Attachment Exhibit C

This document pretains to SES-STA-20071120-01601 for Special Temporal Authority on a Satellite Earth Station filing.

IBFS_SESSTA2007112001601_606611

      EXHIBIT D

  WAIVER REQUEST




INTELSAT NORTH AMERICA LLC
 RASCom—1 LEOP STA REQUEST
    EARTH STATION KA275


                                             Exhibit D

               PETITION FOR WAIVER OF SECTIONS 25.137 AND 25.114

        Pursuant to Section 25.137 of the Federal Communications Commission‘s
("Commission" or "FCC") rules, earth station applicants "requesting authority to operate with a
non—U.S. licensed space station to serve the United States" mustdemonstrate that effective
competitive opportunities exist and must prowde the same technical information required by
Section 25.114 for U.S.—licensed space stations.‘ Intelsat herein seeks authority to provide
launch and early orbit phase ("LEOP") services —— not commercial services —— to the United
States, and thus believes that Section 25.137 does not apply.

       To the extent the Commission determines, however, that Intelsat‘s request for authority to
provide LEOP services on a special temporary basis is a request to serve the United States with a
non U.S.—licensed satellite,Intelsat respectfully requests a waiver of Sections 25.137 and 25 114
of the Commission‘s rules." The Commission may grant a waiver for good cause shown." The
Commission typically grants a Wawcr where the partxcular facts make strict compliance
inconsistent with the public interest." In granting a waiver, the Commission may take into
account cons1derat10ns of hardship, equity, or more effective implementation of overall policy on
an individual basis." Waiver is therefore appropriate if special circumstances warrant a deviation
from the general rule, and such a deviation will serve the public interest.

       In this case, good cause exists for a waiver ofboth Section 25.137 and Section 25.114.
With respect to Section 25.114, Intelsat seeks authority only to provide LEOP services for the
RASCom—1 satellite. Intelsat has already provided with its STA request all the technical
information relating to the LEOP services that Intelsat will be performing. The information
sought by Section 25.114 is not relevant to LEOP services. Moreover, Intelsat does not have—
and would not easily be able to obtain —— such information because Intelsat is not the operator of
the RASCom—1 satellite, nor is Intelsat in contractualprivity with that operator. Rather, Intelsat
has a contract with Telespazio, which was hired by Thales, the manufacturer of the RASCom—1
satellite, to conduct LEOP services for the satellite.

       The information that Intelsat is not including is not required to determine potential
harmful interference. The Schedule S information for this satellite would pertain to the operation
of the RASCom—1 satellite at its final orbital location. However, the present application for
LBOP services involves communications prior to the satellite attaining its final location in the
geostationary orbit. In other words, during the LEOP mission, the earth station will not be

147 C.F.R. § 25.137 (emphasis added).

247 C.F.R. §§ 25.137 and 25.114.
}47 C.ER. § 1.3.
* NE. Cellular Tel. Co. v. FCC, 897 F.24 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) ("Northeast Cellular"). °

5 WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.24 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.24 at
1166.


communicating with a satellite located in the geostationary orbit. Rather, it will be transmitting
to a satellite traveling on its "transfer orbit" or "LEOP path", which starts immediately following
its separation from a launch vehicle, and ends when the satellite reachesits geostationary orbital
location. Moreover, as with any STA, Intelsat will perform the LEOP services on a non—
interference basis.

        Because it is not relevant to the service for which Intelsat seeks authorization, and
because obtaining the information would be a hardship, Intelsat seeks a waiver of all the
information required by Section 25.114. As noted above, Intelsat has provided the required
technical information that is relevant to the LEOP services for which Intelsat seeks authorization.

         Good cause also exists to waive Section 25.137. Section 25.137 is designed to ensure
that "U.S.—licensed satelhte systems have effective competmve opportunities to provide
analogous services" in other countries." Here, there is no service being provided by the satellite;
it is simply being placed in its orbital location after separating from the launch vehicle. Thus, the
purpose of the information required by Section 25.137 is not implicated here. For example,
Section 25.137(d) requires earth station applicants requesting authority to 0‘Perate with a non—
U.S.—licensed space station that is not in orbit and operating to post a bond.‘ The underlying
purpose in having to post a bond—i.e., to prevent warehousing of orbital locations by operators
seeking to serve the United States—would not be served by requiring Intelsat to post a bond in
order to provide approximately 10 days of LEOP services to the RASCom—1 satellite.

       It is Intelsat‘s understanding that RASCom—1 will operate against ITU filings held by
RASCOM, an mtergovemmental organization, and will be operated by RASCOMStar, a
Mauritius company.* It is alsoIntelsat‘s understanding that at 2.85° E.L., RASCom—1 will not
serve the United States. Thus, the purposes of Section 25.137—to ensure that U.S. satellite
operators enjoy "effective competitive opportunities" to serve foreign markets and to prevent
warehousing of orbital locations serving the United States—will not be undermined by grant of
this waiver request.                                              «

        Finally, Intelsat notes that it expects to operate with the RASCom—1 satellite using its
U.S. earth station for a period of approximately 10 days. Requiring Intelsat to obtain copious
technical and legal information from an unrelated party, where there is no risk ofharmful
interference and the operations will cease after approximately 10 days, would pose undue
hardship without servingunderlying policy objectives. Given these partxcular facts, the waiver
sought herein is plainly appropnate




§47 C.FR. § 25.137(8).
7 See 47 CFR. § 25.137(0)(4).
* Mauritius is a WTO—member country.



Document Created: 2007-11-21 12:18:47
Document Modified: 2007-11-21 12:18:47

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