Attachment Spaceflight - Grant

Spaceflight - Grant

DECISION submitted by IB, FCC

Re-issued and Revised Grant

2016-12-07

This document pretains to SAT-STA-20150821-00060 for Special Temporal Authority on a Satellite Space Stations filing.

IBFS_SATSTA2015082100060_1160516

SAT—STA—20150821—00060 182015001561 Spaceflight, Inc. SHERPA Date & Time Filed: Aug 21 2015 7:13:16:996PM International—Buteau Approved: File Number: SAT—STA—20150821—00060 4« with conditions Callsign: Chie® Sotalite Policy Branch FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR SPACE STATION SPECIAL TEMPORARY AUTHORITY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY APPLICANT INFORMATION Enter a description of this application to identify it on the main menu: SHERPA space station STA 1. Applicant Name: Spaceflight, Inc. Phone Number: 202—262—1825 DBA Name: Fax Number: Street: PO Box 1922 E—Mail: THornsby@SpaceflightIndustries. com City: Bellevnue State: WA Country: USA Zipcode: 98009 — Attention: Ms Indra Homsby

ATTACHMENT TO GRANT Spaceflight Inc. IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821—00060 IBFS File No(s): SAT—STA—20150821—00060‘ Licensee/Grantee: Spaceflight Inc. GRANT — Satellite Name: SHERPA With Conditions Orbital Location: NGSO in an elliptical orbit with a perigee altitude of — (required station— 450 km, apogee altitude of 720 km, and 97.4° keeping tolerance) inclination. Administration: United States of America Nature of Service: Space Operations International Bureau Scope of Grant: Authority to operate one non—geostationary satellite for a Satellite Division period not to exceed 12 hours, in order to deploy the spacecraft described in the SHERPA manifest." Service Area(s): Three earth stations* located in North Pole, Alaska, Tukwila, Washington, and Wallops Island, Virginia. Frequencies: Command frequency: 450.2 MHz (Earth—to—space) Telemetry and Tracking frequency: 401.5 MHz (space—to—Earth) Operations under this grant must comport with the legal and technical specifications set forth by the applicant or petitioner and with Federal Communication Commission‘s rules not waived herein. This grant is also subject to the following conditions: 1. All operations under this grant of special temporary authority must be on an unprotected and non—harmful interference basis, i.e., Spaceflight must not cause harmful interference to, and shall not claim protection from interference caused to it by, any other lawfully operating station. 2. In the event of any harmful interference under this grant of special temporary authority, Spaceflight must cease operations immediately upon notification of such interference and must inform the Commission, in ‘ The application was placed on public notice on Jan. 22, 2016. Policy Branch Information Satellite Space Station Applications Acceptedfor Filing, Public Notice, Report No. SAT—01130 (Jan. 22, 2016). 2 See Letter from Jonathan L. Wiener, Goldberg, Godles, Wiener & Wright LLP, to Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC International Bureau, Attach. at 1 (filed Nov. 2, 2015) (on file in IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821—00060) (listing 90 satellites for planned deployment from SHERPA); Letter from Henry Goldberg and Jonathan L. Wiener, Goldberg Godles, Wiener & Wright LLP, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, at 1 (filed June 17, 2016) (indicating that the Pathfinder—1 satellite previously scheduled to be deployed by the SHERPA was removed from the manifest). An additional satellite, the SeeMe satellite, will be deployed from the eXCITe satellite three weeks after the deployment of the eXCITe spacecraft, but until then will remain part of the eXCITe spacecraft. See OET Experimental File No. 0540—EX—PL—2015, Exhibits, ODAR at 1—2 (granted April 25, 2016), grant later modified in other respects by OET Experimental File No. 0089— EX—ML—2016 (granted June 29, 2016). On July 22, 2016, Spaceflight indicated that no additional spacecraft would be added to the manifest. See Letter from Tony Lin, Counsel, Hogan Lovells US LLP, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, at Exh. B (filed July 26, 2016) (enclosing letter from H. Indra Hornsby, General Counsel, Spaceflight, Inc. to Mike Safyan, Director of Launch and Regulatory Affairs, Planet Labs, Inc., July 22, 2016). On November 14, 2016, Spaceflight informed that the 56 Planet Labs satellites scheduled for deployment by the SHERPA had also been removed from the manifest, leaving a total of 34 satellites that would be deployed from the SHERPA. Letter from Henry Goldberg and Jonathan L. Wiener, Attorneys for Spaceflight, Inc., to Jose P. Albuquerque, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC, at 1 (filed Nov. 14, 2016) (Spaceflight Nov. 14, 2016 Ex Parte). 3 See IBFS File Nos. SES—STA—20150824—00549, SES—STA—20150824—00550, and SES—STA—20150821—00051. Page 1 of 5

