Attachment Reply

Reply

REPLY submitted by Stratos, Telenor, FTMSC, BT, MVS

Reply

2006-04-11

This document pretains to SES-STA-20060310-00419 for Special Temporal Authority on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESSTA2006031000419_494656

                                          Before the
                             Federal Communications Commission
                                        Washington, D.C. 20554

In the matter of                    )

Stratos Communications, Inc.        ;     File No. SES—STA—20060310—00419 (Call Sign EO50249)

Telenor Satellite, Inc.             ;     File No. SES—STA—20060313—00430 (Call Sign E050276)

FTMSC US LLC                        %     File No. SES—STA—20060314—00438 (Call Sign EO50284)

BT Americas, Inc.                   ;     File No. SES—STA—20060315—00445 (Call Sign EO60076)

MVS USA Inc.                        §     File No. SES—STA—20060316—00454 (Call Sign E050348)

 CONSOLIDATED REPLY OF MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES SUBSIDIARY LLC

       Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC ("MSV*") hereby files this Reply to the

Consolidated Joint Opposition and separate Stratos Opposition to MSV‘s Consolidated Petition

to Deny the above—referenced applications for Special Temporary Authority ("STA") to operate

25,000 Broadband Global Area Network ("BGAN") terminals using an Inmarsat satellite,

Inmarsat 4F2 at 52.75°W, for which coordination is not complete.‘ The Applicants do nothing to

resolve the fatal flaws with their STA requests: (i) the Applicants seek STAs solely based on

marketing considerations; (ii) the delay that allegedly justifies grant of the STAs has been

created and perpetuated by Inmarsat; and (iii) the proposed operations will cause harmful

interference to the vital services MSV is already providing today to public safety organizations,

including important federal, state, and local agencies in areas vulnerable to hurricanes.

        The Applicants claim that STAs are warranted because the underlying applications for

permanent authority to operate BGAN terminals have been pending in some cases for several


‘ See Consolidated Joint Opposition of Stratos Communications, Inc., Telenor Satellite, Inc., FTMSC US
LLC, BT Americas, Inc., MVS USA Inc., and Inmarsat Ventures Limited (collectively, the "Applicants"),
File No. SES—STA—20060310—00419 et at (April 6, 2006) ("Consolidated Joint Opposition"), Opposition
of Stratos Communications, Inc., File No. SES—STA—20060310—00419 (Call Sign E050249) (April 7,
2006).


months. Consolidated Joint Opposition at 3—4. This delay, however, is a circumstance of

Inmarsat‘s own making." Inmarsat is an experienced operator of satellites throughout the world.

Inmarsat knows well its obligation to coordinate its new satellite and services with other L band

operators. But, despite having many years to do so, Inmarsat has failed to coordinate the

Inmarsat 4F2 and its BGAN service with the North American L band operators. Only Inmarsat —

and neither the Commission nor MSV —— is to blame for Inmarsat‘s failure to coordinate its new

satellite and services."

        There is simply no technical basis for the Applicants‘ assertion that BGAN service can be

provided within the "same technical envelope" that Inmarsat allegedly coordinated previously

with MSV. Consolidated Joint Opposition at 3. The Inmarsat 4F2 satellite is unlike any MSS

satellite that has ever operated over North America. In addition to using certain loaned

frequencies which rightfully belong to MSV, the satellite uses wider bandwidth carriers,

transmits a higher aggregate EIRP, and uses a greater number of co—channel reuse beams than

any satellite Inmarsat has operated previously. The result is that, without prior coordination

between Inmarsat and MSV, the Inmarsat 4F2 satellite will cause harmful interference to users




 The Bureau has specifically stated that an applicant must demonstrate that an STA is necessary "due to
circumstances beyond its control." See Public Notice, DA 87—1311 (September 25, 1987).
* The Applicants disingenuously assert that the Bureau has held that an STA is justified any time an
application has been pending for longer than sixty days. Consolidated Joint Opposition at 3—4. The sixty—
day time frame the Applicants cite refers only to "routinely grantable earth station" applications. See
Public Notice, DA 87—1311 (September 25, 1987). The pending BGAN applications are far from
"routinely grantable" given the harmful interference and international coordination issues raised.
Moreover, the pending BGAN applications are the first applications to seek access to the foreign—licensed
Inmarsat 4F2 satellite in the United States. As such, these applications are more than routine earth station
applications because they present the Bureau with its first opportunity to consider the technical and policy
issues presented by the operation of Inmarsat‘s new satellite in the United States. See Amendment ofthe
Commission‘s Regulatory Policies To Allow Non—U.S.—Licensed Space Stations To Provide Domestic and
International Satellite Service in the United States, Report and Order, IB Docket No. 96—111, 12 FCC
Red 24094 (1997) ("DISCO IT"), at[ 189—190.


that rely on MSV‘s services." While Stratos claims that some federal agencies have expressed an

interest in using BGAN terminals, many of these same federal agencies currently rely on MSV‘s

services and will suffer interference if Inmarsat is permitted to provide BGAN service prior to a

coordination agreement.5 In fact, grant of the BGAN STAs will come at the expense of the

substantial numbers of federal, state, and local public safety users that currently rely on MSV‘s

critical services, including in areas that are impacted by hurricanes. MSV urges the Bureau to

protect the existing and reliable services MSV currently provides to public safety users by

denying the above—referenced STA requests, rather than sacrificing these critical services for the

sake of Inmarsat‘s business plans.

                                         Respectfully submitted,




 Bruce D. Jacobs                                      enmfer A. Manner
 David S. Konczal                                     Vlce President, Regulatory Affairs
 PILLSBURY WINTHROP                                    MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES
        SHAW PITTMAN LLP                                     SUBSIDIARY LLC
 2300 N Street, NW                                      10802 Parkridge Boulevard
 Washington, DC 20037—1128                              Reston, Virginia 20191
 (202) 663—8000                                          (703) 390—2700

Dated: April 11, 2006




* The Applicants cite cases for the unremarkable proposition that the Bureau does not require
international coordination as a prerequisite to authorization of new satellites and services. Joint
Consolidated Opposition at 5 n.20. The Bureau does so only when there is a reasonable basis to conclude
that harmful interference will not occur in the absence of international coordination. Conversely, the
Bureau will not authorize uncoordinated satellites or services when there is evidence that harmful
interference might occur, as in the case of Inmarsat 4F2. See Letter from Thomas S. Tycz, FCC, to
Joseph A. Godles, Counsel for PanAmSat, File No. SAT—STA—19980902—00057 (September 15, 1998);
Loral Orion Services, Inc., Order and Authorization, DA 99—2222, 14 FCC Red 17665, 10 (October 18,
1999); BT North America Inc., Order, DA 00—162, 15 FCC Red 15602 (February 1, 2000).
* MSV respects the privacy interests of its customers and understands its obligation to protect their
confidential information. 47 U.S.C. § 222.


                            CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

        I, Sylvia A. Davis, a secretary with the law firm of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw
Pittman LLP, hereby certify that on this 11th day of April 2006, I served a true copy of
the foregoing by first—class United States mail, postage prepaid, upon the following:
Roderick Porter*                                  Gardner Foster*
International Bureau                              International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission                 Federal Communications Commission
445 12"" Street, S.W.                             445 12"" Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                              Washington, DC 20554

James Ball*                                       Cassandra Thomas*
International Bureau                              International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission                 Federal Communications Commission
445 12"" Street, S.W.                             445 12" Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                              Washington, DC 20554

Karl Kensinger*                                   Fern Jarmulnek*
International Bureau                              International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission                 Federal Communications Commission
445 12"" Street, S.W.                             445 12"" Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                              Washington, DC 20554

Robert Nelson*                                    Howard Griboff*
International Bureau                              International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission                 Federal Communications Commission
445 12"" Street, S.W.                             445 12"" Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                              Washington, DC 20554

Andrea Kelly*                                     Scott Kotler*®
International Bureau                              International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission                 Federal Communications Commission
445 12"" Street, S.W.                             445 12"" Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20554                              Washington, DC 20554

Stephen Duall*                                    Alfred M. Mamlet
International Bureau                              Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Federal Communications Commission                 1330 Connecticut Avenue N.W.
445 12"" Street, S.W.                             Washington, D.C. 20036
Washington, DC 20554
                                                  Counsel for Stratos Communications, Inc.

Keith H. Fagan                                    Diane J. Cornell
Telenor Satellite, Inc.                           Vice President, Government Affairs
1101 Wootton Parkway                              Inmarsat, Inc.
10Floor                                           1100 Wilson Blyvd, Suite 1425
Rockville, MD 20852                               Arlington, VA 22209


John P. Janka                        Linda J. Cicco
Jeffrey A. Marks                     BT Americas Inc.
Latham & Watkins LLP                 11440 Commerce Park Drive
555 Eleventh Street, NW.             Reston, VA 20191
Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20004

William K. Coulter                   Lawrence J. Movshin
DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary US LLP   Stephen L. Goodman
1200 Nineteenth Street, NW.          Lee J. Rosen
Washington, DC 20036—2412            Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP
                                     2300 N St. NW, Suite 700
Counsel for FTMSC US, LLC            Washington, DC 20037

                                     Counsel for MVS USA, Inc.



                                     C%/ ria [ fs




                                                                 t
                                       Sylvia A. Davis

*By hand delivery



Document Created: 2019-04-19 20:18:32
Document Modified: 2019-04-19 20:18:32

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