**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | *  | IB Docket No. 07-253         |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Spectrum and Service Rules for   | ** | RM-11339                     |
| Ancillary                        |    |                              |
|                                  | *  | IB Docket No. 02-364         |
| Terrestrial Components in the    | *) |                              |
| 1.6/2.4 GHz                      | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
| Big LEO Bands                    | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Review of the Spectrum Sharing   | ** |                              |
| Plan Among Non-Geostationary     |    |                              |
| Satellite Orbit Mobile Satellite | *  |                              |
| Service Systems in the 1.6/2.4   | *) |                              |
| GHz Bands                        | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  | )\ |                              |
|                                  | )\ |                              |
|                                  | )  |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**SECOND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION, SECOND REPORT AND ORDER,**

**AND NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING**

**Adopted: November 7, 2007 Released: November 9, 2007**

**Comment Date: (30 days after date of publication in the Federal
Register)**

**Reply Comment Date: (45 days after date of publication in the Federal
Register)**

By the Commission:

Table of Contents

Heading Paragraph \#

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II\. BACKGROUND 3

III\. SECOND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION 8

A. Prior Decision 9

B. Petition for Reconsideration 13

C. Discussion 14

1\. The L-band Bandplan 14

2\. Hearing Under Section 316 of the Communications Act 21

IV\. SECOND REPORT AND ORDER 26

V. notice of proposed rulemaking 27

A. Background 28

B. Comments 31

C. Discussion 37

VI\. Conclusion 43

VII\. procedural matters 46

VIII\. ORDERING CLAUSES 71

APPENDIX A - List of Filers

APPENDIX B - Big LEO L-band Bandplan

# INTRODUCTION

1.  In this *Second Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order,
    and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, we modify the Commission's
    decision in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*[^1] to establish a
    bandplan that improves spectrum efficiency and facilitates sharing
    between code division multiple access (CDMA) and time division
    multiple access (TDMA) Mobile Satellite Service (MSS) systems in the
    1610-1626.5 MHz band (the L-band).[^2] The Big LEO L-band bandplan
    that we establish here provides an equitable distribution of the
    spectrum between the CDMA satellite system operated by Globalstar,
    Inc. (Globalstar), and the TDMA satellite system operated by Iridium
    Satellite LLC (Iridium). In this *Second Order on Reconsideration*,
    based upon new information in the record showing the
    impracticability of Big LEO spectrum sharing, we revise the spectrum
    sharing bandplan the Commission adopted in the *Big LEO Spectrum
    Sharing Order.* Specifically, CDMA and TDMA MSS systems will each
    have the exclusive MSS use of 7.775 megahertz of L-band Big LEO
    spectrum. In addition, in order to account for certain technical
    issues raised by the design characteristics of existing MSS systems,
    we require CDMA and TDMA MSS systems to share 0.95 megahertz of
    L-band spectrum. As a result of today's decision, Globalstar's CDMA
    system and Iridium's TDMA system will have equal amounts of L-band
    Big LEO spectrum for their exclusive MSS use.

2.  Additionally, in response to a petition filed by Globalstar, we
    initiate a new *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice)* to consider
    spectrum authorizations and technical rules for ancillary
    terrestrial components (ATC) in the Big LEO bands.[^3] In the
    *Notice*, we seek comment on whether we should increase the amount
    of spectrum in which CDMA Big LEO MSS systems are authorized to
    operate ATC.

# BACKGROUND

3.  *Big LEO Order*. In 1994, the Commission adopted licensing and
    service rules for satellite operators providing MSS in the L-band
    and the 2483.5-2500 MHz (the S-band) Big LEO bands.[^4]
    Specifically, the Commission designated the 1610-1621.35 MHz segment
    of the L-band for CDMA MSS uplink operations and the 2483.5-2500 MHz
    S-band for CDMA MSS downlink operations.[^5] The Commission
    designated the 1621.35-1626.5 MHz segment of the L-band for TDMA MSS
    uplink and downlink operations. The Commission also considered the
    possibility that not all of the CDMA MSS systems that were
    contemplated at the time of the *Big LEO Order* would ultimately be
    built and launched. In the event that only one CDMA MSS system was
    launched and operated, the Commission noted that it had "proposed to
    reduce the bandwidth assigned to that system automatically from
    11.35 MHz to 8.25 MHz."[^6] The Commission stated that an 8.25 MHz
    assignment, or one-half of the available 1.6 GHz MSS allocation,
    should be sufficient to support a viable system and that the
    remaining 3.1 MHz of spectrum would be made available to an
    operational frequency division multiple access **(**FDMA) or TDMA
    system upon a showing of need or, if this demonstration could not be
    made, to a new entrant.[^7] Ultimately, however, the Commission
    deferred any decision on reassigning the 3.1 megahertz of spectrum
    at 1618.25-1621.35 MHz to a future rulemaking.[^8]

4.  Subsequently, the Commission licensed four CDMA MSS operators to
    share the 1610-1621.35 MHz and 2483.5-2500 MHz bands,[^9] and one
    TDMA operator to have exclusive use of the 1621.35-1626.5 MHz
    band.[^10] Three of the CDMA MSS licenses were later surrendered.
    Currently, the Big LEO bands are occupied by one CDMA MSS system,
    Globalstar[^11] and one TDMA MSS system, Iridium.[^12] The
    Commission currently has no application before it for any new Big
    LEO MSS system.

5.  *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*. In 2003, the Commission issued a
    *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* in response to a Petition for
    Rulemaking filed by Iridium, requesting 5.85 megahertz of additional
    spectrum for Iridium to use in the CDMA portion of the Big LEO
    L-band.[^13] The Commission noted that it had "left open the
    possibility of providing an opportunity for additional MSS entry in
    the Big LEO spectrum" in the *Big LEO Order*.[^14] In seeking
    comment on the issue of spectrum reallocation or reassignment, the
    Commission stated that "it is appropriate to seek comment on both
    the possible reassignment and possible reallocation of any returned
    spectrum for possible use by other services."[^15]

6.  *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*. In 2004, the Commission adopted
    the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, which revised the Big LEO
    bandplan.[^16] The Commission determined that TDMA MSS operators
    could use an additional 3.1 megahertz of spectrum at 1618.25-1621.35
    MHz on a shared basis, while permitting CDMA MSS operators to have
    continued use of that spectrum.[^17] The Commission stated that
    allowing operators using CDMA and TDMA technologies to have access
    to the same spectrum, where feasible, would promote efficient
    spectrum use.[^18] Further, the Commission stated that allowing both
    TDMA and CDMA MSS operators to use this shared spectrum would
    promote technological neutrality, resulting in more market-driven
    uses of the spectrum.[^19] The Commission declined to adopt specific
    coordination rules for the 3.1 megahertz of shared spectrum, stating
    that the MSS operators should be able to coordinate with "minimal
    Commission intervention" in spectrum sharing negotiations.[^20] The
    Commission observed that *de facto* sharing between Globalstar and
    Iridium in the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz segment had already been
    occurring since the Commission granted Iridium special temporary
    authority (STA) to operate in that segment in 2003, in support of
    U.S. operations in the Middle East, and later in support of rescue
    and reconstruction efforts in response to the 2005 hurricane
    season.[^21] The Commission also stated that minimal Commission
    involvement was consistent with its efforts to promote flexible,
    market-oriented spectrum policies encouraging efficient spectrum
    use.[^22] The *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order* also established a
    plan for spectrum sharing in the 2495-2500 MHz band between CDMA MSS
    operators and the fixed and mobile services.[^23] Globalstar filed a
    Petition for Reconsideration of the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing
    Order*. We received one opposition and one reply to opposition.[^24]

7.  *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*. As part of the *Big LEO
    Spectrum Sharing Order*, the Commission issued the *Big LEO Spectrum
    Sharing Further Notice* to explore whether CDMA and TDMA MSS
    operators could share the 1616-1618.25 MHz segment of the
    L-band.[^25] In particular, the Commission asked whether such
    sharing would affect the ability of CDMA and TDMA MSS operators to
    provide a wide variety of services, including aviation
    services.[^26] The Commission also asked whether shared use of the
    1616-1618.25 MHz segment would affect the ability of CDMA operators
    to provide ATC services.[^27] Further, the Commission sought comment
    on how an additional sharing requirement might affect the ability of
    CDMA MSS systems to provide global communications.[^28] Finally, the
    Commission asked for alternate approaches to sharing that would take
    into account technical limitations that might hinder sharing in the
    1616-1618.25 MHz segment and that would permit the most efficient
    use of this spectrum.[^29] In response to the *Big LEO Spectrum
    Sharing Further Notice*, we received three comments, three replies,
    and numerous *ex parte* filings from Globalstar and Iridium.[^30]

# SECOND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

8.  In this *Second Order on Reconsideration*, we adopt a more equitable
    bandplan that reassigns 3.1 megahertz of shared Big LEO L-band
    spectrum to the exclusive use of TDMA MSS systems, subject to
    minimal sharing requirements, and we limit the amount of shared
    spectrum between CDMA and TDMA MSS systems to 0.95 megahertz of
    L-band spectrum at 1617.775-1618.725 MHz. As a result of these
    decisions, the bandplan we adopt today provides CDMA MSS systems
    with an exclusive assignment of 7.775 megahertz of L-band spectrum
    at 1610-1617.775 MHz, TDMA MSS systems with an exclusive MSS
    assignment of 7.775 megahertz of L-band spectrum at 1618.725-1626.5
    MHz, and a small shared segment of 0.95 megahertz between CDMA and
    TDMA MSS systems at 1617.775-1618.725 MHz.

## Prior Decision

9.  As noted briefly above, in 2003 the Commission received the Iridium
    Petition, which sought reassignment of 5.85 megahertz of spectrum in
    the 1615.5-1621.35 MHz portion of the Big LEO L-band, which was
    previously assigned to CDMA Big LEO MSS.[^31] Iridium asserted that
    its demand for spectrum both in the United States and in other
    regions of the world had grown to the point of near-peak capacity
    use on its system at various times and that its projected growth in
    use would require additional Big LEO spectrum in the near
    future.[^32] In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, therefore,
    the Commission stated that it was appropriate to consider making at
    least 3.1 megahertz of additional spectrum available to Iridium
    because only one of the four licensed CDMA Big LEO MSS systems had
    been launched.[^33] As noted above, the Commission had stated in the
    *Big LEO Order* in 1994 that it would defer any decision on whether
    to reassign the 3.1 megahertz segment at 1618.25-1621.35 MHz until
    it was clear that only one CDMA Big LEO MSS system would operate in
    the Big LEO L-band.[^34]

10. In response to the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, Iridium
    asserted that it was unable to satisfy its customers' needs, to meet
    increasing demand for MSS service, or to offer new services with
    only 5.15 megahertz of assigned spectrum.[^35] Further, Iridium
    stated that it was at a competitive disadvantage because it was
    assigned only 5.15 megahertz of spectrum while Globalstar was
    assigned 27.85 megahertz of spectrum, including Globalstar's
    assigned spectrum in the L-band and the S-band.[^36] For these
    reasons, Iridium argued that the Commission should modify the Big
    LEO spectrum bandplan to create spectrum parity. [^37]

11. Globalstar opposed Iridium's plan, claiming that it needed all of
    the spectrum it was assigned to provide service to current and
    anticipated future customers.[^38] Globalstar also claimed that
    inter-service sharing and out-of-band (OOB) emissions limits
    restricted Globalstar\'s spectrum usage in the 1610-1615 MHz band
    and, therefore, that a reduction in L-band spectrum could hinder
    Globalstar\'s ability to provide its services.[^39] Finally,
    Globalstar asserted that Iridium did not use its assigned spectrum
    efficiently, had not demonstrated a need for more spectrum, and had
    previously declined the offer of S-band spectrum in which to
    operate.[^40]

12. Rather than reassigning spectrum in the Big LEO L-band, the
    Commission decided to "establish a new band sharing plan in which
    the TDMA operators may share the 3.1 megahertz of spectrum with CDMA
    operators at 1618.25-1621.35 MHz."[^41] The Commission based this
    decision upon: (1) its earlier decision in the *Big LEO Order* to
    reassess the then-current bandplan if only one CDMA system was
    launched and (2) the fact that only one CDMA satellite system,
    Globalstar, has been launched since the *Big LEO Order*.[^42] The
    Commission found that sharing this segment would promote spectrum
    efficiency by increasing the number of MSS licensees that would use
    the spectrum.[^43] Further, the Commission found that allowing
    sharing in the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz segment "represents a more
    technology neutral approach to assigning spectrum, thereby not
    giving a preference to a specific technology."[^44] The Commission
    also found "that sharing L-band spectrum would be more beneficial
    than granting TDMA MSS operators exclusive access to additional
    L-band spectrum. Both the CDMA and the TDMA MSS operator set forth
    compelling arguments for utilizing the spectrum, so we believe that
    sharing the spectrum would be the most equitable solution at this
    time."[^45] The Commission was unpersuaded by Iridium's spectrum
    parity argument, and considered no other spectrum reassignments in
    the Big LEO bands.[^46]

## Petition for Reconsideration

13. After the Commission issued its spectrum sharing decision in the
    *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, several parties addressed the
    feasibility of spectrum sharing between CDMA and TDMA MSS in the Big
    LEO L-band. Globalstar filed a Petition for Reconsideration,
    requesting that the Commission reverse its decision in the *Big LEO
    Spectrum Sharing Order* and preclude CDMA and TDMA MSS sharing in
    the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz segment.[^47] Should we decline to do this,
    Globalstar requests several alternate measures. First, Globalstar
    requests that we require Iridium to show a need for each CDMA
    channel in the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz band before we grant it access to
    that channel.[^48] Second, Globalstar requests access to Big LEO
    TDMA spectrum, currently used by Iridium, in an amount equal to the
    amount of CDMA spectrum shared with TDMA MSS systems.[^49] Third,
    Globalstar requests that we shift the lower boundary of shared Big
    LEO spectrum from 1618.25 to 1618.725, in order to preserve the CDMA
    Channel 7 for CDMA systems.[^50] Globalstar also contends that the
    Commission cannot allow spectrum sharing in the Big LEO bands
    without affording Globalstar a hearing under Section 316 of the
    Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications Act).[^51]

## Discussion

### The L-band Bandplan

14. In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing* proceeding, the Commission
    assigned 3.1 megahertz of spectrum in the L-band for shared use by
    CDMA and TDMA systems. Upon reconsideration, however, we conclude
    that, based upon new information presented in the record,[^52] the
    public interest would be better served by reassigning spectrum in
    the L-band so that CDMA and TDMA MSS systems have equal assignments
    of spectrum for their exclusive MSS use in order to account for the
    growth of current CDMA and TDMA MSS systems and to limit sharing to
    only a small segment of less than one megahertz. We base our
    decision upon new information showing the impracticability of
    spectrum sharing between heavily loaded CDMA and TDMA MSS systems in
    the Big LEO L-band.

15. As an initial matter, we find that sharing between CDMA and TDMA MSS
    systems becomes technically more difficult as both systems approach
    or achieve full loading, *i.e.*, operation at maximum system
    capacity. Globalstar asserts that spectrum sharing between fully
    loaded CDMA and TDMA systems is not feasible in the L-band.[^53]
    Globalstar states that the two types of systems can coordinate use
    of spectrum to which both have access, so that the two systems are
    *de facto* dividing that portion of the spectrum, but that sharing,
    in the sense of co-frequency co-coverage operations, is not
    feasible.[^54] To support this assertion, Globalstar provides an
    interference analysis demonstrating that Iridium operations at full
    system capacity would cause harmful interference to Globalstar
    operations.[^55] Iridium counters with its own technical analysis
    that demonstrates that sharing between the two operators should
    leave margins of between 12.2 dB and 27.8 dB below Globalstar's
    interference threshold, even assuming full use of the shared
    spectrum by Iridium.[^56] Iridium also contends that Globalstar's
    analysis contains several erroneous assumptions.[^57]

16. Globalstar disputes Iridium's technical arguments,[^58] and along
    with Sagem and Qualcomm, contends that spectrum sharing in the
    1616-1618.25 MHz segment would disrupt Globalstar's provision of
    aviation services.[^59] Globalstar also submits a draft report on
    sharing between TDMA and CDMA systems in the L-band prepared by the
    Electronic Communications Committee (ECC) of the European Conference
    of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations.[^60] The report
    concludes that in shared spectrum, when both Iridium and Globalstar
    are fully loaded, an Iridium satellite would suffer harmful
    interference from Globalstar earth terminals 45% of the time,[^61] a
    Globalstar satellite would suffer interference from Iridium earth
    terminals which may or may not exceed defined protection criteria
    100% of the time,[^62] and Globalstar satellites would receive
    unacceptable interference from Iridium satellites.[^63] Further, our
    own experience of satellite interference issues reinforces the
    decision the Commission made in 1994 to restrict TDMA and CDMA
    systems to different parts of the L-band, a decision based on the
    conclusion that fully-loaded TDMA and CDMA systems cannot share
    spectrum in a co-frequency, co-coverage manner without generally
    undesirable operational limitations. Moreover, both Iridium and
    Globalstar state that their business has grown, and confidently
    predict that their business will continue to grow. Globalstar has
    experienced steady, significant increases in subscribership for the
    last two years,[^64] and Iridium has shown that the communications
    traffic it is handling has increased substantially.[^65] Further,
    Iridium argues it will need more spectrum to provide full-rate voice
    channels and higher speed data transmissions, as well as to
    accommodate peak demand.[^66]

17. In view of these considerations, and in order to provide long-term
    certainty and stability in the Big LEO market and to avoid harmful
    interference between CDMA and TDMA Big LEO MSS systems, we will
    divide the Big LEO L-band spectrum equally to CDMA and TDMA systems.
    As the Commission proposed in the *Big LEO Order*, we will reassign
    the 3.1 megahertz of spectrum at 1618.25-1621.35 MHz from shared Big
    LEO MSS use to the exclusive use of TDMA, except for such minimal
    sharing as we establish below. We will assign this 3.1 megahertz of
    spectrum to Iridium on an exclusive basis, subject to the minimal
    sharing requirements we establish below, because no third party in
    this proceeding expressed an interest in L-band Big LEO spectrum and
    because, based on the record before us, Iridium has made a case
    demonstrating its need for more spectrum.[^67]

18. In order to address technical concerns related to Globalstar, the
    existing CDMA MSS system, we will require CDMA and TDMA MSS systems
    to share the 1617.775-1618.725 MHz segment of the L-band. Globalstar
    notes in its reconsideration petition that its CDMA channels are
    each approximately 1.23 megahertz wide, and there are small guard
    bands at each end of Globalstar's channel plan.[^68] Because of
    this, Globalstar Channel 7 is at 1617.495-1618.725 MHz. Globalstar
    requests that, if the Commission does not reconsider its decision
    requiring spectrum sharing in the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz segment, that
    it move the lower boundary of the shared segment from 1618.25 MHz to
    1618.725 MHz in order to preserve Globalstar Channel 7 for
    Globalstar's exclusive use.[^69] Globalstar contends that it needs
    Channels 6 and 7 on an unencumbered basis to provide aviation
    service.[^70] In its comments, Iridium's asserts that sharing is
    technically feasible, which indicates that Globalstar could continue
    to use Channel 7 on a shared basis if part of the channel was
    assigned for shared use by these two systems.[^71]

19. As noted above, Globalstar's CDMA Channel 7 covers the segment at
    1617.495-1618.725. Were we to divide the L-band equally at 1618.25
    MHz and assign the 1618.25-1626.5 MHz band to Iridium's exclusive
    use would, we would preclude Globalstar from using the portion of
    its Channel 7 at 1618.25-1618.725 MHz. Because of the operating
    characteristics of Globalstar's system, this prohibition would
    effectively deny Globalstar of the use of all of CDMA Channel 7.
    Therefore, if Globalstar could not use CDMA Channel 7 and Iridium
    were authorized to use only the portion of CDMA Channel 7, at
    1618.25-1618.725 MHz, which lay within its assigned L-band spectrum,
    the remainder of CDMA Channel 7, 0.755 megahertz of spectrum at
    1617.495-1618.25 MHz, could not be used by either operator. We find
    that it is not in the public interest to allow 0.755 megahertz of
    scarce, valuable MSS spectrum to go unused. For this reason, we will
    allow Globalstar to use CDMA Channel 7 by allowing Globalstar to
    share the 0.475 megahertz segment of spectrum at 1618.25-1618.725
    MHz, which is assigned to Iridium. This limited sharing will allow
    Globalstar to use all of CDMA Channel 7. At the same time, we note
    that sharing the 0.475 megahertz of spectrum at 1618.25-1618.725 MHz
    may affect the ability of Iridium to use that 0.475 megahertz of
    spectrum to its full advantage. Accordingly, in order to preserve
    equity in the L-band, we will allow Iridium to share the 0.475
    megahertz of spectrum assigned to Globalstar, at 1617.775-1618.25
    MHz. This segment is also within CDMA Channel 7. We believe that
    this approach is equitable because it grants each operator the same
    amount of exclusive spectrum (7.775 megahertz) and provides both
    operators a small segment of shared spectrum (0.95 megahertz).[^72]
    We note that this solution is similar to an approach suggested by
    Globalstar in its reconsideration petition, *i.e.,* allow it to
    share TDMA-exclusive spectrum in an amount equal to the amount of
    CDMA spectrum shared with TDMA systems.[^73] Based on our review of
    the record, we find that the segment of spectrum at
    1617.775-1618.725 can be shared while both systems are relatively
    lightly loaded. We conclude that spectrum sharing in a small segment
    of the Big LEO L-band will allow Globalstar to optimize its use of
    CDMA Channel 7 and will allow the productive use of a 0.755
    megahertz segment of Big LEO MSS spectrum that would otherwise
    remain unused by either operator.

20. As a result of this action, Globalstar will retain the exclusive MSS
    use of the 1610-1617.775 MHz segment of the L-band, Iridium will be
    assigned the exclusive MSS use of the 1618.725-1626.5 MHz segment,
    and the two systems will share the 1617.775-1618.725 MHz segment. A
    graphic presentation of the band assignments is presented at
    Appendix B *infra*. We note that the *Iridium License Order*
    required Iridium to complete all radio astronomy site coordination
    before Iridium began operations in the 1621.35-1626.5 MHz band.[^74]
    In compliance with this requirement, Iridium coordinated its
    operations with the National Radio Astronomy Observatory through a
    Memorandum of Understanding. Iridium also negotiated a Coordination
    Agreement with the National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center of
    Cornell University, which operates the Arecibo radio astronomy site.
    These agreements specify the maximum level of unwanted emissions
    that Iridium may emit into the 1610.6-1613.8 MHz radio astronomy
    band during specific time periods when radio astronomy observations
    are carried out at specific sites. Today\'s decision will permit
    Iridium to operate satellite downlinks closer to the radio astronomy
    band at 1610.6-1613.8 MHz than previously authorized. We remind
    Iridium that it is still bound by the existing agreements and that
    it will have to terminate operations if its operations cause
    unacceptable interference to radio astronomy observations, as
    specified in the existing agreements. Further, we realize that some
    radio astronomy sites may not have existed, or may not have
    envisioned making measurements in the 1610.6-1613.8 MHz band, at the
    time that these agreements were made. To obtain protection from
    Iridium\'s MSS emissions, operators of those sites should request a
    coordination agreement with Iridium.

### Hearing Under Section 316 of the Communications Act

21. In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, the Commission found that
    Globalstar was not entitled to a hearing under Section 316 of the
    Communications Act. That section requires written notice to any
    licensee of a proposed change in the license, so that the licensee
    may object to the proposed change.[^75] The Commission found that
    the "spectrum sharing plan \[did\] not fall under section 316
    because the spectrum sharing plan \[had\] been adopted pursuant to a
    rulemaking proceeding that generally affects all MSS providers
    operating in that band."[^76] Further, the Commission found that
    Section 316 applies only to license modifications, which occurs when
    an unconditional right granted by the license is substantially
    affected. The Commission found that Globalstar never had any
    unconditional right to the spectrum in which the Commission allowed
    sharing, because the spectrum at issue had been granted for the use
    of four CDMA satellite systems. Thus, the Commission found in the
    *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order* that Globalstar's rights to that
    spectrum had always been subject to sharing with other satellite
    systems, and the inclusion of a TDMA system in the sharing
    authorized in part of the spectrum did not substantially affect
    Globalstar's right.[^77]

22. In its reconsideration petition, Globalstar again claims that we
    must grant it a hearing under Section 316 of the Communications Act.
    Globalstar claims that even though the changes in question were the
    result of a rulemaking proceeding, they were "in substance and
    effect individual in impact and condemnatory in purpose."[^78]
    Globalstar states that the Commission's action caused Globalstar to
    modify directly its operations and suppressed Globalstar's access to
    the spectrum.[^79] Thus, according to Globalstar, a hearing under
    Section 316 was required.[^80]

23. We affirm our determination in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*
    on this issue, and we decline to grant Globalstar a hearing under
    Section 316 of the Communications Act. With regard to Globalstar's
    argument that the Commission may not use its rulemaking authority to
    avoid the adjudicatory procedures required for modifying individual
    licenses,[^81] we note that rulemaking proceedings that are general
    in nature -- such as this one -- are not subject to Section 316
    requirements.[^82] As we explained in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing
    Order*, we modified the Big LEO bandplan in order to further our
    public interest goal of promoting more efficient use of spectrum.
    Our action is consistent with past policy decisions that required
    Globalstar to share that spectrum.[^83] Accordingly, we find that
    this proceeding is a rulemaking of general effect, and that such
    modification of Globalstar's license that may occur will result from
    policy decisions based in the public interest.

24. Even if this rulemaking proceeding were subject to the requirements
    of Section 316, we reiterate that, as the Commission found in the
    *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, Globalstar never had a right of
    exclusive access to the spectrum the Commission reassigned for
    sharing. The Commission decided in the *Big LEO Order* to provide
    L-band spectrum at 1610-1621.35 MHz to four CDMA satellite systems.
    The Commission specifically stated that if only one CDMA system was
    constructed, it would propose to reassign the 3.1 megahertz of
    spectrum at 1618.25-1621.35 to another licensee.[^84] We find, as
    the Commission did in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, that the
    grant of spectrum to Globalstar under its license was made with the
    understanding that it was both to be shared with other operators and
    subject to modification if only one CDMA operator launched and
    operated a satellite system.

25. Further, we decline Globalstar's request because Globalstar received
    all the notice and opportunity to object that Section 316 requires,
    and considerably more. Section 316 states that any license may be
    modified by the Commission in the public interest, but that '\[n\]o
    such order of modification shall become final until the holder of
    the license... shall have been notified in writing of the proposed
    action and the grounds and reasons therefor, and shall be given
    reasonable opportunity, of at least thirty days, to protest such
    proposed order...."[^85] We find that Globalstar was given written
    notice of the Commission's proposal in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing
    NPRM*, which was released on February 10, 2003.[^86] That Globalstar
    had actual notice of the proposal is evidenced by the fact that
    Globalstar commented in that proceeding, which culminated in the
    *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order* adopted on June 10, 2004.[^87]
    Thus, Globalstar had sixteen months to object to the proposal.
    Indeed, Globalstar filed for reconsideration of the Commission's
    decision in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*. Globalstar also
    filed comments, reply comments, a petition, replies to oppositions,
    and letters in this proceeding. Moreover, Globalstar's
    representatives have met on an *ex parte* basis with Commission
    personnel.[^88] Thus, we find that Globalstar has had ample
    opportunity, and used that opportunity, to protest the Commission's
    decision.

# SECOND REPORT AND ORDER

26. In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, the Commission
    invited comment on whether and how additional sharing might be
    possible in the future, referring specifically to whether an
    additional 2.25 megahertz of spectrum could be shared at
    1616-1618.25 MHz.[^89] Because we are altering the bandplan for the
    1610-1626.5 MHz band to reduce the amount of spectrum shared by CDMA
    and TDMA Big LEO systems, the proposal for expanded spectrum sharing
    in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, is moot. The
    issues of spectrum assignment and sharing raised in the *Big LEO
    Spectrum Sharing Further Notice* are resolved in the comprehensive
    bandplan for the 1610-1626.5 MHz band that we adopt in the *Second
    Order on Reconsideration*. Accordingly, we terminate the *Big LEO
    Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*.

# notice of proposed rulemaking

27. In this *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, we initiate a proceeding to
    consider spectrum authorizations and technical rules for ATC in the
    Big LEO bands. Specifically, we seek comment on expanding the L-band
    and S-band spectrum in which Globalstar may operate ATC. Globalstar
    requests that we expand its authorization to operate ATC from the
    current 11 megahertz of its assigned spectrum to all of the L-band
    and S-band spectrum in which it is licensed to operate, either
    exclusively or on a shared basis.[^90]

## Background

28. *ATC Order.* MSS systems can provide communications in areas where
    it is difficult or impossible to provide communications coverage via
    terrestrial base stations, such as remote or rural areas and
    non-coastal maritime regions. A disadvantage of MSS is the fact that
    the satellite link is susceptible to blocking by structural
    attenuation, particularly in urban areas and inside buildings. The
    ATC concept allows MSS operators to integrate terrestrial services
    into their satellite networks in order to augment coverage in areas
    where their satellite signals are largely unavailable due to
    blocking.[^91] In 2003, the Commission adopted the ATC Order,
    permitting MSS licensees to seek authority to implement ATC to be
    integrated into MSS networks in MSS bands, including the Big LEO
    bands.[^92] ATC allow MSS operators to expand their communications
    services to urban areas and in buildings where the satellite signal
    is weak by re-using their assigned MSS frequencies.[^93] In the Big
    LEO bands, the Commission limited ATC operations "to the 1610-1615.5
    MHz, 1621.35-1626.5 MHz and 2492.5-2498 MHz bands and to the
    specific frequencies authorized for use by the MSS licensee that
    seeks ATC authority."[^94] Subsequently the Commission shifted the
    S-band ATC block to 2487.5-2493 MHz, so that ATC and the fixed and
    mobile services allocation at 2495-2500 MHz would not overlap.[^95]

29. *Globalstar Petition for Rulemaking.* On June 20, 2006, Globalstar
    filed a *Petition for Expedited Rulemaking* (Petition) requesting
    that we authorize Globalstar to provide ATC using all of its
    assigned spectrum in the 1610-1621.35 MHz and 2483.5-2500 MHz Big
    LEO bands.[^96] We placed the Petition on public notice and received
    four oppositions, four comments, and two reply comments.[^97]

30. Globalstar asserts that since the Commission granted it authority to
    operate ATC in the 1610-1615.5 MHz and 2487.5-2493 MHz bands in
    January 2006,[^98] it has taken a number of steps to prepare for
    implementation of ATC, including "conducting engineering tests and
    consumer surveys on potential ATC technologies and services...
    architecting \[sic\] its next-generation satellites to best limit
    mutual interference between the MSS and ATC components..."[^99]
    Globalstar also states that it is "in active business negotiations
    relating to deployment of ATC."[^100] Globalstar claims that its ATC
    will, when implemented, allow it to offer ubiquitous coverage and a
    wide range of advanced services to customers, as well as using
    Globalstar's spectrum with much greater efficiency.[^101] For this
    reason, Globalstar requests that we allow it to offer ATC in all of
    the Big LEO spectrum Globalstar is authorized to use. This would
    include spectrum that Globalstar shares with Iridium and five
    megahertz of spectrum at 2495-2500 MHz that Globalstar shares with
    the Broadband Radio Service/Educational Broadband Service (BRS/EBS).
    Globalstar maintains that it is being treated unequally because all
    of the spectrum available to MSS operators in other bands may be
    used for ATC, but less than the total spectrum available to
    Globalstar in the Big LEO bands is available for ATC.[^102]
    Globalstar claims that it is the only current or potential MSS
    operator limited to using less than its full authorized spectrum for
    ATC.[^103] Globalstar asserts that it can operate ATC across its
    full assigned spectrum, including spectrum shared with other MSS
    providers, without causing interference to other users.[^104]
    Globalstar asserts that appropriate coordination requirements and
    emissions limits will ensure that its ATC does not cause
    interference to other services.[^105] Globalstar also contends that
    allowing it to use only 11 megahertz for ATC places it at a
    competitive disadvantage *vis-à-vis* other MSS operators who could
    provide ATC and distorts the market for MSS/ATC services.[^106] In
    its comments, Qualcomm, Inc. (Qualcomm), which manufactures
    equipment for Globalstar, agrees with Globalstar's argument.[^107]

## Comments

31. In support of its request, Globalstar analyzes potential cases of
    interference to licensees and services with which it shares
    spectrum, or which it may affect by its use of its spectrum.[^108]
    First, Globalstar lists three possibilities of interference to the
    MSS Big LEO provider with which it shares part of its spectrum,
    Iridium. Globalstar asserts that it can avoid uplink interference
    from Iridium mobile terminals into Globalstar ATC base stations
    simply by assigning its own ATC mobile terminals frequencies in the
    portion of the 1610-1626.5 MHz band of which it has exclusive use.
    In cases of potential downlink interference from Iridium satellites
    to Globalstar ATC base stations, Globalstar asserts that the reduced
    antenna gain of its ATC base stations in the direction of Iridium
    satellites will ameliorate interference concerns. Finally, uplink
    interference into Iridium satellites from Globalstar mobile
    terminals would be limited by the same mechanism that Globalstar
    uses to limit interference into its own satellites, according to
    Globalstar.[^109] With regard to BRS/EBS in the 2495-2500 MHz band,
    Globalstar states that it wishes to use this portion of the band
    only until BRS/EBS is built out. After such build out, Globalstar
    claims that it must, and will, abandon using that portion of its
    spectrum if any occasions of interference arise.[^110] Qualcomm
    agrees, stating that Globalstar can simply and without difficulty
    move out of the 2495-2500 MHz band in any area in which BRS/EBS
    begins operation, because Globalstar MSS/ATC mobile terminals will
    be designed to operate across the entire 2483.5-2500 MHz band.[^111]

32. Several parties oppose granting Globalstar authority to operate ATC
    in the 2495-2500 MHz band. CTIA, the Wireless Association (CTIA),
    states that it has long been the Commission's intent to provide
    protection for BRS/EBS by means of frequency separation from
    ATC.[^112] Sprint Nextel Corp. (Sprint Nextel) agrees, noting that
    Globalstar itself has acknowledged that ATC cannot share spectrum
    with another terrestrial mobile service and that the Commission has
    a predominant scheme of licensing terrestrial services in separate
    spectrum blocks.[^113] The Wireless Communications Association
    International (WCAI) agrees[^114] and further notes that both
    Globalstar and the Commission have stated that Globalstar needs no
    more ATC spectrum.[^115] Motorola, Inc. (Motorola) observes that the
    Commission established sharing between MSS and BRS/EBS in the
    2495-2500 MHz band substantially on the basis that MSS would operate
    primarily in rural and remote areas, while BRS/EBS would operate
    primarily in urban and suburban areas. Because ATC would be used
    primarily in urban areas, Motorola opposes allowing Globalstar to
    operate ATC in the 2495-2500 MHz band.[^116] The WiMAX Forum
    presents a technical analysis to demonstrate its view that ATC and
    BRS/EBS cannot share spectrum, and opposes any ATC use of the
    2496-2500 MHz band.[^117]

33. Iridium opposes expanding Globalstar's ATC spectrum in the L-band,
    stating that Globalstar has provided no technical evidence that it
    can operate ATC across its entire assigned band at 1610-1621.35 MHz,
    including the portion which Globalstar shares with Iridium, without
    causing harmful interference. Further, Iridium claims that
    Globalstar has expressly admitted that Globalstar's ATC could cause
    harmful interference to Iridium's MSS system.[^118]

34. In response, Globalstar asserts that it has demonstrated the need
    for more ATC spectrum, citing its increase in customers and
    services, and states that its ability to plan for ATC is clouded by
    the uncertainty as to the frequencies on which it will be allowed to
    offer ATC.[^119] Globalstar also states that expanded ATC spectrum
    will allow it, in partnership with Open Range Communications, Inc.,
    to provide broadband services in rural areas that currently lack
    affordable, high-speed broadband.[^120] Globalstar reiterates its
    understanding that it will be obliged to adhere to technical rules
    designed to avoid interference, and states that it will operate ATC
    in the 2495-2500 MHz band only where there is no BRS/EBS to suffer
    interference.[^121] Finally, Globalstar asserts that it will not
    interfere with Iridium's operations in the Big LEO L-band.[^122]

35. In response to Globalstar's assertions, T-Mobile USA, Inc.
    (T-Mobile) states that Globalstar has no need for more ATC spectrum,
    and that Globalstar's request for more spectrum comes before it has
    conducted any ATC operations at all.[^123] Further, T-Mobile notes
    that the emergency services Globalstar provided during the 2005
    hurricane season were all provided without ATC.[^124] According to
    T-Mobile, Globalstar has not shown how its ATC can share spectrum
    without interference to other services, and the Commission has long
    recognized the need to maintain separation between ATC and
    BRS/EBS.[^125] Therefore, asserts T-Mobile, we should refuse to
    allow Globalstar ATC in the 2493-2500 MHz segment of the
    S-band.[^126] WCAI asserts that there is an undisputed record
    demonstrating that ATC cannot share with BRS in the 2495-2500 MHz
    segment of the S-band.[^127] WCAI notes that it, the WiMAX Forum,
    Sprint Nextel, CTIA, T-Mobile, SBE, and Iridium have opposed
    Globalstar's rulemaking petition.[^128] WCAI denies Globalstar's
    claim that a rulemaking proceeding will provide certainty as to how
    much spectrum will be authorized for ATC, stating that there is no
    uncertainty that ATC cannot share spectrum with BRS.[^129] WCAI
    contends that any ATC operation in the 2495-2500 MHz segment will be
    secondary to BRS, and that allowing Globalstar to operate ATC in
    this segment would therefore reduce Globalstar's certainty.[^130]
    WCAI states that the presence of ATC in the 2495-2500 MHz segment at
    the start of BRS service "would impose additional costs attributable
    to, among other things, customer churn, processing of complaints
    from those customers who remain, identifying the source and location
    of the interfering ATC facility, notifying the offending ATC
    operator of the problem and, where the ATC operator does not
    cooperate in a timely manner, discontinuing service to
    customers."[^131] Finally, WCAI demands that the Commission account
    for the impact that the same uncertainty will have on Advanced
    Wireless Service licensees to relocate BRS Channel 1 licensees from
    the 2150-2156 MHz band to the 2496-2502 MHz band.[^132] WCAI
    concludes that grant of the Globalstar rulemaking petition will cast
    a pall over the BRS industry, and asks that we deny Globalstar's
    rulemaking petition.[^133]

36. The Society of Broadcast Engineers (SBE) also opposes the deployment
    of ATC in any part of the 2483.5-2500 MHz band because of the
    potential for interference to Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS)
    stations which share the 2483.5-2500 MHz band with CDMA Big LEO
    MSS.[^134] SBE suggests the possibility of authorizing Globalstar to
    use 10 megahertz of spectrum in the 2483.5-2500 MHz band, at
    2486-2496 MHz, subject to "repacking" BAS channels from their
    current spectrum of 2450-2500 MHz to the 2450-2486 MHz and
    conversion to digital format. [^135] SBE also points out that
    Globalstar has not in the past coordinated its operations with
    BAS.[^136]

## Discussion

37. We seek comment on whether we should expand the L-band and S-band
    spectrum in which Globalstar is authorized to operate ATC. Such an
    increase would allow Globalstar to offer a higher-capacity ATC than
    would be possible with its currently authorized 11 megahertz of ATC
    spectrum. In light of our decision in the *Second Order on
    Reconsideration* above, Globalstar is effectively requesting ATC
    authority in the 1610-1618.725 MHz and 2483.5-2500 MHz bands,
    including spectrum it shares with other licensees or services in
    both bands. We seek comment on how much of Globalstar's authorized
    spectrum we should allow Globalstar to use for ATC operations in the
    Big LEO L-band and S-band.

38. We tentatively conclude that we will not authorize ATC in the
    portion of the 1617.775-1618.725 MHz band assigned for sharing
    between CDMA MSS systems, such as Globalstar, and TDMA systems, such
    as Iridium. The ECC study provided by Globalstar indicates that
    there is a high probability of mutual interference problems in
    spectrum shared between CDMA and TDMA systems.[^137] For the
    purposes of interference analysis, ATC uplinks are the same as MSS
    uplinks. The addition of ATC communications to the MSS satellite
    communications considered by the ECC analysis could easily exceed
    the communications volume that the ECC considered to be full loading
    on Globalstar's system. Because ATC would be used primarily in
    densely populated urban areas where there is significant structural
    blockage of the satellite signal path, it is highly likely that
    there could be large numbers of simultaneously operating, co-channel
    ATC mobile terminals. Such levels of system loading could render
    Globalstar ATC infeasible in the shared spectrum at
    1617.775-1618.725 MHz. We seek comment on our tentative conclusion
    not to permit ATC in this shared spectrum and whether a CDMA ATC
    operating in spectrum shared with a TDMA operator would result in
    harmful interference.

39. Big LEO MSS shares the S-band with BRS/EBS, BAS Channel A10, a small
    number of point-to-point microwave operators, private radio
    services, and industrial, scientific, and medical equipment.[^138]
    Allocations in the band are quite complex, as are issues of
    interference avoidance and coordination of operations. The
    Commission noted in the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order* that
    placing fixed and mobile services in the upper portion of the S-band
    at 2495-2500 MHz conflicts with MSS ATC operations previously
    designated for use in the 2492.5-2498 MHz band. For this reason, the
    Commission shifted the 5.5 megahertz segment authorized for ATC in
    the S-band from 2492.5-2498 MHz to 2487.5-2493 MHz.[^139] The
    Commission stated its belief that "moving ATC operations below 2490
    MHz will not impact other in-band and \[out-of-band\] users such as
    BAS much differently than in its original 2492.5-2498 MHz band
    frequency assignment, since in either situation, ATC operators must
    protect incumbent operations that would be subject to harmful
    interference."[^140]

40. MSS shares the 2495-2500 MHz band with the fixed and mobile services
    on a co-primary basis. Several parties state that BRS/EBS licensees
    in the 2495-2500 MHz segment cannot share with ATC due to the
    likelihood of interference between ATC and BRS/EBS licensees.[^141]
    Globalstar does not dispute the conclusion that sharing is not
    feasible between ATC and BRS/EBS, but states in its rulemaking
    petition that it wishes to use this segment only until BRS/EBS
    licensees become active, and that it will vacate this segment to
    resolve any interference problems it may cause to BRS/EBS.[^142]
    Several commenters, however, have asserted that BRS/EBS, as a new
    service, should be able to plan and deploy with a minimum of
    uncertainty about potential interference problems.[^143] If ATC were
    permitted to operate in the band in advance of BRS/EBS deployment,
    they assert that this uncertainty would hamper their ability to
    deploy in a timely manner.[^144] For all of these reasons, we
    tentatively conclude that it is not feasible or in the public
    interest to authorize ATC in the portion of the S-band that Big LEO
    MSS shares with the fixed and mobile services, at 2495-2500 MHz. We
    seek comment on this tentative conclusion. We also seek comment on
    what technical standards for ATC we should consider in the S-band,
    such as coordination requirements, out-of-band emissions limits, and
    power limits, in order to protect BRS/EBS operations from
    interference from ATC. We also note that, even assuming that we
    decline to permit ATC operations on the 5 MHz of BRS/EBS spectrum at
    2495-2500 MHz and the 0.95 MHz of spectrum shared with Iridium, if
    we were to authorize ATC in the remaining spectrum sought by
    Globalstar, this would total an additional 8.275 MHz for ATC use.

41. We note that Sprint Nextel claims that at least three megahertz of
    frequency separation is needed between BRS stations and MSS ATC
    stations in order to avoid interference and that Globalstar should
    not be allowed to operate ATC facilities above 2493 MHz.[^145]
    Sprint Nextel relies on the Commission's prior decision to move ATC
    operations from 2492.5-2498 MHz to 2487.5-2493 MHz because of the
    "conflict" between ATC and fixed and mobile excluding aeronautical
    mobile services above 2495 MHz.[^146] We seek comment on these
    concerns and the appropriate upper limit for ATC operations. We also
    seek comment on the possibility of applying to ATC operations the
    out-of-band emissions rule applicable to BRS and EBS operations.
    Under that rule, for fixed and temporary fixed digital stations, the
    attenuation shall not be less than 43 +10 log (P) dB, unless a
    documented interference complaint is received from an adjacent
    channel licensee.[^147] In the event that the complaint cannot be
    mutually resolved between the parties, licensees of both the
    existing and new systems shall reduce their out-of-band emissions by
    at least 67 + 10 log (P) dB, measured three megahertz from their
    channels' edges for distances between stations exceeding 1.5
    kilometers (km).[^148] The Commission required that the interfering
    licensee either resolve the interference situation or employ the
    more rigorous emission mask within 60 days after receiving a
    documented interference complaint.[^149] MSS systems may submit
    adjacent channel interference complaints against BRS operators on
    the same terms and conditions as adjacent channel BRS and EBS
    licensees.[^150] We seek comment on whether applying this rule to
    MSS ATC operations would make it appropriate to allow ATC operations
    up to 2495 MHz.

42. We also seek comment on how to protect BAS from harmful
    interference, should we expand the authorized ATC spectrum in the
    S-band. BAS Channel A10 is "grandfathered" in this spectrum, and our
    rules require ATC in the Big LEO L-band and S-band to coordinate
    their frequency use with BAS and other services in those
    bands.[^151] Because BAS is most heavily used in urban areas -- the
    same areas where ATC would likely be most heavily deployed -- and
    because BAS is a service in which stations move about, setting up to
    send signals back to television studios from remote locations, often
    with little or no advance notice, we seek comment on power limits,
    technical standards and coordination requirements that would allow
    Globalstar to expand its ATC operations in the S-band. We
    specifically seek comment on whether an expansion of the authorized
    ATC in the spectrum beyond the current authorization would make
    frequency coordination more difficult. We also note that if we
    expand the authorized ATC spectrum to a lower limit of 2483.5 MHz,
    this lower limit would be adjacent to BAS Channel A9. We seek
    comment on what technical standards, such as out-of-band emissions
    limits or power limits, would be necessary to prevent interference
    from ATC to BAS Channel A9. We clarify that this *Notice* is not
    intended to prejudice or influence any action the Commission may
    take with regard to SBE's Petition for Reconsideration in the *Big
    LEO Order on Reconsideration and AWS 5^th^ MO&O* proceeding.[^152]
    Parties should file comments in IB Docket No. 07-253.

# Conclusion

43. The bandplan we adopt here for the Big LEO L-band will provide
    certainty and stability for MSS systems operating in the Big LEO
    bands. By providing equal amounts of L-band spectrum for the
    exclusive use of CDMA and TDMA MSS systems, we provide a more
    equitable distribution of spectrum resources. At the same time, by
    confining necessary spectrum sharing to a small segment of less than
    one megahertz, we provide the opportunity for Big LEO MSS systems to
    plan their future designs and operations with less uncertainty. As a
    result of our decision in this *Second Order on Reconsideration*, we
    will modify both Iridium's and Globalstar's MSS licenses pursuant to
    our authority under Section 316 of the Communications Act.[^153] In
    particular, we will modify Iridium's license to reflect that Iridium
    will have exclusive MSS use of TDMA spectrum at 1618.725-1626.5 MHz,
    as well as shared CDMA/TDMA spectrum at 1617.775-1618.725 MHz. We
    will modify Globalstar's license to reflect that Globalstar will
    have exclusive MSS use of CDMA spectrum at 1610-1617.775 MHz, as
    well as shared CDMA/TDMA spectrum at 1617.775-1618.725 MHz. These
    license modifications will serve the public interest by ensuring
    that both MSS operators have access to adequate spectrum to provide
    their services.

44. In the *Notice,* we seek comment on increasing the spectrum
    available for Globalstar to deploy and operate ATC in both the Big
    LEO L-band and S-band. We tentatively conclude that ATC is not
    feasible in the shared segment of the L-band between
    1617.775-1618.725 MHz because of the likelihood of harmful
    interference to Iridium's system. We further tentatively conclude
    that ATC is not feasible in the segment of the S-band at 2495-2500
    MHz that Globalstar shares with BRS/EBS because of the likelihood of
    harmful interference to BRS/EBS.

45. We delegate authority to the International Bureau to modify
    Iridium's and Globalstar's licenses as set forth in this *Second
    Order on Reconsideration*. Copies of this Order will be served on
    Iridium and Globalstar. Consistent with Section 316, either licensee
    may protest modification of its license within 30 days of such
    modification.[^154]

# procedural matters

46. *Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification*. The Regulatory
    Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),[^155] requires that a
    regulatory flexibility analysis be prepared for notice-and-comment
    rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that "the rule
    will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
    substantial number of small entities."[^156] The RFA generally
    defines the term "small entity" as having the same meaning as the
    terms "small business," "small organization," and "small
    governmental jurisdiction."[^157] In addition, the term "small
    business" has the same meaning as the term "small business concern"
    under the Small Business Act.[^158] 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 U.S. Small Business Administration
    (SBA).[^159]

47. Pursuant to the RFA, the Commission incorporated an Initial
    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) into the *Big LEO Spectrum
    Sharing Further Notice*.[^160] We received no comments in response
    to the IRFA. However, no Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
    necessary for the *Second Report and Order* because we have decided
    not to make any changes to the Commission's rules. We note that this
    Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification addresses only the
    matters considered in the *Second Order on Reconsideration* portion
    of the attached *Second Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and
    Order, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*. For the reasons described
    below, we now certify that the policies and rules adopted in this
    *Second Order on Reconsideration* will not have a significant
    economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

48. In this *Second Order on Reconsideration*, we revise the bandplan of
    the 1610-1626.5 MHz band to reassign a portion of the spectrum. We
    find that our actions will not affect a substantial number of small
    entities because only two MSS operators will be affected. We find
    that these licensees are not small businesses. Small businesses
    often do not have the financial ability to become MSS system
    operators due to high implementation costs associated with launching
    and operating satellite systems and services. Therefore, we certify
    that the requirements of this *Second Order on Reconsideration* will
    not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
    small entities. The Commission will send a copy of the *Second Order
    on Reconsideration*, including a copy of this Final Regulatory
    Flexibility Certification, in a report to Congress pursuant to the
    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, *see* 5
    U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A). In addition, this *Second Order on
    Reconsideration* and this Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification
    will be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
    Administration, and will be published in the Federal Register. *See*
    5 U.S.C. § 605(b).

49. Therefore, we certify that the actions of the *Second Order on
    Reconsideration* will not have a significant economic impact on a
    substantial number of small entities. The Commission will send a
    copy of the *Second Order on Reconsideration,* including a copy of
    this Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, in a report to
    Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.[^161]

50. *Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.* As required by the
    Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),[^162] the Commission has prepared
    this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the
    possible significant economic impact on small entities by the
    policies and rules proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rule Making
    (Notice). 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 provided in paragraph 51 of this
    Notice. The Commission will send a copy of this NPRM, including this
    IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
    Administration (SBA).[^163] In addition, the Notice and IRFA (or
    summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.[^164]

51. *Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules.* The Notice
    proposes no rules, but seeks comment on expanding the Mobile
    Satellite Service (MSS) spectrum in which MSS licensees may offer
    ancillary terrestrial component (ATC) service in the bands
    1610-1626.5 MHz (the Big LEO L-band) and 2483.5-2500 MHz (the Big
    LEO S-band). ATC is a terrestrial communications service operating
    in an MSS licensee's assigned MSS spectrum. It is intended to allow
    MSS licensees to use terrestrial communications to offer service in
    locations where the satellite signal is blocked, such as urban areas
    or inside buildings.

52. Currently, MSS licensees operating code division multiple access
    (CDMA) systems are permitted to offer ATC in the L-band segment at
    1610-1615.5 MHz, and in the S-band segment at 2487.5-2493 MHz. The
    Notice seeks comment on expanding the authorized spectrum for ATC,
    potentially up to 1610-1617.775 in the L-band and 2483.5-2495 MHz in
    the S-band. Any expansion of ATC spectrum would allow CDMA Big LEO
    MSS licensees to offer higher-capacity ATC and be more competitive
    with MSS licensees offering ATC in other MSS bands.

53. *Legal Basis.* The proposed action is authorized under Sections
    4(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307 of the
    Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i),
    301, 302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307.

54. *Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which
    the Proposed Rules 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.[^165] The RFA generally defines the term \"small entity\"
    as having the same meaning as the terms \"small business,\" \"small
    organization,\" and \"small governmental jurisdiction.\"[^166] In
    addition, the term \"small business\" has the same meaning as the
    term \"small business concern\" under the Small Business Act.[^167]
    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 SBA.[^168]

55. CDMA MSS licensees share the L-band with TDMA MSS licensees. None of
    the MSS licensees affected by the proposals in this *Notice* are
    small entities, as defined by 5 U.S.C. § 632.

56. CDMA MSS licensees share the S-band with licensees in the
    Broadcasting Auxiliary Service and the Broadband Radio
    Service/Educational Broadband Service.

57. According to Commission staff review of the BIA Publications, Inc.
    Master Access Television Analyzer Database (BIA) on March 30, 2007,
    about 986 of an estimated 1,374 commercial television stations[^169]
    (or approximately 72 percent) have revenues of \$13.5 million or
    less and thus qualify as small entities under the SBA definition.
    The Commission has estimated that the number of licensed NCE
    television stations to be 380.[^170] We note, however, that, in
    assessing whether a business concern qualifies as small under the
    above definition, the controlling affiliation(s)[^171] must be
    considered. Our estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number of
    small entities that might be affected by our action, because the
    revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate
    revenues from affiliated companies. The Commission does not compile
    and otherwise does not have access to information on the revenue of
    NCE stations that would permit it to determine how many such
    stations would qualify as small entities.

58. BRS/EBS is a new service, and the Commission has no records
    indicating how many entities will be licensed in the service. We
    believe, however, that a substantial number of BRS/EBS licensees are
    likely to be small entities as defined by the SBA.

59. *Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
    Compliance Requirements.* None.

60. *Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
    Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered.* The RFA requires
    an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has
    considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the
    following four alternatives (among others): (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 or
    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.[^172]

61. The Commission seeks comment in the Notice, including comment on
    what impact expanding the L-band and S-band ATC spectrum may have on
    other services, including licensees who are small entities.

62. *Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
    Proposed Rule.* None.

63. This Second Order on Reconsideration and Second Report and Order
    does not contain new or modified information collection requirements
    subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law
    104-13.   In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or
    modified "information collection burden for small business concerns
    with fewer than 25 employees," pursuant to the Small Business
    Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C.
    3506(c)(4).

64. *Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis:* This Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking does not contain proposed information collection
    requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public
    Law 104-13.   In addition, therefore, it does not contain any
    proposed information collection burden "for small business concerns
    with fewer than 25 employees," pursuant to the Small Business
    Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C.
    3506(c)(4).

65. *Ex Parte Rules, Permit-But-Disclose.* This proceeding will be
    treated as a "permit-but-disclose" proceeding subject to the
    "permit-but-disclose" requirements under Section 1.1206(b) of the
    Commission's rules.[^173] *Ex parte* presentations are permissible
    if disclosed in accordance with Commission rules, except during the
    Sunshine Agenda period when presentations, *ex parte* or otherwise,
    are generally prohibited. Persons making oral *ex parte*
    presentations are reminded that a memorandum summarizing a
    presentation must contain a summary of the substance of the
    presentation 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.[^174] Additional rules
    pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in
    section 1.1206(b).

66. *Filing Requirements, Comments and Replies*. Pursuant to Sections
    1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules,[^175] interested parties
    may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates
    indicated on the first page of this document. Comments may be filed
    using: (1) the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System
    ("ECFS"), (2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by
    filing paper copies.[^176]

67. *Electronic Filers:* Comments may be filed electronically using the
    Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ or the
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers
    should follow the instructions provided on the website for
    submitting comments. For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or
    rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers
    must transmit one electronic copy of the comments for each docket or
    rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing the
    transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S.
    Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or
    rulemaking number.

68. *Paper Filers:* Parties who choose to file by paper must file an
    original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or
    rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers
    must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
    rulemaking number. 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). All
    filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of
    the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

-   The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or
    messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at
    236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The
    filing hours at this location are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.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, Express, and Priority mail should
    be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW, Washington DC 20554.

69. *Availability of Documents*. Comments, reply comments, and *ex
    parte* submissions will be available for public inspection during
    regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal
    Communications Commission, 445 12^th^ Street, S.W., CY-A257,
    Washington, D.C., 20554. These documents will also be available via
    ECFS. Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97,
    and/or Adobe Acrobat.

70. *Accessibility Information*. To request information in accessible
    formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and
    Braille), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the FCC's
    Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530
    (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY). This document can also be downloaded
    in Word and Portable Document Format (PDF) at: http://www.fcc.gov.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

71. IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 7, 302, 303(c),
    303(e), 303(f) and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 157, 302, 303(c), 303(e), 303(f)
    and 303(r), this *Second Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and
    Order, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* IS ADOPTED.

72. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration filed by
    Globalstar LLC IS GRANTED to the extent specified herein.

73. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Final Regulatory Flexibility
    Certification, as required by Section 604 of the Regulatory
    Flexibility Act, IS ADOPTED.

74. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
    Certification, as required by Section 604 of the Regulatory
    Flexibility Act, IS ADOPTED.

75. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer and
    Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL
    SEND a copy of this *Second Order on Reconsideration, Second Report
    and Order, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking*, including the Final
    Regulatory Flexibility Certification and the Initial Regulatory
    Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
    Small Business Administration.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Marlene H. Dortch

    Secretary

76. **APPENDIX A**

    **List of Filers**

    **Report and Order, Fourth Report and Order and Further Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking**

**[Comments]{.underline} [Reply to Comments]{.underline}**

Globalstar LLC (Globalstar) Globalstar

Iridium Satellite LLC (Iridium) Iridium

Sagem Avionics, Inc. (Sagem) Qualcomm Incorporated (Qualcomm)

**[Petition for Reconsideration]{.underline} [Oppositions to Petition
for Reconsideration]{.underline}**

Globalstar Iridium

**[Replies to Oppositions]{.underline} [Ex Parte Filings]{.underline}**

Globalstar Globalstar

Iridium

**Petition for Expedited Rulemaking**

**[Oppositions]{.underline}**

CTIA -- The Wireless Association (CTIA)

Society of Broadcast Engineers, Inc. (SBE)

Sprint Nextel Corporation (Sprint Nextel)

Wireless Communications Association International, Inc. (WCAI)

**[Comments]{.underline} [Replies to Comments and
Oppositions]{.underline}**

Iridium Globalstar

Motorola, Inc. (Motorola) SBE

Qualcomm T-Mobile USA, Inc. (T-Mobile)

SBE

WiMAX Forum (WiMax)

**[Ex Parte Filings]{.underline}**

Globalstar

Mobile Satellite Ventures Subsidiary LLC

Sprint Nextel

T-Mobile

Rep. Michael T. Honda

Wireless Communications Association International, Inc. (WCAI)

**APPENDIX B**

**Big LEO L-band
Bandplan**![](media/image1.wmf){width="5.991666666666666in"
height="3.053472222222222in"}

[^1]: *Review of the Spectrum Sharing Plan Among Non-Geostationary
    Satellite Orbit Mobile Satellite Service Systems in the 1.6/2.4 GHz
    Bands; Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate
    Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Service to Support the
    Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services, Including Third
    Generation Wireless Systems*, IB Docket No. 02-364, ET Docket No.
    00-258, Report and Order, Fourth Report and Order and Further Notice
    of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 04-134, 19 FCC Rcd 13386 (2004) (*Big
    LEO Spectrum Sharing Order/Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further
    Notice*).

[^2]: Big LEO systems provide voice and data communication to users with
    handheld mobile terminals via non-geostationary satellites in Low
    Earth Orbit (LEO), *i.e.*, at orbital altitudes below the Van Allen
    Radiation Belt. The term "Big LEO" was coined to distinguish such
    systems, operating in frequency bands above 1 GHz, from the
    so-called "Little LEO" systems that provide data communications via
    non-geostationary satellites in frequency bands below 1 GHz.

[^3]: Globalstar Inc., *Petition for Expedited Rulemaking for
    Authorization to Provide Ancillary Terrestrial Component Services in
    its Entire Spectrum Allocation* (filed June 20, 2006) (Globalstar
    Petition).

[^4]: *See Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and
    Policies Pertaining to a Mobile Satellite Service in the
    1610-1626.5/2483.5-2500 MHz Frequency Bands*, CC Docket No. 92-166,
    Report and Order, FCC 94-261, 9 FCC Rcd 5936 (1994) (*Big LEO
    Order*), *on reconsideration*, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC
    96-54, 11 FCC Rcd 12861 (1996).

[^5]: *See Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5955, ¶ 44.

[^6]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5959-60, ¶ 54.

[^7]: *See Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5959-60, ¶ 54.

[^8]: *See Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5960, ¶ 55.

[^9]: *See Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P.*, Order and Authorization,
    DA 95-128, 10 FCC Rcd 2333 (Globalstar License), *erratum*, DA
    95-373, 10 FCC Rcd 3926 (Int'l Bur. 1995), *recon. denied*, 11 FCC
    Rcd 18502 (1996), *modification granted*, *L/Q Licensee, Inc.*, DA
    96-1924, 11 FCC Rcd 16410 (Int'l Bur./OET 1996) (assigning
    feeder-link frequencies); *TRW, Inc.*, Order and Authorization, DA
    95-130, 10 FCC Rcd 2263, *erratum*, DA 95-371, 10 FCC Rcd 3924
    (Int'l Bur. 1995), *recon. denied*, 11 FCC Rcd 18502 (1996),
    *modification granted*, DA 96-1923, 11 FCC Rcd 20419 (Int'l Bur.
    1996) (assigning feeder-link frequencies); *Mobile Communications
    Holdings, Inc.*, Order and Authorization, DA 97-1367, 12 FCC Rcd
    9663 (Int'l Bur./OET 1997); *Constellation Communications, Inc.*,
    Order and Authorization, DA 97-1366, 12 FCC Rcd 9651 (Int'l Bur./OET
    1997).

[^10]: *See Motorola Satellite Communications, Inc.*, Order and
    Authorization, DA 95-131, 10 FCC Rcd 2268, *erratum*, DA 95-372, 10
    FCC Rcd 3925 (Int'l Bur. 1995), *recon. denied*, 11 FCC Rcd 18502
    (1996), *modification granted*, DA 96-1789, 11 FCC Rcd 13952 (Int'l
    Bur. 1996) (assigning feeder-link frequencies). For a more detailed
    history of the Big LEO licensees, *see* *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing
    Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13365-13367, ¶¶ 19-23.

[^11]: *See* Letter from Josh L. Roland, Counsel to Globalstar LLC to
    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,
    File No. SAT-T/C-20051227-00269 (March 20, 2006) (consummation of
    *pro forma* transfer of control of licenses from Globalstar LLC to
    Globalstar, Inc.); *International Authorizations Granted*, IB Docket
    No. 04-4, Public Notice, DA 04-628, 19 FCC Rcd 4079 (Int'l Bur.
    2004) (granting bankruptcy reorganization of the Globalstar space
    station license and associated earth station licenses held by
    Globalstar LP, Debtor-in-Possession and L/Q Licensee, Inc.).

[^12]: *See Applications of Space Station System Licensee, Inc.,
    Assignor, and Iridium Constellation LLC, Assignee, et al.*,
    Memorandum Opinion and Order, Order and Authorization, DA 02-307, 17
    FCC Rcd 2271 (Int'l Bur. 2002) (approving bankruptcy-related
    assignment of the Iridium space station license and associated earth
    station licenses to Iridium Satellite LLC and affiliated companies).

[^13]: *See* *Flexibility for Delivery of Communications by Mobile
    Satellite Service Providers in the 2 GHz Band, the L-band, and the
    1.6/2.4 GHz Bands; Review of the Spectrum Sharing Plan Among
    Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit Mobile Satellite Service Systems
    in the 1.6/2.4 GHz Bands*, Report and Order and Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking (*Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*), IB Docket No.
    01-185, IB Docket No. 02-364, FCC 03-15, 18 FCC Rcd 1982, 2089 at ¶
    265 (2003) (citing Iridium *Petition for Rulemaking*, filed Jul. 26,
    2002 (Iridium Petition)).

[^14]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2089, ¶ 265
    (citing *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5960, ¶ 55).

[^15]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2089, ¶ 265.

[^16]: *See generally Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13386.

[^17]: On September 3, 2004, the International Bureau modified
    authorizations held by Iridium to use the additional 3.1 MHz of
    spectrum on a shared basis. *See Iridium Constellation LLC, Iridium
    Satellite LLC, Iridium Carrier Services, Modification of Authority
    to Operate a Mobile Satellite System in the 1.6 GHz Frequency Band*,
    Order, DA 04-2869, 19 FCC Rcd 17474 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur. 2004)
    (modifications effective September 8, 2004).

[^18]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13377, ¶ 45.

[^19]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13377, ¶ 46.

[^20]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13369, ¶¶ 28-29
    and 13380, ¶ 53.

[^21]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13380, ¶ 53.

[^22]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13380-81, ¶
    55.

[^23]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13387-88, ¶¶
    69-71.

[^24]: *See* Appendix A*.* Petitions for reconsideration regarding
    spectrum sharing in the 2495-2500 MHz band between CDMA MSS
    operators and the fixed and mobile services were resolved in the
    *Big LEO Order on Reconsideration and AWS 5^th^ MO&O*. *See
    Amendment of Parts 1, 21, 73, 74 and 101 of the Commission's Rules
    to Facilitate the Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access,
    Educational and Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and
    2500-2690 MHz Bands*, WT Docket No. 03-66, *Review of the Spectrum
    Sharing Plan Among Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit Mobile
    Satellite Service Systems in the 1.6/2.4 GHz Band*, IB Docket No.
    02-364, *Amendment of Part 2 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate
    Spectrum Below 3 GHz for Mobile and Fixed Services to Support the
    Introduction of New Advanced Wireless Services, Including Third
    Generation Wireless Systems*, ET Docket No. 00-258, Order on
    Reconsideration and Fifth Memorandum Opinion and Order and Third
    Memorandum Opinion and Order and Second Report and Order, FCC 06-46,
    21 FCC Rcd 5606, 5618-5639, ¶¶ 20-58 (2006) (*Big LEO Order on
    Reconsideration and AWS 5^th^ MO&O*) (recon pending) (appeal held in
    abeyance*, Sprint Nextel Corporation v. FCC*, No. 06-1278 (D.C. Cir.
    filed July 21, 2006)).

[^25]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, 19 FCC Rcd at
    13399, ¶ 98.

[^26]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, 19 FCC Rcd at
    13399, ¶ 99.

[^27]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, 19 FCC Rcd at
    13399, ¶ 99.

[^28]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, 19 FCC Rcd at
    13399, ¶ 99.

[^29]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, 19 FCC Rcd at
    13399, ¶ 100.

[^30]: *See* Appendix A.

[^31]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2089, ¶ 266.

[^32]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2089, ¶ 266
    (citing Letter from Richard E. Wiley, Counsel to Iridium, to Michael
    K. Powell, Chairman, FCC, dated Jan. 13, 2003).

[^33]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Notice*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2089, ¶ 266.

[^34]: *See Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd 5960, ¶ 55.

[^35]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13371, ¶ 34
    (citing Iridium Comments at 10-30, Iridium Reply at 6-9).

[^36]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13371, ¶ 34
    (citing Iridium Comments at 7).

[^37]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13372, ¶ 35
    (citing Iridium Comments at 4-5). Iridium's bandplan called for 5.35
    megahertz of L-band spectrum to be reassigned from CDMA to TDMA Big
    LEO MSS, and for approximately 10 megahertz of CDMA Big LEO S-band
    spectrum to be reclaimed for "other purposes," leaving approximately
    12.5 megahertz of total L-band and S-band Big LEO spectrum available
    to Globalstar. *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd
    13371, ¶ 34 (citing Iridium Comments at 25-26, 36).

[^38]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13372, ¶ 36
    (citing Joint Comments of L/Q Licensee, Inc., Globalstar, L.P. and
    Globalstar USA, L.L.C. (Joint Comments) at 6).

[^39]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13372-73, ¶ 36
    (citing Joint Comments at 11).

[^40]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13373, ¶ 37
    (citing Joint at 12-19, 30).

[^41]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13376, ¶ 44.

[^42]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13371, ¶ 33.

[^43]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13377, ¶ 45.

[^44]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13377, ¶ 46.

[^45]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13377, ¶ 47.

[^46]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13378, ¶ 49.

[^47]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 3-8.

[^48]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 7.

[^49]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 7.

[^50]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 8-9.

[^51]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 13-18 (citing 47 U.S.C. § 316).

[^52]: The record on this reconsideration contains three technical
    analyses of spectrum sharing and the risk of interference between
    CDMA and TDMA MSS systems in the Big LEO L-band. *See* Globalstar
    Petition, Tech. Appx., § 2; Iridium Comments at 17-20; Letter from
    William T. Lake, Counsel to Globalstar, to Marlene H. Dortch,
    Secretary, FCC, dated Feb. 7, 2007, Attachment A (ECC Draft Report).

[^53]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 5-6.

[^54]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 5-6.

[^55]: *See* Globalstar Petition, Tech. Appx., § 2. *See also*
    Globalstar Comments at 12.

[^56]: *See* Iridium Comments at 17-20.

[^57]: Iridium disputes Globalstar's assumption of the number of Iridium
    carriers per Globalstar channel and beam, and the average transmit
    power per carrier of Iridium's system. *See* Iridium Reply at 7-9.

[^58]: *See* Globalstar Reply at 6-13.

[^59]: Globalstar contends that it needs two unshared CDMA channels in
    the L-band to provide service to aircraft. *See* Globalstar Comments
    at 5-16 and Tech. Appendix; Globalstar Reply at 14-22 and Tech.
    Appendix. *See also* Sagem Comments at 1-3; Qualcomm Reply at 1-10.

[^60]: *See* ECC Draft Report at 36.

[^61]: *See* ECC Draft Report at 36.

[^62]: *See* ECC Draft Report at 36.

[^63]: *See* ECC Draft Report at 36.

[^64]: *See* Globalstar Comments at 2.

[^65]: *See* Iridium Comments at 2.

[^66]: *See* Iridium Comments at 7-9.

[^67]: *See* Iridium at 5-10; Iridium Reply at 2-6.

[^68]: *See* Globalstar Petition for Reconsideration at 9-10.

[^69]: *See* Globalstar Petition for Reconsideration at 9-10.

[^70]: *See* Globalstar Comments at 8-10.

[^71]: *See* Iridium Comments at 11-12.

[^72]: This bandplan leaves a 0.28 megahertz portion of CDMA Channel 7,
    at 1617.495-1617.775 assigned exclusively to CDMA systems.

[^73]: *See* Globalstar Petition for Reconsideration at 7.

[^74]: *See Application of Motorola Satellite Communications, Inc. for
    Authority to Construct, Launch, and Operate a Low Earth Orbit
    Satellite System in the 1616-1626.5 MHz* Band, Order and
    Authorization, DA 95-131, 10 FCC Rcd 2268, 2270 at ¶ 14 (1995).

[^75]: *See* 47 U.S.C. § 316.

[^76]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13392, ¶ 85.

[^77]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13394, ¶ 86.

[^78]: Globalstar Petition for Reconsideration at 13 (quoting
    *California Citizens Band Ass'n v. FCC*, 375 F.2d 43, 51-52 (9^th^
    Cir. 1967).

[^79]: *See* Globalstar Petition for Reconsideration at 14.

[^80]: *See* Globalstar Petition for Reconsideration at 17.

[^81]: *See* Globalstar Petition at 13 (citing *Committee for Effective
    Cellular Rules v. FCC*, 53 F.3d 1309, 1319 (D.C. Cir. 1995)).
    Globalstar contends that the Commission "cannot, merely by invoking
    its rulemaking authority, avoid the adjudicatory procedures required
    for granting and modifying *individual* licenses." *Id.* (citing
    *California Citizens Band Assoc. v. FCC*, 375 F.2d 43, 51-52 (9^th^
    Cir. 1967)).

[^82]: *See, e.g.,* *Washington Utils. and Transport. Comm'n* v. FCC,
    513 F.2d 1142, 1160-1165 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 836
    (1975); *WBEN, Inc. v. U.S.*, 396 F.2d 601, 617-20 (2d Cir. 1968),
    cert. denied, 393 U.S. 914 (1968) (stating that "\[a\]djudicatory
    hearings serve an important function when the agency bases its
    decision on the peculiar situation of individual parties who know
    more than anyone else. But when, as here, a new policy is based upon
    the general characteristics of an industry, a rational decision is
    not furthered by requiring the agency to lose itself in an excursion
    into detail that too often obscures fundamental issues rather than
    clarifies them."); *Revision of Rules and Policies for the Direct
    Broadcast Satellite Service*, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 9712,
    9766, ¶ 139 (1995) (stating that "the Commission may modify any
    station license or construction permit if in its judgment such
    action will promote the public interest, convenience, and necessity,
    and, \... such modification may appropriately be accomplished
    through notice and comment rulemaking.").

[^83]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13394-95, ¶
    87.

[^84]: *See* *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5959-60, ¶ 54.

[^85]: 47 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1).

[^86]: *See Flexibility for Deliver of Communications by Mobile
    Satellite Service Providers in the 2 GHz Band, the L-band, and the
    1.6/2.4 GHz Bands; Review of the Spectrum Sharing Plan Among
    Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit Mobile Satellite Service Systems
    in the 1.6/2.4 GHz Bands (Big LEO Spectrum Sharing)*, Report and
    Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, IB Docket No. 01-185, IB
    Docket No. 02-364, 18 FCC Rcd 11030 (2003).

[^87]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd 13356.

[^88]: *See, e.g.*, Letter from William T. Lake, Counsel to Globalstar,
    to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, dated Jul. 18, 2006 (meeting
    with Commissioner Tate); Letter from William T. Lake, Counsel to
    Globalstar, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, dated Jul. 18,
    2006 (meeting with Commissioner McDowell); Letter from William T.
    Lake, Counsel to Globalstar, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC,
    dated Jun. 22, 2006 (meeting with Chairman Martin); Letter from
    William T. Lake, Counsel to Globalstar, to Marlene H. Dortch,
    Secretary, FCC, dated Jun. 22, 2006 (meeting with Commissioner
    Adelstein); Letter from William T. Lake, Counsel to Globalstar, to
    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, dated Apr. 28, 2006 (meeting with
    Commissioner Copps).

[^89]: *See Big LEO Sharing Further Notice* at 13398, ¶ 98.

[^90]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 13.

[^91]: *See Flexibility for Delivery of Communications by Mobile
    Satellite Service Providers in the 2 GHz Band, the L-Band, and the
    1.6/2.4 GHz Bands*, Memorandum Opinion and Order and Second Order on
    Reconsideration, IB Docket No. 01-185, FCC 05-30, 20 FCC Rcd 4616,
    4818 at ¶¶ 7-8 (2005) (*ATC MO&O*).

[^92]: *See Flexibility for Delivery of Communications by Mobile
    Satellite Service Providers in the 2 GHz Band, the L-Band, and the
    1.6/2.4 GHz Bands*, IB Docket No. 01-185, Report and Order and
    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 03-15, 18 FCC Rcd 1962,
    1964-2087, ¶¶ 1-4, 6-260 (2003) (*ATC Order*).

[^93]: *ATC Order* at 1971, ¶ 14.

[^94]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.149(a)(2)(iii).

[^95]: *See* *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13389, ¶
    75.

[^96]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 3.

[^97]: *See* *Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau Reference
    Information Center Petition for Rulemakings Filed*, Public Notice,
    Report No. 2785, RM-11339, released July 27, 2006. For commenters
    and opponents, *see* Appendix A.

[^98]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 6-7.

[^99]: Globalstar *Petition* at 7.

[^100]: Globalstar *Petition* at 7.

[^101]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 8-12.

[^102]: Globalstar refers to the 2 GHz MSS bands at 2000-2020 MHz and
    2180-2200 MHz, and the non-Big LEO MSS L-bands at 1525-1544 MHz,
    1545-1559 MHz, 1626.5-1645.5 MHz, and 1646.5-1660.5 MHz.

[^103]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 15 (citing 47 C.F.R. §
    25.149(a)(2)(ii)).

[^104]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 17.

[^105]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 17.

[^106]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 19-20.

[^107]: *See* Qualcomm Comments at 4-5.

[^108]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 21-22.

[^109]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 23.

[^110]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 25-26.

[^111]: *See* Qualcomm Comments at 6-8.

[^112]: *See* CTIA Comments at 4-5.

[^113]: *See* Sprint Nextel Opposition at 2-5.

[^114]: *See* WCAI Opposition at 7.

[^115]: *See* WCAI Opposition at 4-6.

[^116]: *See* Motorola Comments at 2-4.

[^117]: *See* WiMAX Forum Comments at 2-4.

[^118]: *See* Iridium at 2-3.

[^119]: *See* Globalstar Reply at 3-5.

[^120]: *See, e.g.*, letter from William T. Lake, Wilmer Hale, to
    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, dated Sep. 12, 2007.

[^121]: *See* Globalstar Reply at 9-14.

[^122]: *See* Globalstar Reply at 15-17.

[^123]: *See* T-Mobile Reply at 2.

[^124]: *See* T-Mobile Reply at 2-3.

[^125]: *See* T-Mobile Reply at 3-4.

[^126]: *See* T-Mobile Reply at 4-5.

[^127]: *See* Letter from Paul J. Sinderbrand, Counsel to WCAI, to Kevin
    J. Martin, Chairman, FCC, dated Jun 22, 2007, at 1 (WCAI Letter).

[^128]: *See* WCAI Letter at 2.

[^129]: *See* WCAI Letter at 3.

[^130]: *See* WCAI Letter at 4.

[^131]: WCAI Letter at 5.

[^132]: *See* WCAI Letter at 5.

[^133]: *See* WCAI Letter at 5.

[^134]: *See* SBE Comments at 2.

[^135]: *See* SBE Comments at 2-3. In a joint letter dated June 4, 2007,
    SBE again suggested a "two-phase digitization and repacking" of BAS
    channels A8, A9 and A10 to prevent "mutually destructive"
    interference between BRS and BAS, and Sprint Nextel stated that it
    could "voluntarily assist" most BAS licensees in such a transition.
    *See* Letter from Trey Hanbury, Director, Sprint Nextel and
    Christopher Imlay, General Counsel, SBE, to Marlene H. Dortch,
    Secretary, FCC, dated June 4, 2007. SBE proposes BAS "repacking"
    more completely in its Petition for Reconsideration of the *Big LEO
    Order on Reconsideration and AWS 5^th^ MO&O*, filed May 22, 2006.

[^136]: *See* SBE Comments at 5-7.

[^137]: *See* ECC Draft Report, *supra* n.41, at 36.

[^138]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106.

[^139]: *See Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13389, ¶ 75.

[^140]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13389, ¶ 76.

[^141]: *See* CTIA Comments at 4-5; Sprint Nextel Opposition at 2-5;
    Motorola Comments at 2-4; WiMAX Forum Comments at 2-4.

[^142]: *See* Globalstar *Petition* at 23.

[^143]: *See* CTIA Opposition at 7-8; Sprint Nextel Opposition at 2;
    WCAI Opposition at 11-13.

[^144]: *See, e.g.*, WCAI Opposition at 11-13; CTIA Opposition at 7-8.

[^145]: *See* Sprint Nextel Opposition at 2-4; letter from Trey Hanbury,
    Sprint Nextel, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, dated Sep. 13,
    2007. *See also* letter from Paul J. Sinderbrand, Counsel, WCAI, to
    Kevin J. Martin, Chairman, FCC, dated Jun. 22, 2007 at 3.

[^146]: Sprint Nextel Opposition at 3. *See* *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing
    Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13389, ¶ 75 where the Commission noted "that
    placing fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile services in the
    upper portion of the S-band conflicts with ATC operations previously
    designated for use in the 2492.5-2498 MHz band. Because of this
    allocation change, we will move ATC operations down five megahertz
    to the 2487.5-2493 MHz band, which continues to allow at least two
    megahertz of MSS-only use between ATC operations and non-MSS
    services."

[^147]: 47 C.F.R. § 27.53(l)(2).

[^148]: 47 C.F.R. § 27.53(l)(2).

[^149]: 47 C.F.R. § 27.53(l).

[^150]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 27.53(l)(2).

[^151]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.254(a)(3).

[^152]: *See* SBE Petition for Reconsideration of the *Big LEO Order on
    Reconsideration and AWS 5^th^ MO&O*, filed May 22, 2006.

[^153]: *See* 47 U.S.C. § 316. We made a similar Section 316
    modification to Iridium's license when we decided that TDMA MSS
    operators could access the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz band. *See Big LEO
    Order*, 19 FCC Rcd at 13395, ¶ 88; *Iridium Constellation LLC*,
    Order, DA 04-2869, 19 FCC Rcd 17474 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur. 2004).

[^154]: *See* 47 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1). Any other licensee who believes its
    license will be modified by this decision to modify Iridium's and
    Globalstar's licenses may also protest the decision within 30 days
    from the Federal Register publication of this *Order*. *See* 47
    U.S.C. § 316(a)(2).

[^155]: 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).

[^156]: 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).

[^157]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^158]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of
    "small-business concern" in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. §
    632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), 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 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."

[^159]: 15 U.S.C. § 632.

[^160]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing Further Notice*, 19 FCC Rcd at
    13419-13420, App. F.

[^161]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A).

[^162]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA, *see* 5 U.S.C. § 601 *et. seq.*,
    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).

[^163]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).

[^164]: *See id.*

[^165]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).

[^166]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^167]: 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 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).

[^168]: Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632 (1996).

[^169]: Although we are using BIA\'s estimate for purposes of this
    revenue comparison, the Commission has estimated the number of
    licensed commercial television stations to be 1374. See News
    Release, "Broadcast Station Totals as of December 31, 2006" (dated
    Jan. 26, 2007); *see*
    [http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/totals/bt061231.html]{.underline}.

[^170]: Broadcast Stations Total as of December 31, 2006.

[^171]: "\[Business concerns\] are affiliates of each other when one
    \[concern\] controls or has the power to control the other or a
    third party or parties controls or has the power to control both."
    13 C.F.R. § 121.103(a)(1).

[^172]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603(c).

[^173]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b); *see also* 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1202,
    1.1203.

[^174]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b)(2).

[^175]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1419.

[^176]: *See* *Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
    Proceedings*, Report and Order, GC Docket No. 97-113, FCC 98-56, 13
    FCC Rcd 11322 (1998).