REQUEST FOR RECON OR

PETITION submitted by Iridium Communications, Inc.

Petition For Reconsideration or Clarification

2015-04-29

This document pretains to SES-AMD-20120823-00781 for Amended Filing on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESAMD2012082300781_1086688

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Inmarsat Mobile Networks, Inc. ) File Nos. SES-LIC-20120426-00397, ) SES-AMD-20120823-00781, and Application to Operate a Fixed-Satellite ) SES-AMD-20150114-00008 Service Gateway Earth Station Facility in ) Lino Lakes, Minnesota with the ) Call Sign: E120072 Inmarsat-5 F2 Space Station ) PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR CLARIFICATION In its Order 1 in the above-captioned proceeding, the International Bureau (“Bureau”) granted the application (“Application”) of Inmarsat Mobile Networks, Inc. (“Inmarsat”). The Application requested: (1) a license to operate a Fixed-Satellite Service (“FSS”) gateway earth station in Lino Lakes, Minnesota, to communicate with the Inmarsat-5 F2 geostationary satellite orbit (“GSO”) FSS space station at 55° W.L.; and (2) U.S. market access for Inmarsat-5 F2. Iridium Satellite LLC (“Iridium”), by its attorneys and pursuant to Section 1.106 of the Commission’s rules, hereby requests reconsideration or clarification of two aspects of the Order. 1 Order and Authorization and Declaratory Ruling, DA 15-392, released March 30, 2015 (“Order”).

-2- I. Introduction and Summary Iridium previously raised concerns about the potential for Inmarsat’s Lino Lakes transmissions to interfere with Iridium’s non-geostationary satellite orbit (“NGSO”) mobile satellite service (“MSS”) feeder links in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band. 2 In the Order, the Bureau required that Inmarsat not cause harmful interference to NGSO MSS feeder links, and not claim interference protection from NGSO MSS feeder links, in this band. 3 Iridium asks that the Bureau either clarify or determine on reconsideration that these requirements apply both to MSS feeder links that already are licensed and to MSS feeder links that may be licensed in the future. Iridium also asks that the Bureau either clarify or determine on reconsideration that Inmarsat’s inability to claim interference protection from NGSO MSS feeder links in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band applies to the receivers on Inmarsat-5 F2, which is where Inmarsat’s 29.1-29.25 GHz band transmissions from Lino Lakes will be received. II. Inmarsat Should Not Be Permitted to Cause Harmful Interference to, or to Claim Interference Protection From, Future Iridium Feeder Links. As stated in the Order, in the United States NGSO MSS feeder links and LMDS stations are co-primary in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band and there is no GSO FSS designation in the band. 4 Accordingly, Inmarsat’s feeder links between its Lino Lakes earth station and Inmarsat-5 F2 are a non-conforming use. 2 See Petition to Deny of Iridium, filed Sept. 28, 2012, in the above-captioned proceeding. 3 See Order at ¶ 17. 4 Id. at ¶14.

-3- In light of Inmarsat’s non-conforming status, the Order imposed the restrictions summarized above relating to 29.1-29.25 GHz band stations that have primary status. Condition e of the ordering clauses, states as follows: Inmarsat’s operations in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band shall be on a non- interference basis to MSS feeder link and LMDS operations. Inmarsat must cease operations in the event of any interference into LMDS or MSS feeder link operations. In addition, Inmarsat may not claim interference protection from LMDS or MSS feeder link operations in this frequency band. 5 In the Order, the Bureau recognized there could be issues relating both to Iridium’s existing feeder link earth stations and its future feeder link earth stations. As to existing feeder link earth stations, the Bureau considered interference to be unlikely given the geographic separation between Inmarsat’s Lino Lakes earth station and Iridium’s gateway earth stations. 6 It nevertheless stated that “Inmarsat must cease operations in the event of any interference into LMDS or MSS feeder link operations … [and] may not claim interference protection from LMDS or MSS feeder link operations in this frequency band.” 7 As to future Iridium feeder link earth stations, the Bureau recognized that GSO FSS stations can have a preclusive effect. It stated that “widespread deployment of GSO FSS earth stations transmitting in the band 29.1-29.25 GHz … may not be compatible with the deployment of new Iridium earth stations or LMDS stations.” 8 The ordering 5 Order at ¶41. 6 See Order at ¶ 17. 7 Id. 8 Order at ¶ 17.

-4- clauses in the Order, however, did not make explicit reference to new Iridium feeder link earth stations. Iridium therefore seeks reconsideration or clarification on this point. The preclusive effect language the Bureau used suggests it intends to protect future Iridium feeder link earth stations, and basic allocation principles dictate this result. Non-conforming uses must not cause harmful interference to primary stations and must accept interference from primary stations. That is true in the case of already- licensed primary stations and it is also true in the case of future primary stations. If Inmarsat’s non-conforming Lino Lakes operations in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band could cause harmful interference to future Iridium feeder link earth stations or did not have to accept interference from future Iridium feeder link earth stations, then the Lino Lakes earth station’s status vis-à-vis Iridium’s future feeder link earth stations would be elevated from non-conforming to co-primary. That outcome would be inconsistent with the Commission’s band plan and with the principles underlying the Order. The authority granted to Inmarsat should not be permitted to have a preclusive effect on Iridium’s use of the band for the primary purposes for which it has been designated. A non-conforming use should not constrain the future development and deployment of Iridium NGSO MSS feeder link earth stations that operate in the 29.1- 29.25 GHz band on a primary basis.

-5- III. The Receivers on Inmarsat-5 F2 Should Have to Accept Interference From Iridium’s NGSO MSS Feeder Links. As stated above, the Order both granted Inmarsat’s earth station application and provided U.S. market access for Inmarsat-5 F2. The requirement in the Order that Inmarsat not claim interference protection from NGSO MSS feeder links is relevant to the grant of U.S. market access, because the receivers on Inmarsat-5 F2 are where the 29.1- 29.25 GHz band feeder link transmissions from Inmarsat’s Lino Lakes earth stations will be received. The “do not claim interference protection” requirement, therefore, should apply to the receivers on Inmarsat-5 F2. Conclusion Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the Bureau should either clarify or determine on reconsideration that the interference-related restrictions on Inmarsat’s operations in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band apply to future Iridium feeder link earth stations.

-6- The Bureau also should either clarify or determine on reconsideration that Inmarsat’s inability to claim interference protection from NGSO MSS feeder links in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band applies to the receivers on Inmarsat-5 F2. Respectfully submitted, IRIDIUM SATELLITE LLC By: /s/ Joseph A. Godles Joseph A. Godles GOLDBERG, GODLES, WIENER & WRIGHT LLP 1229 19th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 April 29, 2015

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OR CLARIFICATION was sent electronically this 29th day of April, 2015, to each of the following: Inmarsat Hawaii Inc. Chris Murphy Chris_murphy@inmarsat.com Latham & Watkins John P. Janka john.janka@lw.com Latham & Watkins Elizabeth R. Park Elizabeth.park@lw.com Globe Wireless LLC David B. Kagan President & CEO David.Kagan@globewireless.com Chris Gray Vice President of Marketing and Business Development Chris.Gray@globewireless.com Gogo LLC William J. Gordon Vice President, Regulatory Affairs Bgordon@gogoair.com American Airlines Robert A. Wirick Managing Director, Regulatory and International Affairs Robert.Wirick@aa.com Will Ris Will.Ris@aa.com

-2- Honeywell Chris Benich Vice President, Aerospace Regulatory Affairs Chris.Benich@honeywell.com Encompass Digital Media, Inc. Chris Weissinger cweissinger@encompass-m.com VT iDirect, Inc. Kevin Steen VP Corporate Development Ksteen@idirect.net Cynthia Harty Vice President of Contracts charty@idirect.net Skyware Global Gopi Sundaram Vice President, Product Strategy GopiSundaram@skywareglobal.com The Boeing Company Audrey L. Allison Director, Frequency Management Services Audrey.Allison@boeing.com And Its Attorneys, Bruce A. Olcott Jones Day bolcott@jonesday.com TracStar Systems Inc., dba Cobham SATCOM Mike Gregg Mike.Gregg@cobham.com

-3- ARINC Incorporated John C. Smith Vice President-Law, Secretary and General Counsel JSmith@arinc.com And Its Attorneys, Edward A. Yorkgitis, Jr. Kelley Drye & Warren LLP CYorkgitis@KellyDrye.com /s/ Deborah Wiggins Deborah Wiggins


Document Created: 2015-04-29 15:03:46
Document Modified: 2015-04-29 15:03:46
© 2024 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC