**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+--------------------------------------+----+--------------------------+
| In the Matter of                     | *  | IB Docket No. 06-123     |
|                                      | *) |                          |
| The Establishment of Policies and    | ** |                          |
| Service Rules for the                |    |                          |
| Broadcasting-Satellite Service at    | *  |                          |
| the 17.3-17.7 GHz Frequency Band and | *) |                          |
| at the 17.7-17.8 GHz Frequency Band  | ** |                          |
| Internationally, and at the          |    |                          |
| 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Band for   | *  |                          |
| Fixed Satellite Services Providing   | *) |                          |
| Feeder Links to the                  | ** |                          |
| Broadcasting-Satellite Service and   |    |                          |
| for the Satellite Services Operating | *  |                          |
| Bi-directionally in the 17.3-17.8    | *) |                          |
| GHz Frequency Band                   | ** |                          |
|                                      |    |                          |
|                                      | *  |                          |
|                                      | *) |                          |
|                                      | ** |                          |
|                                      |    |                          |
|                                      | *  |                          |
|                                      | *) |                          |
|                                      | ** |                          |
|                                      |    |                          |
|                                      | *  |                          |
|                                      | *) |                          |
|                                      | ** |                          |
|                                      |    |                          |
|                                      | *  |                          |
|                                      | *) |                          |
|                                      | ** |                          |
|                                      |    |                          |
|                                      | *  |                          |
|                                      | *) |                          |
|                                      | ** |                          |
|                                      |    |                          |
|                                      | *  |                          |
|                                      | *) |                          |
|                                      | ** |                          |
+--------------------------------------+----+--------------------------+

**NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING**

**Adopted: June 21, 2006 Released: June 23, 2006**

**Comment Date:** (75 days after Federal Register publication)

**Reply Comment Date:** (105 days after Federal Register publication)

By the Commission:

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

Para. No.

I.  **INTRODUCTION** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II. **BACKGROUND**

    A.  Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

    B.  Applications to Operate in the 17/24 GHz BSS Band . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . . . . 6

# discussion 

A. Licensing and Processing Procedures

> 1\. Licensing Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
>
> 2\. Safeguards Against Speculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . 10
>
> 3\. Annual Reporting Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . 11
>
> 4\. License Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
>
> 5\. Replacement Satellites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
>
> 6\. Non-U.S.-Licensed Satellite Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . .. . . . 15

B. Public Interest and Other Statutory Obligations

1\. Public Interest Obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2\. Equal Employment Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 22

3\. Geographic Service Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 23

4\. Emergency Alert System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 26

C. Use of BSS Spectrum at 17.7-17.8 GHz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

D. Orbital Spacing and Minimum Antenna Diameter

And Performance Standards

1\. Orbital Spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

2\. Minimum Antenna Diameter and Performance Standards . . . . . . . . .
. 44

> E. Technical Requirements for Intra-Service Operations
>
> 1\. Uplink Power Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
>
> 2\. Downlink Power Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
>
> F. Reverse Band Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
>
> 1\. Ground Path Interference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57
>
> a\. Ground Path Interference into BSS Telemetry Earth Stations . 67
>
> b\. Increased Flexibility of Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . 69
>
> 2\. Space Path Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
>
> G. Other Technical Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
>
> 1\. Tracking, Telemetry and Command (TT&C) Frequencies . . . . . . . .
> . 81
>
> 2\. Polarization and Full Frequency Re-use Requirements . . . . . . .
> . . . . 87

H. Technical Requirements for Inter-Service Operations

1\. Sharing in the 24 GHz Band . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 91

> 2\. Sharing in the 17 GHz Band . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . . 94

# CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

# PROCEDURAL MATTERS 

## Ex Parte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

## Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

## Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

## Comment Filing Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

# ORDERING CLAUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Appendix A -- Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Appendix B -- Proposed Rules

Appendix C -- 15.7-17.3 GHz Band Radiolocation System Characteristics

# I. INTRODUCTION {#i.-introduction .unnumbered}

1.  With this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (*NPRM*), we propose
    processing and service rules for the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting
    Satellite Service (BSS).[^1] Under the Commission's rules and the
    International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Region 2 allocation, the
    allocation for BSS at 17/24 GHz will become effective on April
    1, 2007. Our goal in this proceeding is to promote prompt
    commencement of services in this newly allocated band. The 17/24 GHz
    BSS will introduce a new generation of broadband services to the
    public, providing a mix of local and domestic video, audio, data,
    video-on-demand and multimedia services to residential and business
    subscribers in the United States. The services will potentially
    include standard-definition and high-definition formats and, in
    certain cases, may complement existing direct broadcast satellite
    (DBS)[^2] services. This should provide U.S. consumers with access
    to a wider variety of services and suppliers. Increased competition
    may also lead to reduced prices for those services and further
    technological innovation.

2.  In this *NPRM,* we provide a brief background on the development of
    the 17/24 GHz BSS band allocation by the ITU and Commission. We also
    provide a short description of the 17/24 GHz BSS applications that
    have been filed with the Commission. Next, the *NPRM* proposes
    service rules for operations in the 17/24 GHz BSS bands, including
    requirements for licensing, service obligations, orbital spacing,
    adjacent band operations, reverse band operations, and shared band
    operations. Potential interference from primary adjacent-band
    radiolocation systems and in-band secondary radiolocation systems is
    also addressed. In addition, the *NPRM* also considers proposals for
    use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz BSS spectrum for provision of international
    services outside the United States.

# II. background {#ii.-background .unnumbered}

A.  **ALLOCATION**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
3.  Satellite operators have been offering direct-to-home (DTH) video
    service to U.S. customers since the 1980's. These services were
    first provided in the C- and Ku-bands allocated to the
    Fixed-Satellite Service.[^3] Later, operators implemented new
    systems that could use smaller receiving dishes in another portion
    of the Ku-band. This newer service is commonly referred to as the
    Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) service in the United States.[^4]
    The Commission recently recognized that DTH video service was
    growing rapidly and that additional spectrum for these types of
    systems would likely be required within the next decade.[^5]

4.  In 1992, the World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC-92) of the
    ITU[^6] adopted an additional frequency allocation for BSS in Region
    2.[^7] Specifically, WARC-92 allocated the 17.3-17.8 GHz band to the
    BSS on a primary basis in Region 2, effective April 1, 2007.[^8]
    Until this time, the 17.3-17.7 GHz band may be used in Region 2 by
    the FSS (Earth-to-space) on a primary basis and by the radiolocation
    service on a secondary basis.[^9] The 17.7-17.8 GHz band may be used
    on a co-primary basis by the FSS (space-to-Earth), the Fixed
    Service, and the Mobile Service. Pursuant to actions taken at
    WARC-92, the Mobile Service allocation in this band will revert to a
    secondary allocation on April 1, 2007.[^10] Further, after April 1,
    2007, FSS downlink services may not claim protection from and may
    not cause harmful interference to BSS operations.[^11]

5.  In the *18 GHz Report and Order,*[^12] the Commission implemented,
    in large part, the ITU Region 2 allocation for BSS
    domestically.[^13] The Commission recognized that although the
    allocation would not become effective for several years, its action
    would provide interested parties with sufficient notice and time to
    design their systems to use this spectrum in the most efficient
    manner.[^14] Specifically, the Commission adopted the following
    allocation and designation decisions, to take effect on April 1,
    2007: (1) The Commission allocated the 17.3-17.7 GHz band, on a
    primary basis, to the BSS for downlink transmissions.[^15] Although
    the ITU Region 2 allocation apportioned the 17.3-17.8 GHz band for
    BSS use, the Commission limited the allocation to 17.3-17.7 GHz to
    retain spectrum for the relocation of fixed service (FS) facilities
    which were being displaced as a result of the new BSS
    allocation.[^16] (2) The Commission allocated 300 megahertz of
    spectrum at 24.75-25.05 GHz on a primary basis for the FSS (uplink)
    and limited FSS use to BSS feeder links.[^17] It also allocated 200
    megahertz of spectrum at 25.05-25.25 GHz for co-primary use between
    the 24 GHz Fixed Service, formerly known as Digital Electronic
    Messaging Service (DEMS), and BSS feeder links.[^18] The
    Commission's objective was to accommodate new satellite services
    while providing adequate spectrum for existing FS operations.[^19]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
B.  **APPLICATIONS TO OPERATE IN THE 17/24 GHz BSS BAND**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
6.  Four entities have filed applications to provide broadcast satellite
    service in the 17/24 GHz BSS bands. The applications were filed by
    DIRECTV Enterprises, Inc. (DIRECTV),[^20] Pegasus Development DBS
    Corporation (Pegasus),[^21] EchoStar Satellite LLC (EchoStar),[^22]
    and Intelsat North America, LLC (Intelsat).[^23] Because these
    applications represent a wide range of system designs and business
    plans, we will use them as a basis for developing service rules for
    BSS systems in these bands.

# III. discussion {#iii.-discussion .unnumbered}

## LICENSING AND PROCESSING PROCEDURES

### LICENSING FRAMEWORK

7.  In the *First Space Station Licensing Reform Order*, the Commission
    adopted various procedural reforms to expedite the licensing process
    for most satellite services, with an exception for DBS and the
    Digital Audio Radio Satellite (DARS).[^24] The *Reform Order* did
    not specifically mention how the Commission would treat 17/24 GHz
    BSS. We could, therefore, conclude that 17/24 GHz BSS is analogous
    to the direct-to-home fixed-satellite service (DTH FSS), which *is*
    included in the *Reform Order\'s* purview. This is because the
    proposed 17/24 GHz BSS systems would provide services similar those
    provided by DTH FSS systems and the 17/24 GHz BSS band, like FSS
    bands, is not planned.[^25] Further, the Commission's rules specify
    that DBS is a service provided in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band.[^26] These
    considerations could lead us to conclude that we should consider
    17/24 GHz BSS under the *Space Station* *Reform* licensing
    framework. Alternatively, because it is anticipated that 17/24 GHz
    BSS systems will provide services similar to DBS, we could
    characterize 17/24 GHz BSS as DBS and include this new service in
    the limited exception to the *Space Station Reform* licensing rules
    for DBS. We request comment on the appropriate characterization for
    17/24 BSS systems. We discuss below the licensing issues that arise
    under each of the alternatives.

8.  If we ultimately decide that it is more appropriate to treat 17/24
    GHz BSS systems under the scope of the *Space Station Reform*
    proceeding, we propose to treat applications for such systems under
    the \"first-come, first-served\" licensing approach for
    geostationary-satellite orbit (GSO)-like applications. As part of
    the reforms, the Commission adopted two separate licensing
    frameworks for satellite systems -- a first-come, first-served
    approach for "GSO-like" applications and a modified processing round
    approach for "non-geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO)-like"
    applications. Under the first-come, first-served approach, the
    Commission will grant an application provided the applicant is
    qualified and the proposed system is not technically incompatible
    with a previously licensed satellite or with a satellite proposed in
    a previously-filed application.[^27] All the proposed 17/24 GHz BSS
    satellites will operate in GSO-orbits and all DTH video services, to
    date, are provided via GSO satellites.[^28] Thus, if we decide to
    treat 17/24 GHz BSS systems under the scope of the *Space Station
    Reform* proceeding, we propose to consider 17/24 GHz BSS as
    "GSO-like" under the first-come, first-served licensing queue. In
    addition, we propose that applicants for 17/24 GHz BSS satellites
    should pay fees associated with the "Space Stations (Geostationary)"
    service in Section 1.1107 of the Commission's rules.[^29] For
    applications seeking authority to operate earth stations in the
    17/24 GHz BSS band, we propose to apply the fees associated with the
    "Fixed Satellite Transmit/Receive Earth Stations" in Section
    1.1107.[^30] We seek comment on these proposals.

9.  If we decide that it is more appropriate to treat 17/24 GHz BSS
    outside the scope of the *Space Station Reform Order*, we seek
    comment on what processing framework we should use for licensing
    these satellites. We specifically seek comment on whether pursuant
    to Section 309(j) of the Communications Act[^31] a competitive
    bidding system, or auction, could be designed to assign mutually
    exclusive license applications for use of the 17/24 GHz service in
    the United States. In this regard, we note that a U.S. Court of
    Appeals decision in the *Northpoint* case[^32] found the
    Commission's July 2004 auction of DBS licenses were unauthorized in
    light of Section 647 of the ORBIT Act,[^33] which prohibits the
    Commission from using competitive bidding to assign orbital
    locations or spectrum used "for the provision of international or
    global satellite communications services."[^34] We seek comment on
    whether the Commission could conduct an auction for 17/24 GHz BSS
    licenses consistent with the *Northpoint* ruling and, if so, how
    such an auction would be implemented. We also seek comment on what,
    if any, limitations, the ITU procedures[^35] may place on a
    Commission auction. Further, if future legislative action authorizes
    the Commission to award 17/24 GHz BSS licenses via competitive
    bidding, we request comment on how we could structure an auction in
    this case. Commenters should specify whether, and the extent to
    which, such an auction would be different from one conducted without
    such legislation.

### SAFEGUARDS AGAINST SPECULATION

10. Our first-come, first-served approach for processing space station
    applications contains a package of safeguards to ensure that
    licensees remain committed and able to proceed with system
    implementation in a timely manner. Our rules require all GSO-like
    applicants awarded a license under this procedure to post a \$3
    million performance bond with the Commission within 30 days of
    license grant. They also require licensees to construct and launch
    the satellite consistent with a specified milestone schedule.[^36]
    If the licensee fails to meet an implementation milestone, the
    license becomes null and void and the bond is executed.[^37] The
    rules also limit applicants to a total of five pending applications
    and licenses for unbuilt satellites in a specific frequency band at
    any one time.[^38] If we decide to include 17/24 GHz BSS in the
    processing rules and requirements of the *Space Station Licensing
    Reform Orders*, we propose to apply these accompanying safeguards,
    including applying the standard milestone schedule in Section 25.164
    of the Commission's rules to 17/24 GHz BSS systems. We request
    comment on these proposals. Additionally, we seek comment on whether
    there are any public interest rationales for imposing a higher
    performance bond and/or whether we should impose tighter limits on
    the number of pending applications and licenses that applicants for
    17/24 GHz systems may have for unbuilt satellites at any one time.

### ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENT

11. Most space station operators are subject to annual reporting
    requirements on June 30 of each year. These reports must include,
    among other things, the status of space station construction and
    anticipated launch dates.[^39] We believe that these reports help to
    keep us apprised of whether operators are taking all necessary
    action to meet their milestones. We seek comment on whether 17/24
    GHz BSS U.S.- licensees and 17/24 GHz BSS non-U.S. operators that
    are authorized to access the United States should be required to
    submit similar annual reports, regardless of the licensing mechanism
    we ultimately adopt in this proceeding.

### LICENSE TERMS

12. Section 25.121 of the Commission's rules currently provides that
    licenses for space stations will be issued for a period of 15 years,
    except licenses for DBS space stations.[^40] DBS space stations
    licensed as broadcast facilities are issued licenses for eight year
    terms, and those DBS space stations not licensed as broadcast
    facilities have 10 year terms.[^41] These rules are governed by the
    Communications Act, which provides for a maximum licensing term of 8
    years for broadcasting facilities and allows the Commission to
    determine license terms for particular classes of stations,
    including satellite space and earth stations.[^42]

13. We propose to adopt a ten-year license term for all non-broadcast
    17/24 GHz BSS licenses. For 17/24 GHz BSS satellites that will
    operate as broadcast facilities, we propose an eight-year license
    term, as provided under Section 307(c)(1) of the Communications Act.
    We seek comment on these proposals.

### REPLACEMENT SATELLITES

14. The Commission has previously stated that, given the huge costs of
    building and operating GSO space stations, operators should have
    some assurance that they will be able to continue to serve their
    customers.[^43] Therefore, the Commission has stated that, when an
    orbit location remains available for a U.S. satellite with the
    technical characteristics of the proposed replacement satellite, it
    will generally authorize the replacement satellite at the same
    location.[^44] In 2003, the Commission adopted a streamlined
    procedure for processing replacement satellite applications.
    Unopposed replacement satellite applications with technical
    characteristics consistent with those of the satellite to be retired
    are processed under a grant-stamp procedure.[^45] Upon Commission
    review and finding that the technical characteristics of the
    replacement satellite are consistent with the satellite to be
    retired, the Commission stamps the application as "granted" and
    returns a copy to the applicant. In order to keep track of these
    actions, the Commission issues a public notice announcing such
    action.[^46] We believe that the grant-stamp procedure has proven to
    be an efficient method of processing replacement satellite
    applications, and therefore we propose to employ this procedure to
    process unopposed replacement BSS applications in the 17.3-17.7 GHz
    band. We seek comment on this proposal.

### NON-U.S.-LICENSED SATELLITE OPERATORS

15. In the 1997 *DISCO II Order*,[^47] the Commission established a
    framework under which it would consider requests to serve the U.S.
    market from non-U.S.-licensed satellites. In establishing this
    framework, the Commission implemented market-opening commitments
    that the United States made in the 1997 World Trade Organization
    (WTO) Agreement on Basic Telecommunications Services (WTO Basic
    Telecomm Agreement).[^48] The United States made its market access
    commitments for satellite services in this Agreement on a
    service-by-service basis. The commitments include FSS and
    mobile-satellite service (MSS), but specifically exclude DTH
    service, DBS service, and digital audio radio service (DARS). The
    U.S. commitments do not reference 17/24 GHz BSS. We propose to
    consider requests for U.S. access by foreign-licensed 17/24 GHz BSS
    systems on a service-specific basis consistent with the framework
    established in *DISCO II* and the United States' WTO
    commitments.[^49]

16. Thus, under the *DISCO II* framework, we will evaluate the legal and
    technical qualifications of the non-U.S.-licensed 17/24 GHz BSS
    satellite operator in each request to serve the U.S.-market.
    Further, we will assess the competitive effects of this entry. In
    cases where systems licensed by WTO-member countries seek to provide
    non-DTH FSS to U.S. customers from their 17/24 GHz BSS systems, we
    will presume that entry will further competition. In cases where
    non-WTO-member countries seek to use these systems to serve the
    United States or where WTO-member countries seek to provide services
    such as DTH over 17/24 GHz BSS systems, we will apply the effective
    competitive opportunities test (ECO-SAT) to ensure that entry will
    not distort competition in the U.S market. Under this test, the
    Commission examines whether there are effective competitive
    opportunities for U.S.-licensed satellites to serve the home market
    of the satellite seeking U.S. access. In particular, the Commission
    examines whether there are any *de jure* or *de facto* barriers to
    entry in the foreign country for the provision of analogous services
    and whether any such barriers cause competitive distortions in the
    U.S. market.

17. As in all cases where an operator seeks authority to serve the
    U.S.-market from a non-U.S. satellite, the foreign operator must
    provide the same information concerning the 17/24 GHz BSS satellite
    as U.S. applicants must provide when applying for a space station
    license.[^50] In addition, foreign entities must include an ECO-SAT
    analysis where applicable.

18. Once authorized to serve the United States, we propose to impose the
    same technical and regulatory requirements as contained in our
    existing rules and rules established as a result of this proceeding
    (*e.g*., bond requirement, geographic service requirements,
    spacecraft end-of-life disposal requirements). We seek comment on
    any reason we should deviate from this approach.

## PUBLIC INTEREST AND OTHER STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS

### PUBLIC INTEREST OBLIGATIONS

19. In 1992, Congress directed the Commission to initiate a rulemaking
    and impose public interest obligations on providers of direct
    broadcast satellite service.[^51] Section 335 of the Communications
    Act defines DBS providers as either licensees for a Ku-band
    satellite system under Part 100 of the Commission's rules or as
    distributors who control a minimum number of channels using a
    Ku-band fixed-satellite service satellite for the provision of video
    programming directly to the home and are licensed under Part 25 of
    the Commission's rules.[^52] In 1998, the Commission adopted
    rules[^53] to implement Section 335. The Commission's rules apply to
    entities licensed to operate satellites in the 12.2 to 12.7 GHz DBS
    frequency bands;[^54] entities licensed pursuant to Part 25 of the
    Commission's rules to provide FSS, via the Ku-band,[^55] that sell
    or lease transponder capacity to a video program distributor who
    offers the specified number of direct-to-home video channels to
    consumers; and non-U.S. licensed satellites providing DBS or DTH-FSS
    services in the United States.[^56] Section 25.701 of our rules
    requires these providers to meet certain political broadcast
    requirements, compliance with children's television advertising
    limits, and to set aside four percent of channel capacity for
    noncommercial, educational or informational programming.

20. Section 335 was enacted in 1992 and does not expressly identify
    satellite licensees in the 17/24 GHz band because this band was not
    then allocated domestically for BSS.[^57] To the extent that 17/24
    GHz band licensees provide DBS-like services, we propose that they
    should be subject to the public interest obligations contained in
    Section 25.701 of our rules. We seek comment on this proposal.

21. In addition, we request comment on whether licensees in the 17/24
    GHz BSS band qualify to use the compulsory copyright licenses
    granted under Sections 119 and 122 of the Copyright Act.[^58] These
    licenses permit satellite carriers, as defined in the Copyright Act,
    to provide broadcast television service to subscribers. Section 119
    defines the term "satellite carrier" as an entity that uses a
    satellite operating in the FSS or in the DBS service for
    point-to-multipoint distribution of television signals.[^59] This
    section allows satellite carriers to offer distant broadcast signals
    under certain circumstances. Section 122 defines the term "satellite
    carrier" by reference to the definition in Section 119 and provides
    a copyright license for local-into-local broadcast television
    service.[^60] We ask commenters to address whether 17/24 GHz
    licensees should be considered "satellite carriers" within the
    meaning of these statutory provisions. If so, do broadcast carriage
    requirements apply to these licensees?[^61] Should the Commission
    apply these requirements to the extent that the licensees using this
    new allocation provide services similar to other satellite carriers?
    Or, if these licensees are not within the Copyright Act definition,
    how would they obtain permission to retransmit material subject to
    copyright?

### EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES

22. Section 25.601 of the Commission's rules require an entity that uses
    an owned or leased FSS or DBS service facility for video programming
    directly to the public on a subscription basis to comply with the
    equal employment opportunity (EEO) requirements set forth in Part 76
    of the Commission's rules if such entity exercises control over the
    video programming it distributes.[^62] Notwithstanding other EEO
    provisions within these rules, a licensee or permittee of a DBS
    station operating as a broadcaster must comply with the equal
    employment opportunity requirements set forth in Part 73.[^63]
    Consequently, to the extent that 17/24 GHz BSS band licensees
    provide DBS-like services, we propose to apply Section 25.601 to
    those licensees. In addition, we propose to require 17/24 GHz BSS
    licensees to comply with any other EEO requirements that may be
    subsequently adopted or enforced by the Commission for broadcasters
    and multichannel video service providers (MVPDs). We seek comment on
    these proposals.

### GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE RULES

23. The Commission is committed to establishing policies and rules that
    will promote service to all regions in the United States,
    particularly to traditionally underserved areas, such as Alaska and
    Hawaii, and other remote and underserved areas in the United States.
    In order to achieve these goals, we propose to apply geographic
    service rules for the states of Alaska and Hawaii in the 17/24 GHz
    BSS band. Specifically, to the extent that 17/24 GHz BSS band
    licensees provide DBS-like services, we propose to adopt rules
    analogous to those in effect for DBS satellites in Section 25.148(c)
    of the Commission\'s rules.[^64] These rules require licensees to
    provide service to Alaska and Hawaii where such service is
    technically feasible from the authorized orbit location. Applicants
    who do not propose to provide service to Alaska and Hawaii must
    provide technical analyses to the Commission demonstrating that such
    service is not feasible as a technical matter or that, while
    technically feasible, such service would require so many compromises
    in satellite design and operation as to make it economically
    unreasonable. We seek comment on this proposal.

24. We anticipate that many of the satellite operators in the 17/24 GHz
    BSS bands will operate multiple satellites in their system or fleet.
    If a 17/24 GHz BSS licensee has multiple satellites, should the
    Commission consider applying geographic service rules at each orbit
    location or should we apply rules on a per licensee basis?[^65] We
    also anticipate that many 17/24 GHz BSS satellites will be used to
    provide local-into-local broadcast television stations via
    small-footprint spot beams. As discussed previously, we are seeking
    comment on whether 17/24 GHz licensees are "satellite carriers" for
    Copyright Act purposes.[^66] If so, those licensees that provide any
    local broadcast stations to subscribers residing in a particular
    market pursuant to the compulsory copyright license must also
    provide all otherwise qualified local stations to subscribers in
    that market.[^67] We seek comment on any special considerations we
    should take into account because of the different business models
    and system designs that are envisioned for 17/24 GHz BSS bands if
    licensees are subject to carry-one, carry-all copyright
    requirements. We also note that Section 210 of the Satellite Home
    Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act[^68] amends Section 338(a)
    of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,[^69] and requires
    satellite carriers with more than five million subscribers to carry
    both the analog and digital signals of television broadcast stations
    in local markets in noncontiguous states. This legislation further
    requires that satellite carriers provide these signals to
    substantially all of their subscribers in each station's local
    market. We seek comment on whether satellite operators in the 17/24
    GHz BSS bands are "satellite carriers" within the meaning of Section
    338 and if they are thus subject to this requirement.[^70]

25. Commenters should also address issues concerning international
    coordination with neighboring satellites. 17/24 GHz BSS satellites
    are subject to the ITU's first-in-time filing policy to satellite
    coordination and notification outlined in Articles 9 and 11 of the
    International Radio Regulations.[^71] The final operating parameters
    of the satellite, including its coverage area, power levels, and
    even perhaps, orbital location, are subject to the completion of
    these coordination requirements which may conclude many years after
    the Commission has licensed the satellite to operate. We seek
    comment on how the Commission should take into account the
    uncertainty imposed by this international regulatory system when
    considering various approaches to ensure service to traditionally
    underserved areas in the United States.

### EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM

26. In the Commission's August, 2004 Emergency Alert System (EAS) Notice
    of Proposed rulemaking,[^72] the Commission sought comment on
    whether the Commission should require digital providers, including
    DBS providers, to comply with the Commission's EAS Rules.[^73] In
    November, 2005, the Commission released the *EAS First Report and
    Order and Further Notice*,[^74] in which it noted that consumers are
    adopting digital technologies as replacements to analog broadcast
    and cable systems that are currently required to implement EAS, and
    as such, an increasingly large percentage of television viewers and
    radio listeners receive their programming from systems that may have
    no independent duty to provide EAS.[^75] Consequently, the
    Commission amended Part 11 of its rules to require participation in
    the EAS by digital broadcast stations, digital cable systems,
    wireless cable systems, DBS services, and DARS. In the Further
    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that accompanied the *EAS First Report
    and Order and Further Notice*, the Commission sought comment on how
    DBS providers might deliver regionally targeted alerts in a next
    generation alert and warning system.[^76]

27. In the *EAS First Report and Order and Further Notice*, the
    Commission defined DBS broadly to include the "vast majority of DTH
    services, particularly those which viewers may have expectations as
    to available warnings based on experience with broadcast television
    services."[^77] We believe the same concerns the Commission
    addressed in the *EAS First Report and Order and Further Notice* are
    presented with the introduction of services by 17/24 GHz providers.
    The customers of the new 17/24 GHz services would likely have
    similar expectations regarding these services as they would towards
    those in the 12.2 to 12.7 GHz and Ku bands, if for no other reason
    than the particular band in which DTH services are offered has no
    relevance to customers' expectations regarding their ability to
    receive warnings. Accordingly, to the extent that 17/24 GHz BSS band
    licensees provide DBS-like services, we propose to apply the EAS
    requirements to providers of those services. We seek comment on this
    proposal. Finally, we propose to incorporate herein by reference all
    comments regarding the application of EAS requirements to DBS
    providers in the EAS Notice and Further Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking. We seek further comment on this issue in this docket.

## USE OF BSS SPECTRUM AT 17.7-17.8 GHz

28. In the *18 GHz Report and Order*, the Commission stopped the
    domestic allocation to the BSS at 17.7 GHz.[^78] Although the
    international allocation for Region 2 BSS in the space-to-Earth
    direction extends from 17.3-17.8 GHz, the Commission believed that
    it was important to keep as much spectrum available to the
    terrestrial fixed services as possible, for as long as possible, in
    order to assist in relocating displaced facilities. In making this
    decision, the Commission took into account the ubiquitous nature of
    BSS services which we believed would preclude successful
    coordination with a terrestrial service that was similarly widely
    deployed, and the amount of terrestrial fixed spectrum being lost as
    a result of that proceeding.[^79]

29. The Commission now has received several applications seeking
    authority to launch and operate satellites in the 17.3-17.8 GHz
    band. DIRECTV, Pegasus, EchoStar and Intelsat all propose to operate
    their satellites in the full 500 MHz of spectrum from 17.3-17.8
    GHz.[^80] In their applications, EchoStar and Intelsat request that
    the Commission re-examine the availability of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band
    in the future.[^81] EchoStar states that if the Commission extends
    the BSS allocation to cover the full 500 MHz of spectrum allocated
    in the ITU Radio Regulations, it intends to use the 17.7-17.8 GHz
    band to provide U.S. service; but at a minimum it plans to use the
    band for international BSS service to other portions of North
    America, including Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean.[^82] Similarly,
    Pegasus is hopeful that the Commission will re-examine the
    availability of spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band and includes the
    17.7-17.8 GHz band in its application. However Pegasus states that
    it will modify its technical design should only 400 MHz of spectrum
    be available.[^83] Intelsat states that its proposed satellites have
    the capability to provide both U.S. and foreign service in the
    17.7-17.8 GHz band should the spectrum become available, and seeks
    authority to operate in the band.[^84]

30. The intent of this proceeding is to establish service rules for use
    of the 17/24 GHz BSS allocation that becomes effective on April 1,
    2007, so that applicants may have sufficient time to design their
    systems in a manner that will conform to our rules. Recognizing the
    significant technical challenges posed by the question of BSS/FS
    band-sharing at 17.7-17.8 GHz, we believe that this goal would be
    disserved by engaging in the protracted rulemaking process that
    would inevitably result. Moreover, although 17/24 GHz BSS applicants
    seek to use the 17.7-17.8 GHz band, none has provided evidence that
    terrestrial fixed service spectrum relocation requirements are less
    demanding than predicted. Nor has any applicant provided a
    convincing argument that coordination of widely deployed terrestrial
    services with ubiquitously located 17/24 GHz BSS receivers would be
    readily feasible. For these reasons, we do not find compelling
    motivation to reexamine the Commission's earlier decision with
    regard to BSS use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band in the United States.
    Therefore, we do not propose to authorize or to protect the
    reception of BSS (space-to-Earth) transmissions into the United
    States and its possessions in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band.[^85]

31. We recognize however, that U.S. satellite operators may wish to use
    the 17.7-17.8 GHz band to provide service to receiving earth
    stations located within Region 2, but outside of the United States.
    The operation of 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth stations outside of
    the United States and its possessions does not present the same
    coordination difficulties with regard to U.S.-licensed terrestrial
    fixed service stations, nor would it hinder the re-location of these
    services in the 18 GHz band.[^86] We propose to permit U.S.
    operators to use the international allocation to the BSS in the
    17.7-17.8 GHz band,[^87] but to limit use of that allocation to
    international service only, *i.e*., to receiving earth stations
    located outside of the U.S. and its possessions.[^88] We seek
    comment on this proposal.

32. We seek comment on other changes to our rules which might be
    necessary should we allow use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band to provide
    non-U.S. BSS service. We are proposing to permit transmissions in
    the 17.7-17.8 GHz band only to receiving earth stations located
    outside of the United States and its possessions. However, we
    recognize that the footprint of satellite beams serving near-by
    Region 2 countries could illuminate portions of the United States
    and that U.S. terrestrial service stations may be subject to
    interference from such space-to-Earth satellite transmissions,
    particularly at low elevation angles. Historically, the Commission
    has adopted power flux density (pfd) limits to protect terrestrial
    service antennas from interference from co-frequency space station
    transmissions.[^89] At present, neither the Commission's rules nor
    the ITU define any pfd limits for BSS systems operating in the
    17.7-17.8 GHz band. Prior to adoption of the *18 GHz Report and
    Order* in 2002,[^90] Section 25.208(c) of the Commission's rules
    imposed pfd limits for the FSS in the entire 17.7-19.7 GHz band[^91]
    and Article 21 of the ITU Radio Regulations imposes the same pfd
    limits on the FSS operating in the 17.7-19.7 GHz band in order to
    protect terrestrial stations.[^92] We propose to extend these same
    pfd limits to the BSS service (space-to-Earth) in the 17.7-17.8 GHz
    band. We seek comment on this proposal, and ask whether these pfd
    limits are sufficient to protect U.S. terrestrial operations in the
    band, or whether some other limits should be adopted. We note that
    these pfd limits were adopted to facilitate sharing between
    co-primary FS and FSS services. Recognizing that we do not intend to
    authorize receipt of (space-to-Earth) BSS transmissions in the
    United States and its possessions in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band, we ask
    whether more stringent pfd limits might be appropriate, particularly
    in areas of the U.S. located farther from the borders.

33. We also seek comment on tracking, telemetry and command (TT&C)
    operations in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band. Section 25.202(g) of our rules
    requires that TT&C functions for all U.S. domestic satellites be
    conducted at either or both edges of the allocated band(s).[^93] The
    Commission has previously recognized that TT&C functions for
    U.S.-licensed satellites are best performed at facilities located
    within the United States, and that locating such facilities in a
    foreign country could adversely affect an operator's ability to
    maintain control of its spacecraft.[^94] Accordingly, we ask how
    best to accommodate TT&C functions for 17/24 GHz BSS satellites
    seeking to use the 17.7-17.8 GHz band to provide international
    service. We ask whether there is sufficient spectrum available at
    the lower edge of the band (*i.e*., above 17.3 GHz) for TT&C
    transmissions, particularly recognizing that this same portion of
    the band will be used for reverse-band telecommand transmissions
    from DBS satellites. We seek comment on whether TT&C transmissions
    can be carried out at the band edge just below 17.7 GHz.

## ORBITAL SPACING AND MINIMUM ANTENNA DIAMETER AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

### 1. ORBITAL SPACING {#orbital-spacing .unnumbered}

34. In this proceeding, we seek to establish service rules for use of
    the 17/24 GHz BSS allocation that become effective on April 1, 2007.
    To date we have received only applications to operate GSO satellites
    in the 17/24 GHz band.[^95] Because we envision the service as a GSO
    service, we are not considering rules for NGSO satellite systems in
    this proceeding. However, we seek comment on the appropriateness of
    this approach and ask whether we should allow for the possibility of
    both GSO and NGSO 17/24 GHz BSS systems. If so, we ask commenters to
    elaborate on how such GSO/NGSO sharing might be effected, and what
    additional or different rules might be necessary to accommodate both
    types of systems in the band.

35. In developing operating rules for the 17/24 GHz BSS allocation, the
    Commission must consider whether a GSO orbital spacing policy is
    needed, and if so, what separation is appropriate. Historically, the
    Commission has adopted orbital spacing policies in other frequency
    bands as a means of accommodating the largest number of spacecraft
    in an environment that minimizes harmful interference between
    adjacent satellite operators. For example, the Commission's
    licensing policy for C-, Ku- and Ka-band GSO FSS networks is
    predicated upon two-degree orbital spacing.[^96] In contrast, in the
    12 GHz BSS (DBS) band, U.S.-licensed satellites now operate from
    allotted orbital positions that are spaced at least nine degrees
    apart.[^97] This nine-degree spacing environment was established by
    the ITU Region 2 Plan outlined in Appendices 30 and 30A of the Radio
    Regulations.[^98] DBS operators have taken advantage of this orbital
    separation to deploy small-diameter subscriber receiving
    antennas[^99] and to operate with the relatively high-transmit
    powers associated with modern multi spot-beam DBS space station
    antennas.

36. Many of the economic and technical concerns associated with 17/24
    GHz BSS operations may be either exacerbated or mitigated by the
    degree of orbital spacing. These can include the size, cost and
    design of receiving antennas, the degree of interference from and
    into adjacent satellites, which in turn affects quality and
    availability of service, the equipment cost required to mitigate
    adjacent-satellite interference, the total orbital capacity
    available for use by operators, the degree of design and operational
    flexibility afforded to satellite operators and the ability to adapt
    to future advances in technology. Carefully conceived GSO orbital
    spacing policies can permit satellite operators to design their
    systems in a manner that best balances these technical and economic
    concerns, and affords some assurance that subscriber receiving
    antennas will be protected from interference from other
    U.S.-licensed transmissions. In the FSS bands, our ability to
    license GSO satellites in an efficient and equitable manner has been
    facilitated by our two-degree orbital spacing policy. We believe
    that the establishment of a well-considered orbital spacing policy
    in the 17/24 GHz band will be equally valuable in achieving these
    goals.

37. In addition, we acknowledge the unique opportunity and advantages
    available in adopting an orbital spacing policy before the frequency
    band becomes populated with operating satellites. However, we also
    recognize that administrations other than the United States now have
    17.3-17.8 GHz (space-to-Earth) BSS filings at the ITU[^100] and it
    is reasonable to anticipate that others will file in the future. Any
    orbital spacing policy that the Commission might adopt would be
    applicable only to U.S.-licensed satellites and to foreign
    satellites seeking authority to serve the U.S. Because coordination
    between U.S. and foreign-licensed satellites is governed by
    procedures set forth in the ITU Radio Regulations, there is no
    assurance that a particular orbital spacing designed for service to
    the United States could be achieved and maintained across
    significant portions of the Western Hemisphere. Moreover, there may
    be a loss of operating flexibility associated with any orbital
    spacing policy, as well as certain economic and technical costs.
    Accordingly, we seek comment on whether an orbital spacing policy
    should be adopted for the 17/24 GHz BSS service. We ask commenters
    to consider and comment on whether some other approach might be
    preferred in order to maximize orbital capacity and minimize
    interference to operators of small-diameter antenna receivers. We
    also seek comment on how any such policy should take into account
    co-existence and coordination with foreign satellites that are not
    subject to U.S. rules, or foreign satellites seeking to provide
    service to the U.S.

38. Two 17/24 GHz BSS applicants, DIRECTV and EchoStar, propose
    satellite fleets that are located at orbital separations of 4.5
    degrees.[^101] Moreover, in its comments in response to the *18 GHz
    NPRM,* DIRECTV specifically proposed that the Commission adopt a
    separation of 4.5 degrees instead of the nine-degree spacing
    characteristic of the 12 GHz DBS band.[^102] DIRECTV asserts that
    this value would at least double the spectrum resources available in
    this band relative to the 12 GHz DBS band, and permit operators to
    locate BSS satellites not only at current U.S. DBS locations, but
    also at many additional locations.[^103] DIRECTV also argues that
    due to the characteristics of the higher frequency band, customers
    will be able to receive a quality of service to 45-cm (18-inch)
    receive antennas comparable to that now available in the 12 GHz DBS
    band. Finally, DIRECTV maintains that any orbital spacing policy we
    adopt should, when possible, be consistent with the U.S. assignments
    in the ITU Region 2 BSS Plan.[^104] A third applicant, Intelsat,
    asserts that from the point of view of mutual interference, an
    orbital spacing of four-degrees is the minimum separation required
    for adequate provision of service to receiving earth stations larger
    than 18 inches (45 cm) at these frequencies.[^105] In its
    application, Pegasus proposes to operate its fleet at orbital
    separations of nine or ten degrees, although the interference
    analysis submitted with its application is based on a 4.5-degree
    orbital separation.[^106] Finally we note that Pegasus also filed an
    application proposing to add 17/24 GHz BSS service to its Ka-band
    FSS DTH satellites that would operate at an orbital separation of
    ten degrees.[^107]

39. The Commission recognizes that there is merit in considering an
    orbital spacing policy for the 17/24 GHz BSS band that is different
    from either two or nine degrees. The current two-degree FSS spacing
    requirement, if applied to 17/24 GHz BSS systems, would necessitate
    deployment of subscriber antennas with diameters that may be
    unacceptably large for the direct-to-home market. Moreover,
    two-degree spacing would increase relative to that now afforded to
    operations subject to nine-degree spacing, without sacrificing
    quality of service to consumers. The question we must consider is
    what orbital spacing best advances the competing goals of permitting
    small-diameter receiving antennas and relatively high-power
    transmissions, while simultaneously allowing for the greatest
    occupancy of the geostationary satellite orbit.

40. Both DIRECTV and EchoStar propose to operate their satellites at
    4.5-degrees of orbital separation.[^108] We recognize that such a
    spacing scheme offers the advantages of accommodating relatively
    small-diameter subscriber antennas, while simultaneously permitting
    operators to co-locate with 12 GHz DBS satellites at up to three
    existing U.S. GSO locations from which service is possible to all 50
    states.[^109] We note, however, that other orbital separations
    (*e.g*., three-degrees) could similarly facilitate co-location with
    12 GHz DBS satellites. There are other advantages and associated
    trade-offs with other spacing schemes that we might consider. For
    example a two-degree or three-degree separation scheme would afford
    increased orbital capacity, albeit at the expense of smaller antenna
    diameters. Separation values such as six-degrees, eight-degrees, or
    even nine-degrees would permit even smaller subscriber antennas to
    be deployed, however, the choice and flexibility of sites available
    to operators would decrease accordingly. The primary differences in
    these spacing schemes would be the resulting minimum receiving
    antenna diameter possible, and the total number of orbital positions
    made available to operators. Accordingly, we seek comment on whether
    there is a spacing scheme different from the current FSS two-degrees
    or DBS nine-degrees (*i.e*., 3º, 4º, 4.5º, etc.), that would better
    maximize orbital capacity, accommodate small-diameter antennas, be
    compatible with the ITU Appendices 30 and 30A Plans, and optimize
    operator flexibility.

41. In addition, we note that U.S. licensed 12 GHz DBS satellites now
    operate at only those GSO locations allotted to the U.S. in the
    Region 2 Plan. While a few 17/24 GHz BSS applicants may be able to
    take initial advantage of co-location with these 12 GHz DBS
    satellites at select positions, subsequent applicants, or those
    seeking to offer service from other portions of the GSO arc, may not
    have this co-location option available. Moreover, there are numerous
    unresolved technical and operational difficulties associated with
    co-locating 17/24 GHz BSS and DBS satellites, particularly problems
    associated with space-path interference, which may make this
    arrangement less attractive than originally envisioned by certain
    applicants. For these reasons, we consider it likely that many
    operators may choose to co-locate 17/24 GHz BSS satellites with
    Ku-band or Ka-band FSS satellites[^110] that are also authorized to
    provide DTH services, in particular to capitalize on the possibility
    of marketing a single antenna with dual-band receivers. In such
    instances, an orbital separation that is compatible with current FSS
    satellite spacing regimen might be preferable. Accordingly, adoption
    of a 17/24 GHz BSS orbital separation that is some multiple of two
    degrees might best facilitate our goals of maximizing orbital
    capacity and operator flexibility while providing sufficient
    protection for small-diameter subscriber antennas. It is also
    possible that different spacing schemes could be adopted in
    different portions of the GSO arc. For example, recognizing the
    stated desire of many applicants to co-locate or interleave with DBS
    satellites operating between 101º W.L. and 119º W.L.,[^111] we could
    adopt a 3-degree or 4.5-degree spacing policy in this segment of the
    GSO arc, and a different spacing scheme (*e.g*., 4 degrees) in other
    portions of the arc.

42. We seek comment on what minimum orbital separation should be
    effected in the 17/24 GHz BSS band. Specifically, we ask how to best
    balance the goals of providing maximum GSO orbital capacity while
    simultaneously minimizing interference into small receiving
    antennas. We seek comment on what parameters we should give priority
    to when formulating such a policy, including what minimum-diameter
    antenna we should seek to accommodate, what service
    availability[^112] we should seek to protect, and what degree of
    orbital capacity and flexibility in system design we should seek to
    make available. We ask whether any orbital spacing scheme must
    include the ability to co-locate with U.S. Region 2 BSS Plan
    assignments, as DIRECTV suggests. In addition, we ask whether there
    are other factors that we should consider, such as the ability to
    co-exist with foreign BSS networks, the technical difficulties
    associated with reverse-band operation in the 17 GHz band,
    geographic service requirements, and frequency sharing with other
    services. We seek comment on whether a single orbital separation for
    17/24 GHz BSS satellites will best accomplish the objectives we seek
    to promote, or whether a hybrid orbital spacing scheme might better
    achieve these objectives. We also seek comment on whether an orbital
    spacing scheme should be applied to only certain portions of the GSO
    arc, or whether it should apply uniformly across the entire
    hemisphere. We ask for comments on what orbital spacing regime, if
    any, might be best adopted in the eastern or far-western regions of
    the arc, *i.e*., 61.5º W.L., 148º W.L., 157º W.L., 166º W.L., and
    175º W.L., where DBS channels are allotted to the United States in
    the ITU Region 2 BSS and Feeder Link Plans.

43. Finally, we recognize that several petitions are now before the
    Commission asking us to consider various proposals to permit
    operation of 12 GHz DBS satellites at orbital separations less than
    nine degrees.[^113] The Commission has reached no conclusions with
    regard to these petitions, nor has it limited the proceeding to
    consideration of a single possible spacing scheme (*e.g.*, 4.5
    degrees). Although it is not the purpose of this document to
    influence that proceeding, we recognize that any decision the
    Commission ultimately reaches with regard to less than nine-degree
    spacing for 12 GHz DBS satellites may have bearing upon the
    preferred orbital spacing for the 17 GHz BSS band. Accordingly,
    parties should consider all possible outcomes when formulating their
    comments in this proceeding. In addition, we invite comment on how
    the possibility of reduced orbital spacing in the 12 GHz DBS band
    might influence the choice of orbital spacing in the 17/24 GHz BSS
    band. We also invite commenters to address what measures the
    Commission should consider when formulating its decision on 17/24
    GHz BSS spacing in the broader context of accommodating the current
    FSS and DBS orbital spacing schemes, as well as the possibility of
    reduced orbital spacing in the 12 GHz DBS band.

**2. MINIMUM ANTENNA DIAMETER AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS**

44. Because of the inverse relationship between antenna diameter and
    antenna off-axis discrimination performance, the orbital separation
    scheme will largely determine the minimum antenna diameter that can
    be accommodated in the 17/24 GHz BSS band. As the receiving antenna
    diameter decreases, greater orbital separation is required to
    compensate for the increase in off-axis interference received from
    neighboring satellites. However, because antenna off-axis
    discrimination performance for a given size antenna improves at
    shorter received-signal wavelengths, comparably-sized 17/24 GHz
    BSS-band receive-antennas may be able to deliver a quality of
    service comparable to 12 GHz DBS-band systems, while operating with
    satellites at smaller orbital separations.

45. Figure 1 shows the antenna off-axis discrimination as a function of
    off-axis angle for three different diameters of antenna.[^114] The
    antenna patterns are based on ITU-R Recommendation BO.1213-1.[^115]
    Assuming that orbital separation must be large enough to place
    adjacent satellites outside the receiving antenna's main beam, and
    that minimum off-axis rejection values on the order of 20 dB[^116]
    are desired, some observations can be made regarding the
    relationship between antenna diameter and orbital spacing. For
    example, based upon this figure, antenna diameters of 0.45 m may be
    accommodated with orbital spacing of about four degrees. A spacing
    of three degrees or less would demand antennas of 0.6 meters in
    diameter or greater, and two-degree spacing would require receiving
    antennas on the order of 1 meter -- a size that is likely to be
    unacceptable to a large percentage of U.S. consumers.

![](media/image1.wmf){width="7.579861111111111in"
height="5.471527777777778in"}

**Figure 1**.

46. At present, four parties have filed applications with the Commission
    to operate BSS satellites in the 17/24 GHz bands.[^117] All of these
    applicants propose to operate direct-to-home (DTH) satellite
    services with receiving antennas as small as 45 cm in diameter. In
    the DBS band, consumers commonly purchase receive antennas on the
    order of 45 cm in diameter, and we recognize the desire to continue
    marketing this size dish to U.S. customers. However, we ask whether
    45 cm is an appropriate minimum size antenna to accommodate when
    considering a GSO orbital spacing policy. Many customers have shown
    a willingness to purchase larger dishes, particularly those
    receiving enhanced programming packages requiring multi-feed
    antennas.[^118] In other regions of the world, the 60-cm antenna is
    the accepted standard, and in some portions of the U.S. where 45-cm
    antennas are infeasible, consumers have become accustomed to larger
    diameter dishes.[^119] In addition, we note that the increased gain
    achieved at larger diameters is helpful in mitigating certain
    technical difficulties, such as those due to rain-fade effects. We
    ask what minimum earth station size the Commission should seek to
    accommodate when formulating its rules. Is 45 cm reasonable, or
    should some other size be considered, especially in light of the
    increased orbital capacity that could be afforded with closer
    satellite spacing?

47. Historically, the Commission has opted not to regulate explicitly
    the diameter or other technical characteristics of receive-only
    antennas.[^120] Rather, the Commission has typically chosen to
    establish limits on other system characteristics such as power flux
    density (pfd) levels or orbital spacing and has left the choice of
    receive-antenna characteristics to the operator with the
    understanding that receiver size has a bearing on availability,
    quality of service and the ability to market the service to
    consumers; however, the operator must then accept any resulting
    interference from other systems that are operating within the
    permitted levels. We believe that this approach has afforded
    operators maximum technical flexibility, especially considering that
    earth station receive antenna size is a very important factor to
    potential consumers of DTH service. However, the Commission also
    seeks to ensure that U.S.-licensed BSS systems receive sufficient
    interference protection and that subscribers\' receive antennas will
    work effectively in current and future radio frequency interference
    environments. In particular, the receive earth station antenna
    off-axis discrimination performance will affect the amount of
    interference into BSS receivers from other systems. We note that, in
    implementing its two-degree spacing policy with respect to the FSS,
    the Commission has adopted certain earth station antenna performance
    requirements.[^121] Accordingly, we request comment on whether the
    Commission should afford interference protection to 17/24 GHz BSS
    systems only to the extent that they meet certain receive antenna
    performance standards. Specifically, we request comment on what type
    of regulation might be appropriate, such as adopting side-lobe
    suppression or minimum gain requirements, or some other parameter.

## TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR INTRA-SERVICE OPERATIONS

**1. UPLINK POWER LEVELS**

48. In order to implement the two-degree spacing policy for C- and
    Ku-band FSS satellites, the Commission established rules that define
    uplink power density limits and antenna performance standards.[^122]
    In combination, these power density limits and antenna performance
    standards ensure that conforming FSS satellite systems will not emit
    power at off-axis angles at levels high enough to cause unacceptable
    interference to adjacent co-frequency satellites spaced at
    two-degree intervals. Similarly, in the Ka-band the Commission
    adopted a two-degree blanket licensing requirement that included
    uplink off-axis equivalent isotropically radiated power (e.i.r.p.)
    density limits and a single-entry power flux density (pfd) limit in
    the downlink.[^123] Successful implementation of any orbital spacing
    regime for the 17/24 GHz BSS service will likely require that the
    Commission develop analogous criteria. However, we recognize that in
    the 17/24 GHz BSS band the choice of orbital spacing will be
    determined in large measure by the operator's desire to serve its
    customers with a certain size of receiving antenna, and that 17/24
    GHz BSS satellites may operate in an orbital spacing environment
    with greater than two-degrees of separation. Moreover, we recognize
    that feeder link earth stations typically operate with large
    diameter antennas that exhibit good off-axis rejection properties.
    For these reasons, the problem of off-axis interference into
    adjacent satellites may not be as significant in the 17/24 GHz band
    as it is in the FSS bands. Accordingly, we seek comment on our
    assumption regarding the need to establish off-axis uplink power
    limits for this service. In addition, the Commission's rules provide
    for routine licensing of FSS earth stations in situations where (in
    combination with the antenna performance standards of § 25.209)
    specific minimum equivalent antenna diameters and maximum uplink
    power limits are met.[^124] We seek comment on whether analogous
    criteria might be developed for expedited licensing of feeder link
    earth stations in the 24 GHz band, and if so, what equivalent
    antenna diameters and power limits, or other technical
    characteristics might be appropriate.

49. The antenna performance standards of Section 25.209 apply to any
    antenna transmitting from an earth station operating with a
    geostationary satellite in the FSS.[^125] Because by definition BSS
    feeder-links operate in the FSS, these antenna standards are
    applicable to the 17/24 GHz BSS feeder-link earth stations. At
    present there are no uplink power or power-density requirements
    established for Earth-to-space transmissions in the 24 GHz FSS band.
    A review of the current 17/24 GHz BSS applications reveals that
    applicants propose to operate with clear-sky[^126] uplink e.i.r.p
    levels that range between 76.1 dBW and 79.4 dBW[^127]; associated
    e.i.r.p. density levels ranging between 2.3 dBW/Hz and 5.6
    dBW/Hz.[^128] We propose to accommodate the highest clear-sky power
    density levels planned thus far, *i.e*., 5.6 dBW/Hz. Applying the
    current GSO FSS antenna performance standard of Section 25.209, the
    resulting e.i.r.p density values at various off-axis angles are
    shown in Table 1 below.[^129]

**E.I.R.P. Density as Function of Off-Axis Angle**

  --------------------------------- -------------------------------------
  **Off-axis angle (degrees)**      **e.i.r.p density (dBW/Hz)**

  2                                 -38.0

  3                                 -42.4

  4                                 -45.5

  4.5                               -46.8

  6                                 -50.0

  8                                 -51.5

  9                                 -51.5
  --------------------------------- -------------------------------------

**Table 1**

50. We recognize that absent a clearly defined orbital separation, the
    interference contribution resulting from uplink transmissions to
    adjacent satellites cannot be fully determined. However, we seek
    comment on whether the proposed clear-sky earth station antenna
    off-axis e.i.r.p. density values might be appropriate down to some
    minimum orbital separation value, and whether they would provide
    sufficient protection to adjacent GSO BSS satellites. We have chosen
    to propose accommodating the highest power level proposed by an
    applicant, but we seek comment on whether some mid-range or other
    value might be preferable, or whether a higher level might be better
    to allow for future higher-power systems. We seek further comment on
    whether there are other factors that should be considered when
    determining an off-axis e.i.r.p. density value, such as the
    potential for interference to/from other services sharing the band,
    including 24 GHz FS systems, or the radiolocation service. We also
    ask what form an uplink power density rule should take, whether it
    is most appropriate to specify some input power or power density
    level in combination with the antenna performance requirements of
    Section 25.209, or to specify a composite curve of off-axis e.i.r.p.
    density levels as is done for blanket licensing of Ka-band GSO FSS
    earth stations.[^130]

51. We anticipate that some future systems may wish to operate at higher
    e.i.r.p. density values than those proposed at this time. Our
    current FSS service rules provide a mechanism for licensing such
    non-conforming systems.[^131] These rules place the burden on the
    applicant to provide a technical showing to the Commission, and to
    coordinate its non-conforming operations with adjacent operators. We
    propose to adopt a similar approach to accommodate satellite systems
    in the 17/24 GHz BSS band wishing to uplink with higher power
    levels. We seek comment on this issue and ask whether this approach
    is appropriate or whether different rules should be adopted.
    Non-conforming FSS operators are required to coordinate with
    adjacent satellites at 2º, 4º and 6º away.[^132] Recognizing that
    17/24 GHz BSS satellites may not be operating in a two-degree
    spacing environment, we seek comment on the angular distance over
    which coordination should be required.

52. The uplink off-axis e.i.r.p. density limits discussed above are for
    clear-sky operations only. GSO satellites operating in the 24 GHz
    band can suffer significant signal attenuation in the presence of
    precipitation and may likely need to transmit at higher powers
    during such weather conditions in order to overcome the effects of
    rain fade. Applicants have indicated a need to employ uplink
    adaptive power control to provide transmit power levels sufficient
    to meet the desired link performance during unfavorable weather
    events, while simultaneously ensuring that threshold power levels
    are not excessive at other times.[^133] In the *28 GHz First Report
    and Order*, we recognized that uplink power control limits would
    facilitate operations in the 27.5-30.0 GHz band, and we amended
    Section 25.204 of our rules to require that all Ka-band FSS earth
    stations employ adaptive uplink power control or other methods of
    fade compensation.[^134] In the *18 GHz Report and Order,* we
    adopted rules for Ka-band FSS earth stations employing uplink power
    control which limit transmissions during conditions of uplink fading
    to 20 dB above those permitted under clear-sky conditions.[^135] We
    seek comment on whether it is necessary to adopt a rule requiring
    17/24 GHz BSS feeder link earth stations to employ uplink power
    control, similar to the FSS requirement of Section 25.204. We also
    seek comment on what values or conditions might be applied to the
    use of 17/24 GHz BSS uplink adaptive power control, including: a
    minimum signal attenuation required before uplink transmit power may
    be increased; an upper limit on permissible transmit power increase;
    an accuracy requirement over the range of path attenuations; or
    other possible parameters such as the control-loop response time or
    limits on system overshoot.[^136]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  **DOWNLINK POWER LIMITS**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
53. The downlink power levels transmitted by adjacent co-frequency
    satellites, in combination with the sidelobe performance
    characteristics of the receiving earth station antenna, will
    determine the carrier-to-interference ratio that an operator
    experiences at the receive antenna as a result of adjacent satellite
    interference. At present, neither the Commission nor the ITU have
    established power flux density requirements or other downlink power
    limits for BSS systems operating in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band. Article
    21 of the ITU Radio Regulations does define pfd limits for the FSS
    in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band in its Table 21-4.[^137]

54. In other frequency bands, the Commission has frequently adopted
    downlink power limits for space stations transmissions in order to
    facilitate both inter-service and intra-service sharing. For
    example, our rules define power flux density limits in the 4/6 GHz
    and 20/30 GHz FSS bands in Section 25.208,[^138] and impose
    additional pfd requirements for blanket licensing of Ka-band earth
    stations.[^139] However, in other bands, no downlink power limits
    exist.[^140] We note that one advantage of imposing a downlink power
    limit is to establish a relatively homogeneous transmitting
    environment, and to ensure that established receiving antennas are
    not subject to unforeseen levels of adjacent satellite interference,
    particularly as newer generation satellites are brought into
    service. Moreover, application of downlink power limits may also
    influence the ability of 17/24 GHz BSS systems to operate in the
    vicinity of co-frequency receiving DBS satellites. However, adopting
    such limits can to some extent restrict the ability of future
    satellites to increase their power levels in response to
    improvements in technology, or to compensate for interference from
    other sources (*e.g*., foreign satellites or adjacent-band radars).

55. A review of the 17/24 GHz BSS filings submitted to the Commission,
    indicates that applicants plan to operate digital systems with
    downlink maximum e.i.r.p. levels that range between 58.6 dBW and
    64.7 dBW. It appears that worst case pfd levels are less than -117
    dBW/MHz/m^2^ for all systems, with the exception of certain Intelsat
    spot beams that may have maximum saturated pfd levels of -115
    dBW/MHz/m^2^ at the Earth's surface.[^141] Accordingly, we seek
    comment on whether the Commission should adopt pfd or other downlink
    power level values in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band. We ask what level of
    downlink power would be appropriate, and in particular whether the
    ITU's FSS pfd limits,[^142] with an upper limit of -115
    dBW/MHz/m^2^, should be applied in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band.[^143] We
    ask whether a different, perhaps higher power level is preferable in
    order to provide for future generation satellites, or to compensate
    for anticipated interference sources. The present operating downlink
    transmitted power levels proposed by applicants assume an orbital
    spacing environment of either 4-degrees or 4.5-degrees. We seek
    comment on what pfd limit would be preferable if the Commission were
    to establish an orbital spacing regime different from either
    4-degrees or 4.5-degrees.

## REVERSE BAND OPERATIONS

56. When the Region 2 BSS allocation at 17.3-17.8 GHz becomes effective
    in 2007, it will be shared with the current 17.3-17.8 GHz DBS
    feeder-link allocation in the Earth-to-space direction.[^144] This
    operating scenario, in which the same frequency band is used for
    both Earth-to-space and space-to-Earth transmissions, is known as
    "reverse band" and results in additional interference paths which
    are different from those found in a conventional GSO satellite
    sharing situation. In the typical GSO satellite sharing scenario,
    interference paths occur between the earth stations of one system
    and the satellites of another, and vice versa. In such cases,
    co-frequency sharing is facilitated primarily through antenna
    off-axis discrimination at each end of the interference path, in
    combination with limits on spatial proximity (orbital separation)
    and transmission power. The reverse-band sharing scenario is
    different in that two new and distinct interference paths occur: (1)
    between the earth stations of different systems; and (2) between the
    space stations of different systems. In effect, reverse-band
    operations create two additional interference paths: an earth
    station-into-earth station path (ground path), and a space
    station-into-space station path (space path).

### GROUND PATH INTERFERENCE

57. Ground path interference[^145] will occur when the signals from
    transmitting DBS feeder-link earth stations operating in the
    17.3-17.7 GHz band are detected at the receiving earth stations of
    17/24 GHz BSS subscribers. This interference situation will be the
    most severe in areas surrounding the DBS feeder uplink stations. In
    addition, 17/24 GHz BSS operators who choose to co-locate their TT&C
    earth stations with DBS TT&C earth stations systems may experience
    difficulty in receiving the downlinked telemetry signal from the
    17/24 GHz BSS spacecraft.

58. At present there are a relatively small number of DBS feeder-link
    earth stations. If the current situation were to remain unchanged,
    the ground path interference problem into 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber
    antennas might not pose a significant problem. However, we recognize
    that local programming is being uplinked from a growing number of
    metropolitan areas.[^146] We must anticipate that DBS feeder-link
    earth stations that transmit in the Earth-to-space direction may
    become increasingly common in populated areas, thereby escalating
    the potential for interference into 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber
    antennas. In addition, future entrants such as short-spaced DBS
    systems, or non-U.S. DBS satellites serving the U.S. market, could
    result in the deployment of an even greater number of feeder-link
    earth stations at multiple sites within the United States. The
    interference problem may be further exacerbated by the proliferation
    of small-diameter 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber receiving antennas with
    relatively poor off-axis discrimination properties.

59. There is no procedure established in the Commission's rules
    regarding coordination of co-frequency, DBS feeder-link satellite
    earth stations with BSS subscriber terminals. Instead, we note that
    Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio Regulations describes a procedure for
    determining the coordination area for an earth station transmitting
    in a frequency band allocated to space services in both
    Earth-to-space and space-to-Earth directions.[^147] In other sharing
    situations, the Commission has successfully relied upon the ITU
    Appendix 7 coordination methodologies to effect coordination between
    the co-frequency earth stations of different services. Specifically,
    Section 25.203 in combination with Section 25.251 of our rules
    define a mechanism for coordination between terrestrial microwave
    stations and satellite earth stations that share frequency bands
    with equal rights.[^148] This mechanism is based upon the procedures
    set forth in Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio Regulations. Similarly, in
    the case of coordination between co-frequency reverse-band DBS
    feeder-link and BSS receiving earth stations operating in the
    17.3-17.7 GHz band, we propose to make use of the coordination
    methodology defined in Annex 3 of Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio
    Regulations. We seek comment on this proposal and ask whether this
    coordination methodology may be appropriately applied in this
    situation.

60. In summary, the ITU methodologies described in Section 3 of Appendix
    7 define techniques for calculating a coordination area around a
    transmitting earth station for two propagation modes: (1)
    propagation phenomena in clear air; and (2) hydrometeor (*i.e*.,
    rain) scatter. These two methodologies are elaborated in Annex 5
    (Sections 2 and 3) and make use of additional parameters defined in
    Table 9b to Appendix 7, which include the modulation type of the
    receiving earth station, various receiving earth station
    interference parameters and criteria, receiving earth station
    physical characteristics, reference bandwidth and permissible
    interference power levels. Unfortunately, an examination of Table
    9b[^149] reveals that in the case of a transmitting earth station in
    the FSS that operates in reverse-band mode relative to a receiving
    station in the BSS at 17.3-17.8 GHz, the table lacks all of the
    requisite data. Accordingly, we seek comment on the appropriate
    values to use for the coordination parameters in Table 9b as
    follows:

**Table 9b**

**Parameters required for the determination of coordination distance for
a transmitting earth station in bands shared bidirectionally with
receiving earth stations**

+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| **Param   |         | *    | **Description**                        |
| eter(s)** |         | *Val |                                        |
|           |         | ue** |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Orbit     |         | GSO  | Orbit in which the space service in    |
|           |         |      | which receiving earth station operates |
|           |         |      | (GSO or NGSO)                          |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| M         |         |      | Analog or digital                      |
| odulation |         |      |                                        |
| at        |         |      |                                        |
| receiving |         |      |                                        |
| earth     |         |      |                                        |
| station   |         |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Receiving | *p~0~   |      | Percentage of the time during which    |
| earth     | (%)*    |      | interference from all sources may      |
| station   |         |      | exceed the threshold value             |
| int       |         |      |                                        |
| erference |         |      |                                        |
| p         |         |      |                                        |
| arameters |         |      |                                        |
| and       |         |      |                                        |
| criteria  |         |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *n*     |      | Number of equivalent, equal level,     |
|           |         |      | equal probability entries of           |
|           |         |      | interference, assumed to be            |
|           |         |      | uncorrelated for small percentages of  |
|           |         |      | the time                               |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *p(%)*  |      | Percentage of the time during which    |
|           |         |      | the interference from one source may   |
|           |         |      | exceed the permissible interference    |
|           |         |      | power value; since the entries of      |
|           |         |      | interference are not likely to occur   |
|           |         |      | simultaneously, *p=p~0~/n*             |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *N~L~   |      | Link noise contribution                |
|           | (dB)*   |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *M~s~   |      | Link performance margin                |
|           | (dB)*   |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *W      |      | A thermal noise equivalence factor for |
|           | (dB)*   |      | interfering emissions in the reference |
|           |         |      | bandwidth; it is positive when the     |
|           |         |      | interfering emissions would cause more |
|           |         |      | degradation than thermal noise         |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Receiving | *G~m~   |      | On-axis gain of the receive earth      |
| earth     | (dBi)*  |      | station antenna                        |
| station   | [^150]  |      |                                        |
| p         |         |      |                                        |
| arameters |         |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *G~r~*  |      | Horizon antenna gain for the receive   |
|           |         |      | earth station                          |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *       |      | Minimum elevation angle of operation   |
|           | ε~min~* |      | in degrees                             |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *T~e~   | 30   | The thermal noise temperature of the   |
|           | (K)*    | 0K[^ | receiving system at the terminal of    |
|           |         | 151] | the receiving antenna                  |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Reference | *B      |      | Reference bandwidth (Hz), *i.e.,* the  |
| Bandwidth | (Hz)*   |      | bandwidth in the receiving station     |
|           |         |      | that is subject to the interference    |
|           |         |      | and over which the power of the        |
|           |         |      | interfering emission can be averaged   |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Pe        | *       |      | Permissible interference power of the  |
| rmissible | P~r~(p) |      | interfering emission (dBW) in the      |
| int       | (dBW)   |      | reference bandwidth to be exceeded no  |
| erference | in B*   |      | more than p% of the time at the        |
| power     |         |      | receiving antenna terminal of a        |
|           |         |      | station subject to interference, from  |
|           |         |      | a single source of interference, using |
|           |         |      | the general formula:                   |
|           |         |      |                                        |
|           |         |      | *P~r~(p) = 10 log (k T~e~ B) + N~L~ +  |
|           |         |      | 10 log (10 ^Ms/10^ -1) -- W*           |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+

61. We also seek comment on the types of technical information DBS
    feeder-link earth station operators should make available to 17/24
    GHz BSS operators for the purposes of earth station coordination. In
    the case of satellite and terrestrial earth station coordination,
    Commission rules now require that all transmitting satellite earth
    station applicants submit an interference analysis as required by
    Section 25.203 of the Commission's rules.[^152] Section 25.203(c)(2)
    requires that the earth station applicant provide each terrestrial
    station licensee with specific technical details. Similarly, we
    propose that DBS feeder-link earth station applicants provide the
    following information to licensees and prior-filed applicants in the
    17/24 GHz broadcasting-satellite service:

    \(i\) The geographical coordinates of the proposed earth station
    antenna(s);

    \(ii\) Proposed operating frequency band(s) and emission(s);

    \(iii\) Antenna center height above ground and ground elevation
    above mean sea level;

    \(iv\) Antenna gain pattern(s) in the plane of the main beam;

    \(v\) Longitude range of geostationary satellite orbit (GSO)
    satellites at which an antenna may be pointed, for proposed earth
    station antenna(s) accessing GSO satellites;

    \(vi\) Horizon elevation plot;

    \(vii\) Antenna horizon gain plot(s) determined in accordance with
    the procedure in Section 2.1 of Annex 5 to Appendix 7 of the ITU
    Radio Regulations;

    \(viii\) Minimum elevation angle;

    \(ix\) Maximum equivalent isotropically radiated power (e.i.r.p.)
    density in the main beam in any \[TBD\] Hz[^153] band;

    \(x\) Maximum available RF transmit power density in any \[TBD\]
    Hz[^154] band at the input terminals of the antenna(s);

    \(xi\) Maximum permissible RF interference power level as determined
    in accordance with Annex 7 to Appendix 7 for all applicable
    percentages of time; and

    \(xii\) A plot of the coordination distance contour(s) and rain
    scatter coordination distance contour(s) as determined by Table 2 of
    Section 3 to Appendix 7.

    We ask what reference bandwidths would be appropriate in items (ix)
    and (x). In addition seek comment on whether these parameters listed
    here or other technical information would be appropriate to provide
    in order to facilitate coordination between DBS feeder-link earth
    stations and receiving 17/24 GHz BSS antennas.

62. In addition, we envision that both the DBS feeder links and 17/24
    GHz BSS services will be deploying new earth stations over time, so
    that new stations of one service will continually be established
    among existing stations from the other. The Commission wants to
    ensure that U.S.-licensed 17/24 GHz BSS systems receive sufficient
    interference protection and that subscribers\' receive antennas will
    work effectively in both current and future radio frequency
    interference environments. However, we are also committed to
    preserving the prospect for growth and expansion of the DBS service,
    and to providing for future DBS market entrants. Therefore, we seek
    to adopt service rules that achieve an appropriate balance between
    accommodating both present and future DBS feeder-link operations and
    ensuring protection of 17/24 GHz BBS receiving systems from
    interference.

63. In the *MVDDS Second R&O*,[^155] the Commission addressed a
    frequency sharing situation that presented ground path interference
    issues and temporal build-out of interspersed earth stations,
    similar to those we envision resulting from reverse band satellite
    operations in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band. In the 12 GHz band, two
    co-primary, co-frequency services sought to operate in a sharing
    scenario where ubiquitous and ongoing deployment of stations from
    both services was anticipated. The Commission recognized that the
    incumbent DBS receive-only antennas were subject to interference
    from the introduction of transmitting MVDDS stations. In the *MVDDS
    Second R&O,* the Commission concluded that careful MVDDS system
    design and the use of various mitigation techniques could achieve
    successful sharing of the 12 GHz frequency band by both services. To
    accomplish this goal, the Commission adopted *inter alia* a
    coordination procedure that requires that an MVDDS operator entering
    a market where DBS receivers are already established must satisfy
    certain requirements in order to protect these customers.[^156] In
    addition, a mechanism is established for information exchange
    between the operators of both services, in particular to take into
    account recently acquired DBS customers.[^157] Once the time period
    prescribed for this information exchange has passed, any new DBS
    receive antennas must be installed in a manner to avoid interference
    from the MVDDS signal. These later-installed DBS earth stations have
    no right of complaint against the notified MVDDS transmitting
    antenna.

64. We seek comment on whether we should adopt a similar approach to
    sharing between DBS feeder-link earth stations and 17/24 GHz BSS
    receiving earth stations. Under such an approach, DBS operators
    planning new feeder-link earth stations would be required to provide
    the technical information discussed above to 17/24 GHz BSS
    licensees, at least 90 days prior to commencing operations of the
    new DBS feeder-link earth station. Within 30 days after receipt of
    the new DBS feeder-link earth station technical information, the
    17/24 GHz BSS licensees would be required to provide the DBS
    feeder-link earth station operator with a list of
    potentially-affected 17/24 GHz BSS customer locations within the
    coordination area described above. Before beginning operations, the
    new DBS feeder-link earth station operator would be required to take
    into account these 17/24 GHz BSS customers and to ensure that its
    operations do not cause them harmful interference.[^158] Once the
    30-day time period prescribed for this information exchange has
    passed, any new 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth stations would be
    required to accept or mitigate any interference from the DBS
    feeder-link transmissions. These later-installed 17/24 GHz BSS
    receiving earth stations would have no right of complaint against
    the new DBS feeder-link transmitting earth station. We seek comment
    on this proposal. We recognize that there may be reluctance on the
    part of 17/24 GHz BSS operators to reveal their customer data,
    particularly to another DBS or BSS operator, and we seek comment on
    alternate approaches to coordinating DBS feeder-link and 17/24 GHz
    BSS earth station operations. We also ask whether some different
    approach would better facilitate sharing in the 17/24 GHz band.

65. In the *MVDDS Second R&O*, the Commission took additional steps to
    ensure successful sharing in the 12 GHz band and adopted various
    equivalent power flux density (epfd) and power density limits for
    MVDDS systems, as well as rules governing their application.[^159]
    The Commission's existing rules do not specify transmitting epfd or
    of-axis e.i.r.p. density limits for DBS feeder-link earth stations,
    except in the band 17.7-17.8 GHz, which is shared co-equally with
    terrestrial services.[^160] Interference into 17/24 GHz BSS
    receivers could be reduced if the e.i.r.p. levels emitted towards
    the horizon by DBS feeder link antennas were minimized. Limiting DBS
    feeder link off-axis transmit power levels may facilitate
    co-existence of 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber earth stations and DBS
    feeder link earth stations, while decreasing the coordination burden
    on both services. Accordingly, we ask whether off-axis e.i.r.p.
    density or other transmitting power limits should be applied to DBS
    feeder-link bands in order to protect 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth
    stations from interference.

66. Section 25.204(b) of the Commission's rules places limits on earth
    station e.i.r.p. in bands above 15 GHz shared coequally with
    terrestrial radiocommunication services, in order to facilitate
    sharing with these services.[^161] This rule was not intended to
    facilitate sharing among DBS and BSS earth stations, and it is
    applicable to DBS feeder link earth stations only in the band
    segment 17.7-17.8 GHz that is shared with terrestrial services. We
    seek comment on whether the Commission should extend this
    requirement to DBS feeder link earth stations operating in the
    entire 17.3-17.8 GHz band or adopt some other, more stringent
    off-axis e.i.r.p. requirement. We also seek comment on whether a
    different approach, such as requiring DBS feeder link antenna
    shielding, would be more appropriate. Similarly, we request comment
    on whether the Commission should afford interference protection to
    17/24 GHz BSS systems only to the extent that they meet certain
    receive antenna performance standards. Specifically, we request
    comment on what type of regulation, if any, would be appropriate,
    such as adopting antenna off-axis discrimination requirements or
    minimum gain requirements. We seek comment on whether the e.i.r.p
    density limits of Section 25.204 (b)-(e) would be sufficient to
    protect 17/24 GHz BSS earth stations if applied to the 17.3-17.7 GHz
    band, or whether some other limits would be more appropriate. We
    seek comment on whether it is necessary to adopt another approach,
    such as stipulating epfd limits, in order to facilitate coordination
    between DBS feeder-link earth stations and 17/24 GHz subscriber
    receivers, and if so, which methodology should be used in
    determining such limits. We also seek comment on whether we should
    impose any additional requirements on either DBS feeder-link earth
    station operators or on 17/24 GHz BSS operators in order to mitigate
    interference into 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber receiving antennas.

#### GROUND PATH INTERFERENCE INTO BSS TELEMETRY EARTH STATIONS

67. Ground path interference may also occur between transmitting DBS
    feeder-links and the receiving TT&C stations of 17/24 GHz BSS
    systems that choose to co-locate their TT&C earth stations at
    existing DBS feeder-link earth station sites. Choice of facility
    site is a system design parameter that is under the control of the
    operator, and does not necessarily require a Commission action to
    remedy. Moreover, given the large financial investment required to
    launch and operate a satellite, we believe that BSS operators have
    strong incentive to make correct technical decisions with regard to
    their choice of TT&C facility sites and equipment design. However,
    we also recognize that interference into TT&C systems can present a
    serious problem due to the potential for loss of satellite control.
    Accordingly, we seek comment on whether the Commission should adopt
    requirements to guard against such interference scenarios.

68. We propose to require earth station applicants planning to co-locate
    their 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C stations with DBS feeder-links earth
    stations to make a technical showing to the Commission demonstrating
    their ability to maintain sufficient margin in their telemetry links
    in the presence of the interfering DBS signal. Additionally, we
    propose to require DBS feeder link earth station applicants planning
    to co-locate with their 17/24 GHz BSS telemetry earth stations to
    make a similar technical showing to the Commission. We seek comment
    on this proposal and ask what parameters would be appropriate in
    such a showing. We ask whether we should preclude co-location of
    17/24 GHz BSS TT&C and DBS feeder-link facilities altogether, or
    whether perhaps we should require some minimum separation between
    such facilities. Finally, we seek comment on other interference
    measures we might consider such as mandating a level of equipment
    performance (*e.g*., filter rejection).

#### INCREASED FLEXIBILITY OF SPECTRUM

69. Footnote NG 167 of the Domestic Table of Frequency Allocations[^162]
    limits use of the FSS allocation (Earth-to-space) in the 24.75-25.25
    GHz band to use by feeder links for the BSS operating in the band
    17.3-17.7 GHz. In the *18 GHz Report & Order,* we noted that,
    although we were allocating 500 megahertz for BSS feeder links at
    24.75-25.25 GHz for 400 megahertz of BSS uplinks at 17.3-17.7 GHz,
    we declined to reduce the amount of spectrum available for feeder
    links for the BSS.[^163] We stated that the flexibility that this
    additional 100 MHz of feeder link spectrum afforded might prove
    useful to 17/24 GHz BSS operators in some situations including
    occasional difficulties that might be encountered during
    coordination. The ability to use spectrum in the 24 GHz band for
    feeder-links operating with other BSS services, such as DBS, might
    afford operators increased flexibility in system design and spectrum
    use. Providing this increased flexibility might also assist
    operators in designing their systems so as to avoid ground path
    interference problems associated with reverse band operations in the
    17.3-17.8 GHz band. The benefit of alternative feeder link spectrum
    might be particularly useful in situations where DBS feeder-link
    earth stations must be located in populated areas with a high
    density of 17/24 GHz BSS receiving antennas, or when 17/24 GHz BSS
    telemetry receiving facilities are close by. We propose to modify
    footnote NG167 of the Domestic Table of Frequency Allocations in
    order to permit use of the 24.75-25.25 GHz FSS allocation
    (Earth-to-space) by feeder links operating with the BSS in frequency
    bands other than 17 GHz, *e.g*., the 12 GHz DBS band. We seek
    comment on this proposal.

70. The 24.75-25.05 GHz band is shared on a co-primary basis with the
    radionavigation service and the 25.05-25.25 GHz band is similarly
    shared on a co-primary basis with the fixed service. Permitting
    migration of BSS feeder link operations from other bands (such as
    17.3-17.7 GHz) into the 24 GHz band could place an increased burden
    on these two services, and may hinder their ability to operate or to
    deploy additional stations. General requirements for sharing with
    the radionavigation service and the fixed service in the 24 GHz band
    are discussed in paragraphs 91-93 of this *NPRM*. However, we seek
    specific comment on any impact to these other co-primary services
    from our proposal to permit more flexible use of the 24 GHz band by
    BSS feeder links. In the *18 GHz Report & Order,* we noted our
    belief[^164] that the feasibility of the sharing between these 17/24
    GHz BSS feeder links and the fixed service at 24 GHz is based in
    part on the limited number of expected 17/24 GHz BSS feeder links.
    We ask whether these additional feeder link operations can be
    accommodated in the 24.75-25.25 GHz band, or whether they will
    unduly restrict operation and deployment of either new
    radionavigation or fixed service systems. We ask whether our
    existing FSS/FS coordination procedures set forth in Section 25.203
    of the Commission's rules are sufficient to facilitate co-existence
    of additional BSS feeder link earth stations with the 24 GHz Fixed
    Service, or whether some additional requirement(s) should be
    imposed.

### SPACE PATH INTERFERENCE

71. Space path interference will occur when the signals from
    transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS satellites are detected by the receiving
    antennas of DBS satellites. The amount of interference received by
    the victim DBS satellite will depend on the specific orientation
    between the transmitting and receiving satellites, the extent of
    physical separation, the transmit power (e.i.r.p.) levels, and the
    off-axis gain discriminations of both transmitting and receiving
    antennas on the adjacent satellites. This problem is expected to be
    particularly problematic when satellites are nominally co-located,
    *i.e*., a receiving DBS satellite is located at the same nominal GSO
    orbital longitude as a transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS satellite.

72. The Commission has received several applications from operators
    seeking to locate BSS satellites transmitting in the 17 GHz band at
    nominal orbital locations now occupied by DBS satellites.[^165]
    Currently operating U.S. DBS satellites are located at nominal
    orbital locations defined in the Region 2 BSS and feeder-link Plans
    of Appendices 30 and 30A of the ITU Radio Regulations, which
    apportion spectrum and orbit locations for the 12 GHz BSS. The
    Region 2 Plans are based on grouping of the space stations in
    clusters; satellites are spaced at locations of 0.2º from the
    cluster center, or nominal orbital location.[^166] In the Region 2
    BSS and feeder-link Plans, channels at a given orbital location are
    specified such that oppositely polarized channels (right hand
    circular polarization or left hand circular polarization) are
    located at opposite edges of the cluster, or 0.4 degrees
    apart.[^167] By seeking to operate at the nominal DBS location
    (center of the cluster) 17/24 GHz BSS applicants will be located at
    separations somewhere between 0.0º and 0.2º from co-frequency,
    reverse-band DBS satellites.[^168]

73. While some applicants acknowledge the difficulty in co-locating
    17/24 GHz BSS satellites with DBS satellites, none presents a
    detailed interference analysis nor offers a comprehensive method for
    preventing space path interference between the nominally co-located
    satellites operating in the two services. Pegasus comments that
    interference to co-located or nearby satellites in other service
    bands can only be evaluated in specific circumstances and should be
    resolved during the normal coordination process.[^169] DIRECTV cites
    a number of factors that it believes will mitigate potential
    interference including physical separation of the satellites,
    antenna directivity and off-axis rejection, and the recessed design
    of existing DBS spacecraft feeder-link receiving antennas.[^170]
    EchoStar notes that it will be necessary to maintain some minimal
    physical separation and specific orientation between the two
    satellites and notes that this would be greatly facilitated by
    having both satellites under control of the same operator.[^171]

74. The ITU-R Working Party 6S is examining the question of required
    separation distance between a transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS space
    station and a receiving DBS satellite.[^172] One relevant ITU-R
    study includes a parametric analysis which varies the amount of
    off-axis discrimination for transmit and receive satellite antennas,
    the transmitting e.i.r.p., and the amount of allowable interference.
    The study concludes that required geocentric angular separations
    ranges between 0.02º and 5.67º in order to achieve ΔT/T values of
    either 4% or 6%. We note however that this study makes certain
    simplifying assumptions (*i.e*., a constant angle relative to
    boresight between transmitting and receiving satellites of
    approximately 90°) and does not take significant account of other
    complicating factors such as stationkeeping excursions. Although the
    study suggests that under certain conditions spacing as close as
    0.2º may be possible, it does not provide a sufficiently in-depth
    analysis upon which a set of regulations permitting co-clustered DBS
    and 17/24 GHz BSS satellites can be based.

75. The Region 2 BSS and feeder-link Plans are based on cross-polarized,
    adjacent channels that overlap in frequency[^173] that are also the
    basis for our domestic channelization scheme. At a given DBS orbit
    location these channels may be assigned to different DBS operators.
    Interference between overlapping channels is avoided by transmitting
    in opposite polarizations.[^174] In turn, the satellite antenna must
    radiate or receive power in its reference polarization, and avoid
    radiating or receiving significant amounts of power in the opposite,
    or cross-polarization.[^175] For satellites located in the same
    cluster, the angle between transmitting and receiving antennas
    relative to boresight is on the order of 90º. While antenna
    cross-polarization discrimination is normally sufficient to provide
    adequate signal isolation on-axis, cross-polarization isolation at
    large off-axis angles is typically quite poor.[^176] For this reason
    too, we question whether there will be sufficient polarization
    discrimination between the transmitted signals of 17/24 GHz BSS
    space stations and the feeder-link receiving antennas of DBS
    satellites to permit reverse band operations on a channel-by-channel
    basis. Moreover, 17/24 GHz BSS operators may not necessarily design
    a satellite system that operates with a channelization scheme
    (*i.e*., same center frequencies, bandwidths and polarizations)
    consistent with the one specified in the Region 2 Plans, and
    applicable to DBS systems.

76. Recognizing the significant difficulties in preventing harmful
    interference in the case of co-clustered satellites, we ask whether
    transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS satellites should be precluded from
    locating in the same cluster with receiving *co-frequency* DBS
    satellites. We seek comment on this issue. We also ask whether
    co-clustering of 17/24 GHz BSS and receiving *co-frequency* DBS
    satellites might be possible in instances where both spacecraft are
    controlled by the same operator. However, we also seek comment on
    methods we might employ to facilitate co-location, or co-clustering
    of DBS and 17/24 GHz BSS satellites.

77. We seek further comment on the feasibility in general of locating
    transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS satellites at close distances (*i.e*.,
    within the same cluster, or at nearby adjacent locations) as
    receiving DBS satellites operating with 17 GHz feeder-links. We ask
    whether there is a minimum separation distance that we should
    mandate for the two co-frequency satellites, and if so, what that
    separation distance should be. We also ask whether we should impose
    an off-axis antenna discrimination requirement on satellites in the
    17/24 GHz BSS service, the DBS service, or both, and if so what the
    requirement(s) should be. We ask whether we should impose either an
    absolute e.i.r.p. limit on transmitting BSS satellites, and if so,
    what that value might be, or whether an e.i.r.p. mask might be more
    appropriate. If the latter, we seek comment on the angular range
    over which such a mask should be applied, and what power limits
    would be most appropriate at different angular values. Finally, we
    seek comment on whether there are any other requirements we should
    consider in order to prevent reverse-band adjacent satellite
    interference in the 17 GHz band. Specifically, we ask applicants how
    they plan to address the problem of space path interference with the
    co-located satellites they have proposed.

78. Space path interference from transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS satellites
    has the potential to cause loss of the telecommand signal at the
    receiving DBS satellite. As in the ground path telemetry case, we
    are aware that interference into TT&C systems can present a serious
    problem due to the potential loss of satellite control, and we seek
    comment on what requirements the Commission should adopt to guard
    against such interference scenarios. As in the ground path case, we
    propose to require space station applicants planning to co-locate
    their 17/24 GHz BSS space stations within cluster locations occupied
    by DBS space stations to make a technical showing to the Commission
    demonstrating their ability to sufficiently minimize interference
    into nearby DBS systems, such that adequate margin is maintained in
    the DBS telecommand links in the presence of the interfering BSS
    signal. Similarly, we will ask DBS operators planning to locate
    their satellites at an orbital location already occupied by a
    transmitting 17/24 GHz BSS satellite to make a technical showing to
    the Commission demonstrating how they plan to maintain sufficient
    margin in their telecommand links in the presence of the interfering
    BSS signal. We seek comment on this proposal and ask what parameters
    would be appropriate in such a showing.

79. Section 25.202(g) of the Commission's rules requires that TT&C
    functions for U.S. domestic satellites be conducted at either or
    both edges of the allocated band.[^177] The Region 2 BSS and
    Feeder-link Plans provide 12 MHz of guardband spectrum at both the
    upper and lower bounds of the frequency band where DBS TT&C
    operations are typically conducted. We note that although both the
    DBS and the 17/24 GHz BSS services may transmit in the lower
    guardband (just above 17.3 GHz) the upper guardband of the DBS
    feeder-link plan falls outside of the present 17/24 GHz BSS
    allocation, in the 12 MHz of spectrum just below 17.8 GHz. We ask
    whether sufficient advantage can be taken of this situation (in
    combination with the shared 12 MHz of frequency at the lower edge of
    the band) to avoid interference into DBS telecommand links, and what
    effect our proposal to permit limited use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band
    might have on this issue.[^178] We ask whether we should preclude
    17/24 GHz BSS satellites that co-locate at DBS locations from
    transmitting in the lower band-edge DBS guardbands, or whether we
    should limit such BSS transmission to TT&C functions and require
    coordination between the two services. We seek comment on these
    issues.

## OTHER TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 

80. We note that TT&C issues have been raised in some of the 17/24 GHz
    applications filed with the Commission, and below, seek comment on
    need to establish requirements for these activities. Also, discussed
    below, we seek comment on the need for polarization and frequency
    re-use requirements. In addition to these issues, we invite parties
    to comment on other technical matters that the Commission should
    address in this rulemaking, and seek comment on any further changes
    to our rules that should be adopted for 17/24 GHz BSS systems.

### TRACKING, TELEMETRY AND COMMAND (TT&C) FREQUENCIES

81. Several applicants have indicated plans to use other frequency bands
    for certain tracking, telemetry and command (TT&C) activities during
    various phases of the satellite's operation. DIRECTV requests to use
    the 12.2-12.7 GHz and 14.0-14.5 GHz band for both transfer orbit and
    on-station TT&C, citing the need to avoid interference between DBS
    feeder-links in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band at sites where these TT&C
    stations are co-located. DIRECTV also seeks to operate transfer
    orbit command frequencies in the Ku-band to avoid the risk presented
    by the greater atmospheric attenuation during this critical phase,
    and cites the lack of ground facilities in the 24 GHz band. DIRECTV
    further argues that on-station Ku-band TT&C is necessary to avoid
    flying two sets of command receivers as well as the need to prevent
    the loss of reliability associated with switching, as well as the
    need to compensate for decreased command link availability due to
    atmospheric effects.[^179] EchoStar proposes various options for its
    TT&C operations with uplink telecommand in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band
    (reverse band) and telemetry in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band for both the
    launch, early operations and on-orbit operations, or switching to
    in-band TT&C operations during on-station operations. EchoStar also
    notes the problem of potential interference from DBS uplink earth
    stations into 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth station.[^180] In
    contrast, Pegasus plans to use frequencies in the 17/24 GHz BSS
    bands for its TT&C operations, noting the availability of ground
    facilities following the deployment of Ka-band FSS satellites.[^181]
    Intelsat proposes multiple options for operating its TT&C links in
    both the C-band and Ka-band, with some launch and early operations
    links also planned for the Ku-band.[^182]

82. Section 25.202(g) of the Commission's rules requires that tracking,
    telemetry and telecommand functions for U.S. domestic satellites be
    conducted at either or both edges of the allocated band(s).[^183] In
    this *NPRM,* we are not proposing to change our requirement for
    satellites operating in the 17/24 GHz BSS service but we seek
    comment on this issue. We recognize the present lack of 24 GHz
    ground facilities needed to support launch, transfer, and testing
    operations, however we note that this issue has been faced in the
    past by other new services, typically through the use of
    case-by-case waivers.[^184] We seek comment on the feasibility of
    employing such a case-by-case approach until ground facilities
    become more widely available. We ask whether a permanent rule change
    is necessary to accommodate what may only be a temporary situation.
    We also seek comment on the issue of atmospheric attenuation in the
    24 GHz band and the associated loss of uplink command reliability.
    We ask whether this difficulty presents a significant problem for
    all operators and if so, during what phase of operations.
    Specifically, we ask if the problem is limited to certain "critical
    phases" such as the launch phase, and we seek comment on methods
    that might be adopted to mitigate loss of command link reliability.

83. Finally, we note that several applicants anticipate difficulties
    with interference into their 17/24 GHz BSS telemetry links from DBS
    feeder uplinks, both of which operate in the 17.3-17.7 GHz bands.
    This earth-station-into-earth station interference is encountered
    when the DBS uplink facility is co-located with (or located in close
    proximity to) the 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C facility. This problem is part
    of the larger issue of reverse band operation in the 17 GHz band,
    which is discussed previously in Section H.1.a of this item.
    However, we seek comment on its ramifications specific to TT&C
    operations. We ask whether there are means to avoid reverse band
    interference into telemetry receivers such as site separation,
    antenna shielding or frequency/polarization isolation.

84. The DBS service is subject to the channelization scheme outlined in
    the Region 2 Plan of Appendix 30 and 30A of the Radio Regulations.
    The Plan provides guardbands with 12 MHz of spectrum which are used
    only for DBS TT&C (command) uplinks at both the upper and lower
    bounds of the allocated band.[^185] We believe that there is
    sufficient spectrum available in the guardbands to accommodate the
    TT&C transmissions of multiple satellites.[^186] With careful
    planning, it may be possible to use these guardbands for both 17/24
    GHz BSS telemetry and DBS command signals, in particular if both
    transmissions are from satellites licensed to the same operator. We
    seek comment on whether advantage can be taken of these guardbands,
    especially at the lower edge of the band,[^187] in order to avoid
    ground path interference between the TT&C transmissions of
    co-located DBS and 17/24 GHz BSS systems.

85. EchoStar has proposed using standard DBS frequency bands for all or
    part of its TT&C operations; command uplinks would be in the
    17.3-17.8 GHz band, and telemetry downlinking would be in the
    12.2-12.7 GHz band.[^188] We recognize that this approach may have
    some merit in cases where a single operator has both DBS and 17/24
    GHz BSS satellites at the same nominal orbital longitude. In these
    cases the operator is already authorized to use DBS guardband
    spectrum, however, we question whether such an approach would
    provide sufficient TT&C spectrum for other DBS operators that may be
    operating at the same nominal position. We seek comment on this
    issue, and ask whether a case-by-case approach to licensing such
    TT&C operations would be sufficient, or whether a Commission rule
    change is needed.

86. Finally, we ask whether the Commission should consider other changes
    to its rules in order to facilitate reverse band operations in the
    17.3-17.7 GHz band, specifically with regard to TT&C operations. We
    note that a significant number of 17/24 GHz BSS applicants are also
    DBS operators, and recognizing that these parties have likely given
    considerable thought to addressing these same problems, we invite
    comment on possible solutions.

### POLARIZATION AND FULL FREQUENCY RE-USE REQUIREMENTS

87. We seek comment on what polarization requirements, if any should be
    established for 17/24 GHz BSS systems. We recognize that most
    operators prefer to operate with circularly polarized signals in the
    space-to-Earth direction because this facilitates installation of
    receiving antennas in the direct-to-home market. In the
    Earth-to-space direction, applicants have indicated plans to use
    both linearly and circularly polarized transmissions.[^189] In the
    FSS, the Commission mandates use of orthogonal linearly polarized
    signals for standard C-band[^190] operations, limits Ka-band
    transmissions to either orthogonal linear or circular
    transmissions,[^191] and permits any type of orthogonal polarization
    for extended C-band and Ku-band transmissions.[^192] For 12 GHz DBS
    systems the Commission requires that they conform to the technical
    characteristics contained in Appendices 30 and 30A of the ITU Radio
    Regulations (the BSS and feeder link Plans), which specify
    circularly polarized transmissions in both the uplink and downlink
    directions.[^193] In addition, Appendices 30 and 30A precisely
    define all 32 channels at a given orbital location. Adjacent
    channels overlap partially in frequency and interference is avoided
    in part by specifying opposite polarizations (Right-hand circular
    polarization or "Left-hand circular polarization) on overlapping
    channels.[^194]

88. At this time we do not plan to impose channelization or polarization
    requirements on 17/24 GHz BSS transmissions other than requiring
    that orthogonally polarized signals be employed. Nor do we intend to
    require that 17/24 GHz receivers be interoperable with the 17/24 GHz
    networks of other operators. We seek comment on this approach. We
    ask whether there is a need to establish more specific polarization
    requirements for satellites in this service. We prefer to leave as
    many aspects of system design to the discretion of the operator as
    possible. However, we seek comment on whether there is a need to
    institute a standardized convention with regard to transponder
    bandwidth, center frequency or signal polarization throughout the
    allocated band. In particular, we ask whether co-location or
    adjacent-location of reverse-band operating satellites may be
    facilitated by harmonization of the frequency and polarization
    schemes employed by the space stations in the two services. We seek
    comment on whether other technical goals such as facilitating an
    orbital spacing regime or interference mitigation might be improved
    through adopting more stringent channel and polarization
    requirements.

89. We also propose to require that space stations operating in the
    17/24 GHz BSS service employ full frequency re-use either through
    the use of orthogonal polarizations in the same beam and/or the use
    of spatially independent beams. This requirement is in keeping with
    past Commission practice for other GSO satellite services,[^195] and
    is based on our goal of encouraging the highest and best use of
    limited spectrum resources. We seek comment on our proposal in
    general. We seek comment on whether this requirement is appropriate
    for the 17/24 GHz BSS band or whether some other requirement should
    be adopted. We ask if issues unique to this service such as reverse
    band operations, and in particular the possibility of location in
    the vicinity of co-frequency DBS systems might affect the means or
    ability of operators to fully use the allocated spectrum. If so, we
    ask what requirement might better ensure full use of the resource.
    Although we do not propose adopting a transponder-by-transponder
    polarization plan or mandating polarization switching capability, we
    also seek comment on the need for these or other possible
    polarization requirements.

90. We seek comment on the need for a cross-polarization requirement in
    the 17/24 GHz BSS service, and if adopted, how stringent such
    requirement should be. We recognize that in order to achieve full
    frequency re-use, some degree of polarization isolation is
    necessary. The Commission now requires that both FSS and DBS space
    stations operate with antennas designed to provide 30 dB of
    cross-polarization isolation in the primary coverage area.[^196]
    Because BSS feeder-links operate in the FSS, this requirement can be
    assumed to apply to the uplink already. However, most of our present
    rules were written prior to the widespread use of shaped antenna
    beams or multi-spot beam satellites. Moreover, we recognize that
    cross-polarization interference has historically been viewed as
    primarily an intra-system problem and did not typically cause
    significant levels of harmful interference to adjacent operators.
    However, the possibility of space-to-space interference scenarios
    between 17/24 GHz BSS and DBS satellites requires a closer
    examination of our existing approach to cross-polarization
    requirements. Accordingly, we ask whether we should adopt a
    cross-polarization isolation requirement, and if so, should 30 dB or
    some other ratio of co-polar to cross-polar gain be imposed.

## TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER-SERVICE OPERATIONS

### SHARING IN THE 24 GHz BAND

91. In 1997, the Commission modified the Domestic Table of Frequency
    Allocations to provide a primary allocation in the frequency band
    25.05-25.25 GHz to support the 24 GHz Fixed Service, formerly known
    as the Digital Electronic Messaging Service (DEMS).[^197] This band
    is now allocated on a co-primary basis to both the FS and to the FSS
    (Earth-to-space). Several 24 GHz FS systems have already been
    licensed and we must therefore consider the likelihood that
    additional systems will be deployed in the future. The potential
    exists for 17/24 GHz BSS feeder-link earth stations operating in the
    25.05-25.25 GHz band to interfere with existing and future 24 GHz FS
    hub and user stations that operate in the same frequency band. When
    we adopted this shared allocation at 24 GHz, we stressed that while
    the full extent of the interference was unknown at that time, our
    belief in the feasibility of sharing was based on limitations on the
    number of expected 17/24 GHz BSS feeder link facilities and on the
    fact that potential interference to the 24 GHz service would be
    limited to hub stations. It was noted that the rules relevant to the
    24 GHz service are subject to the outcome of the 24 GHz service
    rules proceeding.[^198] We noted that the successful implementation
    of this allocation would require the development of sharing criteria
    that will be considered in a future rulemaking.[^199] In light of
    the proposed expansion in this band for 12 GHz BSS feeder links in
    this *NPRM*[^200] and the nature of the 24 GHz service, we seek to
    develop sharing criteria that would assure successful implementation
    of BSS feeder links and the 24 GHz service and request comment on
    what these criteria should be. Accordingly, we request comment on
    the feasibility of operating BSS feeder-links in this band on a
    co-frequency basis with 24 GHz FS systems and whether existing power
    levels and coordination procedures are sufficient given that 24 GHz
    FS systems have been licensed by geographic area and are not
    required to file site specific data.

92. At present, Section 25.203 of the Commissions rules provides a
    coordination mechanism for minimizing interference between satellite
    earth stations and FS stations, in bands where both services share
    equal rights.[^201] In addition, Section 25.204 sets forth power
    limits for satellite earth stations in bands shared co-equally with
    terrestrial radiocommunication services.[^202] Moreover, the antenna
    pattern requirements of Section 25.209 (*i.e*., 29-25\*log~10~θ)
    apply to BSS feeder-link stations because these antennas operate by
    definition in the FSS. We seek comment on whether these rules
    provide sufficient protection to hub and user stations of 24 GHz FS
    systems. We ask whether other requirements such as different power
    limits, or perhaps some other changes in our rules, may be necessary
    to facilitate sharing in the band. We also recognize that BSS
    feeder-link antennas may be less widely deployed than BSS receiving
    antennas. In addition, BSS feeder-link earth stations will typically
    employ relatively large diameter antennas with antenna off-axis
    rejection characteristics sufficient to minimize interference into
    24 GHz FS systems. These factors should help decrease the likelihood
    of interference events with 24 GHz FS receiving stations. For these
    reasons we also seek comment on whether the existing rules are
    appropriate, or might be relaxed in some manner in order to relieve
    the coordination burden on either or both services.

93. In Region 2, the International Table of Frequency Allocations
    provides only the FSS with primary status in the frequency band
    24.75-25.05 GHz. In the Domestic Table of frequency allocations
    however, primary status is shared by both the FSS and the
    radionavigation service.[^203] At this time we are aware of no
    operational radionavigation systems in the band. However, it is not
    inconceivable that future radionavigation systems might be deployed.
    Furthermore, we are aware of no specific sharing criteria or rules
    governing co-frequency operation of FSS and radionavigation systems.
    We seek comment on the feasibility of operating BSS feeder-links
    (Earth-to-space) in this band on a co-primary basis with potential
    future radionavigation systems. We seek comment on what are the most
    likely interference scenarios, and ask what measures might best
    provide for future operation of both services. We ask whether any
    changes to our rules such as power limits, coordination
    requirements, or antenna performance requirements might be
    considered in order to minimize inter-service interference in the
    24.75-25.05 GHz band. We seek comment on technical or operational
    measures that might be adopted by either satellite system operators
    or by radionavigation system operators in order to facilitate
    co-frequency operation of these two services.

### SHARING IN THE 17 GHz BAND

94. In the Domestic table of Frequency Allocations, the Radiolocation
    Service is allocated use of the 15.7-17.3 GHz band on a primary
    basis for U.S. Government systems.[^204] Military services are the
    largest users of the band and have a considerable investment in
    radiolocation operations in this frequency range, which include a
    large number of radar systems that perform ground-mapping,
    terrain-following maritime and target-identification
    functions.[^205] Numerous high-powered synthetic aperture radars
    (SARs) operate near the band edge adjacent to 17.3 GHz. At present,
    these SARs are largely airborne, and are employed primarily for
    ground mapping and detection of airborne objects.[^206] The National
    Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has stated
    that future radar systems are likely to resemble existing radars,
    including the capability to operate differently in different azimuth
    and elevation sectors, and that future designs may seek to operate
    in a wide band extending to the edge of the authorized
    allocation.[^207] Future radar systems will likely employ
    electronically-steerable antennas, and the NTIA maintains that the
    introduction of newer phase-steered radars could facilitate
    electromagnetic compatibility in some circumstances. In addition,
    newer radar systems are expected to have average-power capabilities
    at least as high as those of current systems, although the NTIA
    expects that future designs will strive to reduce wideband noise
    emissions through the use of solid-state transmitter/antenna
    systems. These would employ longer pulse transmissions with
    substantially higher duty cycles, but probably at lower peak power
    levels, as compared to tube-type radar transmitters.[^208]

95. We anticipate that unwanted emissions from high-power, adjacent-band
    radiolocation systems, especially those on board aircraft, may pose
    a significant harmful interference threat to 17/24 GHz BSS
    subscriber earth stations. The NTIA has expressed to the Commission
    its concern that interference from these high-powered radars into
    17/24 GHz BSS receivers may occur even though the radiolocation
    systems meet current regulations[^209] with respect to unwanted
    emissions.[^210] Recognizing the long lead development and life
    cycle of radiolocation and BSS systems, the NTIA requests that the
    BSS and radiolocation communities begin discussions that would
    include the possibility of mitigation techniques in both services,
    in order to ensure adjacent band compatibility. [^211] The
    Commission acknowledged the NTIA's concerns, and agreed that
    discussions between the radiolocation and BSS communities at an
    early stage would be beneficial to ensuring adjacent band
    compatibility.[^212] The Commission has traditionally encouraged
    operator-to-operator discussions as a means to resolve interference
    issues, and we seek comment on this approach in this context, and
    ask how best to address the issue of potential adjacent-band
    interference into 17/24 GHz BSS receivers.

96. The NTIA has provided the Commission with information concerning
    technical and operating characteristics of certain adjacent-band
    radiolocation systems that it considers likely to impact 17/24 GHz
    BSS receiving earth stations and sufficient for general calculations
    to asses the compatibility between these radars and BSS
    systems.[^213] The technical characteristics of the radiolocation
    systems operating in the 15.7-17.3 GHz band are provided in
    Appendix C. The NTIA has also identified two interference coupling
    scenarios that it believes are likely to exist between radiolocation
    systems and BSS receiving antennas in the 17 GHz band: earth station
    receiver front-end overload[^214] and out-of-band interference from
    high-power pulsed emissions.[^215] With regard to adjacent band
    interference due to high power pulsed emissions, the NTIA cites
    measurements that it performed[^216] on a 4 GHz digital earth
    station receiver that employed error correction signal
    processing.[^217] However, as the NTIA also notes, the applicability
    of these results to 17 GHz systems requires further study.
    Accordingly, we seek comment on the interference scenarios that are
    most likely to be encountered between adjacent-band radiolocation
    systems and BSS receiving antennas, and on the general applicability
    of the NTIA's findings. Specifically, we ask what differences in
    17/24 GHz BSS receiver design and signal processing should be taken
    into account when assessing interference from adjacent-band
    radiolocation systems. We also ask 17/24 GHz BSS operators for
    comment on their systems' sensitivity to unwanted adjacent-band
    emissions, and on the level of protection they may require.

97. We also seek comment on what measures 17/24 GHz BSS operators might
    adopt in order to mitigate such interference. In its April 8, 2005
    letter to the Commission, the NTIA suggested various mitigation
    techniques that BSS operators might implement to mitigate
    adjacent-band radiolocation transmission interference.[^218] The
    NTIA also recommends that BSS operators at least employ adequate
    radio frequency filtering to avoid front-end overload from
    adjacent-band radar signals, and that BSS operators investigate
    altering inter-leaving[^219] and/or other error correction
    techniques to improve survivable pulsed interference-to-carrier
    levels.[^220] We seek comment on the feasibility of the NTIA's
    recommendations, particularly with regard to their effects upon BSS
    system performance and cost. We ask what other mitigation techniques
    might be considered to diminish adjacent-band radiolocation
    transmission interference. We also seek comment on what limits or
    other measures the Commission might adopt in order to protect
    receiving earth stations from harmful interference caused by
    unwanted adjacent-band emissions, and we ask in particular whether
    the Commission should adopt requirements to limit 17/24 GHz BSS
    receiver susceptibility to unwanted emissions, and specifically what
    requirements might be appropriate.

98. The Commission's rules do not establish unwanted emission limits for
    radiolocation systems operating in the 15.7-17.3 GHz band. Appendix
    3 of the ITU Radio Regulations defines limits for an attenuation
    value used to calculate maximum permitted power levels of unwanted
    emissions[^221] in the spurious domain in Table II of Section II.
    For the Radiolocation Service[^222] this attenuation below the
    radiated emission power level is defined as 43 + 10Log~10~(PEP),
    where PEP is the peak envelope power in watts.[^223] We seek comment
    on the suitability of this value to protect 17/24 GHz BSS receivers
    from interference caused by unwanted emissions from adjacent-band
    radars.

99. In addition, the band 17.3-17.7 GHz is allocated on a secondary
    basis to the Radiolocation Service for use by Federal Government
    systems.[^224] Numerous types of radiolocation stations have been
    operated in this band, including ship, ground and airborne
    equipment. There may be future radiolocations systems that seek to
    operate in this spectrum on a secondary basis, and the potential for
    interference into 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber receiving antennas
    exists. We intend to ensure that 17/24 GHz BSS receivers are
    adequately protected. However, the Commission is also committed to
    encouraging efficient use of spectrum whenever possible.
    Accordingly, we seek comment on approaches we might adopt to
    accommodate future secondary radiolocation operations in this band.
    We ask what types of interference scenarios may be anticipated and
    what criteria might be adopted to ensure protection of BSS systems
    while allowing for future secondary operation of radiolocation
    systems in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band. We also ask 17/24 GHz BSS
    operators to address the level of protection required for their
    receiving earth stations and whether 17/24 GHz BSS and secondary
    radiolocation services could co-exist if appropriate protection
    criteria were in place. Finally, we note that Footnote US259 to the
    United States Table of Frequency Allocations requires that stations
    in the radiolocation service in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band be restricted
    to operating powers of less than 51 dBW e.i.r.p. after feeder-link
    stations for the broadcasting-satellite service are authorized and
    brought into use.[^225] This requirement was developed to protect
    GSO satellites operating with feeder-link transmissions defined by
    the Region 2 planned bands, and was not designed with protection of
    small-diameter 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth stations in mind.
    Nonetheless, we seek comment on whether this restriction is adequate
    to protect 17/24 GHz BSS subscriber earth stations from harmful
    interference caused by transmitting radiolocation systems.

100. The allocation to the radiolocation service is secondary relative
     to the BSS in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band. Accordingly, secondary
     radiolocation stations are precluded from causing harmful
     interference to the stations of a primary service such as the 17/24
     GHz BSS.[^226] However, we recognize that Federal radiolocation
     systems are now operating in this band and have been in operation
     for some time. Further, in its March 29, 2000 letter to the
     Commission, NTIA stated that radiolocation systems continuing to
     operate in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band after April 1, 2007 may have to
     be accommodated, notwithstanding their allocation status with
     respect to BSS stations.[^227] Recently, NTIA again noted that it
     anticipates continued operation of Federal radiolocation systems in
     certain portions of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band, in a limited number of
     geographic areas after April 1, 2007.[^228] The Commission is
     committed to protecting 17/24 GHz BSS consumers from harmful
     interference. However we also wish to accommodate national defense
     interests and appreciate the Defense Department's need to continue
     operating a limited number of existing radars in the 17.3-17.7 GHz
     band after April 1, 2007. Accordingly, we seek comment on what
     methods or criteria might be adopted to accommodate continued
     operation of these currently operating Federal radiolocation
     systems. Specifically, we seek comment on the typical interference
     scenarios that could occur between receiving 17/24 GHz BSS earth
     stations and existing Federal radiolocation systems. We ask whether
     case-by-case coordination or some other approach might best permit
     continued operation of Federal radiolocation systems in portions of
     the 17.3-17.7 GHz band following the introduction of 17/24 GHz BSS
     systems after April 1, 2007.

**VI. CONCLUSION**

101. The proposed licensing and service rules described above for the
     17/24 GHz BSS bands reflect our interest in facilitating the
     deployment of new and enhanced services. The proposals set forth in
     this *NPRM* are designed to address: 1) issues regarding
     licensing; 2) service obligations; 3) facilitating service to the
     states of Alaska and Hawaii; 4) allocation issues; 5) orbital
     spacing; 6) reverse band operations; and 7) sharing with other
     services. Based on the considerations discussed above, we conclude
     that the proposals set forth in this *NPRM* will facilitate the
     implementation of service in the 17/24 BSS GHz bands. We seek
     comment on all aspects of these rules and anticipate an extensive
     record on which to base decisions on final policies and rules.

**V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS**

A.  **EX PARTE**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
102. This proceeding shall be treated as a "permit-but-disclose"
     proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte
     rules.[^229] Persons making oral ex parte presentations are
     reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain
     summaries of the substance of the presentations and not merely a
     listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one- or two-sentence
     description of the views and arguments presented is generally
     required.[^230] Other rules pertaining to oral and written
     presentations are set forth in Section 1.1206(b) of the
     Commission's rules as well.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
B.  **INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
103. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),[^231] the
     Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
     (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small
     entities by the proposals considered in this *NPRM*. The text of
     the IRFA is set forth in Appendix A. Written public comments are
     requested on this IRFA. Comments must be filed in accordance with
     the same filing deadlines for comments on the *NPRM*, and they
     should have a separate and distinct heading designating them as
     responses to the IRFA. The Commission will send a copy of the
     *NPRM*, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
     the Small Business Administration.[^232]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
C.  **INITIAL PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995 ANALYSIS**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
104. *Paperwork Reduction Act.* This NPRM contains proposed new and
     modified information collections. The Commission, as part of its
     continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general
     public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on
     the information collections contained in this NPRM, as required by
     the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13. Public
     and agency comments are due 60 days from the date of publication of
     the NPRM in the Federal Register. Comments should address: (a)
     whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the
     proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including
     whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the
     accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance
     the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
     and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
     information on the respondents, including the use of automated
     collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In
     addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
     2002, Public Law No. 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. § 3506(c)(4), we seek
     specific comment on how we might "further reduce the information
     collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
     employees."

105. A copy of any comments on the information collections contained
     herein should be submitted to Judy Boley Herman, Federal
     Communications Commission, Room 1-C804, 445 12^th^ Street, S.W.,
     Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to <jbHerman@fcc.gov> and
     to Kristy L. LaLonde, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10234 NEOB, 725 17^th^
     Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20503, or via the Internet to
     <Kristy_L.LaLonde@omb.eop.gov>, or via fax at 202-395-5167.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
D.  **COMMENT FILING PROCEDURES**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
106. Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission\'s rules,
     *47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1.419,* interested parties may file comments
     in response to this *NPRM* no later than on or before 75 days after
     Federal Register publication. Reply comments to these comments may
     be filed no later than on or before 105 days after Federal Register
     publication. All pleadings are to reference **IB Docket No.
     06-123**. Comments may be filed using the Commission\'s Electronic
     Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies. Parties are
     strongly encouraged to file electronically. *See Electronic Filing
     of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24,121
     (1998).*

107. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file
     via the Internet to http://www.fcc/gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Parties
     should transmit one copy of their comments to the docket in the
     caption of this rulemaking. In completing the transmittal screen,
     commenters should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service
     mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number.
     Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail.
     To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should
     send and e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov and should include the following
     words in the body of the message, \"get form \<your e-mail
     address\>.\" A sample form and directions will be sent in reply.

108. Parties choosing to file by paper must file an original and four
     copies of each filing in IB Docket No. 06-123. Filings can be sent
     by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or
     by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we
     continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service
     mail). If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the
     caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional
     copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. The
     Commission\'s mail contractor, Vistronix, Inc. will receive
     hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the
     Commission\'s Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Suite
     110, Washington, D.C. 20002. The filing hours at this location are
     8:00 a.m. to 7:00p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together
     with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of
     before entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than
     U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to
     9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal
     Service first-class mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be
     addressed to 445 12^th^ Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. All
     filings must be addressed to the Commission\'s Secretary, Office of
     the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

109. Comments submitted on diskette should be on a 3.5 inch diskette
     formatted in an IBM-compatible format using Word for Windows or
     compatible software. The diskette should be clearly labeled with
     the commenter\'s name, proceeding (including the docket number, in
     this case, IB Docket No. 06-123), type of pleading (comment or
     reply comment), date of submission, and the name of the electronic
     file on the diskette. The label should also include the following
     phrase \"Disk Copy - Not an Original.\" Each diskette should
     contain only one party\'s pleadings, preferably in a single
     electronic file.

110. All parties must file one copy of each pleading electronically or
     by paper to each of the following: (1) The Commission\'s
     duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th
     Street, S.W., Room CY-B402, Washington, D.C. 20554, telephone (202)
     488-5300, facsimile (202) 488-5563, or via e-mail at
     <FCC@BCPIWEB.COM>.

111. Comments and reply comments and any other filed documents in this
     matter may be obtained from Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in person
     at 445 12th Street, S.W., Room CY-B402, Washington, D.C. 20554, via
     telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile (202) 488-5563, or via
     e-mail at <FCC@BCPIWEB.COM>. The pleadings will be also available
     for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in
     the FCC Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 Twelfth
     Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20554 and through the Commission\'s
     Electronic Filing System (ECFS) accessible on the Commission\'s
     World Wide Website, [www.fcc.gov](http://www.fcc.gov/).

112. Comments and reply comments must include a short and concise
     summary of the substantive arguments raised in the pleading.
     Comments and reply comments must also comply with Section 1.49 and
     all other applicable sections of the Commission\'s rules.[^233] All
     parties are encouraged to utilize a table of contents, and to
     include the name of the filing party and the date of the filing on
     each page of their submission. We also strongly encourage that
     parties track the organization set forth in this *NPRM* in order to
     facilitate our internal review process.

113. Commenters who file information that they believe is proprietary
     may request confidential treatment pursuant to Section 0.459 of the
     Commission\'s rules. Commenters should file both their original
     comments for which they request confidentiality and redacted
     comments, along with their request for confidential treatment.
     Commenters should not file proprietary information electronically.
     *See* Examination of Current Policy Concerning the Treatment of
     Confidential Information Submitted to the Commission, *Report and
     Order*, 13 FCC Rcd 24816 (1998), *Order on Reconsideration*, 14 FCC
     Rcd 20128 (1999). Even if the Commission grants confidential
     treatment, information that does not fall within a specific
     exemption pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) must be
     publicly disclosed pursuant to an appropriate request. *See* 47
     C.F.R. § 0.461; 5 U.S.C. § 552. We note that the Commission may
     grant requests for confidential treatment either conditionally or
     unconditionally. As such, we note that the Commission has the
     discretion to release information on public interest grounds that
     does fall within the scope of a FOIA exemption.

**VI. ORDERING CLAUSES**

114. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority
     contained in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 7(a), 301, 303(c), 303(f),
     303(g), 303(r), 303(y), and 308 of the Communications Act of 1934,
     as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 151, 154(i), 154(j), 157(a), 301,
     303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 303(y), 308, this Notice of
     Proposed Rulemaking IS ADOPTED.

115. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission\'s Consumer and
     Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center shall
     send a copy of this NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING, including the
     initial regulatory flexibility analysis, to the Chief Counsel for
     Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, in accordance with
     Section 603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, *5 U.S.C. § 601,
     et seq.* (1981).

> FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
>
> Marlene H. Dortch
>
> Secretary
>
> **APPENDIX A**

**INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS**

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended
(RFA),[^234] the Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules
proposed in this item, the Establishment of Policies and Service Rules
for the Broadcasting-Satellite Service at the 17.3-17.7 GHz Frequency
Band and at the 17.7-17.8 GHz Frequency Band Internationally, and at the
24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Band for Fixed Satellite Services Providing
Feeder Links to the Broadcasting-Satellite Service and for the Satellite
Services Operating Bi-Directionally in the 17.3-17.8 GHz Frequency Band,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (*NPRM*).[^235] Written public comments
are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to
the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the *NPRM*
provided in paragraph 106 of this *NPRM*. The Commission will send a
copy of the *NPRM*, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA).[^236] In addition,
the *NPRM* and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the
Federal Register.[^237]

**A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules**

In this NPRM the Commission makes proposals and seeks comment on service
rules that will apply to U.S. licensees authorized to operate in the
17/24 GHz BSS band. Our objective in this proceeding is to promote
prompt commencement of services in the 17/24 GHz BSS band. This newly
allocated band is expected to introduce a new generation of broadband
services to the public, providing a mix of local and domestic video,
audio, data, video-on-demand, and multimedia services to residential and
business subscribers in the United States. As discussed in greater
detail below, the Commission is provisionally considering a rulemaking
which proposes rules and procedures for operation in the 17/24 GHz BSS
band, including requirements for licensing, service obligations, orbital
spacing, adjacent band operations, reverse band operations, and shared
band operations. Potential interference from primary adjacent-band
radiolocation systems and in-band secondary radiolocation systems is
also addressed. In addition, the *NPRM* also considers proposals for use
of the 17.7-17.8 GHz BSS spectrum for provision of international
services outside the United States.

The Commission is provisionally considering whether to apply the
processing rules and requirements set forth in the *Space Station
Licensing Reform Orders* to the 17/24 GHz BSS or whether to adopt
another licensing mechanism, such as competitive bidding. If the
Commission decides to apply the *Space Station Licensing Reform*
framework, it is provisionally considering that the 17/24 GHz BSS will
be classified as a "GSO-like" service and therefore a "first-come,
first-served" licensing framework will apply to the service. Under this
processing option, the Commission is considering applying the package of
safeguards that are contained within the first-come, first-served
processing scheme. These safeguards include a requirement that all
GSO-like applicants awarded a license under this procedure to post a \$3
million performance bond with the Commission within 30 days of license
grant. They also require licensees to construct and launch the satellite
consistent with a specified milestone schedule. If the licensee fails to
meet an implementation milestone, the license becomes null and void and
the bond is executed. The rules also limit applicants to a total of five
pending applications and licenses for unbuilt satellites in a specific
frequency band at any one time. In addition, the Commission is
considering making 17/24 GHz BSS licensees subject to the same annual
reporting requirements as most of our current space station licensees
are subject to. These reports include, among other things, the status of
space station construction and anticipated launch dates.

The Commission is also provisionally considering the adoption of a
ten-year license term for all non-broadcast 17/24 GHz BSS licensees and
an eight-year license term for 17/24 GHz BSS satellites that will
operate as broadcast facilities. In addition, the Commission is
provisionally considering the adoption of the grant-stamp procedure to
process unopposed replacement 17/24 GHz BSS applications with technical
characteristics consistent with those of the satellite to be retired.

Regarding non-U.S.-licensed satellite operators, the Commission is
provisionally considering to evaluate requests for U.S. access by
foreign-licensed 17/24 GHz BSS systems on a service-specific basis
consistent with the framework established in the 1997 *DISCO II Order.*
Thus, if this approach is adopted, in cases where systems licensed by
World Trade Organization (WTO)-member countries seek to provide FSS to
U.S. customers from their 17/24 GHz BSS systems, we will presume that
entry will further competition. In cases where non-WTO-member countries
seek to use these systems to serve the United States or where WTO-member
countries seek to provide services such as DTH and DBS over 17/24 GHz
BSS systems, we will apply the effective competitive opportunities test
(ECO-SAT) to ensure that entry will not distort competition in the U.S
market.

The Commission is also provisionally considering whether 17/24 GHz BSS
licensees should be subject to public interest obligations, such as
those currently imposed on providers of direct broadcast satellite
services. Under these obligations, these providers are required to meet
certain political broadcast requirements, compliance with children's
television advertising limits, and to set aside four percent of channel
capacity for noncommercial, educational or informational programming.
Also, the Commission is provisionally considering rules that would
result in the equal employment opportunity requirements set forth in
Part 76 of the Commission's rules being applied to 17/24 GHz BSS
licensees. In addition, the Commission is provisionally considering
adopting rules that would require 17/24 GHz BSS licensees to provide
service to Alaska and Hawaii where such service is technically feasible
from the authorized orbit location. In addition, the Commission is
provisionally considering applying EAS requirements on 17/24 GHz BSS
operators.

The Commission is also provisionally considering rules that may
apportion a specific frequency band for tracking, telemetry and command
operations for 17/24 GHz BSS satellites. Also, the Commission is
provisionally considering the adoption of rules for orbital spacing for
17/24 GHz BSS satellites.

The Commission is also provisionally considering rules regarding
adjacent band operations, reverse band operations, and shared band
operations. If adopted, these rules would:

-   Require Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) service applicants seeking
    to operate within \[TBD\] degrees of a geostationary orbital
    location where a space station has already been authorized to
    operate in the Broadcasting Satellite Service (BSS) in the 17.3-17.8
    GHz band (space-to-Earth) to submit a technical showing
    demonstrating their ability to maintain sufficient telecommand link
    margin in the presence of the interfering BSS signal.

-   Require 17/24 GHz BSS applicants seeking to operate within \[TBD\]
    degrees of a geostationary orbital location where a space station
    has already been authorized to operate in the DBS service in the
    17.3-17.8 GHz band (Earth-to-space) to submit a technical showing
    demonstrating their ability to avoid causing harmful interference to
    the existing DBS telecommand link.

-   Require applicants proposing to co-locate DBS feeder link earth
    stations at sites where they are already authorized to operate earth
    stations receiving telemetry signals from space stations operating
    in the 17/24 GHz BSS service to submit a technical showing
    demonstrating their ability to maintain sufficient margin in their
    17 GHz band telemetry links in the presence of the interfering DBS
    signal.

-   Require applicants proposing to co-locate 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C earth
    stations at sites where they are already authorized to operate DBS
    feeder link earth stations to submit a technical showing
    demonstrating their ability to maintain sufficient margin in their
    17 GHz band telemetry links in the presence of the interfering DBS
    signal.

-   Require applicants for feeder-link earth station licenses that
    propose to transmit with e.i.r.p. spectral density levels in excess
    of 5.6 dBW/Hz, under clear sky conditions, to submit a showing
    demonstrating that their higher power levels will not cause harmful
    interference to nearby satellites.

Establishing service rules for the 17/24 GHz BSS bands will facilitate
the delivery of a new generation of satellite services to the public,
thus stimulating competition in the communications marketplace. The
delivery of these services is anticipated to include standard-definition
and high-definition formats and may complement existing DBS service
offered by applicants. Operation in the 17/24 GHz BSS band is
anticipated to provide a mix of local and national video, audio, data,
and video-on-demand to residential and business subscribers in the
United States.

**B. Legal Basis**

This *NPRM* is adopted pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 7(a), 301,
303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 303(y), and 308 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 151, 154(i), 154(j), 157(a),
301, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 303(y), 308.

> **C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
> the Proposals will Apply**

The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.[^238] The RFA generally
defines the term \"small entity\" as having the same meaning as the
terms \"small business,\" \"small organization,\" and \"small
governmental jurisdiction.\"[^239] In addition, the term \"small
business\" has the same meaning as the term \"small business concern\"
under the Small Business Act.[^240] A small business concern is one
which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in
its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria
established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).[^241] Below, we
further describe and estimate the number of small entity licensees that
may be affected by the adopted rules.

***Satellite Telecommunications.*** The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for Satellite Telecommunications, which consists
of all such companies having \$13.5 million or less in annual
receipts.[^242] According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were 536
firms in the category Satellite Telecommunications, total that operated
for the entire year.[^243] Of this total, 49 firms had annual receipts
of \$5 million to \$9,999,999 and an additional 99 firms had annual
receipts of \$10 million or more.[^244] Thus, under this size standard,
the majority of firms can be considered small.

***Space Stations (Geostationary).*** Commission records reveal that
there are 44 space station licensees. We do not request nor collect
annual revenue information concerning such licensees, and thus are
unable to estimate the number of geostationary space stations that would
constitute a small business under the SBA definition cited above, or
apply any rules providing special consideration for Space Station
(Geostationary) licensees that are small businesses.

***Fixed Satellite Transmit/Receive Earth Stations.*** Currently there
are approximately 1142 operational fixed-satellite transmit/receive
earth stations authorized for use in the Ku-bands. The Commission does
not request or collect annual revenue information, and thus is unable to
estimate the number of earth stations that would constitute a small
business under the SBA definition.[^245]

***Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.*** The SBA has
developed a small business size standard for Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications, which consists of all such firms having 1,500 or
fewer employees.[^246] According to Census Bureau data for 2002, in this
category there was a total of 8,863 firms that operated for the entire
year.[^247] Of this total, 401 firms had 100 or more employees, and the
remainder had fewer than 100 employees.[^248]

> **D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
> Compliance Requirements**

The proposed rules would, if adopted, require a Direct Broadcast
Satellite (DBS) service applicant seeking to operate within \[TBD\]
degrees of a geostationary orbital location where a space station has
already been authorized to operate in the broadcasting-satellite service
in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band (space-to-Earth) to submit a technical showing
which demonstrates its ability to maintain sufficient telecommand link
margin in the presence of the interfering Broadcasting-Satellite Service
(BSS) signal. This requirement will aid in ensuring that DBS operators
seeking to operate in these locations will be able to maintain their
telecommand link in order to maintain control of their satellites.

Also, a 17/24 GHz BSS applicant seeking to operate within \[TBD\]
degrees of a geostationary orbital location where a space station has
already been authorized to operate in the DBS service in the 17.3-17.8
GHz band (Earth-to-space), will be required, under the proposed rules,
to submit a technical showing which demonstrates its ability to maintain
sufficient telecommand link margin in the presence of the interfering
DBS service signal. This requirement will aid in ensuring that BSS
operators seeking to operate in these locations will be able to maintain
their telecommand link in order to maintain control of their satellites

The proposed rules would also require that applicants proposing to
co-locate DBS feeder link earth stations at sites where they are already
authorized to operate earth stations receiving telemetry signals from
space stations operating in the 17/24 GHz BSS service, must submit a
technical showing demonstrating their ability to maintain sufficient
margin in the 17 GHz band telemetry links in the presence of an
interfering DBS signal. This requirement will aid in ensuring that DBS
earth station operators can monitor the health and status of their
satellites in the presence of an interfering signal from the DBS feeder
link.

The proposed rules would also require that applicants proposing to
co-locate 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C earth stations at sites where they are
already authorized to operate DBS feeder link earth stations must submit
to the Commission a technical showing which demonstrates their ability
to maintain sufficient margin in their 17 GHz band telemetry links in
the presence of an interfering DBS signal. This requirement will aid in
ensuring that the BSS TT&C earth station operators will be able to
maintain their telecommand link in order to maintain control of their
satellites.

Finally, the proposed rules would require that each applicant for a
feeder-link earth station license that proposes to transmit with
e.i.r.p. spectral density levels in excess of 5.6 dBW/Hz, under clear
sky conditions, shall submit (1) link budget analyses of its proposed
operations, along with a detailed written explanation of how each uplink
and each transmitted satellite carrier density figure is derived, and
(2) a narrative summary which indicates whether there are margin
shortfalls in any of the current baseline services as a result of the
addition of the applicant's higher power service. If there are such
shortfalls, each applicant must submit an explanation of how the
applicant intends to resolve the margin shortfalls. In addition, such
applicants shall certify that all potentially affected parties
acknowledge, and do not object to, the applicant's use of the higher
power densities. This requirement will aid in ensuring that earth
station operators proposing to operate in excess of the level described
above will not cause harmful interference to adjacent co-frequency
satellites.

The Commission does not expect significant costs to be associated with
these proposals, if adopted. Therefore, we do not anticipate that the
burden of compliance would be greater for smaller entities.

> **E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
> Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered**

The RFA requires that, to the extent consistent with the objectives of
applicable statutes, the analysis shall discuss significant alternatives
such as: (1) the establishment of differing compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into account the resources
available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule
for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design,
standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part
thereof, for small entities.[^249]

The proposed rules are necessary for the efficient operation of the
17/24 GHz BSS band, which is expected to introduce a new generation of
broadband services to the public. We are provisionally considering rules
and procedures for operation in the 17/24 GHz BSS band, including
requirements for a licensing framework , service obligations, license
terms, non-U.S.-licensed satellite operators, public interest
obligations, equal employment opportunity requirements, geographic
service requirements, , tracking, telemetry and command operations, and
orbital spacing requirements. We seek comment on alternatives to these
provisionally considered rules and procedures that would minimize the
economic impact on small entities. We also seek comment on the
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements that
take into account the resources available to small entities.

In addition, the Commission is provisionally considering the adoption of
rules that would facilitate adjacent band operations, reverse band
operations, and shared band operations. We believe that these proposed
rules, which may require a technical showing demonstrating the
licensee's ability to operate without causing interference to other
satellites, are necessary for the efficient administration of bandwidth
because they will ensure that operators in the 17/24 GHz BSS band and
the DBS service can operate compatibly. We have considered alternatives
and believe these are the most equitable solutions to the potential
interference problems posed by the operation of the 17/24 GHz BSS
service. For example, one alternative is to require that technical
showings be made after operation has begun. We rejected this alternative
because we concluded that it would not be as efficient as requiring that
technical showings be made before operation. This is because, in many
instances, harmful interference will invariably occur, which will lead
to disruptions in service. By requiring that technical showings be made
prior to operation, we anticipate that there will be far fewer instances
of harmful interference. We seek comment on viable alternatives to these
rules or their reporting requirements that would lessen the economic
impact on small entities. We also seek comment on the establishment of
differing compliance or reporting requirements that take into account
the resources available to small entities.

The *NPRM* seeks comment on these proposals, including the effectiveness
and utility of the proposals, and also seeks comment on how to minimize
undue burdens on small business.

> **F. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
> Proposed Rules**

None.

**APPENDIX B**

**Proposed Rules**

##### § 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.

+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| *       |            |          | **United |            | **FCC    |
| *Intern |            |          | States   |            | Rule     |
| ational |            |          | Table**  |            | P        |
| Table** |            |          |          |            | art(s)** |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| *       | **Region   | **Region | *        | **N        |          |
| *Region | 2**        | 3**      | *Federal | on-Federal |          |
| 1**     |            |          | Gove     | Go         |          |
|         |            |          | rnment** | vernment** |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| 17      | 17.3-17.7  | 1        | 1        | 17.3-17.7  | S        |
| .3-17.7 |            | 7.3-17.7 | 7.3-17.7 |            | atellite |
|         | FIXED      |          |          | FIXED      | Commun   |
| FIXED   | SATELLITE  | FIXED    | Radio    | -SATELLITE | ications |
| SA      |            | S        | location |            | (25)     |
| TELLITE | (Earth     | ATELLITE | US259    | (Earth     |          |
|         | -to-Space) |          | G59      | -to-Space) |          |
| (E      | 5.516      | (Earth-t |          | US271      |          |
| arth-to |            | o-Space) |          |            |          |
| -Space) | BR         | 5.516    |          | BR         |          |
| 5.516   | OADCASTING |          |          | OADCASTING |          |
|         | -SATELLITE | Radio    |          | -SATELLITE |          |
| Radiol  |            | location |          | NG163      |          |
| ocation | Rad        |          |          |            |          |
|         | iolocation | 5.514    |          | US259      |          |
| 5.514   |            |          |          |            |          |
|         | 5.514      |          |          |            |          |
|         | 5.515      |          |          |            |          |
|         | 5.517      |          |          |            |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| 17      | 17.7-17.8  | 1        | 1        | 17.7-17.8  | S        |
| .7-18.1 |            | 7.7-18.1 | 7.7-17.8 |            | atellite |
|         | FIXED      |          |          | FIXED      | Commun   |
| FIXED   |            | .FIXED   | .        |            | ications |
|         | FIXED      |          |          | FIXED      | (25      |
| F       | -SATELLITE | FIXED-S  | .        | -SATELLITE |          |
| IXED-SA |            | ATELLITE |          |            | A        |
| TELLITE | (Space     |          |          | (Earth     | uxiliary |
|         | -to-Earth) | (Space-t |          | -to-Space) | Broa     |
| (S      |            | o-Earth) |          | US271      | dcasting |
| pace-to | (Earth     | 5.484A   |          |            | (74)     |
| -Earth) | -to-Space) |          |          | NG144      |          |
| 5.484A  | 5.516      | (Earth-t |          |            | Cable TV |
|         |            | o-Space) |          |            | Relay    |
| (E      | BRO        | 5.516    |          |            | (78)     |
| arth-to | ADCASTING- |          |          |            |          |
| -Space) | SATELLITE  | MOBILE   |          |            | Fixed    |
| 5.516   |            |          |          |            | M        |
|         | Mobile     |          |          |            | icrowave |
| MOBILE  |            |          |          |            | (101)    |
|         | .          |          |          |            |          |
| .       |            |          |          |            |          |
|         | 5.515      |          |          |            |          |
|         | 5.517      |          |          |            |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
|         | 17.8-18.1  |          | 1        | 17.8-18.3  | A        |
|         |            |          | 7.8-18.3 |            | uxiliary |
|         | FIXED      |          |          | FIXED      | Broa     |
|         |            |          | FIXED-S  |            | dcasting |
|         | FIXED      |          | ATELLITE | 5.519      | (74)     |
|         | -SATELLITE |          |          | US334      |          |
|         |            |          | (Space-t | US271      | Cable TV |
|         | (Space     |          | o-Earth) |            | Relay    |
|         | -to-Earth) |          | G117     |            | (78)     |
|         | 5.484A     |          |          |            |          |
|         |            |          | 5.519    |            | Fixed    |
|         | (Earth     |          | US334    |            | M        |
|         | -to-Space) |          |          |            | icrowave |
|         | 5.516      |          |          |            | (101)    |
|         |            |          |          |            |          |
|         | MOBILE     |          |          |            |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
|         |            |          |          |            |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+

+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| *       |            |          | **United |            | **FCC    |
| *Intern |            |          | States   |            | Rule     |
| ational |            |          | Table**  |            | P        |
| Table** |            |          |          |            | art(s)** |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| *       | **Region   | **Region | *        | **N        |          |
| *Region | 2**        | 3**      | *Federal | on-Federal |          |
| 1**     |            |          | Gove     | Go         |          |
|         |            |          | rnment** | vernment** |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
| 24.7    | 2          | 24.      | 24.      | 2          | S        |
| 5-25.25 | 4.75-25.25 | 75-25.25 | 75-25.05 | 4.75-25.05 | atellite |
|         |            |          |          |            | Commun   |
| FIXED   | FIXED      | FIXED    | RADIONA  | FIXED      | ications |
|         | SATELLITE  |          | VIGATION | -SATELLITE | (25)     |
|         |            | FIXED    |          |            |          |
|         | (Earth     | S        |          | (Earth     | Aviation |
|         | -to-Space) | ATELLITE |          | -to-Space) | (87)     |
|         | 5.535      |          |          | NG167      |          |
|         |            | (Earth-t |          |            |          |
|         |            | o-Space) |          | RADIO      |          |
|         |            | 5.535    |          | NAVIGATION |          |
|         |            |          |          |            |          |
|         |            | Mobile   |          |            |          |
|         |            |          |          |            |          |
|         |            | 5.534    |          |            |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+
|         |            |          | 25.      | 2          | S        |
|         |            |          | 05-25.25 | 5.05-25.25 | atellite |
|         |            |          |          |            | Commun   |
|         |            |          |          | 2          | ications |
|         |            |          |          | 4.75-25.05 | (25)     |
|         |            |          |          |            |          |
|         |            |          |          | FIXED      | Fixed    |
|         |            |          |          | -SATELLITE | M        |
|         |            |          |          |            | icrowave |
|         |            |          |          | (Earth     | (101)    |
|         |            |          |          | -to-Space) |          |
|         |            |          |          | NG167      |          |
|         |            |          |          |            |          |
|         |            |          |          | FIXED      |          |
+---------+------------+----------+----------+------------+----------+

NG163 The allocation to the broadcasting-satellite service in the band
17.3--17.7 GHz shall come into effect on 1 April 2007. Use of the
17.3-17.7 GHz band by the broadcasting-satellite service is limited to
geostationary satellite orbit systems.

NG167 The use if the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) in the
band 24.75-25.25 GHz is limited to feeder links for the
broadcasting-satellite service. The allocation to the fixed-satellite
service (Earth-to-space) in the band 24.75-25.25 GHz shall come into
effect on 1 April 2007.

**§ 25.114 Applications for space station authorizations.**

\(d\) The following information in narrative form shall be contained in
each application:

\(15\) For satellite applications in the Direct Broadcast Satellite
service seeking to operate within \[TBD\] degrees of a geostationary
orbital location where a space station has already been authorized to
operate in the broadcasting-satellite service in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band
(space-to-Earth), a technical showing with regard to its telecommand
link margin in accordance with 25.148(g).

\(16\) For satellite applications in the 17/24 GHz
broadcasting-satellite service seeking to operate within \[TBD\] degrees
of a geostationary orbital location where a direct broadcast satellite
(DBS) space station has already been authorized to operate that has
feeder links in the in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band (Earth-to-space), a
technical showing with regard to the DBS system's telecommand link
margin as in accordance with 25.xxx(1).

\(17\) A description of the design and operational strategies that will
be used to mitigate orbital debris, including the following information:

**Revise § 25.121(a) to read as follows:**

**§ 25.121 License term and renewals.**

\(a\) *License Term*. Except for licenses for DBS and 17/24 GHz
facilities, licenses for facilities governed by this part will be issued
for a period 15 years. Licenses for DBS and 17/24 GHz space stations
licensed as broadcast facilities will be issued for a period of 8 years.
Licenses for DBS and 17/24 GHz space stations not licensed as broadcast
facilities will be issued for a period of 10 years.

**§ 25.148 Licensing Provisions for the Direct Broadcast Satellite
Service**

\(g\) *Co-location with 17/24 GHz BSS space stations.* A DBS applicant
seeking to operate within \[TBD\] degrees of a geostationary orbital
location where a space station has already been authorized to operate in
the broadcasting-satellite service in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band
(space-to-Earth), must submit to the Commission a technical showing
demonstrating its ability to maintain sufficient telecommand link margin
in the presence of the interfering BSS signal.

\(h\) *Co-location of DBS feeder links and 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C earth
stations.* Applicants proposing to co-locate their DBS feeder link earth
stations at sites where they are already authorized to operate earth
stations receiving telemetry signals from space stations operating in
the 17/24 GHz BSS service, must submit to the Commission a technical
showing demonstrating their ability to maintain sufficient margin in
their 17 GHz band telemetry links in the presence of the interfering DBS
feeder-link signal.

**§ 25.2xx Licensing requirements for 24 GHz band feeder link earth
stations transmitting to space stations in the broadcasting-satellite
service**

***\[new rule for subpart B -- Applications and Licenses, Earth
Stations\]***

\(a\) All applications for an FSS feeder-link earth station license in
the 24.75-25.25 GHz, band shall meet the following requirements:

\(1\) The feeder link earth station antenna shall not transmit with
e.i.r.p. spectral density levels in excess of 5.6 dBW/Hz, under clear
sky conditions, except as otherwise provided by this part.

\(2\) Each applicant for feeder-link earth station license(s) that
proposes levels in excess of those defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section shall submit link budget analyses of the operations proposed
along with a detailed written explanation of how each uplink and each
transmitted satellite carrier density figure is derived. Applicants
shall also submit a narrative summary which must indicate whether there
are margin shortfalls in any of the current baseline services as a
result of the addition of the applicant\'s higher power service, and if
so, how the applicant intends to resolve those margin short falls.
Applicants shall certify that all potentially affected parties (*i.e.,*
those 17/24 GHz GSO BSS satellite networks that are **\[TBD\]** degrees
apart) acknowledge and do not object to the use of the applicant\'s
higher power densities.

\(3\) Licensees authorized pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section
shall bear the burden of coordinating with any future applicants or
licensees whose proposed compliant operations at **\[TBD\]** degrees or
smaller orbital spacing, as defined by paragraph (a)(1) of this section,
is potentially or actually adversely affected by the operation of the
non-compliant licensee. If no good faith agreement can be reached,
however, the non-compliant licensee shall reduce its earth station power
density levels to be compliant with those specified in paragraph (a)(1)
of this section.

\(b\) Applicants proposing to co-locate their 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C earth
stations at sites where they are already authorized to operate DBS
feeder link earth stations, must submit to the Commission a technical
showing demonstrating their ability to maintain sufficient margin in
their 17 GHz band telemetry links in the presence of the interfering DBS
signal.

**§ 25.1xx Licensing Provisions for the 17/24 GHz Broadcasting Satellite
Service**

***\[new rule for subpart B -- Applications and Licenses, Space
Stations\]***

> \(a\) *License terms*. License terms for 17/24 GHz facilities are
> specified in § 25.121(a).
>
> \(b\) *Due Diligence*.
>
> \(c\) *Geographic service requirements*.
>
> \(d\) *Bond Requirement.*
>
> \(e\) *Co-location with DBS space stations.* A 17/24 GHz BSS applicant
> seeking to operate within \[TBD\] degrees of a geostationary orbital
> location where a space station has already been authorized to operate
> in the direct broadcast satellite (DBS) service in the 12.2-12.7 GHz
> band that is authorized to use feeder links in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band
> (Earth-to-space), must submit to the Commission a technical showing
> demonstrating its ability to avoid causing harmful interference to the
> DBS operator, such that the DBS system is able to maintain sufficient
> margin in its telecommand link in the presence of the interfering BSS
> signal.
>
> \(f\) *Limit on pending applications.*
>
> \(g\) *Milestone requirements.*
>
> \(h\) *Replacement satellites.*
>
> \(i\) *Non-U.S.-licensed satellites.*
>
> \(j\) *Public interest.*
>
> \(k\) *Equal employment opportunity.*

**§ 25.201 Definitions**

*Broadcasting-Satellite Service.* A radiocommunication service in which
signals transmitted or retransmitted by space stations are intended for
direct reception by the general public.

Note: In the broadcasting-satellite service, the term *direct reception*
shall encompass both individual reception and community reception.

**§. 25.202 Frequencies, frequency tolerance and emission limitations.**

(a)(1) Frequency band. The following frequencies are available for use
by the fixed-satellite service. Precise frequencies and bandwidths of
emission shall be assigned on a case-by-case basis. The Table follows:

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

Space-to-Earth (GHz) Earth-to-space (GHz)

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

3.7-4.2 ^\\1\\^ 5.925-6.425 ^\\1\\^

10.7-10.95 ^\\1\\12^ 12.75-13.25 ^\\1\\\ 12\\\ 14^

10.95-11.2 ^\\1\\2\\12^ 13.75-14 ^\\4\\12^

11.2-11.45 ^\\1\\12^ 14-14.2 ^\\5\\^

11.45-11.7 ^\\1\\2\\12^ 14.2-14.5

11.7-12.2 ^\\3^ 17.3-17.8 ^\\9^

12.2-12.7 ^\\13^ 24.75-25.25 ^\\17^

18.3-18.58 ^\\1\\10^ 27.5-29.5 ^\\1^

18.58-18.8 ^\\6\\10\\11^ 29.5-30

18.8-19.3 ^\\7\\10^ ^\\1\\^ 47.2-50.2

19.3-19.7 ^\\8\\10^

19.7-20.2 ^\\10^

37.5-40 ^\\15\\16^

37.6-38.6

40-42 ^\\16^

\\17\\ Use of the band 24.75-25.25 GHz by the fixed-satellite service
(Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for space stations in the
broadcasting-satellite service. The allocation to the fixed-satellite
service (Earth-to-space) in the band 24.75-25.25 GHz shall come into
effect on 1 April 2007.

\(8\) The following frequencies are available for use by the
Broadcasting-Satellite Service after 1 April 2007:

17.3-17.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) ^\\1\\^

17.7-17.8 GHz (space-to-Earth) ^\\2\\^

^\\1\\^ Use of the 17.3-17.7 GHz band by the broadcasting-satellite
service is limited to geostationary satellite orbit systems.

^\\2\\^ Use of the 17.7-17.8 GHz band (space-to-Earth) by the
broadcasting-satellite service is limited to transmissions from
geostationary satellite orbit systems to receiving earth stations
located outside of the United States and its Possessions.

**§ 25.208 Power flux density limits.**

\(c\) In the **\[**17.7-17.8 GHz**\]**, 18.3-18.8 GHz, 19.3-19.7 GHz,
22.55-23.00 GHz, 23.00-23.55 GHz, and 24.45-24.75 GHz frequency bands,
the power flux-density at the Earth\'s surface produced by emissions
from a space station for all conditions for all methods of modulation
shall not exceed the following values:

\(1\) -115 dB (W/m\\2\\) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between
0 and 5 degrees above the horizontal plane.

\(2\) -115 + 0.5 (d-5) dB (W/m\\2\\) in any 1 MHz band for angles of
arrival d (in degrees) between 5 and 25 degrees above the horizontal
plane.

\(3\) -105 dB (W/m\\2\\) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between
25 and 90 degrees above the horizontal plane.

**§25.2xx Technical requirements for space stations operating in the
17/24 GHz broadcasting-satellite service**

***\[new requirement for Subpart C -- Technical Standards\]***

\(a\) All space stations operating in the 17/24 GHz
broadcasting-satellite service shall employ state-of-the art full
frequency re-use either through the use of orthogonal polarizations
within the same beam and/or the use of spatially independent beams

**§ 25.2xx** **Special coordination requirements for DBS feeder link
earth stations to protect 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth stations**

***\[new requirement for Subpart C -- Technical Standards\]***

\(a\) *Coordination with 17/24 GHz BSS receiving earth stations.*
Feeder-link earth station applicant planning to operate in the 17.3-17.8
GHz band shall coordinate the proposed frequency usage with 17/24 GHz
BSS receiving earth stations, including 17/24 GHz BSS TT&C earth
stations, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Sec. 25.251.

\(b\) In computing the coordination distance for the transmitting DBS
feeder-link earth station, the applicant shall use the following
technical parameters:

+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| **Param   |         | *    | **Description**                        |
| eter(s)** |         | *Val |                                        |
|           |         | ue** |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Orbit     |         | GSO  | Orbit in which the space service in    |
|           |         |      | which receiving earth station operates |
|           |         |      | (GSO or NGSO)                          |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| M         |         | \[T  | Analog or digital                      |
| odulation |         | BD\] |                                        |
| at        |         |      |                                        |
| receiving |         |      |                                        |
| earth     |         |      |                                        |
| station   |         |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Receiving | *p~0~   | \[T  | Percentage of the time during which    |
| earth     | (%)*    | BD\] | interference from all sources may      |
| station   |         |      | exceed the threshold value             |
| int       |         |      |                                        |
| erference |         |      |                                        |
| p         |         |      |                                        |
| arameters |         |      |                                        |
| and       |         |      |                                        |
| criteria  |         |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *n*     | \[T  | Number of equivalent, equal level,     |
|           |         | BD\] | equal probability entries of           |
|           |         |      | interference, assumed to be            |
|           |         |      | uncorrelated for small percentages of  |
|           |         |      | the time                               |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *p(%)*  | \[T  | Percentage of the time during which    |
|           |         | BD\] | the interference from one source may   |
|           |         |      | exceed the permissible interference    |
|           |         |      | power value; since the entries of      |
|           |         |      | interference are not likely to occur   |
|           |         |      | simultaneously, *p=p~0~/n*             |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *N~L~   | \[T  | Link noise contribution                |
|           | (dB)*   | BD\] |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *M~s~   | \[T  | Link performance margin                |
|           | (dB)*   | BD\] |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *W      | \[T  | A thermal noise equivalence factor for |
|           | (dB)*   | BD\] | interfering emissions in the reference |
|           |         |      | bandwidth; it is positive when the     |
|           |         |      | interfering emissions would cause more |
|           |         |      | degradation than thermal noise         |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Receiving | *G~m~   | \[T  | On-axis gain of the receive earth      |
| earth     | (dBi)*  | BD\] | station antenna                        |
| station   |         |      |                                        |
| p         |         |      |                                        |
| arameters |         |      |                                        |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *G~r~*  | \[T  | Horizon antenna gain for the receive   |
|           |         | BD\] | earth station                          |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *       | \[T  | Minimum elevation angle of operation   |
|           | ε~min~* | BD\] | in degrees                             |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
|           | *T~e~   | \[T  | The thermal noise temperature of the   |
|           | (K)*    | BD\] | receiving system at the terminal of    |
|           |         |      | the receiving antenna                  |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Reference | *B      | \[T  | Reference bandwidth (Hz), *i.e.,* the  |
| Bandwidth | (Hz)*   | BD\] | bandwidth in the receiving station     |
|           |         |      | that is subject to the interference    |
|           |         |      | and over which the power of the        |
|           |         |      | interfering emission can be averaged   |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+
| Pe        | *       | \[T  | Permissible interference power of the  |
| rmissible | P~r~(p) | BD\] | interfering emission (dBW) in the      |
| int       | (dBW)   |      | reference bandwidth to be exceeded no  |
| erference | in B*   |      | more than p% of the time at the        |
| power     |         |      | receiving antenna terminal of a        |
|           |         |      | station subject to interference, from  |
|           |         |      | a single source of interference, using |
|           |         |      | the general formula:                   |
|           |         |      |                                        |
|           |         |      | *P~r~(p) = 10 log (k T~e~ B) + N~L~ +  |
|           |         |      | 10 log (10 ^Ms/10^ -1) - W*            |
+-----------+---------+------+----------------------------------------+

\(c\) The feeder-link earth station applicant shall provide each such
17/24 GHz BSS licensee, and prior-filed applicant with the technical
details of the proposed earth station and the relevant coordination
distance calculations that were made. At a minimum, the earth station
applicant shall provide the 17/24 GHz BSS licensee, and/or prior filed
applicants with the following technical information:

\(i\) The geographical coordinates of the proposed earth station
antenna(s);

\(ii\) Proposed operating frequency band(s) and emission(s);

\(iii\) Antenna center height above ground and ground elevation above
mean sea level;

\(iv\) Antenna gain pattern(s) in the plane of the main beam;

\(v\) Longitude range of geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) satellites
at which antenna may be pointed, for proposed earth station antenna(s)
accessing GSO satellites;

\(vi\) Horizon elevation plot;

\(vii\) Antenna horizon gain plot(s) determined in accordance with the
procedure in Section 2.1 of Annex 5 to Appendix 7;

\(viii\) Minimum elevation angle;

\(ix\) Maximum equivalent isotropically radiated power (e.i.r.p.)
density in the main beam in any **\[TBD\]** Hz band;

\(x\) Maximum available RF transmit power density in any **\[TBD\]** Hz
band at the input terminals of the antenna(s);

\(xi\) Maximum permissible RF interference power level as determined in
accordance with Annex 7 to Appendix 7 for all applicable percentages of
time; and

\(xii\) A plot of the coordination distance contour(s) and rain scatter
coordination distance contour(s) as determined by Table 2 of Section 3
to Appendix 7.

**§ 25.251 Special requirements for coordination**.

\(a\) The administrative aspects of the coordination process are set
forth in Sec. 101.103 of this chapter in the case of coordination of
terrestrial stations with earth stations, and in Sec. 25.203 in the case
of coordination of earth stations with terrestrial stations.

\(b\) The administrative aspects of the coordination process in the case
of coordination of DBS feeder-link earth stations with 17/24 GHz BSS
receiving earth stations are set forth in Section 25.xxx of this chapter
in combination with the additional technical parameters set forth in
\[**TBD**\]

\(c\) The technical aspects of coordination are based on Appendix 7 of
the International Telecommunication Union Radio Regulations and certain
recommendations of the ITU Radiocommunication Sector (available at the
FCC\'s Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554).

**APPENDIX C**

**Technical Characteristics of Radiolocation Systems**

**in the 15.7-17.3 GHz Band**

Table C-1 shows technical characteristics of radar systems that will
likely impact the BSS earth station receivers, namely, the airborne
ground-mapping radars. The lower power radars of "System 1" are included
because of wider antenna beamwidths (e.g., mainbeam and sidelobe), which
could increase the potential for interference. These systems currently
tend to operate in the sub-band 16.2-17.3 GHz by provision of National
Telecommunications and Information Administration Manual of Regulations
and Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency Management Section 8.2.46,
but this could change at any time to also allow ground-based radars. The
airborne radar systems tend to have antenna pointing capabilities such
that mainbeam-to-mainbeam coupling can occur with BSS subscriber earth
station antennas. The information provided in Table C-1 should be
sufficient for general calculation to assess the compatibility between
these radars and BSS systems.

Table C-1. Characteristics of Radar Systems Operating in the\
16.2-17.3 GHz Frequency Range

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Characteristics**   **System 1**             **System 2**
  --------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
  Function              Search, track and        Search, track and
                        ground-mapping radar     ground-mapping radar
                        (multi‑function)         (multi‑function)

  Platform type         Airborne,\               Airborne,\
                        low power                high power

  Tuning range (GHz)    16.2-17.3                16.29-17.21

  Modulation            Linear FM pulse          Linear and non-Linear FM
                                                 pulse

  Transmit peak power   \< 80                    \< 3260
  (W)                                            

  Pulse width (s)       18.2; 49                 120-443

  Pulse rise/fall time  20                       4
  (ns)                                           

  Pulse repetition rate 2041; 5495               900‑1600
  (pps)                                          

  Duty Cycle            4-25%                    \< 50%

  Output device         Travelling wave tube     Travelling wave tube

  Antenna pattern type  Fan/pencil               Fan

  Antenna type          Slotted waveguide        Phased array

  Antenna polarization  Linear vertical          Linear vertical

  Mainbeam Antenna gain 25.6                     38.0
  (dBi)                                          

  Antenna elevation     9.7                      2.5
  beamwidth (deg)                                

  Antenna azimuthal     6.2                      2.2
  beamwidth (deg)                                

  Antenna horizontal    0-30 deg/s               0-5 deg/s
  scan rate                                      

  Antenna horizontal    ±45 deg to ±135 deg\     ±30 deg\
  scan type             (mechanical)             (electronic, conical)
  (continuous, random,                           
  sector, etc.)                                  

  Antenna vertical scan 0-30 deg/s               0-5 deg/s
  rate                                           

  Antenna vertical scan --10 to --50 deg\        0 to --90 deg\
  type.(\*)             (mechanical)             (electronic, conical)

  Antenna 1st side-lobe 10 dBi @ 31 deg          18 dBi @ 1.7 deg
  gain level                                     

  Antenna height        Aircraft altitude        Aircraft altitude

  Chirp bandwidth (MHz) \< 640                   \< 1200

  Transmitter RF        \< 622\                  \< 1200\
  emission\             \< 725\                  \< 1220\
  bandwidth             \< 868\                  \< 1300\
  (MHz).(\*\*)\         \< 1040                  \< 1400
  --3 dB\                                        
  --20 dB\                                       
  ‑40 dB\                                        
  ‑60 dB                                         
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

(\*) 0 degrees represents a horizontal orientation. Angles below
horizontal are negative.

> (\*\*) The radar center frequency is lowered if necessary to ensure
> that the -20 dB bandwidth is contained below 17.3 GHz. This may cause
> radar emissions to fall below 16.2 GHz, but they will still be within
> the allocated band.

[^1]: BSS is the international term used for a radiocommunication
    service in which signals transmitted or retransmitted by space
    stations are intended for direct reception by the general public.
    *See, e.g.,* 47 C.F.R. § 2.1. In this item, the term "17/24 GHz BSS
    band" generally refers to the space-to-Earth (downlink) frequencies
    at 17.3-17.7 GHz and the corresponding Earth-to-space (uplink)
    frequencies at 24.75-25.25 GHz.

[^2]: DBS is the term used in the United States to describe the domestic
    implementation of BSS in the 12.2-12.7 GHz frequency bands. *See* 47
    C.F.R. §§ 25.201, 25.202(a)(7).

[^3]: These frequency bands are the C-band at 3700-4200/5925-6425 MHz
    and the Ku-band at 11.7-12.2/14.0-14.5 GHz.

[^4]: *See* fn. 2, *supra.*

[^5]: Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use, *Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, 13 FCC Rcd 19923,19958, para. 79 (1998) ("*18 GHz
    NPRM")*.

[^6]: The ITU, based in Geneva, Switzerland, is a United Nations
    specialized organization that deals with international
    communications issues.

[^7]: International Telecommunication Union, Final Acts of the World
    Administrative Radio Conference (Malaga-Torremolinos, 1992). The ITU
    Radio Regulations divide the world into three regions. Generally,
    Region 1 includes Africa, Europe, and northern and western portions
    of Asia; Region 2 includes the Americas and Greenland; Region 3
    includes southern portions of Asia, Australia, and the South
    Pacific. *See* ITU Radio Regulations, Article 5, Section 1.

[^8]: *See also* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106, footnote 5.517.

[^9]: The 17.3-17.7 GHz band is also allocated to the fixed and mobile
    services on a secondary basis in the countries listed in footnote
    5.514 of the ITU Radio Regulations. *See also* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106,
    footnote 5.514.

[^10]: Specifically, footnote 5.518 of the ITU Radio Regulations reads
    as follows: "*Different category of service:* in Region 2, the
    allocation of the band 17.7-17.8 GHz to the mobile service is on a
    primary basis until 31 March 2007." *See also* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106,
    footnote 5.518.

[^11]: *See* footnote 5.517 of the ITU Radio Regulations and 47 C.F.R. §
    2.106, footnote 5.517. Two other international footnotes impact the
    sharing or use of the 17.3-17.8 GHz band. In Region 2, footnote
    5.515 of the ITU Radio Regulations provides that "\[i\]n the band
    17.3-17.8 GHz, sharing between the fixed-satellite service
    (Earth-to-space) and the broadcasting-satellite service shall also
    be in accordance with the provisions of § 1 of Annex 4 of Appendix
    30A." *See also* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106, footnote 5.515. Further,
    footnote 5.516 of the ITU Radio Regulations provides that in Region
    2, "\[t\]he use of the band 17.3-18.1 GHz by geostationary-satellite
    systems in the fixed-satellite service (Earth-to-space) is limited
    to feeder links for the broadcasting-satellite service. The use of
    the band 17.3-17.8 GHz in Region 2 by systems in the fixed-satellite
    service (Earth-to-space) is limited to geostationary satellites. For
    the use of the band 17.3-17.8 GHz in Region 2 by feeder links for
    the broadcasting-satellite service in the band 12.2-12.7 GHz, *see*
    Article 11. The use of the bands 17.3-18.1 GHz (Earth-to-space) in
    Regions 1 and 3 and 17.8-18.1 GHz (Earth-to-space) in Region 2 by
    non-geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service
    is subject to application of the provisions of No. 9.12 for
    coordination with other non-geostationary-satellite systems in the
    fixed-satellite service. Non-geostationary-satellite systems in the
    fixed-satellite service shall not claim protection from
    geostationary-satellite networks in the fixed-satellite service
    operating in accordance with the Radio Regulations, irrespective of
    the dates of receipt by the Bureau of the complete coordination or
    notification information, as appropriate, for the
    non-geostationary-satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service
    and of the complete coordination or notification information, as
    appropriate, for the geostationary-satellite networks, and No. 5.43A
    does not apply. Non-geostationary-satellite systems in the
    fixed-satellite service in the above bands shall be operated in such
    a way that any unacceptable interference that may occur during their
    operation shall be rapidly eliminated." *See also* 47 C.F.R. §
    2.106, footnote 5.516.

[^12]: Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use, *Report and Order,* 15 FCC Rcd
    13430 (2000).

[^13]: *Id.* at 13482.

[^14]: *1d.* at 13478.

[^15]: *Id.* at 13476, 13478.

[^16]: *Id.* at 13477-78.

[^17]: *18 GHz Report & Order*, 15 FCC Rcd*.*at 13476, 13479.

[^18]: *Id.* at 13476, 13479-80.

[^19]: *Id.*

[^20]: In June 1997, DIRECTV filed three applications for authority to
    construct, launch, and operate a 17/24 GHz BSS system at the 96.5°
    W.L., 101° W.L., and 105.5° W.L. orbital locations. *See* File Nos.
    SAT-LOA-19970605-00049 (S2242), SAT-LOA-19970605-00050 (S2243) and
    SAT-LOA-19970605-00051 (S2244), as amended by
    SAT-AMD-20051118-00224, SAT-AMD-20051118-00225,
    SAT-AMD-20051118-00226. (collectively, "*DIRECTV Application*").
    DIRECTV proposes to use these satellites to provide direct-to-home
    and direct-to-business delivery of video, audio, data, and
    multimedia services. DIRECTV also filed a Petition for Rulemaking
    concurrently with its application, requesting that the Commission
    allocate spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band for BSS downlinks, and
    in the 24.75-25.25 GHz band to FSS for use as BSS feeder links.
    DIRECTV's Petition for Rulemaking was partially granted by the *18
    GHz Report & Order*, 15 FCC Rcd*.* at 13477-78, para. 99.

[^21]: In March 2002, Pegasus filed applications for authority to
    construct, launch, and operate a BSS system that will operate at the
    91º W.L., 101º W.L., and 110º W.L. orbital locations. *See* File
    Nos. SAT-LOA-20020322-00032, SAT-LOA-20020322-00033,
    SAT-LOA-20020322-00034. These applications were dismissed in
    December 2005 for failure to submit the required orbital debris
    showings. *See* Policy Branch Information, Actions Taken, *Public
    Notice,* Report No. SAT-00332, DA 05-3152 (rel. Dec. 7, 2005).
    Pegasus filed a Petition for Reconsideration, which was denied by
    the Bureau in an Order dated June 6, 2006 (DA 06-1220). In April
    2006, Pegasus re-filed its applications seeking authority to
    construct, launch, and operate a BSS system at the 91º W.L., 101º
    W.L., and 110º W.L. orbital locations. *See* File Nos.
    SAT-LOA-20060412-00042, SAT-LOA-20060412-00043, and
    SAT-LOA-20060412-00044 (collectively, "*Pegasus Application*"). In
    addition, Pegasus' parent company, Pegasus Development Corporation,
    filed modification applications to add similar satellite payloads to
    two of its licensed Ka-band satellites at the 107º W.L. and 117º
    W.L. orbital locations (SAT-MOD-20020322-00035 (117º W.L.) and
    SAT-MOD-20020322-00036 (107º W.L.)) (*Pegasus Ka-band Mod.
    Applications*). These applications were dismissed as moot in
    November 2004 because Pegasus chose not to develop a Ka-band BSS
    system. *See* Letter from Fern J. Jarmulnek, Deputy Chief, Satellite
    Division, Int'l. Bur., FCC to Bruce D. Jacobs, Esq., Shaw Pittman
    LLP (November 17, 2004).

[^22]: EchoStar filed an application in March 2002 for authority to
    construct, launch, and operate three BSS satellites at the 110°
    W.L., 114.5° W.L., and 119° W.L. orbital locations. EchoStar
    proposes to use these satellites to supplement its multichannel
    video program distribution offerings to residential subscribers in
    the United States, and to offer additional services to business
    users and international consumers as regulatory approvals are
    obtained in other countries. *See* File Nos. SAT-LOA-20020328-00050
    (S2440), SAT-LOA-20020328-00051 (S2441), and SAT-LOA-20020328-00052
    (S2442), as amended by SAT-AMD-20051118-00245,
    SAT-AMD-20051118-00246, SAT-AMD-20051118-00247 (collectively,
    "*EchoStar Application"*).

[^23]: In February 2005, Intelsat filed an application for authority to
    construct, launch, and operate four BSS satellites at the 67.5°
    W.L., 89.0° W.L., 97.0° W.L., and 121.0° W.L. orbital locations.
    Intelsat proposes to use these satellites to provide video, audio,
    data, and multimedia services to residential subscribers in the
    United States, as well as Canada, Central America, and South
    America, subject to obtaining the requisite non-U.S. regulatory
    approvals to do so. *See* Intelsat North America LLC, Application
    for Authority to Construct, Launch and Operate a Direct Broadcast
    Satellite System Comprised of Four Satellites in the 17 GHz and 25
    GHz Bands, File Nos. SAT-LOA-20050210-00028 (S2659),
    SAT-LOA-20050210-00029 (S2660), SAT-LOA-20050210-00030 (S2661) and
    SAT-LOA-20050210-00031 (S2662) SAT-AMD-20051118-00238,
    SAT-AMD-20051118-00239, SAT-AMD-20051118-00240, and
    SAT-AMD-20051118-00241 (collectively, "*Intelsat Application*").

[^24]: Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and
    Policies, *First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, 18 FCC Rcd 10760, 10764, n. 4 (2003) ("*First Space
    Station Licensing Reform Order"*). These rules became effective on
    August 27, 2003.

[^25]: 17/24 GHz BSS is an unplanned band, as opposed to a planned band,
    which is a band for which the ITU has assigned frequencies at
    certain orbital locations to each country.

[^26]: Definition of DBS, *see* fn 2, *supra*. 47 C.F.R. § 25.202 and
    25.202(a)(7). *Cf.* definition of BSS, *see* fn. 1, *supra*.

[^27]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.158. In contrast, under the modified
    processing round approach for NGSO-like satellite systems, the
    Commission announces a cut-off date for filing applications and then
    divides the available spectrum equally among the qualified
    applicants. *See First Space Station Licensing Reform Order,* 18 FCC
    Rcd 10760, 10792-10822, paras. 71-159 (2003). *See also* 47 C.F.R. §
    25.158.

[^28]: The Commission determined that in cases where there are no
    service rules establishing criteria for sharing between GSO and NGSO
    satellite systems in a particular frequency band, we will consider
    only applications of the kind that is filed first. In this case, all
    the 17/24 GHz BSS band applications propose GSO satellites.

[^29]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.1107, 9.

[^30]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.1107, 3.

[^31]: 47 U.S.C. § 309(j).

[^32]: *See* *Northpoint Technology, Ltd. and Compass Systems, Inc. v.
    Federal Communications Commission*, 412 F.3d 145 (D.C. Cir. 2005)
    (*Northpoint v. FCC*).

[^33]: Open-Market Reorganization for the Betterment of International
    Telecommunications Act, Pub. L. No. 106-180, 114 Stat. 48 (2000),
    *as amended*, Pub. L. No. 107-233, 116 Stat. 1480 (2002), *as
    amended* Pub. L. No. 108-228, 118 Stat. 644 (2004), *as amended,*
    Pub. L. No. 108-371, 118 Stat. 1752 (2004). The ORBIT Act amended
    the Satellite Communications Act of 1962, 47 U.S.C. § 701 *et seq.*
    (Satellite Act) and is *codified* *at* 47 U.S.C. § 761 *et seq.*
    Section 647 of the ORBIT Act states that "\[n\]otwithstanding any
    other provision of law, the Commission shall not have the authority
    to assign by competitive bidding orbital locations or spectrum used
    for the provision of international or global satellite
    communications services. The President shall oppose in the
    International Telecommunication Union and in other bilateral and
    multilateral fora any assignment by competitive bidding of orbital
    locations or spectrum used for the provision of such services."
    *See* 47 U.S.C. § 765f.

[^34]: *Id*.

[^35]: For example, the ITU first in time filing policy applies to the
    17/24 GHz service. Thus, a country filing first at the ITU obtains
    superior international coordination rights at that orbital location.
    *See* ITU Radio Regulations, Articles 7, 8, 9, and 11.

[^36]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.164. Under this milestone schedule, the licensee
    must enter into a binding, non-contingent construction contract
    within one year of grant; complete critical design review within two
    years; begin construction within three years; and launch and operate
    the satellite within five years of grant.

[^37]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.165.

[^38]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.159.

[^39]: *See, e.g*., 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.143(e) (reporting requirements for
    1.6/2.4 GHz mobile-satellite service (MSS) and 2 GHz MSS; 25.144(c)
    (reporting requirements for satellite digital audio radio service
    (SDARS); 25.145(f) (reporting requirements for fixed-satellite
    service in the 20/30 GHz bands); 25.10(l) (reporting requirements
    for FSS in the 4/6 GHz band). Other elements of the annual reports
    include a listing of non-scheduled transponder outages that last
    more than 30 minutes and identification of transponders not
    available for service or not performing to specifications. *See id*.

[^40]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.121(a).

[^41]: *Id*. Changes in the license terms for DBS space stations were
    initially addressed in the *DBS Auction Order*, which adopted a
    ten-year license term for non-broadcast DBS space stations. *See*
    *DBS Auction Order*, 11 FCC Rcd at 9762, para. 130*.*

[^42]: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 granted the Commission
    authority to "prescribe the period or periods for which licenses
    shall be granted and renewed ... ." Telecommunications Act of 1996,
    Pub. L. No. 104-104, Title II, § 203, 110 Stat. 56, 112, (1996)
    (amending Section 307 of the Communications Act to eliminate
    ten-year term and creating new Section 307(c)(1)).

[^43]: Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and
    Policies, *First Order on Reconsideration and Fifth Report and
    Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 12673, 12657, at para. 54 (2004) ("*Fifth Space
    Station Reform Order"*), *citing* Amendment of the Commission's
    Space Station Licensing Rules and Policies, *Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, 17 FCC Rcd 3847, 3887, at para. 119 (2002) ("*Space
    Station Reform NPRM")*; *citing* Assignment of Orbital Locations to
    Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, *Memorandum
    Opinion and Order*, 3 FCC Rcd 6972, 6976 n. 31 (1988); Hughes
    Communications Galaxy, Inc., *Order and Authorization*, 6 FCC Rcd
    72, 74 n. 7 (1991); GE American Communications, Inc., *Order and
    Authorization*, 10 FCC Rcd 13775, 13775-76, at para. 6 (1995). The
    Commission's rules define a "replacement" satellite as one that is
    authorized to operate at the same orbit location, in the same
    frequency bands, and with the same coverage area as one of the
    licensees existing satellites and will be brought to use at
    "approximately the same time as ... the existing satellite is
    retired." *See, e.g.*, 47 C.F.R. § 25.143(c).

[^44]: *Fifth Space Station Reform Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 12657, para.
    54, *citing Space Station Reform NPRM*, 17 FCC Rcd at 3887, para.
    119, *citing 1988 Orbit Assignment Order*, 3 FCC Rcd at 6976 n. 31;
    *GE Americom Replacement Order*, 10 FCC Rcd at 13775-76, para. 6.

[^45]: *Fifth Space Station Reform Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 12657, para.
    54, *citing First Space Station Reform Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 10856,
    paras. 253-54.

[^46]: *First Space Station Reform Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 10856, para.
    253.

[^47]: *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*, IB Docket No.
    96-111, 12 FCC Rcd 24094 (1997) ("*DISCO II"* or *"DISCO II
    Order"*).

[^48]: *DISCO II*, 12 FCC Rcd at 24112, para. 39. The WTO came into
    being on January 1, 1995, pursuant to the Marrakesh Agreement
    Establishing the World Trade Organization (the Marrakesh Agreement).
    33 I.L.M. 1125 (1994). The Marrakesh Agreement includes multilateral
    agreements on trade in goods, services, intellectual property, and
    dispute settlement. The General Agreement on Trade in Services
    (GATS) is Annex 1B of the Marrakesh Agreement. 33 I.L.M. 1167
    (1994). The WTO Basic Telecom Agreement was incorporated into the
    GATS by the Fourth Protocol to the GATS (April 11, 1997), 36 I.L.M.
    354 (1997) (Fourth Protocol to the GATS). The WTO Basic Telecom
    Agreement also contains specific commitments with respect to market
    access and national treatment commitments made by WTO members.

[^49]: *DISCO II*, 12 FCC Rcd at 24134, para. 92.

[^50]: *First Space Station Reform Order,* 18 FCC Rcd at 10776, para.
    30. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.137. Thus, foreign entities must file a
    Schedule S, providing all the information required in Section 25.114
    (c)of the Commission\'s rules. 47 C.F.R. § 25.114(c).

[^51]: Section 25 of the 1992 Cable Act is codified at Section 335 of
    the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. § 335.

[^52]: 47 U.S.C. § 335(b)(5). Definitions set by other statutes or rules
    may apply in different settings. *See, e.g.,* Section 1012 of the
    Local TV Act (Prevention of Interference to Direct Broadcast
    Satellite Services), which defines "Direct Broadcast Satellite
    Service" as "any direct broadcast satellite system operating in the
    direct broadcast satellite frequency band," which this statute
    defines as "the band of frequencies at 12.2 to 12.7 gigahertz." 47
    U.S.C. § 1110(c).

[^53]: Implementation of Section 25 of the Cable Television Consumer
    Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Direct Broadcast Satellite
    Public Interest Obligations*, Report and Order*, 13 FCC Rcd 23254
    (1998) (*"First Report and Order"*)*.*

[^54]: In 2002, the Commission released a *Report and Order* eliminating
    Part 100 of the Commission's Rules. The Commission moved Section
    100.5 to Section 25.701 and eliminated the reference to entities
    licensed pursuant to Part 100. Instead, the new rule in section
    25.701 (a)(1)defines DBS Providers as entities licensed to operate
    satellites in the 12.2-12.7 DBS frequency bands. *See* Policies and
    Rules for the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, *Report and
    Order,* 17 FCC Rcd 11331 at paras. 22-24 (2002) (*"Part 100 Report &
    Order"*). For purposes of this section of the *NPRM*, any reference
    to Part 100 licensees means entities defined in Section
    25.701(a)(1).

[^55]: The Ku-band frequencies referenced in the statute are 11.7
    GHz-12.2 GHz and 14.0 GHz-14.5 GHz.

[^56]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.701(a).

[^57]: *See 18 GHz Report & Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13475, paras. 96-99.

[^58]: 17 U.S.C. §§ 119 &122.

[^59]: 17 U.S.C. § 119 (d)(6).

[^60]: 17 U.S.C. § 122. *See also* 47 U.S.C. § 338.

[^61]: *See* 47 U.S.C. § 338.

[^62]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.601.

[^63]: 47 C.F.R. Part 73.

[^64]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.148(c).

[^65]: *See* In the Matter of EchoStar Satellite LLC, *Memorandum
    Opinion and Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 6075 (2004) (In this Order, the
    International Bureau granted EchoStar's request for a waiver of the
    geographic service rule for its EchoStar 4 satellite at the 157°
    W.L. orbital location because service to Alaska and Hawaii was not
    technically feasible from that satellite at that particular orbital
    location, and EchoStar was providing service to Alaska and Hawaii
    from its satellites at the 119° orbital location.); In re EchoStar
    Satellite Corporation, DIRECTSAT Corporation, EchoStar DBS
    Corporation, *Memorandum Opinion and Order,* 13 FCC Rcd 8595 (1998)
    (In this Order, the International Bureau granted EchoStar's request
    for a waiver of the geographic service rule for its EchoStar 1
    satellite at the 148° W.L. orbital location because service to
    Hawaii was not technically feasible from that satellite at that
    particular orbital location, and EchoStar pledged to provide service
    to Hawaii from its satellite at the 119.2° W.L. orbital location.).

[^66]: 17 U.S.C. §§ 119, 122. *See* para. 21 *supra.*

[^67]: 47 U.S.C. § 338.

[^68]: The Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of
    2004 ("SHVERA"), Pub. L. No. 108-447, §210, 118 Stat 2809 (2004).

[^69]: 47 U.S.C. § 338.

[^70]: *See* In the Matter of Implementation of Section 210 of the
    Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 to
    Amend Section 338 of the Communications Act, Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking, MB Docket No.181, FCC 05-92 (released May 2, 2005).

[^71]: *See* ITU Radio Regulations, Article 9 and Article 11.

[^72]: *See* Review of the Emergency Alert System, *Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking*, EB Docket No. 04-296, 19 FCC Rcd 15775 (2004) (*EAS
    NPRM*).

[^73]: *Id.*, at 15786, para 29.

[^74]: *See* Review of the Emergency Alert System, *First Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, EB Docket No.
    04-296, FCC 05-191 (rel. Nov. 10, 2005) (*EAS First Report and Order
    and Further Notice*).

[^75]: *Id*. at para. 2.

[^76]: *Id*. at para 68.

[^77]: *Id*. at para 49. In the *EAS First Report and Order and Further
    Notice*, the Commission defined DBS providers for EAS purposes to
    include: (1) entities licensed to operate satellites in the 12.2 to
    12.7 GHz DBS frequency bands; (2) entities licensed to operate
    satellites in the Ku band fixed satellite service (FSS) and that
    sell or lease capacity to a video programming distributor that
    offers service directly to consumers providing a sufficient number
    of channels so that four percent of the total applicable programming
    channels yields a set aside of at least one channel of non
    commercial programming pursuant to section 25.701(e) of the
    Commission's rules, or (3) non U.S. licensed satellite operators in
    the Ku band that offer video programming directly to consumers in
    the United States pursuant to an earth station license issued under
    part 25 of this title and that offer a sufficient number of channels
    to consumers so that four percent of the total applicable
    programming channels yields a set aside of one channel of non
    commercial programming pursuant to section 25.701(e) of the
    Commission's rules. *Id.*

[^78]: *See* *18 GHz Report & Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13475, paras. 95-99.

[^79]: *Id.* *See also* Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency
    Band, Blanket Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2
    GHz and 27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of
    Additional Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz
    Frequency Bands for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use, *First Order on
    Reconsideration,* 16 FCC Rcd 19808, 19822-23, paras. 30-31 (2001).

[^80]: *See* *DIRECTV Application* at 7; *EchoStar Application* at 4 and
    23; *Pegasus Application* at 3; and *Intelsat Application* at 3.

[^81]: *See* *EchoStar Application* at 4 and 23; and *Intelsat
    Application* at 3. The application of DIRECTV was filed in 1997
    prior to the Commission's decision to stop the BSS allocation at
    17.7 GHz.

[^82]: *See EchoStar Application* at 4 and 23.

[^83]: *See Pegasus Application* at 3.

[^84]: *See Intelsat Application* at 3.

[^85]: In the United States and its possessions, reception of BSS
    (space-to-Earth) transmissions in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band from
    foreign-licensed satellites would similarly not be authorized or
    protected.

[^86]: The relocation of FS in the 18 GHz band in Docket 04-143 is
    currently under review by the Commission*. See* Rechannelization of
    the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band for Fixed Microwave Services under
    Part 101 of the Commission\'s Rules, WT Docket No. 04-143, *Notice
    of Proposed Rulemaking*, FCC 04-77 (rel. April 19, 2004).

[^87]: *See* Article 5 of the ITU Radio Regulations and footnote 5.517,
    which reads as follows: In Region 2, the allocation to the
    broadcasting-satellite service in the band 17.3-17.8 GHz shall come
    into effect on 1 April 2007. *See also* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106, footnote
    5.517.

[^88]: We note that licensing of earth stations in a foreign country
    does not fall within the purview of the Commission. Authorization
    for any such earth stations would be granted by the relevant foreign
    administration.

[^89]: *See, e.g.*, 47 C.F.R. § 25.208.

[^90]: *See* note 12 *supra*.

[^91]: In the 17.7-19.7 GHz band these pfd limits were as follows: (1)
    -115 dB (W/m\\2\\) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between 0
    and 5 degrees above the horizontal plane; (2) -115+0.5 (δ-5) dB
    (W/m\\2\\) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival δ (in degrees)
    between 5 and 25 degrees above the horizontal plane; (3) -105 dB
    (W/m\\2\\) in any 1 MHz band for angles of arrival between 25 and 90
    degrees above the horizontal plane.

[^92]: *See* Table 21-4 of the ITU Radio Regulations. These limits are:

    -115 dBW/m^2^/MHz for 0º ≤ δ ≤ 5º

    -115 + 0.5(δ-5) dBW/m^2^/MHz for 5º ≤ δ ≤ 25º

    -105 dBW/m^2^/MHz for 25º ≤ δ ≤ 90º

    where δ is the angle of arrival above the horizontal plane.

[^93]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.202(g).

[^94]: *See* In the Matter of EchoStar Satellite LLC Application for
    Authority to Construct, Launch and Operate a Geostationary Satellite
    Using the Extended Ku-band Frequencies in the Fixed-Satellite
    Service at the 109° W.L. Orbital Location, *Order and
    Authorization,* 20 FCC Rcd 930 at para. 17 (2004).

[^95]: *See DIRECTV Application, EchoStar Application, Pegasus
    Application and Intelsat Application.*

[^96]: *See* Licensing of Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-
    Satellite Service and Related Revisions of Part 25 of the Rules and
    Regulations, *Report and Order*, CC Docket No. 81-704, FCC 83-184,
    54 Rad. Reg. 2d577 (rel. Aug. 16, 1983); summary printed in
    Licensing Space Stations in the Domestic Fixed-Satellite Service, 48
    F.R. 40233 (Sept. 6, 1983) (*Two-Degree Spacing Order*). *See also
    18 GHz Report & Order*, 15 FCC Rcd*.*at 13479.

[^97]: Under the terms of the Region 2 BSS and Feeder-Link Plans, the
    United States is assigned eight orbit locations for providing
    broadcasting-satellite service to the United States. The eight U.S.
    orbital positions, proceeding from east to west (all West
    Longitude), are 61.5, 101, 110, 119, 148, 157, 166, and 175°.
    Requests to serve the United States from DBS orbital locations not
    in the ITU Region 2 Plan are now under consideration in separate
    proceedings. *See, e.g.,* para. 43 *infra*.

[^98]: The International Telecommunication Union's (ITU) Regional
    Administration Radio Conference for the Planning in Region 2 of the
    Broadcasting-Satellite Service (BSS) in the Frequency Bands
    12.2-12.7 GHz and Associated Feeder links in the Frequency Band
    17.3-17.8 GHz (Geneva) (1983) ("RARC Sat-R2"), adopted the plan for
    the broadcasting-satellite service in the frequency band 12.2-12.7
    GHz in Region 2 (the "Region 2 Plan").

[^99]: In ITU Regions 1 and 3 (Europe/Africa and Asia/Oceana) a separate
    allotment plan exists with orbital separations for Ku-band BSS
    satellites of six degrees in order to protect receiving antennas as
    small as 60 cm in diameter.

[^100]: At this time, advance publication information and/or
    coordination information has been submitted by the Administrations
    of Canada, Luxembourg, Malaysia, and United Kingdom.

[^101]: *See* *DIRECTV Application* and *EchoStar Application*.

[^102]: *See 18 GHz Report & Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13475-76, para. 96,
    *citing DIRECTV Comments* at 6, n.12.

[^103]: *See* In the Matter of Petition of DIRECTV Enterprises, Inc. to
    Amend Parts 2, 25 and 100 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate
    Spectrum for the Fixed-Satellite Service and the
    Broadcasting-Satellite Service, Petition for Rulemaking, RM No. 9118
    (filed June 5, 1997). This Petition for Rulemaking was filed
    response to the *18 GHz* *NPRM.*

[^104]: *Id.*

[^105]: *See* *Intelsat Application* at 7.

[^106]: *See* *Pegasus Application* at 1 and 27.

[^107]: *See* *Pegasus Ka-band Mod. Applications* (File Nos.
    SAT-MOD-20020322-00035, SAT-MOD-20020322-00036). *See also* note 21
    *supra*.

[^108]: *See DIRECTV Application* at 3 and *EchoStar* *Application* at
    3.

[^109]: These locations are 101º W.L., 110º W.L., and 119º W.L.

[^110]: *See* *Intelsat Application* at 7. Intelsat proposes to locate
    two of its 17/24 GHz BSS satellites at locations where it is already
    authorized to provide C/Ku-band services, *i.e*., 89º W.L. and 97º
    W.L. *See also* *Pegasus Ka-band Mod. Applications* (File Nos.
    SAT-MOD-20020322-00035, SAT-MOD-20020322-00036). Pegasus proposed to
    modify two of its Ka-band authorizations at the orbital locations,
    107° W.L. and 117° W.L. to include 17/24 GHz BSS payloads. However,
    these applications were dismissed in November 2004. *See* note 21
    *supra*.

[^111]: We note that at least two DBS locations, 110º W.L. and 119º
    W.L., lie in a region of the GSO arc where the U.S. is precluded
    from operating 12/14 GHz Ku-band satellites by virtue of the
    Trilateral Agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. *See*
    Trilateral Arrangement Regarding Use of the Geostationary Orbit
    Reached by Canada, Mexico, and the United States, *Public Notice*
    (September 2, 1988) ("*Trilateral Agreement"*).

[^112]: "Service availability" is defined as the amount of time that the
    quality of a telecommunication service or communications link equals
    or exceeds a specified minimum value. For satellite communication
    links, the availability is usually expressed as a percentage of the
    average year.

[^113]: *See, e.g.,* In the matter of SES Americom, Inc., Petition for
    Declaratory Ruling to Serve the U.S. Market Using BSS Spectrum from
    the 105.5° W.L. Orbital Location, FCC File No.
    SAT-PDR-200220425-00071; Petition of DIRECTV Enterprises LLC for a
    Rulemaking on the Feasibility of Reduced Orbital Spacing in the U.S.
    Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, filed December 5, 2003;
    Application of EchoStar Satellite Corporation for Authority to
    Construct, Launch and Operate a Direct Broadcast Satellite in the
    12.2-12.7 GHz and 17.3-17.8 GHz Frequency Bands at the 86.5° W.L.
    Orbit Location, File No. SAT-LOA-20030606-00113; and In the Matter
    of Spectrum Five LLC, Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Serve the
    U.S. Market Using BSS Spectrum from the 114.5º W.L. Orbital
    Location, File Nos. SAT-LOI-20050312-00062 and
    SAT-LOI-20050312-00063. *See also* submissions made in response to
    *International Bureau Seeks Comment on Proposals to Permit Reduced
    Orbital Spacing Between U.S. Direct Broadcast Satellites,* Public
    Notice, Report No. SPB-196, DA 03-3903 (rel. Dec. 16, 2003).

[^114]: This graph does not take into account topocentric off-set or
    antenna pointing error.

[^115]: *See* Recommendation ITR-R BO.1213-1. We note that that ITU-R
    BO.1213 was recently updated at the November 2005 meeting of ITU-R
    Study Group 6. This most recent version (ITU-R BO.1213-1) includes
    new language recommending that the co-polar and cross-polar antenna
    patterns given by the formulae therein should be recognized as
    reference earth station antenna patterns for the BSS in the
    11.7-12.75 GHz band. This change does not preclude use of these
    formulae in other frequency bands *(e.g*., 17 GHz) and we believe
    that for the purposes of this NPRM these formulae may be reasonably
    applied to the 17 GHz band.

[^116]: The Commission's rules provide for routine licensing of Ku-band
    earth stations with antenna diameters of greater than 1.2 meters in
    a two-degree spacing environment. At the 14 GHz uplink and 11.7 GHz
    downlink frequencies, this translates to off-axis discrimination
    values of 22 dB and 20.5 dB respectively.

[^117]: *See* *DIRECTV Application, Pegasus Application, EchoStar
    Application,* and *Intelsat Application*.

[^118]: In recent years, triple-feed 18" x 20" elliptical-dish antennas
    capable of receiving signals from satellites at 101º W.L., 110º
    W.L., and 119º W.L. have been deployed by DIRECTV. DIRECTV also
    markets an 18"-diameter dual-feed circular antenna designed to
    receive signals from the 101º W.L. orbital location, and dual-feed
    20"-diameter round antennas capable of receiving signals from the
    satellites at both 110º W.L. and 119º W.L. orbital locations. DISH
    Network has also deployed two versions of a 26" x 18" "SuperDish"
    elliptical antenna which is capable of receiving signals from DBS
    satellites at both 110º W.L. and 119º W.L. orbital locations, as
    well as signals from FSS satellites at either the 105º W.L. or 121º
    W.L. orbital locations that transmit DTH signals with DISH Network
    programming.

[^119]: Larger antennas, up to 2.4 meters in diameter, are required to
    receive DBS signals in Alaska and Hawaii.

[^120]: *See, e.g.*, *Part 100 Report & Order,* 17 FCC Rcd 11331 (2002).

[^121]: *See, e.g.*, 47 C.F.R. § 25.209.

[^122]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.134, 25.208, 25.209.

[^123]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.138.

[^124]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.211(d), and § 25.212(c)-(d).

[^125]: Section 25.209 establishes an envelope, below which the antenna
    gain, as a function of off-axis angle, must lie. Separate envelopes
    are established for the plane of the GSO arc and for all other
    directions. This rule also protects receiving antennas from harmful
    interference on the basis of conformance to these same standards.
    Separate requirements for NGSO antennas are also defined. *See* 47
    C.F.R. § 25.209.

[^126]: The clear-sky value is taken to be the condition when the
    intrinsic atmospheric attenuation due to gasses and water vapor are
    applicable, without additional attenuation due to tropospheric
    precipitation, such as rain or snow. *See* Recommendation ITU-R
    PN.676-1.

[^127]: One recent application included spot beam peak e.i.r.p. levels
    as high as 103.2 dBW, however it was not clear from the application
    that these were clear sky values. *See Pegasus Application* at 20.

[^128]: *See DIRECTV Application* at 42, *Intelsat Application* at 22.

[^129]: These values are the product of the off-axis the earth station
    antenna gain values given in §25.209 and an antenna input e.i.r.p.
    density of 79.4 dBW/24MHz , with a peak gain of 65.1 dBi. They do
    not take into account topocentric gain.

[^130]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.138(a).

[^131]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.220, 25.138(b),(c).

[^132]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.220, 25.138(c).

[^133]: Applicants typically propose operating with 10 to 20 dB of
    excess power during rain events.

[^134]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.204(g) and *28 GHz First Report and Order.*

[^135]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.138(a)(5).

[^136]: The term control-loop refers to a circuit that feeds back some
    of the output to the input of a system. This feedback allows for
    self-correction and adjusts the system operation on the basis of the
    difference between the actual and the desired output. The term
    overshoot refers to a transient rise in power beyond the final
    value. Overshoot occurs when a system transitions from a steady
    state to some higher value in response to a change in some factor,
    *e.g*., electrical potential.

[^137]: *See* footnote 95, *supra*.

[^138]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.208(a), (c), (d), (e).

[^139]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.137(a)(6).

[^140]: *E.g*., standard Ku-band (11.7-12.2 GHz).

[^141]: Transmission bandwidths range from 24 MHz to 48 MHz. *See*
    *DIRECTV Application* at Table D-2, *Pegasus Application* at 20,
    *EchoStar Application* at 16, and *Intelsat Application* at Table
    C.8.

[^142]: *See* footnote 95, *supra*.

[^143]: In the 17.7-17.8 GHz band, we propose to adopt the ITU pfd
    limits in order to protect terrestrial services operating in the
    band. *See* para. 32 *supra*.

[^144]: The U.S. BSS allocation extends only from 17.3-17.7 GHz and
    becomes effective on the same date. The problem of reverse-band
    interference in the 17.7-17.8 GHz band, particularly into victim DBS
    satellites via the space-path, will result from foreign satellite
    transmissions, and also possibly from U.S. satellites transmitting
    to foreign administrations.

[^145]: In this Section III. H. 1., the terms "DBS" or "DBS earth
    station" refer to earth stations that are DBS feeder links.

[^146]: *See, e.g.*, In the Matter of DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC for
    Authority to Launch and Operate DIRECTV 7S (USABSS-18), *Order and
    Authorization,* 19 FCC Rcd 7754 (2004). DIRECTV sought authority to
    operate uplink earth stations at sites in Los Angeles, CA, Castle
    Rock, CO, Winchester, VA and St. Paul, MN.

[^147]: *See* Section 3 of Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio Regulations.

[^148]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.203(b)-(d), 25.251(b). *See also* 47
    C.F.R. §§ 101.21(f), 101.103.

[^149]: *See* Table 9b of Annex 7 to Appendix 7 (rev. WRC-03) of the ITU
    Radio Regulations.

[^150]: This value may be calculated using the procedure of Annex 5 to
    Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio Regulations. If no value of *G*~m~ is
    specified, 42 dBi may be used.

[^151]: *See* § 2.1 of Annex 7 to Appendix 7 of the ITU Radio
    Regulations which provides a default value for two earth stations
    operating in opposite directions of transmission at frequencies
    greater than 17/24 GHz.

[^152]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.203(b)(2) (which requires that the earth
    station applicant provide each terrestrial station licensee with
    certain specific technical details).

[^153]: We note that Section 25.203 stipulates a reference bandwidth of
    4 kHz for frequency bands below 15 GHz and 1 MHz for frequency bands
    above 15 GHz.

[^154]: Section 25.203 stipulates reference bandwidths of both 1 MHz and
    4 kHz.

[^155]: *See* Amendment of Parts 2 and 25 of the Commission's Rules to
    Permit Operation of NGSO FSS Systems Co-Frequency with GSO and
    Terrestrial Systems in the Ku-Band Frequency Range; Amendment of the
    Commission's Rules to Authorize Subsidiary Terrestrial Use of the
    12.2-12.7 GHz Band by Direct Broadcast Satellite Licensees and Their
    Affiliates; and Applications of Broadwave USA, PDC Broadband
    Corporation, and Satellite Receivers, Ltd. to Provide a Fixed
    Service in the 12.2-12.7 GHz Band. *Memorandum Opinion and Order and
    Second Report and Order*, 17 FCC Rec 9614 (2002) ("*MVDDS Second
    R&O"*).

[^156]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 101.1440(d).

[^157]: *See* *MVDDS Second R&O*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9652, para. 88. MVDDS
    operators are required to provide DBS operators with specific
    technical information concerning their planned operation. After
    receipt of the MVDDS system information, the DBS licensee must
    provide the MVDDS licensee with a list of any new DBS customer
    locations that have been installed following the MVDDS notification.
    Before beginning operations, the MVDDS operator must take into
    account existing as well as the new DBS customers of record, and
    ensure that its operations do not cause interference. DBS licensees
    should also provide the MVDDS operator with information regarding
    affected customer locations, comment on the analysis provided, or
    indicate its agreement.

[^158]: At this time, 17/24 GHz BSS licensees may also provide the DBS
    operator with additional information regarding affected customer
    locations, or comment on its analysis, including its agreement.

[^159]: Specifically, the Commission adopted: (1) a prescribed
    methodology and predictive model to calculate epfd values in order
    to ascribe an unavailability allowance to MVDDS in the 12.2-12.7 GHz
    band; (2) epfd limits for each of four regions across the United
    States; (3) an additional maximum MVDDS power density limit; (4)
    required MVDDS operators to ensure that the prescribed epfd limits
    were not exceeded at DBS customer of record locations; if the epfd
    limit is exceeded, MVDDS operations must be discontinued until such
    time as the limits can be met; and (5) an epfd "safety valve," so
    that if due to an anomalous situation a DBS provider can demonstrate
    a tangible detrimental impact on DBS caused by MVDDS operations, the
    Commission may consider adjustments to the epfd limit for that
    specific location. *See MVDDS Second R&O,* 17 FCC Rcd at 9641-9642,
    para 68.

[^160]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.204(b)-(e). These limits are: +64 dBW in
    any 1 MHz band for θ \< 0º; +64+3θ dBW in any 1 MHz band for 0º \< θ
    \< 5º; where θ is the elevation angle of above the horizon viewed
    from the center of radiation of the antenna and measured in degrees.

[^161]: Section 25.204(b) states that "in bands shared coequally with
    terrestrial radio-communication services, the equivalent
    isotropically radiated power transmitted in any direction towards
    the horizon by an earth station operating in frequency bands above
    15 GHz shall not exceed the following limits except as provided for
    in paragraph (c) of this section:

    +64 dBW in any 1 MHz band for \<0º

    +64+3 dBW in any 1 MHz band for 0º\<\<5º

    where is as defined in paragraph (a) of this section."

[^162]: Amendment of the Commission's Regulatory Policies to Allow
    Non-U.S.-Licensed Space Stations to Provide Domestic and
    International Satellite Service in the United States, *First Order
    on Reconsideration*, 15 FCC Rcd 7207 (1999).

[^163]: *18 GHz Report & Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13475-77, para. 96.

[^164]: *Id.* at para. 106.

[^165]: *See DIRECTV Application*, *Pegasus Application* and *EchoStar
    Application*. DIRECTV seeks to operate at the 101° W.L. orbit
    location , Pegasus seeks to operate at the 101° W.L. and 110° W.L.
    orbit location, and EchoStar seeks to operate at 110° W.L. and 119°
    W.L. orbit location.

[^166]: *See* Section B of Annex 7 to Appendix 30 and Section 4.13.1 of
    Annex 3 to Appendix 30A of the ITU Radio Regulations.

[^167]: *Id.*

[^168]: Although the United States initially followed the ITU cluster
    separation scheme when assigning channels at a given orbit location,
    DBS licensees increasingly indicated a desire for greater
    flexibility regarding the placement of their satellites within the
    cluster. Moreover, the ITU rules allow Administrations to locate
    their satellites at any orbital position within the cluster,
    provided they obtain the agreement of Administrations having
    assignments to space stations in the same cluster. At locations
    where all 32 channels are assigned to a single operator, the
    Commission has been willing to allow the operator considerable
    freedom to locate the spacecraft anywhere within the cluster
    boundaries. As a result, location of U.S. DBS satellites no longer
    strictly adheres to a 0.4 degree even/odd channel separation scheme.

[^169]: *See* *Pegasus Application* at 27.

[^170]: *See* *DIRECTV Application* at 44.

[^171]: *See* EchoStar Application at 23.

[^172]: *See* Document WP6S/106-E, 13 January 2001, Interference
    Analysis Concerning Transmitting BSS Satellites in Region 2
    Interfering with Receiving Feeder-link Satellite in Regions 1 and 3
    in the 17.3 to 17.8 GHz Band.

[^173]: *See, e.g.,* Downlink Channel 1 extends from 12.212 -- 12.236
    GHz, Channel 2 extends from 12.22658 -- 12.25058 GHz, and Channel 3
    extends from 12.24116 -- 12.26516 GHz. Thus there is a 9.42 MHz
    overlap between Channels 1 and 2, and a similar overlap between
    Channels 2 and 3. *See* Table 4, of Appendix 30 for the Region 2 BSS
    channel assignments.

[^174]: "Polarization" is the property of an electromagnetic wave that
    describes the [time](../../dir-037/_5459.htm)-varying direction and
    amplitude of the [electric field](../../dir-013/_1919.htm) vector
    (*i.e*., orientation). States of polarization are described in terms
    of the figures traced as a function of time by the projection of the
    extremity of a representation of the electric vector onto a fixed
    plane in space that is perpendicular to the direction of
    [propagation](../../dir-028/_4183.htm). In general, the polarization
    is elliptical and is traced in a clockwise or counterclockwise
    sense, as viewed in the direction of propagation. If the major and
    minor axes of the ellipse are equal, the polarization is said to be
    "circular.*"* If the minor axis of the ellipse is zero, the
    polarization is said to be "linear." Rotation of the electric vector
    in a clockwise sense is designated "right-hand polarization," and
    rotation in a counterclockwise sense is designated "left-hand
    polarization."

[^175]: The ratio of power transferred by an antenna radiating in the
    reference polarization to another antenna receiving in the
    cross-polarization is known as the cross-polarization isolation
    ratio and is normally measured in decibels ("dB").

[^176]: *See, e.g.,* Section 3.13.3 of Annex 5 to Appendix 30 of the ITU
    Radio Regulations.  

[^177]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.202(g).

[^178]: This situation could change if the Commission should decide to
    permit 17/24 GHz BSS operations for international service in the
    17.7-17.8 GHz band segment.

[^179]: *See* *DIRECTV Application* at 6.

[^180]: *See* *EchoStar Application* at 17.

[^181]: *See Pegasus Application* at 21.

[^182]: *See Intelsat Application* at Table C.4.

[^183]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.202(g).

[^184]: *See, e.g.,* In the Matter of EchoStar L.L.C. for Modification
    of its License to Select TT&C Frequencies for its Ka-Band GSO
    Satellite at 117º W.L., *Order and Authorization*, DA 05-536, paras.
    4-10 (released March 2, 2005).

[^185]: *See* Section 3.9 of Annex 5 to Appendix 30 and Section 4.1 of
    Annex 3 to Appendix 30A.

[^186]: Typical TT&C transmissions are on the order of 1 MHz in
    bandwidth.

[^187]: The upper edge of the 17/24 GHz BSS allocation lies just below
    17.7 GHz and is not coincident with the upper edge of the DBS feeder
    link band, *i.e*., 17.8 GHz. BSS downlink transmissions in this
    guardband would fall within DBS channel 26 (17.6765-17.7005 MHz).

[^188]: *See* *EchoStar Application* at 17.

[^189]: *See* *DIRECTV Application* at Table D-1, *Pegasus Application*
    at 6, *EchoStar Application* at Table A.4-1, and *Intelsat
    Application* at Table C.4.1.1.

[^190]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.210(a)(1).

[^191]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.210(b).

[^192]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.210(f).

[^193]: Other polarizations may be permitted if a Plan modification has
    been submitted to the ITU and an adequate technical showing is made
    to the Commission. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.148(f). *See also* Annex 5
    (Section 3.2) of Appendix 30 and Annex 3 (Section 4.8) of Appendix
    30A of the ITU Radio Regulations.

[^194]: In addition, spatial separation is employed by locating even and
    odd channels at opposite edges of a cluster centered around the
    nominal orbital position. *See* Article 10 of Appendix 30 and
    Article 9 of Appendix 30A of the ITU Radio Regulations.

[^195]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.210(a), (b), (f).

[^196]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.210(i), 25.215.

[^197]: *See* Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Relocate the
    Digital Electronic Message Service from the 18 GHz Band to the 24
    GHz Band and to Allocate the 24 GHz Band for Fixed Service, *Order,*
    15 FCC Rcd 3471 (1997).

[^198]: *18 GHz Report & Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13479, para. 105
    (referring to Amendments to Parts 1, 2, 87 and 101 of the
    Commission's Rules to License Fixed Services at 24 GHz, *Report and
    Order,* 15 FCC Rcd 16934 (2000)).

[^199]: *Id.* at 13477, para. 98.

[^200]: *See* para. 69 *supra.*

[^201]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.203.

[^202]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.204. Specifically, for bands above 15 GHz
    the e.i.r.p towards the horizon is limited to +64 dBW in any 1 MHz
    band for θ\<0º, and +64 + 3θ in any 1 MHz band for 0\< θ\<5º, where
    θ is the elevation angle of the horizon as viewed from the center of
    radiation of the earth station antenna, and measured in degrees as
    positive above the horizontal plane and negative below it. Section
    25.204(b) provides for the use of uplink power control in the
    presence of rain-fade.

[^203]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106. In addition, the International Table
    permits *all* FSS operations in the 24.75-25.25 GHz band, with
    priority given to use by BSS feeder-links; the associated downlink
    band is not specified. By contrast, the domestic allocation limits
    use of the FSS allocation only to feeder-links for the
    broadcasting-satellite service operating in the band 17.3-17.7 GHz.

[^204]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §2.106.

[^205]: These radiolocation systems include land-based, transportable,
    shipborne and airborne platforms.

[^206]: *See* Letter to Edmond J. Thomas, Chief, Office of Engineering
    and Technology, Federal Communications Commission, from Fredrick R.
    Wentland, Associate Administrator, Office of Spectrum Management,
    National Telecommunications and Information Administration, (April
    8, 2005) ("*April 8 NTIA Letter*"). *See also* U.S. Department of
    Commerce, NTIA Special Publication 00-40, Federal Radar Spectrum
    Requirements, May 2000.

[^207]: *See April 8 NTIA Letter*.

[^208]: *Id*.

[^209]: Standards for levels of unwanted emission for government radio
    determination systems are addressed in Section 5.5 of the NTIA
    Manual of Regulations & Procedures for Federal Radio Frequency
    Management (May 2003 Edition, September 2004 Revisions).

[^210]: *See* Letter from Karl Nebbia, Deputy Associate Administrator,
    Office of Spectrum Management, NTIA, United States Department of
    Commerce, to Donald Abelson, Chief, International Bureau, Federal
    Communications Commission, dated June 21 2002 ("*June 21 NTIA
    Letter").*

[^211]: *See* *June 21 NTIA Letter*.

[^212]: *See* Letter to Karl Nebbia, Deputy Associate Administrator,
    Office of Spectrum Management, NTIA, from Donald Abelson, Chief,
    International Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, (July 15,
    2002).

[^213]: *See April 8 NTIA Letter.*

[^214]: Front-end overload is a condition that occurs when out of band
    energy is captured and amplified. Front-end overload typically
    results when the receiver\'s front-end amplifier filtering is overly
    broad, and allows energy outside of the desired receiving band to
    enter the first amplifier stage.  Front-end overload can also occur
    when strong interfering signals are present inside the desired
    receiving band.

[^215]: *See April 8 NTIA Letter*.

[^216]: *See* National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration, NTIA Report 02-393, *Measurements of Pulsed
    Co-Channel Interference in a 4 GHz Digital Earth Station Receiver*
    (May 2002). This receiver employed error correction signal
    processing. The measurements show that degradation of performance is
    directly related to the carrier-to-peak interference ratio (C/I).
    These measurements also show that the potential interference impact
    is a function of the pulsed characteristics (pulse width, pulse
    repetition frequency, duty cycle) of the radar systems.

[^217]: In digital communication systems, error correction is the
    process of detecting bit errors and correcting them. Error
    correction is employed to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the
    received data.

[^218]: These include antenna shielding techniques to reduce side-lobes,
    auxiliary side-lobe blanking in receive antennas upon detection of
    interference, or frequency diversity *(i.e*., adaptive selection of
    operating frequencies in response to detected interference). *See*
    *April 8 NTIA Letter.*

[^219]: Interleaving is a component of many digital communication
    systems used in conjunction with forward error correction coding.
    Interleaving the encoded symbols provides a form of time diversity
    to guard against localized corruption or bursts of errors.

[^220]: *See* *April 8 NTIA Letter*.

[^221]: Unwanted emissions include both spurious and out-of-band
    emissions.

[^222]: The requirement is defined for the Radiodetermination Service as
    a whole. Radiolocation is a particular type of Radiodetermination.

[^223]: *See* Appendix 3, Section II, Table II of the ITU Radio
    Regulations. This value is applicable to transmitters installed
    after January 1, 2003, and for all transmitters after January 1,
    2012. The limits of Appendix 3, Section I, Table I apply for
    transmitters installed on or before January 1, 2003, and are valid
    until January 1, 2012. The ITU does not specify emission limits for
    the out-of-band domain.

[^224]: Prior to the 1979 World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC),
    the 15.7-17.7 GHz band was allocated to the radiolocation service on
    a primary basis. At WARC 79, the band 17.3-17.8 GHz was reallocated
    to the fixed satellite-service (Earth-to-space) limited to feeder
    links for the BSS, and the radiolocation service was downgraded to a
    secondary allocation in the 17.3-17.7 GHz band in all three
    International Telecommunication Union regions.

[^225]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106, footnote US259.

[^226]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.105c)(2)(i).

[^227]: *See* Letter to Dale M. Hatfield, Chief, Office of Engineering
    and Technology, Federal Communications Commission, from William T.
    Hatch, Associate Administrator, Office of Spectrum Management,
    National Telecommunications and Information Administration, (March
    29, 2000).

[^228]: *See April 8 NTIA Letter*.

[^229]: 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200, 1.1206; Amendment of 47 C.F.R. § 1.1200 *et
    seq*. Concerning Ex Parte Presentations in Commission Proceedings,
    GC Docket No. 95-21, *Report and Order*, 12 FCC Rcd 7348 (1997).

[^230]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b)(2).

[^231]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA has been amended by the Contract
    with America Advancement Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat.
    847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the CWAAA is the Small Business
    Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).

[^232]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).

[^233]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.49.

[^234]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA (*see* 5 U.S.C. § 601 -- 612), has
    been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
    Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857
    (1996).

[^235]: *See* The Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for the
    Broadcasting-Satellite Service at the 17.3-17.7 GHz Frequency Band
    and at the 17.7-17.8 GHz Frequency Band Internationally, and at the
    24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Band for Fixed Satellite Services
    Providing Feeder Links to the Broadcasting-Satellite Service and for
    the Satellite Services Operating Bi-Directionally in the 17.3-17.8
    GHz Frequency Band, IB Docket No. 06-123, FCC 06-90, *Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking* (*NPRM*), *rel*. June 23, 2006.

[^236]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).

[^237]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).

[^238]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).

[^239]: *Id.* § 601(6).

[^240]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of
    \"small business concern\" in 15 U.S.C. § 632). Pursuant to the RFA,
    the statutory definition of a small business applies \"unless an
    agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small
    Business Administration and after the opportunity for public
    comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are
    appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such
    definition(s) in the Federal Register.\" 5 U.S.C. § 601(3).

[^241]: Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632 (1996).

[^242]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517410.

[^243]: U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Receipt Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax:
    2002," Table 1, NAICS code 517410 (issued Nov. 2005).

[^244]: *Id*.

[^245]: The SBA has developed a small business size standard for
    Satellite Telecommunications, which consists of all such companies
    having \$13.5 million or less in annual receipts. 13 C.F.R. §
    121.201, NAICS code 517410.

[^246]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517212.

[^247]: U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Employment Size of Establishments for the United
    States: 2002," Table 2, NAICS code 517212 (issued Nov. 2005).

[^248]: *Id.*

[^249]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(c)(1), (c)(4).