ATTACHMENT TO GRANT Spaceflight Inc. IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821—00060 writing, immediately of such an event. 3. We waive, on our own motion, Section 25.113(g) of the Commission‘s rules, requiring orbital deployment approval and a license to be applied for and granted prior to orbital deployment and operation of a space station." We find that the special circumstances presented here, including the short operational lifetime of the space station, and the similarity of the space station to an upper stage launch vehicle," justify waiver of the rule. Further, waiver of the rule would not undermine the policy objective of the rule. The Commission has described the intent of the rule to be "that the approval process [for space stations] involves a public interest review of proposed space station operation and debris mitigation plans before a space station is launched into orbit."" Consistent with the intent of the rule, we have reviewed the description of space station operations and orbital debris mitigation plan submitted by Spaceflight, and make a finding that granting the requested STA is in the public interest. In light of these specific circumstances, we conclude that waiver would serve the public interest. The rule is waived herein without prejudice to any future applications by Spaceflight, or by any other operators seeking authority to operate space stations designed to deploy satellites. 4. On May 11, 2016, ORBCOMM License Corp. (ORBCOMM) filed Informal Comments requesting that the Commission defer grant of this STA request.‘ ORBCOMM objected to grant of STA on the basis that the SHERPA spacecraft and satellites planned for deployment from SHERPA would use altitudes and orbital planes that would intersect with the authorized 47 degree—inclined 715 km circular target operational orbits for its ORBCOMM Generation 2 Satellites.© ORBCOMM‘s concern is that it will be required to perform an unacceptably large number of collision avoidance maneuvers, thereby impacting the service life of its satellites, as a result of potential collisions between its satellites and the SHERPA and SHERPA—deployed satellites." ORBCOMM is also concerned that the SHERPA and the SHERPA— deployed satellites may collide with each other, thus creating debris that would affect ORBCOMM."* We find, based on the conditions placed on this authorization and on the additional information filed in the record, including technical analysis placed in the record by Planet Labs Inc. (Planet Labs) and confirmed by Spaceflight,"‘ that we can proceed with grant of Spaceflight‘s request for STA to operate the SHERPA spacecraft. Although the 56 Planet Labs satellites will no longer be deployed from the SHERPA," the analysis conducted by Planet Labs remains relevant. 4 47 CFR § 25.113(g). 5 An upper stage launch vehicle would not be licensed by the Commission, to the extent that the vehicle falls within the authority of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). See Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 17 FCC Red 5586, 5592—93, paras. 14—15 (2002) (citing the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as amended, 49 U.S.C. § 70101 et seq., and the FAA‘s implementing regulations, codified at 14 CFR Ch. III, § 400 et seq.); see also Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Second Report and Order, 19 FCC Red 11567, 11611, para. 105 (2004) (noting the Commission‘s prior observation that "matters addressed under the Commercial Space Launch Act and its implementing regulations are most appropriately addressed by the FAA"). © Comprehensive Review ofLicensing and Operating Rules for Satellite Services, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 29 ECC Red 12116, 12155, para. 133 (2014). 7 ORBCOMM License Corp., Informal Comments at 1 (filed May 11, 2016) (on file in IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821— 00060) (ORBCOMM Informal Comments). ® Id. at 2. ° Id. at 3—4. 9 TJ. at 2. !! See Letter from Tony Lin, Counsel, Hogan Lovells US LLP, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, at 1, Exhs. A, B (filed July 26, 2016). 2 Spaceflight Nov. 14, 2016 Ex Parte Letter at 1. Page 2 of 5

ATTACHMENT TO GRANT Spaceflight Inc. IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821—00060 a. With respect to ORBCOMM‘s concern with an unacceptably large number of collision avoidance maneuvers, the Commission authorization granted to Spire is conditioned on Spire performing certain actions in the eventit receives a conjunction warning from the Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) or other source." These actions should assist ORBCOMM in reducing the number of collision avoidance maneuvers to an acceptable level. With respect to the concern with collisions among the spacecraft in the SHERPA mission, the analysis provided by Planet Labs concluded that the risk of in— plane collisions over a two year period for any pair of objects is 7.8 x 107.‘ In an ex parte letter filed on August 9, 2016, ORBCOMM argued that since there were 4,095 possible pairs of objects, the aggregate probability of in—plane collision would be 3.18 x 109.‘ However, of the satellites planned for deployment from SHERPA at the time of the analysis, 56 would have been operated by Planet Labs, and these will be replaced by mass simulators that will not be deployed into orbit.‘* Eight of the satellites still planned for deployment will be operated by Spire, Inc., which has stated that its satellites can perform collision—avoidance maneuvers using differential drag and an on—board attitude determination and control system.‘‘ Four other satellites are equipped with propulsion.‘* b. We conclude that although the collision risk as calculated by ORBCOMM correctly assesses risk based on multiple collision pairs, the figure derived by ORBCOMM overstates the actual risk because collisions will be less likely than assumed in the Planet Labs® analysis, and the total number of objects has been reduced because of the withdrawal of the Planet Labs®‘ satellites. In order to derive a more realistic estimate of the aggregate probability of collision, including the effect of removal of the Planet Labs satellites, we consider two different scenarios. In scenario 1, we assume that the 12 objects identified above with some means of maneuvering do not collide among themselves. In scenario 2, we assume in addition that these 12 objects also do not collide with any of the other 23 objects (22 satellites plus SHERPA). This allows us to conclude that, starting from the probability of collision for any pair of objects, as estimated by Planet Labs (7.8 x 107), the aggregate probability of collision is bounded by 0.20 x 107 (scenario 2) and 0.41 x 107 (scenario 1). c. This range does not include collision risk with respect to the "background" large object debris population. Exhibit A, Appendix B of the exparte filing submitted by Planet Labs on July 26, 2016 contains such an analysis, prepared using NASA‘s Debris Assessment Software (DAS), for the entire SHERPA mission.‘" Adding up the probabilities of collision originally calculated by Planet Labs for the " See Planet Labs Inc., IBFS File No. SAT—MOD—20150802—00053 (granted Sept. 15, 2016); Spire Global, Inc., IBFS File No. SAT—LOA—20151123—00078 (grant—in—part and defer—in—part Oct. 14, 2016). " Letter from Tony Lin, Counsel, Hogan Lovells US LLP, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, at 3 (filed July 26, 2016). This figure provides an approximation, as it was arrived at based on Planet Labs‘ participation in the deployment. 5 Letter from Walter H. Sonnenfeldt, Regulatory Counsel, ORBCOMM License Corp. & Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, ORBCOMM Inc. to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, at 4, n.7 (filed Aug. 9, 2016) (filed as "Response to 7/26/16 Planet Labs Letter"). * Spaceflight Nov. 14, 2016 Ex Parte Letter at 1—2). !" Application of Spire Global, Inc., File No. SAT—LOA—20151123—00078, Exhibit A at 5—6 (Nov. 23, 2015). # See OET Experimental File No. 0586—EX—PL—2015, Exhibits, Revised ODAR v.3.1 at 8—10 (granted Jan. 27, 2016) (describing propulsion system on the two identical Aerocube—7 spacecraft); OET Experimental File No. 0829—EX—PL—2014 Exhibits, Orbital Debris Assessment at 8 (granted Dec. 28, 2015) (describing propulsion system on the BlackSky Global Pathfinder satellites, including the Pathfinder—2 spacecraft) grant later modified in other respects by OET Experimental File No. 0053—EX—ML—2016 (granted April 11, 2016); Su—A Song, Yeona Yoo, Soyeon Koo, Seungkeun Kim, and Jinyoung Suk, System Design and Dynamic Analysisfor Sail Deploymentfor Cube Satellite CNUSAIL—1, 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.2016—0964 (describing planned solar sail propulsion for Chungnam University‘s CNUSAIL—1 spacecraft). Letter from Tony Lin, Counsel, Hogan Lovells US LLP, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, Exh A. at 10—59 (filed July 26, 2016). Page 3 of 5

ATTACHMENT TO GRANT Spaceflight Inc. IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821—00060 91 objects planned for deployment (ninety satellites plus SHERPA), and subtracting the probability of collision for the 56 Planet Labs satellites that will no longer be deployed by SHERPA, we arrive at an aggregate probability of collision with the background of 0.18 x 10". Therefore, we estimate the overall probability of collision for the entire SHERPA mission, based on the approximate collision probability per satellite pair, to be bounded by 0.38 x 10% and 0.59 x 10°. The Planet Labs analysis also included an estimate of the probability of collision of any of the previously planned 91 objects in the SHERPA mission and any of the ORBCOMM satellites."" This calculation is relevant in assessing the burden that will be imposed on ORBCOMM as a result of maneuvers required to avoid collisions. However, we have not included it in our estimate ofthe overall probability of collision because such collisions will be avoided. 5. Spaceflight must take all steps within its control to ensure that it and the launch provider, SpaceX, abort the separation of the SHERPA deployer from the SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle in the event that a SpaceX Formosat—5 launch mission anomaly precludes lowering the Falcon 9 second stage from the Formosat—5 720 km circular release orbit to the specified 450 x 720 km SHERPA release orbit. If, despite Spaceflight taking all steps within its control, SHERPA is separated from the SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle at an orbit other than the specified 450 x 720 km SHERPA release orbit, SHERPA must not deploy any satellites. 6. NOAA conducted an analysis for any SHERPA operations prior to November 30, 2016, which was provided to Spaceflight on October 24, 2016. Since the launch will occur after the November 30, 2016 date, Spaceflight must provide notification to the following point of contact at the earliest possible date prior to launch, so that additional orbit analysis can be accomplished. Richard Kelley Alion Science and Technology for U.S. Department of Commerce and NOAA/NESDIS NOAA Satellite Operations Facility Suitland, MD phone 01.301.817.4636 rkelley@alionscience.com richard.kelley@noaa.gov 7. Prior to the start of operations, Spaceflight must contact the Air Force Spectrum Management Office and supply a stop buzzer point of contact (POC). This POC must be available any time testing is being performed. Air Force Spectrum Management Office 6910 Cooper Ave Ft George G. Meade, Maryland Jennifer Corzo Phone: 301—225—3719 Jennifer.corz0.2@us.af.mil 8. This authorizationis limited to operations of the SHERPA spacecraft and does not in any way grant authority for operations or express a view concerning the status of any satellite that will be deployed from SHERPA. 9. Spaceflight shall not integrate any satellite into the SHERPA deployer unless, for any space station on such satellite requiring FCC authorization, the operator has either obtained an FCC license for such space station, or in the case of an amateur space station, has submitted pre—launch notifications to the FCC, and * See id. at 3. Page 4 of 5

ATTACHMENT TO GRANT Spaceflight Inc. IBFS File No. SAT—STA—20150821—00060 the FCC has confirmed that the space station is considered documented pursuant to Section 97.5(a)(3) of the Commission‘s rules, 47 CFR § 97.5(a)(3). 10. Operations of the SHERPA spacecraft must begin no later than 15 days following launch of the spacecraft. Upon commencement of operations, Spaceflight must file a notification within one (1) day certifying to the Commission that the space station has been successfully placed in orbit and its operations fully conform to the terms and conditions of this grant. Licensee/grantee is afforded thirty (30) days from the date of release of this action to decline the grant as conditioned. Failure to respond within this period will constitute formal acceptance of the grant as conditioned. This action is taken pursuant to Section 0.261 of the Commission‘s rules on delegated authority, 47 CFR § 0.261, and is effective upon release. Station licenses are subject to the conditions specified in Section 309(h) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 309(h). Action Date: October 25, 2016 i Term Dates From: see conditions | To: see conditions Approved: /éé,/; gmz/ Stephen J.{Dtuall Chief, Satellite Policy Branch K¥ RE—ISSUED on 12/07/1G6*¥*¥ + REvVISED Page 5 of 5

2. Contact Name: Jonathan L. Wiener Phone Number: 202—429—4900 Company: Goldberg Godles Wiener & Wright Fax Number: 202—429—4912 LLP Street: 1229 19th Street, NW E—Mail: jwiener@g2w2.com City: Washington State: DC Country: USA Zipcode: 20036 —2413 Attention: Relationship: Legal Counsel (If your application is related to an application filed with the Commission, enter either the file number or the IB Submission ID of the related application. Please enter only one.) 3. Reference File Number or Submission ID 4a. Is a fee submitted with this application? @ IfYes, complete and attach FCC Form 159. If No, indicate reason for fee exemption (see 47 C.F.R.Section 1.1114). C Governmental Entity C Noncommercial educational licensee C Other(please explain): 4b. Fee Classification CXW — Space Station (Non—Geostationary) 5. Type Request C Change Station Location > Extend Expiration Date @ Other 6. Temporary Orbit Location 7. Requested Extended Expiration Date

8. Description (If the complete description does not appear in this box, please go to the end of the form to view it in its entirety.) Spaceflight Inc., pursuant to Section 25.120 of the Commission‘s Rules, hereby requests Special Temporary Authority to permit it to communicate with a spacecraft, known as SHERPA, and corresponding earth stations for a duration of up to twelve (12) hours to take place in a single occurrence between January 15, 2016 and April 15, 2016. 9. By checking Yes, the undersigned certifies that neither applicant nor any other party to the application is subject @) Yes «y No to a denial of Federal benefits that includes FCC benefits pursuant to Section 5301 of the Anti—Drug Act of 1988, 21 U.S.C. Section 862, because of a conviction for possession or distribution of a controlled substance. See 47 CFR 1.2002(b) for the meaning of "party to the application" for these purposes. 10. Name of Person Signing 11. Title of Person Signing Indra Hornsby General Counsel 12. Please supply any need attachments. Attachment 1: Request for STA Attachment 2: ODAR Attachment 3: WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS FORM ARE PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND / OR IMPRISONMENT (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001), AND/OR REVOCATION OF ANY STATION AUTHORIZATION (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 312(a)(1)), AND/OR FORFEITURE (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 503).

FCC NOTICE REQUIRED BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT The public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 2 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the required data, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. If you have any comments on this burden estimate, or how we can improve the collection and reduce the burden it causes you, please write to the Federal Communications Commission, AMD—PERM, Paperwork Reduction Project (3060—0678), Washington, DC 20554. We will also accept your comments regarding the Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of this collection via the Internet if you send them to PRA@fce.gov. PLEASE DO NOT SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO THIS ADDRESS. Remember — You are not required to respond to a collection of information sponsored by the Federal government, and the government may not conduct or sponsor this collection, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control numberor if we fail to provide you with this notice. This collection has been assigned an OMB control number of 3060—0678. THE FOREGOING NOTICE IS REQUIRED BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995, PUBLIC LAW 104—13, OCTOBER 1, 1995, 44 U.S.C. SECTION 3507.


Document Created: 2016-12-07 16:21:53
Document Modified: 2016-12-07 16:21:53
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC