DTH) service, Direct Broadcast Satellite Service (DBS)68 or Digital Audio Radio Service (DARS) to, from, or within the United States. 25. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this authorization is also subject to the following requirements: a. LeoSat must post a surety bond in satisfaction of 47 CFR §§ 25.165(a)(1) & (b) no later than December 19, 2018 and thereafter maintain on file a surety bond requiring payment in the event of a default in an amount, at minimum, determined according to the formula set forth in 47 CFR § 25.165(a)(1); and b. LeoSat must launch 50 percent of the maximum number of proposed space stations, place them in the assigned orbits, and operate them in accordance with the station authorization no later than November 19, 2024 and LeoSat must launch the remaining space stations necessary to complete its authorized service constellation, place them in their assigned orbits, and operate each of them in accordance with the authorization no later than November 19, 2027. 47 CFR § 25.164(b). Failure to post and maintain a surety bond will render this grant null and void automatically, without further Commission action. Failure to meet the milestone requirements of 47 CFR § 25.164(b) may result in LeoSat’s authorization being reduced to the number of satellites in use on the milestone date. Failure to comply with the milestone requirement of 47 CFR § 25.164(b) will also result in forfeiture of LeoSat’s surety bond. By December 4, 2024, LeoSat must either demonstrate compliance with its milestone requirement or notify the Commission in writing that the requirement was not met. 47 CFR § 25.164(f). 26. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the request for waivers of the United States Table of Frequency Allocations, 47 CFR § 2.106 and the Commission’s Ka-band plan, with regard to NGSO FSS operations in the 17.8-18.6 GHz, 19.3-19.4 GHz and 19.6-20.2 GHz frequency bands IS DISMISSED as MOOT for the reasons set forth herein. 68 With respect to DBS and DTH, this paragraph excludes from the scope of the grant those services specified in 47 CFR § 25.701(a)(1)-(5). 11

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 27. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the request for waiver of the band segmentation provision in 47 CFR § 25.157(e) IS DISMISSED as MOOT. 28. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitions to Deny of Telesat Canada and ViaSat, Inc. ARE GRANTED to the extent that certain conditions requested by Telesat Canada and ViaSat are imposed, as indicated herein, and are otherwise DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Marlene H. Dortch Secretary 12

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN AJIT PAI Re: Space Exploration Holdings, LLC Application for Approval for Orbital Deployment and Operating Authority for the SpaceX V-band NGSO Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-LOA- 20170301-00027; In the Matter of Kepler Corporation Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Kepler’s NGSO FSS System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20161115- 00114; In the Matter of Telesat Canada Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Telesat’s V-band NGSO Constellation, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20170301- 00023;In the Matter of LeoSat MA, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning U.S. Market Access for the LeoSat Ka-band Low-Earth Orbit Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR- 20161115-00112. Today, we’re considering applications involving four proposed constellations of non-geostationary orbit satellites. Two of them involve repeat players; two involve startups. One proposed constellation would be authorized by the United States; three would be authorized by foreign governments and receive U.S. market access. But what they all have in common is the promise of variety in the burgeoning field of non-geostationary satellite services and innovative solutions to bridging the digital divide. From providing high-speed broadband services in remote areas to offering global connectivity to the Internet of Things through “routers in space” for data backhaul, I’m excited to see what services these proposed constellations have to offer. Our approach to these applications reflects this Commission’s fundamental approach: encourage the private sector to invest and innovate and allow market forces to deliver value to American consumers. I’d also like to take a moment to recognize the staff of the International Bureau, not just for their efforts in bringing up to the Commission the items we’re considering at this meeting, but for their ongoing efforts over these past two years. Since last June, the Commission has approved 13 market access requests and satellite applications to nine companies for NGSO systems, including the four that we add to the list today. This productivity is primarily due to your hard work and expertise. Thanks to your efforts, I’m optimistic that the American people will benefit from new satellite-based services. In particular, I’d like to express my gratitude to Jose Albuquerque, Christopher Bair, Jennifer Balatan, Curtrisha Banks, Stephen Duall, Jennifer Gilsenan, Joseph Hill, Karl Kensinger, Sylvia Lam, Julia Malette, Kathyrn Medley, Sankar Persaud, Cindy Spiers, Tom Sullivan, Troy Tanner, and Jay Whaley from the International Bureau. I’d also thank those from other Bureaus and Offices who have played a critical role in advancing these items: Michael Ha, Nick Oros, and Jamison Prime from the Office of Engineering and Technology; Stephen Buenzow, John Schauble, and Becky Schwartz from the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; and Deborah Broderson, David Horowitz, and Bill Richardson from the Office of General Counsel. 13

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MICHAEL O’RIELLY Re: Space Exploration Holdings, LLC Application for Approval for Orbital Deployment and Operating Authority for the SpaceX V-band NGSO Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-LOA- 20170301-00027; In the Matter of Kepler Corporation Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Kepler’s NGSO FSS System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20161115- 00114; In the Matter of Telesat Canada Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Telesat’s V-band NGSO Constellation, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20170301- 00023;In the Matter of LeoSat MA, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning U.S. Market Access for the LeoSat Ka-band Low-Earth Orbit Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR- 20161115-00112. These are exciting times in the development and deployment of new global satellite constellations that will serve consumers. Not since the early 1990s have satellite systems received such attention and captured the imagination of what new technologies, including high-speed broadband offerings, may bring. This also comes with some apprehension as few can predict which satellite systems, if any, will succeed or make money, and existing satellite offerings are indeed being subject to greater scrutiny. But, this new race to satellite orbit provides a first-class seat to the dreams of visionaries, and I look forward to seeing what NGSO systems develop and what services are eventually offered. Quite frankly, our job at the Commission is to approve the qualified applications and then let the market work its will. In these four items, the Commission approves four additional systems, which will add at least another 7,859 satellites into orbit, if everything goes according to the submitted plans; and this comes on top of the nine applications and petitions the Commission has approved over the last 17 months. Between SpaceX’s current application and the one previously consented to by the Commission, SpaceX alone is envisioning a future constellation of an unprecedented 11,943 satellites. As I said earlier today, new technologies – especially ones that revolutionize an industry model – oftentimes require the Commission to modernize and streamline our rules to provide a limited, but sound, framework to deal with accompanying policy issues. That is what today is all about. I support granting the SpaceX application and the Kepler, LeoSat, and Telesat petitions for market access. While there are still issues to be explored, including communications with ESIMs and orbital debris, and policy calls that we may not have gotten quite right, such as how we handle in-line interference, the Commission continues to take the necessary steps to allow investment and future deployment of these ambitious projects. I approve. 14

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER BRENDAN CARR Re: Space Exploration Holdings, LLC Application for Approval for Orbital Deployment and Operating Authority for the SpaceX V-band NGSO Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-LOA- 20170301-00027; In the Matter of Kepler Corporation Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Kepler’s NGSO FSS System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20161115- 00114; In the Matter of Telesat Canada Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Telesat’s V-band NGSO Constellation, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20170301- 00023;In the Matter of LeoSat MA, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning U.S. Market Access for the LeoSat Ka-band Low-Earth Orbit Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR- 20161115-00112. Never before have there been so many companies using such diverse technologies to connect Americans—and that is phenomenal news. We used to focus on improved speeds over copper, and then fiber, and then over the air using LTE. Today, the buzz includes fixed wireless and gigabit connections powered by high-band spectrum and 5G. With these four decisions, we authorize another tool in the broadband toolbox: large constellations of satellites in low-earth orbit. These satellites are smaller and less expensive to launch than the traditional geostationary satellites that have been going up since the 1960s. They promise lower latency connections because they typically orbit only a few hundred miles above Earth, as opposed to many thousands. Many corners of our country that don’t have broadband today, or don’t have many broadband choices, could soon see new, high-speed services thanks to these low-earth orbit satellites. At least two of the applicants we consider today plan to offer services that could enable IoT devices—powering smart cities and smart ag. And those use cases complement the many connections satellites make today on ships, airplanes, and other vehicles. The broader point is that, at this moment, innovation in tech and telecom has the extraordinary potential to benefit everyday Americans. As we move towards 5G, satellite, fiber, cable, fixed wireless, and a range of other offerings are all going to compete for your broadband dollars. And we can help move competition in that direction through smart policies. That’s what we’re doing today. We’re not picking winners and losers in the competition to provide more broadband to more Americans. We don’t have the foresight to centrally plan the particular mode of connectivity everyone will use. Recognizing this is a good thing. After all, if your family is getting fast, affordable broadband, you probably don’t care whether that connection is through a low-earth satellite or high-band spectrum. So that’s the approach we take here. We let these four companies move forward and allow the market to decide their success. For my part, I am excited to see what services these four companies will offer. And I’m glad we’re clearing the way for more choices and more connections for Americans, regardless of where they live. Once again, I want to thank the International Bureau for its work on these items. They have my support. 15

Federal Communications Commission FCC 18-164 STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER JESSICA ROSENWORCEL Re: Space Exploration Holdings, LLC Application for Approval for Orbital Deployment and Operating Authority for the SpaceX V-band NGSO Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-LOA- 20170301-00027; In the Matter of Kepler Corporation Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Kepler’s NGSO FSS System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20161115- 00114; In the Matter of Telesat Canada Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Grant Access to the U.S. Market for Telesat’s V-band NGSO Constellation, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR-20170301- 00023;In the Matter of LeoSat MA, Inc., Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning U.S. Market Access for the LeoSat Ka-band Low-Earth Orbit Satellite System, IBFS File No. SAT-PDR- 20161115-00112. The United Nations is well known for its Human Development Index. It’s a lot like a national report card. It’s a composite of indicators involving life expectancy, education, and per capita income. As indices go, this one gets all the glory at the General Assembly. But there’s another United Nations index that deserves some time in the spotlight—and that’s the Index of Objects Launched into Outer Space. Moreover, it’s one that directly informs our satellite work at the Federal Communications Commission. According to this index, there are currently 4,857 satellites orbiting the globe. If you start counting from the fall of 1957, when Russia’s Sputnik became earth’s first artificial star, a total of 8,126 objects have been launched into space. Now consider this. Today this agency is approving more than 7,500 new satellites for orbit. That’s on top of more than 4,500 new satellites already authorized this year. Then consider that we have another 1,200 proposed satellites still in our pipeline for review. Do the math. It adds up to a next-generation space race. New commercial models, players, and technologies are coming together and rapidly multiplying the range of satellite services. With these services come all kinds of opportunities. They include new capacities to connect more people in more places, use scarce resources more efficiently, support expanded access to education and health care, and grow economies beyond the limits of today’s terrestrial networks. In other words, they could help with improving the very sorts of things that are measured by the United Nations in its Human Development Index. This is exciting. Of course, increasing the number of satellites in orbit like this brings new challenges. That’s because left unchecked, the growing amount of debris in orbit could make some regions of space unusable for decades to come. This should concern us all—because junking up our far altitudes will constrain our ability to innovate, connect, and make progress with satellite systems. 16


Document Created: 2019-05-04 11:30:50
Document Modified: 2019-05-04 11:30:50
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC