**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | * | IB Docket No. 02-364         |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Review of the Spectrum Sharing   | ) | ET Docket No. 00-258         |
| 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 Services to Support    |   |                              |
| the Introduction of New Advanced | * |                              |
| Wireless Services, including     | * |                              |
| Third Generation Wireless        | ) |                              |
| Systems                          | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

**REPORT AND ORDER, FOURTH REPORT AND ORDER**

**AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING**

**Adopted:** June 10, 2004 **Released:** July 16, 2004

**Comment Date:** 30 days after Federal Register publication

**Reply Comment Date:** 45 days after Federal Register publication

By the Commission:

Table of Contents

Paragraph No.

I. Introduction 1

II\. Background 4

A. Initial License Proceedings 4

1\. Big LEO NPRM 13

2\. Big LEO Order 16

B. MSS Licenses Granted in the Big LEO Bands 19

C. The Existing Big LEO Systems 20

D. Ancillary Terrestrial Component Order 24

E. Current Use of 2495-2500 MHz Band 25

F. Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM 27

G. TDMA Use of CDMA L-Band Spectrum Under Special Temporary Authority 28

III\. DISCUSSION 30

A. The Need to Reassess the Current Band Plan 30

B. The Revision of L-Band Spectrum in the Big LEO Band Plan 34

1\. Iridium's Request for More L-Band Spectrum 34

2\. Revised L-Band Sharing Plan 44

3\. Restrictions on TDMA MSS Operations in the L-Band 51

4\. Coordination of the Shared Spectrum in L-Band 53

C. Spectrum Sharing in the S-Band 58

1\. Proposals 59

2\. S-Band Sharing Plan 66

3\. Fixed and Mobile Allocation at 2495-2500 MHz 69

4\. Technical Feasibility of Sharing S-Band Spectrum 72

5\. Ancillary Terrestrial Component Operations in the S-Band 75

D. Government Space Stations in the Big LEO Bands 78

E. Miscellaneous Issues 80

1\. Sections 316 and 312 of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended
80

2\. Other ATC Issues 90

3\. International Law 94

IV\. further notice of proposed rulemaking 96

V. CONCLUSION 101

VI\. procedural matters 102

VII.ORDERING CLAUSES 110

Appendix A: List of Commenters

Appendix B: Final Rules

Appendix C: Technical Analysis for Ratio of CDMA MSS Big LEO L-Band to
S-Band Capacity

Appendix D: Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification for Report and
Order

Appendix E: Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for Fourth Report and
Order

Appendix F: Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification

# Introduction

1.  In this Order, we adopt a spectrum sharing plan in the 1610-1626.5
    MHz band (1.6 GHz or L-band) and the 2483.5-2500 MHz band (2.4 GHz
    or S-band) (collectively referred to as the Big LEO bands or Big LEO
    spectrum).[^1] Under this spectrum sharing plan, code division
    multiple access (CDMA) mobile-satellite service (MSS) operators will
    share certain portions of Big LEO spectrum with time division
    multiple access (TDMA) MSS operators in the L-band, and fixed and
    mobile terrestrial wireless operators in the S-band. In particular,
    we: (1) allow TDMA MSS operators to share the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz
    band with CDMA MSS operators; and (2) allocate the 2495-2500 MHz
    band for fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile services on a
    primary basis, which will share this band with CDMA MSS operators
    providing MSS service on an unprotected basis.[^2]

2.  In addition, we find that the hearing requirements of sections 316
    and 312 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act),[^3] do
    not apply to this proceeding. We also move ancillary terrestrial
    component (ATC) operations from 2492.5-2498 MHz to 2487.5-2493 MHz
    in the S-band due to fixed and mobile terrestrial wireless operators
    having access to the upper portion of that band. We decline,
    however, to increase the amount of Big LEO spectrum available for
    ATC operations. In addition, we find that the Big LEO spectrum
    sharing band plan complies with relevant International
    Telecommunication Union (ITU) radio regulations. Finally, we issue a
    Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to explore whether CDMA and
    TDMA MSS operators feasibly could share additional spectrum in the
    L-band. We adopt this Order concurrently with another order in which
    we: (1) incorporate the spectrum at 2495-2500 MHz into the 2500-2690
    MHz band currently used for multipoint distribution service (MDS)
    and instructional television fixed service (ITFS) operators; (2)
    restructure the services occupying 2495-2690 MHz into a new
    Broadband Radio Service (BRS)/ Educational Broadband Service (EBS)
    band plan; (3) provide spectrum to accommodate MDS operators
    currently located at 2150-2162 MHz within the new 2495-2690 MHz
    band; and (4) adopt the licensing and service rules for those
    operators in that band.[^4]

3.  In our decision today, we make changes to the Big LEO band plan in
    an effort to promote spectral efficiency while ensuring that
    operators in the Big LEO bands can provide service without causing
    or experiencing harmful interference.[^5] When the Commission
    initially adopted the Big LEO band plan, it licensed five companies
    to provide MSS in the Big LEO bands.[^6] Two Big LEO systems were
    implemented and are now providing MSS -- one TDMA system and one
    CDMA system. In this proceeding, we consider how this development
    impacts usage of Big LEO spectrum and, as a result, make changes to
    the existing band sharing plan. We believe that the new band plan
    promotes more efficient use of the spectrum than the existing band
    plan by requiring MSS providers to share certain portions of the
    spectrum in the L-band, and by allowing non-MSS operators to share a
    portion of spectrum in the S-band.

# Background

## Initial License Proceedings

4.  In 1990, the Ellipsat Corporation (Ellipsat) and Motorola Satellite
    Communications, Inc. (Motorola) filed license applications for
    authority to construct and operate satellite systems to provide MSS,
    *i.e.*, satellite communication service for users equipped with
    earth station terminals that can be operated while in motion.
    Ellipsat proposed to operate with CDMA[^7] and requested assignment
    of 1610-1626.5 MHz for uplink transmission from mobile transceivers
    to satellites and 2483.5-2500 MHz for downlink transmission from the
    satellites to the transceivers.[^8] Motorola, which referred to its
    proposed system by the trade name "Iridium," proposed to operate
    with TDMA[^9] and use the 1610-1626.5 MHz band for service-link
    transmission in both directions (*i.e.*, bi-directional TDMA).

5.  Ellipsat and Motorola proposed to construct
    non-geostationary-satellite-orbit (NGSO) MSS systems with global
    coverage. Their proposed use of NGSO satellites would orbit at much
    lower altitudes than geostationary-satellite-orbit (GSO) satellites,
    substantially reducing uplink power requirements, which made
    feasible the use of handheld transceivers. Hence, Ellipsat and
    Motorola proposed to provide a wide variety of MSS services to users
    equipped with handheld earth station transceivers, including two-way
    voice communication with interconnection to the public switched
    telephone network.

6.  The Commission placed the Ellipsat and Motorola MSS applications on
    public notice and established a cut-off date for filing applications
    to be considered concurrently.[^10] Four additional applications
    were filed before the cut-off date, three of which proposed NGSO MSS
    systems that, like Ellipsat's, would operate with CDMA and use
    1610-1626.5 MHz for service uplinks and 2483.5-2500 MHz for service
    downlinks.[^11] Among the subsequent NGSO applicants was Loral
    Qualcomm Partnership (LQL), which called its proposed system
    "Globalstar." In sum, five NGSO applications were filed before the
    cut-off date -- four proposing CDMA operation with 1610-1626.5 MHz
    service uplinks and 2483.5-2500 MHz service downlinks and Motorola's
    Iridium application, proposing TDMA operation with bi-directional
    service-link transmission in the 1610-1626.5 MHz band.

7.  In addition to the five applications proposing NGSO systems, one
    other relevant application was filed before the cut-off date by
    American Mobile Satellite Corporation (AMSC).[^12] AMSC requested
    modification of its existing GSO-MSS license to include authority
    for operation in the 1616.5-1626.5 MHz band, using either CDMA or
    TDMA.

8.  At the time these applications were filed, neither the 1610-1626.5
    MHz band nor the 2483.5-2500 MHz band was allocated for MSS. In
    response to proposals from the U.S. delegation, however, the 1992
    World Administrative Radio Conference (WRC-92) of the ITU amended
    the international allocation table to add co-primary allocations for
    MSS uplink transmission in the 1610-1626.5 MHz band and MSS downlink
    transmission in the 2483.5-2500 MHz band and a secondary allocation
    for MSS downlinks in the 1613.8-1626.5 MHz band.[^13] The Commission
    later adopted conforming domestic allocations.[^14]

9.  In December 1992, the Commission established a negotiated-rulemaking
    committee (NR Committee) with representatives from all six MSS
    applicants, among others, to provide advice and recommendations
    regarding MSS operation in the Big LEO bands.[^15] The NR Committee
    could not agree to a single proposal and, as a result, submitted two
    separate reports on intra-service spectrum issues -- one provided by
    Motorola and another endorsed by the other five MSS applicants
    (majority coalition).

10. The majority coalition advocated a band plan that would allow all
    qualified applicants to share the entire 1610-1626.5 MHz band for
    CDMA uplinks and the entire 2483.5-2500 MHz band for CDMA downlinks
    and allow TDMA uplink transmission in the top 2.75 megahertz of the
    1610-1626.5 MHz band and TDMA downlink transmission in the top 2.75
    megahertz of the 2483.5-2500 MHz band.[^16] The majority coalition
    urged the Commission to prohibit downlink transmission in the
    1610-1626.5 MHz band, arguing that such operation would be
    incompatible with their proposed use of the band for service
    uplinks. The majority coalition maintained that excluding downlink
    operations would allow the 1.6 GHz band to accommodate service
    uplinks for as many as six MSS systems, including a GSO system.

11. Motorola advocated a band-splitting plan that would allot
    1610-1618.25 MHz for CDMA uplinks and 1618.25-1626.5 MHz for
    bi-directional TDMA operation.[^17] Although Motorola agreed that
    use of a frequency band for TDMA service-link transmission in both
    directions would effectively preclude use of the same band for CDMA
    service uplinks,[^18] Motorola maintained that authority for
    bi-directional operation in a portion of the 1610-1626.5 MHz band
    was indispensable for implementation of the Iridium system because
    the 2483.5-2500 MHz band was unsuitable for Iridium service
    downlinks.[^19] Further, Motorola argued that such a TDMA system
    should be assigned frequencies in the *upper* half of the available
    L-band spectrum because, among other things, the international
    allocation table barred downlink operation below 1613.8 MHz.[^20]

12. Subsequently, the NGSO-CDMA applicants abandoned the
    full-band-sharing proposal and, in concert with Motorola, advocated
    adoption of rules that would preclude assignment of any of the Big
    LEO spectrum for use by GSO systems and would reserve a separate
    segment of the 1610-1626.5 MHz band for bi-directional TDMA
    transmission.[^21]

### Big LEO NPRM

13. In 1994, the Commission proposed adoption of licensing policies in
    the *Big LEO NPRM*.[^22] The Commission initially proposed to limit
    license eligibility to applicants proposing NGSO systems.[^23] In
    addition, because there was no record basis for finding that CDMA
    was inherently superior to TDMA, or *vice versa*,[^24] and because
    the applicants all agreed that CDMA systems could share compatibly
    spectrum with each other but could not operate compatibly in
    spectrum used for TDMA downlinks, the Commission proposed to divide
    the 1610-1626.5 MHz band into two separate segments, one for CDMA
    uplink transmission and the other for bi-directional TDMA
    transmission. Specifically, the Commission proposed to designate
    1610-1621.35 MHz for shared use by up to four systems for CDMA
    uplink transmission and 1621.35-1626.5 MHz for bi-directional
    transmission by one TDMA system.[^25] The Commission also proposed
    to assign 11.35 megahertz of downlink spectrum in the S-band for
    shared use by CDMA systems.[^26] In addition, the Commission
    proposed to insert a condition in each CDMA-system license that
    would reduce the assigned uplink bandwidth from 11.35 megahertz to
    8.25 megahertz "\[i\]n the unlikely event that \[no other\] CDMA
    system is implemented."[^27]

14. The Commission proposed this band plan as a compromise that would
    afford precisely as many NGSO-CDMA and NGSO-TDMA license slots,
    respectively, as the number of applicants respectively proposing
    NGSO-CDMA and NGSO-TDMA operation, with the express hope that
    adoption of the plan would facilitate resolution of mutual
    exclusivity.[^28]

15. Motorola and three of the four applicants proposing NGSO-CDMA
    systems subsequently entered into a settlement agreement, pursuant
    to which they jointly urged the Commission to adopt the plan
    outlined in the *Big LEO NPRM* for assignment of spectrum in the
    1610-1626.5 MHz band. In addition, they requested that the
    Commission: (1) assign the 2483.5-2500 MHz downlink band for shared
    use by CDMA systems; (2) adjust the band plan to equitably apportion
    the burden of any loss of spectrum use above 1610 MHz due to
    requirements for protection of the Russian Global Navigation
    Satellite System's (GLONASS') radionavigation signals on carrier
    frequencies above 1605.375 MHz; and (3) in the event a single TDMA
    system and only one CDMA system were to become operational, consider
    reassignment of some or all of the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz segment to
    the TDMA licensee based on a showing of need.[^29] LQL, the
    Globalstar proponent, did not sign the settlement agreement but
    filed a statement in which it agreed that 1610-1621.35 MHz should be
    reserved for sharing by up to four CDMA systems and 1621.35-1626.5
    MHz for bi-directional transmission by a single TDMA system, as
    proposed in the *Big LEO NPRM*, and that 2483.5-2500 MHz should be
    assigned for CDMA downlink transmission.[^30]

### Big LEO Order

16. In October 1994, the Commission issued the *Big LEO Order*
    establishing licensing and service rules for MSS operation in the
    1610-1626.5 MHz and 2483.5-2500 MHz bands.[^31] As proposed in the
    *Big LEO NPRM*, and as recommended by LQL and the parties to the
    settlement agreement, the Commission: (1) restricted eligibility to
    applicants proposing NGSO systems (absent proof that a GSO system
    could operate compatibly with NGSO systems in the spectrum bands in
    question); (2) designated 1610-1621.35 MHz for assignment for
    service uplink transmission by up to four CDMA systems; and (3)
    designated 1621.35-1626.5 MHz for assignment to a single TDMA system
    for bi-directional transmission.[^32] The Commission adopted the
    assignment plan for the 1610-1626.5 MHz band based on the support of
    the five applicants proposing NGSO systems.[^33]

17. The Commission also concluded in the *Big LEO Order* that it should
    assign the entire 16.5 megahertz of allocated MSS downlink spectrum
    at 2483.5-2500 MHz to CDMA system licensees for shared use, rather
    than merely assigning them an 11.35 megahertz portion of that band
    to match the bandwidth of their service-uplink band. The Commission
    based its conclusion on the CDMA applicants' contentions that they
    needed additional bandwidth in the allocated downlink band because
    the regulatory limits on power flux density (PFD)[^34] affected
    traffic-handling capacity and because it was necessary to operate
    across the entire band to achieve maximum capacity at minimum cost.
    The Commission stated that assignment of the entire allocated
    downlink band would afford CDMA licensees flexibility for
    coordination with each other and with other users.[^35]

18. In the *Big LEO Order*, the Commission did not adopt its proposal in
    the *Big LEO NPRM* to reduce a CDMA licensee's uplink assignment by
    3.1 megahertz from 1610-1621.35 MHz to 1610-1618.25 MHz if no other
    CDMA system were implemented.[^36] The Commission acknowledged
    commenters' concerns that the lower half of the L-band might provide
    significantly less capacity than the upper half due to the
    constraints placed on MSS operators to protect radio astronomy
    service (RAS)[^37] in the 1610.6-1613.8 MHz band and GLONASS
    radionavigation service in the 1598-1610 MHz band.[^38] The
    Commission also stated that it did not know the impact of
    foreign-licensed satellite systems on U.S.-licensed systems across
    the entire band.[^39] Therefore, the Commission stated that it would
    refrain from deciding whether any such adjustment was warranted
    unless and until: (1) no CDMA system was licensed; (2) only one CDMA
    system was licensed; or (3) two or more CDMA systems were licensed,
    except all but one of the CDMA-system licenses were later declared
    null and void for failure to meet implementation-milestone
    deadlines.[^40] The Commission said that if confronted with one of
    these circumstances, it would institute a rulemaking proceeding with
    respect to the 3.1 megahertz between 1618.25 and 1621.35 MHz.[^41]

## MSS Licenses Granted in the Big LEO Bands

19. Pursuant to the rules and policies adopted in the *Big LEO Order*,
    the Commission's International Bureau[^42] granted licenses for four
    CDMA NGSO MSS systems, authorizing use of the 1610-1621.35 MHz band
    for service uplinks and 2483.5-2500 MHz for service downlinks. The
    recipients of the CDMA licenses were LQL, the proponent of the
    Globalstar system; TRW, Inc., which proposed to construct and
    operate a system called "Odyssey;" Mobile Communications Holdings,
    Inc. (MCHI), the proponent of the Ellipso system; and Constellation
    Communications, Inc., which proposed to construct and operate a
    system called "Aries."[^43] The International Bureau also granted
    Motorola's license application for the Iridium system, authorizing
    bi-directional TDMA operation in the 1621.35-1626.5 MHz band.[^44]
    The only participant in the processing round that did not receive a
    license was AMSC, which had requested add-on frequencies for its
    existing GSO system. The Commission eventually dismissed its
    application for failure to file financial information.[^45]

## The Existing Big LEO Systems

20. The systems authorized by the licenses issued to TRW, MCHI, and
    Constellation never were implemented, and those licenses are no
    longer in force. TRW returned the Odyssey license to the Commission
    in 1998.[^46] In affirming previous determinations by the
    International Bureau, the Commission ruled that the Ellipso and
    Aries licenses were null and void because MCHI and Constellation had
    failed to meet deadlines for commencement of satellite construction
    and had not shown good cause for an extension or waiver.[^47]

21. Motorola, with its Iridium TDMA system, and LQL, with its Globalstar
    CDMA system, successfully implemented their MSS systems in the Big
    LEO bands pursuant to valid satellite and earth station licenses.
    Both systems were constructed and placed into operation within the
    time periods specified in the satellite licenses. The Iridium system
    commenced commercial operation in November 1998, with a
    constellation of sixty-six functional NGSO satellites and twenty
    in-orbit spares. The Globalstar system commenced commercial
    operation in North America in March 2000 with a full constellation
    of forty-eight functional NGSO satellites, four in-orbit spares, and
    seven spares in ground storage.

22. In August 1999, the Motorola subsidiary with principal financial
    responsibility for Iridium operation filed for protection from
    creditors under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Iridium
    system ceased commercial operation in the spring of 2000, and
    Motorola prepared to remove the satellites from orbit, but a
    bankruptcy sale of the Iridium assets shortly before the scheduled
    starting date for de-orbiting preserved the system from imminent
    destruction.[^48] The purchaser was Iridium,[^49] a newly-formed
    company that had entered into a contract with the Department of
    Defense (DOD) for provision of service for up to 20,000 users.[^50]
    Acting as resellers, Iridium and affiliates began providing Iridium
    service to the DOD in December 2000 and to other subscribers in
    March 2001, while awaiting disposition of applications for
    assignment of the Iridium authorizations from the incumbent
    license-holders. The International Bureau granted the assignment
    applications early in the following year,[^51] and Iridium has
    continued operations since then.

23. In February 2002, the parent of the companies holding the Globalstar
    satellite license, the license for Globalstar's U.S. gateway
    station, and the blanket license for operation of Globalstar mobile
    terminals in the United States, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
    protection. During the pending pleading cycle for the *Big LEO
    Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, ICO Global Communications (Holdings) Limited
    (ICO) made a failed attempt to merge with Globalstar.[^52] In
    November 2003, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court approved a sale, subject to
    Commission approval, of the Globalstar system's assets to New
    Operating Globalstar LLC (hereinafter referred to as Globalstar).
    Subsequently, the International Bureau granted the assignment of
    Globalstar's MSS-related authorizations and licenses from
    Globalstar, L.P. and LQL Licensee, Inc. to Globalstar on March 8,
    2004.[^53]

## Ancillary Terrestrial Component Order

24. In 2003, the Commission adopted the *ATC Order*, granting MSS
    licensees the authority to implement ATCs to be integrated into MSS
    networks in MSS bands, including the Big LEO bands.[^54] ATCs 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 frequencies.[^55] In the Big LEO bands, the
    Commission has 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."[^56]

## Current Use of 2495-2500 MHz Band

25. The 2495-2500 MHz band is a subset of a larger band at 2483.5-2500
    MHz that is allocated to MSS (space-to-Earth) and
    radiodetermination-satellite (space-to-Earth) services on a primary
    basis, and is designated for industrial, scientific and medical
    (ISM) applications.[^57] Under the current rules, the 2483.5-2500
    MHz band may also be used by grandfathered stations in the broadcast
    auxiliary service (BAS) and private radio service per non-Federal
    Government footnote NG147.

26. A database search shows that the 2495-2500 MHz band currently
    includes 108 licenses for BAS and private radio services, which are
    grandfathered on a primary basis: 1 local television transmission
    license, 12 point-to-point microwave, private-industrial business
    licenses, 4 conventional public safety pool licenses, 12 TV
    intercity relay licenses, 78 TV pickup licenses, and 1 TV translator
    relay license.

## Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM

27. In the *Big* *LEO Order*, the Commission reserved the option to
    re-examine the Big LEO spectrum sharing plan in a rulemaking based
    on the circumstances at that time and to make additional findings to
    refine the use of the Big LEO bands to better serve the public
    interest.[^58] In addition, the Commission also left open the
    possibility of providing an opportunity for additional MSS entry in
    Big LEO spectrum.[^59] In keeping with the previously-stated
    intention to reconsider the Big LEO band plan in the event only one
    of the originally authorized CDMA systems was implemented, we issued
    the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that initiated this proceeding
    (*Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*).[^60] The *Big LEO Spectrum
    Sharing NPRM*, which was incorporated into the same document as the
    *ATC Order*, invited public comment on relevant proposals for
    spectrum in the Big LEO bands and prompted interested parties to
    provide detailed information as to current Iridium and Globalstar
    operations and future spectrum requirements for each system.[^61]
    The Commission also invited comment on: (1) the feasibility of CDMA
    MSS/TDMA MSS spectrum sharing in the 1610-1626.5 MHz band; (2) the
    potential impact of downward expansion of the TDMA MSS service-link
    band on RAS and GLONASS; (3) possible reassignment or reallocation
    of a portion of the 2483.5-2500 MHz band currently reserved for Big
    LEO CDMA downlinks; and (4) implementation of ATC in additional
    portions of the Big LEO bands.[^62]

## TDMA Use of CDMA L-Band Spectrum Under Special Temporary Authority

28. Beginning in April 2003, Iridium filed a series of requests for
    special temporary authority (STA) to use an additional 2.5 megahertz
    of spectrum in the 1618.85-1621.35 MHz band, contending that a
    temporary expansion of the available spectrum for Iridium operation
    was necessary to accommodate demand for Iridium service by U.S. and
    Coalition Forces in the Middle East region.[^63] Although Globalstar
    initially agreed to the STAs, it questioned Iridium's need for the
    additional spectrum.[^64] The International Bureau's Satellite
    Division (Division) granted the STA requests, finding that such
    action was necessary to accommodate vital communications needs of
    U.S. and Coalition Forces. In June 2003, Iridium again requested an
    extension of its temporary authority to use the additional
    spectrum.[^65] Iridium acknowledged, however, that while it
    continued to experience high levels of demand for its service, the
    demand had subsided. Thus, Iridium requested additional temporary
    authority to use less spectrum, 1.25 megahertz, at 1620.1-1621.35
    MHz. Globalstar opposed this request stating, among other things,
    that its own system was experiencing harmful interference that
    "appears" to arise from Iridium's use of the Globalstar
    channels.[^66] The Division granted Iridium an additional 30 days to
    use the spectrum, finding it allowed Iridium to provide critical
    support to U.S. Forces in the Middle East region. The Division also
    stated that Iridium's reduction in use, to 1.25 megahertz of
    spectrum, was an appropriate response to lower traffic levels and
    concerns with possible interference raised by Globalstar. The
    Division further directed Iridium to have the capability to cease
    operations within 24 hours notice from the Commission.[^67]

29. Thereafter, in response to another request from Iridium, the
    Division granted Iridium authority to use the 1620.1-1621.35 MHz
    band for 120 days. The Division noted that the Defense Systems
    Information Agency of the DOD supported Iridium's use of the
    additional spectrum, stating that it had a positive effect on
    services provided to U.S. and Coalition Forces.[^68] In the Order,
    the Division noted that there has been "no demonstrated
    interference" between the Iridium and Globalstar systems. The
    Division authorized the spectrum use conditioned upon the
    requirement that Iridium file a monthly status report on system
    loading, and that Iridium operate on a co-equal basis with
    Globalstar in the Middle East region and on a non-harmful
    interference basis in areas outside the Middle East region.[^69] In
    December 2003 and June 2004, for essentially the same reasons and
    subject to the same conditions, the Division granted authority for
    continued Iridium operation in the 1620.10-1621.35 MHz band, until
    November 8, 2004 or until levels of usage and U.S. Government
    requirements no longer justify the need for the additional
    spectrum.[^70]

#  DISCUSSION 

## The Need to Reassess the Current Band Plan

30. In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, we tentatively concluded
    that it was appropriate to reassess the current Big LEO spectrum
    sharing plan and sought comment on this tentative conclusion.[^71]
    We affirm our conclusion that conditions have been met to justify a
    reassessment of the existing band plan.

31. Iridium, Globalstar and ICO appear to disagree over whether certain
    conditions have been met to justify reassessment of the current Big
    LEO spectrum sharing plan. According to Iridium, the time is ripe
    for reassessing the Big LEO spectrum sharing plan because the
    Commission determined in the *Big LEO Order* that "it would be
    necessary to reassign Big LEO spectrum . . ." if only one CDMA
    licensee out of the original four CDMA licensees implemented its
    system.[^72] In addition, Iridium states that, in a 1996 agreement,
    Iridium, Globalstar, and Odyssey noted the plan was subject to
    change if only a single entity implemented a CDMA-based Big LEO
    satellite system.

32. Joint Commenters Globalstar and LQL (collectively referred to as
    Globalstar) and ICO disagree with Iridium's interpretation of the
    Commission's actions in the *Big LEO Order*. According to these
    commenters, the operation of only one CDMA system does not
    "necessitate" modification of the band plan at this time.[^73] In
    particular, Globalstar claims that when the Commission adopted the
    Big LEO band plan in 1994, it stated that it might consider
    reassignment of 3.1 megahertz of Big LEO L-band spectrum based on
    the circumstances existing when Big LEO systems commenced
    operations.[^74] However, the Commission declined to find that an
    automatic halving of the L-band spectrum was appropriate if only one
    CDMA and one TDMA system became operational.[^75] ICO argues that,
    in the *Big LEO Order*, the Commission decided to postpone
    reassessment of the current band plan "until the occurrence of
    certain contingencies alleviating inter-service sharing constraints
    in the L-band."[^76] ICO claims, however, that these contingencies
    have not occurred because Globalstar must still comply with
    restrictions imposed to protect RAS and GLONASS from harmful
    interference in the L-band.[^77]

33. We agree that the *Big LEO Order* did not require an automatic
    reassignment of spectrum in the event that only one CDMA provider
    implements service. We disagree, however, with those commenters that
    suggest that we have no basis for reassessing the current band plan
    at this time. In particular, we disagree with ICO that restrictions
    must be lifted with regard to protecting RAS and GLONASS before the
    Commission may proceed with a band plan reassessment. As noted
    above, the Commission stated that it would reassess the current band
    plan if: (1) no CDMA system is licensed; (2) only one CDMA system is
    licensed; or (3) two or more CDMA systems are licensed but only one
    CDMA operator successfully implements its system.[^78] Currently,
    Globalstar holds the only remaining CDMA license out of the four
    CDMA licenses originally granted, thereby meeting the third
    condition. Thus, we believe that reassessing the current band plan
    at this time is appropriate.

## The Revision of L-Band Spectrum in the Big LEO Band Plan

### Iridium's Request for More L-Band Spectrum

34. In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, we sought comment on whether
    the Big LEO band plan should be modified in response to Iridium's
    petition for rulemaking seeking additional spectrum in the
    L-band.[^79] In its comments, Iridium argues that although it uses
    its spectrum efficiently in the L-band, 5.15 megahertz of spectrum
    is insufficient to satisfy its existing customers' needs, to meet
    increasing demand for MSS services, or to introduce new services
    such as ATC service that will allow Iridium to remain competitive in
    the provision of MSS.[^80] For example, according to Iridium, it is
    unable to handle geographically dense traffic loads that exceed 180
    to 200 users with single beam loading. Iridium states that, with an
    additional 5.35 megahertz of L-band spectrum, it could handle 350 to
    450 users with single beam loading.[^81] Furthermore, Iridium claims
    that the Commission's grant of Iridium's STA demonstrates that its
    system limitations result from a lack of spectrum.[^82]

35. Iridium also argues that the current band plan places it at a
    competitive disadvantage because it is licensed to operate in merely
    5.15 megahertz of spectrum as compared to Globalstar, which,
    counting both the L-band and S-band CDMA spectrum, is licensed to
    operate in 27.85 megahertz of spectrum.[^83] Iridium claims that, as
    a result of this imbalance, Globalstar offers voice services at up
    to 8 kilobits per second (kbps), and data services at up to 9.6
    kbps, while Iridium is forced to cut voice and data rates in half
    throughout its network.[^84] Iridium argues, therefore, that the
    Commission must modify the Big LEO spectrum band plan to create
    spectrum parity among the licensees, which would ensure a
    competitive marketplace for MSS.[^85] Iridium claims that its
    proposed band plan, which would divide the Big LEO spectrum into
    three "comparably sized blocks" for a CDMA system, TDMA system and
    undetermined services, respectively, would ensure "competitive
    parity."[^86] Iridium contends that adopting its band plan will
    serve the public interest by allowing Iridium to implement new
    services and meet customers' needs.[^87]

36. Globalstar, along with other commenters, opposes Iridium's proposed
    band plan or any other change to the existing Big LEO band
    plan.[^88] In particular, Globalstar claims that it needs access to
    all of its licensed channels, nine channels in the L-band and
    thirteen channels in S-band, due to "the need for channel diversity,
    the regulatory restrictions on the specific frequencies, and
    anticipated capacity requirements."[^89] Globalstar states that it
    offers three types of services that require multiple channels:
    voice/data service for non-aeronautical users; aviation service with
    higher data rates for rapidly-moving users; and simplex telemetry
    services.[^90] According to Globalstar, in different geographic
    areas, it would assign at least one channel for ATC, two channels
    for aviation, and two channels for remote telemetry, leaving only
    four channels for voice and data transmissions in the L-band or
    return link.[^91] In addition, Globalstar claims that inter-service
    sharing with RAS and out-of-band (OOB) emissions limits for
    protecting GPS and GLONASS restricts Globalstar's spectrum usage in
    the 1610-1615 MHz band.[^92] Globalstar, therefore, claims that a
    reduction in L-band spectrum could hinder Globalstar's ability to
    provide its services.[^93]

37. Globalstar further argues that Iridium does not need the additional
    spectrum in the L-band. First, Globalstar argues that Iridium does
    not make full and efficient use of the 5.15 megahertz of spectrum
    currently assigned to Iridium in the L-band.[^94] Based on
    Globalstar's observations, Iridium's capacity in the 5.15 megahertz
    appears to be limited by design and spectrum usage decisions.[^95]
    Second, Globalstar claims that Iridium has failed to provide
    evidence in the record to demonstrate that the constraints on its
    operating capacity are caused by a lack of spectrum.[^96] For
    example, according to Globalstar, other factors may be limiting the
    capacity of Iridium's system because Iridium has failed to show that
    all capacity on the satellites has increased now that Iridium has
    more spectrum under the STA.[^97] Globalstar also points out that
    Iridium already has access to 2 GHz MSS spectrum.[^98] Globalstar
    further argues that more L-band spectrum would still not enable
    Iridium to implement ATC because Iridium's bi-directional system
    design prevents it from offering ATC.[^99] In addition, Globalstar
    argues that, although Iridium complains that the band plan requires
    parity, the current band plan was adopted to accommodate
    Iridium.[^100] Globalstar argues that Iridium was offered, but
    refused, a spectrum assignment at S-band for its downlinks; refused
    to use a spectrum sharing technology; and insisted on a band plan
    that accommodated its highly-specialized technology.[^101]

38. Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) opposes modification of the
    current spectrum plan.[^102] According to Lockheed, the original
    spectrum plan was a valid compromise and should not be overturned.
    In particular, Lockheed argues that, because new CDMA MSS systems
    can share across the frequency band with Globalstar based on the
    flexibility of CDMA technology, the current split allows new
    entrants to use the spectrum without requiring any significant
    changes to the operation of existing systems.[^103] The spectrum
    that has been allocated for TDMA does not easily support use by new
    entrants.[^104] Lockheed concludes that, absent a persuasive showing
    that TDMA-based systems need more spectrum, the Commission should
    not reassess the existing spectrum sharing plan.[^105]

39. Globalstar Canada claims that increasing spectrum access in the
    L-band for TDMA MSS will have an adverse impact on Industry Canada's
    ability to manage Big LEO MSS spectrum in Canada.[^106] Globalstar
    Canada argues that allowing Iridium to occupy additional spectrum
    above approximately 1616 MHz will hinder Globalstar Canada's ability
    to grow, particularly as Globalstar Canada prepares to file an
    application for additional spectrum above 1616.2 MHz in response to
    subscribership growth in the Canadian public safety/aviation
    market.[^107]

40. Blue Sky opposes Iridium's band plan proposal, but supports a change
    in the Big LEO band plan.[^108] Blue Sky argues that the modified
    band plan should require Iridium and Globalstar to share the burden
    of coordinating operations with RAS and GPS services in the lower
    portion of the L-band. In particular, Blue Sky proposes that the
    Commission assign spectrum from approximately 1610-1613.8 MHz to
    Iridium and spectrum from approximately 1613.8-1621.2 MHz to
    Globalstar.[^109] Blue Sky argues that, as a result, both licensees
    would receive the same amount of Non-Inter-service Sharing Channels
    in the Big LEO uplink band.[^110] Blue Sky explains that "special
    consideration" should not be given "to accommodate and expand
    Iridium's 'unique' and highly inefficient use of a Band Plan that
    was clearly designed to promote \[frequency division duplexing\]
    technologies."[^111]

41. Some commenters express concern regarding Iridium's possible harmful
    interference if the Commission grants Iridium access to additional
    spectrum in the L-band.[^112] Specifically, Globalstar Canada argues
    that Iridium's use of spectrum above 1616.2 MHz would pose harmful
    interference with Globalstar Canada's operations at approximately
    1616.2-1617.4 MHz and below.[^113] Globalstar argues that granting
    Iridium the additional spectrum will harm RAS because Iridium is
    unable to control its frequency assignments on a regional
    basis.[^114] Cornell University contends that the incidence of
    harmful interference will depend on the proximity of Iridium's
    transmissions to the 1610.6-1613.8 MHz RAS band, the number of
    separate channels used by Iridium and the density of Iridium's
    traffic.[^115] Cornell University further argues that the Commission
    only should grant Iridium use of part of the 5.85 megahertz of
    spectrum in the frequencies farthest away from the RAS band, and
    that any assignment of closer frequencies should be conditioned on
    results of tests performed to determine the impact of such an
    assignment.[^116] Subsequently, Cornell University filed a
    supplemental letter which stated that Iridium's current use of
    additional spectrum under the STA did not cause the harmful
    interference experienced by the Arecibo Radio Astronomy
    Observatory.[^117]

42. Iridium disagrees with Globalstar's comments and claims that its
    band plan will not hinder Globalstar's ability to provide services
    in the L-band.[^118] According to Iridium, Globalstar's own
    statements indicate that it has excess spectrum.[^119] For example,
    Iridium claims that Globalstar stated that it had less than 25,000
    subscribers in the United States as of the second quarter of 2003
    and claims that it is efficiently and fully using the 11.35
    megahertz of L-band spectrum and 16.5 megahertz of S-band spectrum.
    However, according to Iridium, Globalstar also stated that 5.15
    megahertz of spectrum would be sufficient for Iridium to provide
    service to at least 500,000 subscribers in the United States.[^120]
    In addition, Iridium states that, although Globalstar allegedly
    needs to use spectrum in 1616.2-1621.2 MHz for aviation services,
    Globalstar has not experienced any disruptions in aviation service
    while Iridium has operated in 1618.7-1619.9 MHz under the STA.[^121]

43. Iridium also disagrees with commenters regarding the possibility of
    harmful interference and Iridium's ability to provide ATC. Iridium
    states that its band plan will not pose harmful interference to
    other users, such as RAS and GLONASS, in the L-band. With regard to
    RAS, Iridium argues that access to more spectrum under its band plan
    will enable it to better utilize a functionality that provides for
    significantly reduced OOB emissions.[^122] With regard to GLONASS,
    Iridium suggests that after GLONASS shifts frequencies in
    2005[^123] and after Globalstar amends its operations to take the
    GLONASS frequency shift into account, then Iridium will be able to
    obtain additional spectrum while protecting GLONASS.  Iridium also
    suggests that Globalstar could use better filters on its mobile
    terminals to protect GLONASS.[^124] Iridium further contends that
    the use of a 0.65 megahertz guard band, as suggested under its
    proposed band plan, would help ensure that its system could operate
    without potential harmful interference to Globalstar's system.[^125]
    Moreover, Iridium claims that it already has demonstrated it can
    protect adjacent channel license operations because it has operated
    without any adverse impact under the STA and has complied with the
    Memorandum of Understanding created to protect RAS.[^126] Lastly,
    Iridium argues that it has the capability of providing ATC services
    by utilizing a time division duplex format coupled with the
    additional spectrum.[^127]

### Revised L-Band Sharing Plan 

44. We 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.  Specifically, TDMA operators will share this
    band on a co-primary basis in the uplink (Earth-to-space) direction,
    and on a secondary basis in the downlink (space-to-Earth)
    direction.  For the reasons discussed below, we find that sharing
    the 3.1 megahertz would best serve the public interest.

45. First, sharing this spectrum should promote spectral efficiency by
    increasing the number of MSS licensees that will use this spectrum,
    particularly at a time when the demand for spectrum has increased.
    In fact, we believe that promoting efficient spectrum use through
    sharing spectrum is consistent with our overall spectrum policy. For
    example, in the *Cognitive Radio Technologies NPRM* released in
    December 2003, we recognized that implementing cognitive radio
    technologies in terrestrial or satellite systems could increase the
    efficient use of spectrum by facilitating greater spectrum sharing
    through improved coordination techniques.[^128] By relying on
    cognitive technology to promote real-time spectrum coordination,
    "actual occurrence of 'worst case' interference conditions could be
    anticipated and avoided by changing terrestrial paths, changing
    satellite uplink or downlink paths, modifying \[radio frequency\]
    parameters, or through other techniques."[^129] As a result of these
    tentative findings, we sought comment on ways to encourage dynamic
    coordination approaches that would facilitate spectrum
    sharing.[^130] Thus, we view spectrum sharing as an approach that
    should be implemented, and improved, wherever possible.

46. This spectrum sharing plan represents a more technology neutral
    approach to assigning spectrum, thereby not giving a preference to a
    specific technology. Consequently, this sharing plan should promote
    more market-driven, as opposed to regulatory-driven, uses of the
    spectrum. As discussed in prior Commission decisions, we consider
    technical neutrality to be an important spectrum management
    objective.[^131]

47. In addition, we find that the record in this proceeding supports a
    finding 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. For example, based on our review of the record, Iridium's need
    for spectrum appears to be more sporadic and geographic-specific. In
    particular, when Iridium's system experiences a high level of
    traffic in a specific geographic area, having more spectrum will
    alleviate that traffic. As discussed previously, Iridium's system
    experienced high traffic levels last year in Iraq and received more
    spectrum in the L-band under the STA. When that traffic decreased,
    however, Iridium's need for that same amount of spectrum also
    decreased. Thus, we decline to take spectrum from a competitor on a
    worldwide basis for what appears to be a sporadic and
    geographically-based need.

48. With regard to the amount of sharing to allow, we limit sharing to
    3.1 megahertz in the L-band. First, encumbrances in the lower
    portion of the L-band, for protecting RAS, for example, restricts
    the CDMA MSS operators' ability to provide services in that
    spectrum, particularly aviation services. In addition, we remain
    consistent with our decision in the *Big LEO Order* in which we
    chose to consider reallocating 3.1 megahertz of L-band
    spectrum.[^132] Arguments, however, have been set forth regarding
    whether the CDMA and TDMA MSS operators could share an additional
    2.25 megahertz, totaling 5.35 megahertz of shared spectrum in the
    L-band at 1616-1621.35 MHz. We defer a decision on this issue to a
    *Further Notice* in order to obtain a more detailed record.[^133]

49. We disagree with Iridium's contention that the new band plan must
    ensure "spectrum parity." Iridium fails to persuade us that
    disproportionate amounts of spectrum in the Big LEO bands prevent
    Iridium from providing competitive services or that Iridium's
    alleged competitive disadvantage justifies allocating the same
    amount of spectrum to TDMA and CDMA MSS operators. Indeed, we are
    not convinced that such "spectrum parity" in the Big LEO bands will
    better serve the public interest. As noted above, the spectrum
    within the L-band is not equally encumbered. If the Commission
    implemented "spectrum parity" on a pure megahertz-per-party basis,
    it would ignore the significant encumbrances that exist in the lower
    portion of the L-band due to RAS operations in that band as well as
    GPS receivers in the adjacent band. Moreover, the Iridium TDMA
    system's inability to operate MSS in the S-band further makes
    "spectrum parity" impractical. Thus, we reject Iridium's proposal
    that "spectrum parity" be a consideration in our decision today.

50. Our decision today, however, does not affect the validity of
    Iridium's STA operations until Iridium's license is modified to
    incorporate the decision made in this Order.[^134] In the meantime,
    STA requests will continue to be resolved on their own merits on a
    case-by-case basis by the Commission's International Bureau.[^135]

### Restrictions on TDMA MSS Operations in the L-Band

51. We note that MSS operators in the L-band must protect both the
    radionavigation satellite service below 1610 MHz, typified by the
    GPS system, and RAS within the 1610.6-1613.8 MHz band. Section
    25.216 specifies the OOB emission limits necessary to protect the
    radionavigation satellite service from mobile earth stations (MES)
    operating in 1610-1626.5 MHz.[^136] The current license for Iridium
    MESs is in the 1621.35-1626.5 MHz portion of the band and the same
    OOB emission limits will apply to Iridium MESs uplink operations in
    the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz portion of the L-band.

52. Similarly, section 25.213 specifies the inter-service requirements
    for protecting RAS sites from MSS emissions.[^137] Specifically,
    section 25.213(a)(2) states that "Mobile Satellite Service space
    stations transmitting in the 1613.8-1626.5 MHz band shall take
    whatever steps are necessary to avoid harmful interference to the
    radio astronomy facilities listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii)
    of this section during periods of observation." This section applies
    to TDMA MSS operations in the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz band just as it
    applies to TDMA MSS operations in the 1621.35-1626.5 MHz band. The
    *Iridium License Order* required that all radio astronomy site
    coordination be complete before Iridium began its operations in the
    1621.35-1626.5 MHz band.[^138] In compliance with this requirement,
    Iridium coordinated its operations with the National Radio Astronomy
    Observatory, through a Memorandum of Understanding. A Coordination
    Agreement was also negotiated and signed by the National Astronomy
    and Ionosphere Center of Cornell University, the operators of the
    Aercibo radio astronomy site, and Iridium. 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, after coordinating the use of
    this spectrum with Globalstar, will permit Iridium to operate
    satellite downlinks closer to the radio astronomy band at
    1610.6-1613.8 MHz. We are aware that the radio astronomy community
    is concerned that such operations could potentially cause
    interference to radio astronomy observations in this band. We remind
    Iridium that it is still bound by the existing agreements and that
    it will have to terminate operations if unacceptable interference
    should occur to radio astronomy observations outside of the limits
    specified in the existing agreements. Lastly, 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.

### Coordination of the Shared Spectrum in L-Band

53. We believe that coordination between TDMA and CDMA MSS operators at
    the 1618.25-1621.35 MHz band is feasible. Although we traditionally
    require new entrants to request coordination from incumbent
    operators,[^139] we do not consider Globalstar an incumbent in this
    regard because the Commission never granted unconditional authority
    for Globalstar to operate across the entire 1610-1621.35 MHz band
    originally assigned for shared use by multiple CDMA systems.[^140]
    Under the policy we adopt here, neither TDMA MSS operators nor CDMA
    MSS operators will have priority over the shared spectrum at
    1618.25-1621.35 MHz. Further, we find that the licensees should be
    able to coordinate with minimal Commission intervention,
    particularly because the existing TDMA and CDMA MSS operators both
    have been operating on some of the 3.1 megahertz of spectrum without
    Commission assistance since April 2003.[^141] In fact, Globalstar
    notes that, as a result of sharing spectrum, both the TDMA and CDMA
    MSS licensees have learned more about each other's systems and have
    been in discussions regarding a common band plan proposal for future
    operations.[^142] Thus, these operators already have demonstrated
    that TDMA and CDMA MSS operators may be able to share the spectrum.

54. In the unlikely event that complications arise making coordination
    technically infeasible, we encourage the TDMA and CDMA MSS operators
    to explore economic solutions for coordination such as compensating
    one licensee for not using a portion of spectrum in a particular
    geographic zone where the requesting licensee's operations require
    additional capacity. [^143] We emphasize that the spectrum is to be
    used by and among Big LEO MSS operators and not to be sold on the
    open market. An economic solution for coordination should be based
    on how each licensee values the spectrum with respect to each other.
    Additionally, we believe that the licensees will be better off if
    they are able to come to an agreement on their own.

55. We find that allowing TDMA and CDMA MSS operators to coordinate
    their operations in the 3.1 megahertz of spectrum with minimum
    Commission involvement is consistent with the Commission's existing
    approach towards spectrum management. In particular, we seek to
    promote flexible and market-oriented spectrum policies that will
    encourage more technologically innovative and economically efficient
    uses of the spectrum.[^144] As we stated in the *Interference
    Temperature NOI/NPRM*, "\[w\]e need to provide opportunities for an
    ever increasing array of new digital radio technologies and services
    and to allow licensees to implement and modify these new
    technologies and services in accordance with the demands of market
    forces without having to wait for the completion of lengthy ad hoc
    rule makings or resolution of individual proceedings that hinge on
    disputes over interference."[^145] Ultimately, we believe that
    greater spectrum access and efficiency will result from promoting
    market-oriented approaches.[^146]

56. If the TDMA and CDMA MSS operators are unable to reach an agreement,
    we would become involved in finding a solution. A Commission-based
    solution, however, may be less desirable than if the licensees had
    come to an agreement on their own terms. Furthermore, Commission
    intervention could lengthen the time frame for a resolution.[^147]

57. Finally, with regard to commenters' concerns of harmful
    interference, TDMA and CDMA MSS operators must coordinate the
    sharing of 3.1 megahertz in a manner that does not create harmful
    interference to other operators in the L-band. Entities may contact
    the Commission if harmful interference occurs and cannot be resolved
    without Commission assistance. In contacting the Commission, the
    entity alleging interference should provide detailed evidence of the
    harmful interference, including the source(s) of the alleged
    interference.

## Spectrum Sharing in the S-Band

58. In the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, we sought comment on whether
    we should make any returned spectrum, including service downlink
    spectrum in the 2483.5-2500 MHz band, available in a second Big LEO
    processing round.[^148] We also sought comment on whether we should
    reallocate spectrum in the 2483.5-2492.5 MHz and 2498-2500 MHz bands
    to other providers such as unlicensed operators or critical
    infrastructure licensees.[^149] In response, we received proposals
    from several parties. As discussed further below, we conclude that
    the 2495-2500 MHz band should be designated for use by fixed and
    mobile terrestrial wireless service providers on a primary basis.
    CDMA MSS operators must accept interference from terrestrial
    services in this band and comply with existing PFD limits when
    operating in this band.

### Proposals

59. Several commenters support allowing a portion of the S-band spectrum
    to be used by alternative, non-military operators.[^150] Commenters
    primarily support S-band spectrum use by unlicensed operators and
    MDS/ITFS operators. With the exception of government use of S-band
    spectrum as discussed below, Iridium claims that it has no
    preferences regarding which service would receive the S-band
    reallocation, but recommends that the Commission consider analyzing
    these options in a further notice of proposed rulemaking.[^151]
    Iridium, however, opposes the introduction of a third service unless
    Iridium has "exclusive access to 10.5 \[megahertz\] of spectrum in
    the 1.6 GHz frequency band."[^152]

60. Some commenters support the use of the 2483.5-2500 MHz band by
    unlicensed operators.[^153] According to the Licensed-Exempted
    Alliance (LEA), designating additional spectrum for unlicensed
    services is more commonplace.[^154] LEA also claims that unlicensed
    spectrum is being increasingly used for "last mile" broadband
    deployment, particularly in areas not served by wireline
    technologies.[^155] According to LEA, last-mile broadband services
    over unlicensed spectrum will increase as a result of the latest
    developments in the standards-setting process.[^156] Thus, LEA
    argues that, from a consumer perspective, an increase in these
    services justifies allocation of additional spectrum in the
    2483.5-2492.5 MHz and 2498-2500 MHz bands.[^157] LEA argues that, in
    addition to providing more spectrum to unlicensed services, such an
    allocation would ensure that technical compatibility exists with
    services in the adjacent band, which would minimize interference and
    technical and regulatory constraints.[^158] LEA agrees with the IEEE
    Local and Metropolitan Area Networks Standards Committee (IEEE 802)
    that the allocation would relieve frequency congestion and promote
    efficient use of spectrum.[^159] IEEE 802 contends that placing
    unlicensed services in the 2483.5-2492.5 MHz and 2498-2500 MHz bands
    would not result in interference to adjacent services, including MDS
    and ITFS.[^160]

61. The American Petroleum Institute (API) and the United Telecom
    Council (UTC) (collectively referred to as API/UTC) support use of
    portions of the S-band by site-based or critical infrastructure
    licensees.[^161] In particular, API/UTC claims that a licensed,
    site-based critical infrastructure allocation in the S-band could be
    used for Internet Protocol delivery systems and other possible
    applications.[^162] API/UTC claims that the spectrum allocation
    should be performed on a site-based, first-come, first-served basis
    because such entities are exempt from spectrum auctions and not
    suited for geographic-area licensing.[^163]

62. Verizon Wireless argues that the Commission should consider
    reallocating portions of the S-band to MDS licensees.[^164]
    Specifically, Verizon Wireless proposes two relocation options for
    MDS systems operating in the 2150-2160/62 MHz (2.1 GHz) band so that
    advanced wireless services (AWS) may be placed in that
    spectrum.[^165] Verizon Wireless first suggests that MDS systems in
    the 2.1 GHz band could be relocated to spectrum in the 2500-2690 MHz
    (2.5 GHz) band as long as that band is realigned as proposed by
    MDS/ITFS licensees. Verizon Wireless argues that under that
    proposal, MDS operators would need less spectrum because more
    spectrally efficient, cellular-like architectures would be
    deployed.[^166] IEEE 802 agrees with this proposal.[^167] If the
    Commission does not adopt that proposal, Verizon Wireless recommends
    that the Commission relocate MDS operators to the 2490-2500 MHz
    band, which is adjacent to the 2.5 GHz band occupied by MDS and ITFS
    licensees.[^168] Verizon Wireless contends that MDS operators would
    have more contiguous spectrum. Verizon also claims that AWS
    providers would not need to compensate for numerous relocations
    because no incumbents would need to be moved from the Big LEO
    band.[^169] WCA initially disagreed with Verizon Wireless that MDS
    licensees should be relocated to the 2490-2500 MHz portion of the
    S-band.[^170] Later, however, WCA endorsed a proposal placed on the
    record by W.A.T.C.H. TV Company in favor of reallocating the
    2494-2500 MHz band to MDS operators to assist in the relocation of
    MDS systems operating in the 2150-2160/62 MHz band.[^171]

63. The Globalstar Committee and Globalstar oppose the use of spectrum
    in the S-band by other commercial operators.[^172] Globalstar argues
    that the available spectrum is needed to provide MSS in the United
    States.[^173] Globalstar explains that the Commission has already
    allocated 70 megahertz of "globally-harmonized" MSS spectrum to
    other services, including 30 megahertz of 2 GHz spectrum to
    terrestrial services.[^174] Globalstar further argues that
    ITU-estimated demand for MSS, 206 megahertz, cannot be met because
    the Commission has maintained only 143 megahertz for MSS.[^175]
    Globalstar adds that the importance of MSS must not be
    underestimated because "MSS is the only service that can provide a
    relatively low-cost and readily accessible telecommunications
    infrastructure globally."[^176]

64. As for the operation of unlicensed devices in the S-band, Globalstar
    contends that such devices may cause harmful interference to
    Globalstar and could hinder its quality of service.[^177] Lockheed
    agrees, claiming that unlicensed devices could cause harmful
    interference to existing and future satellite operations.[^178]
    Globalstar also contends that commenters have failed to demonstrate
    any need for such spectrum.[^179] Globalstar points out that
    unlicensed service advocates have overlooked recent Commission
    proposals for allocating an additional 225 megahertz in the 5 GHz
    band for unlicensed devices.[^180] Globalstar also argues that LEA's
    proposal to use spectrum for providing last-mile wireless broadband
    access to rural areas merely replicates the services provided by
    Globalstar and that unlicensed wireless broadband systems are less
    secure due to the uncertain interference environment.[^181]

65. Globalstar claims that giving MSS spectrum to licensed operators may
    restrict Globalstar's ability to provide a variety of services and
    that more time is needed to ramp-up its services in order to achieve
    public interest benefits.[^182] Globalstar also argues that API and
    UTC intend to use the spectrum for the same critical infrastructure
    services that Globalstar provides. In opposing the use of spectrum
    by licensed services, however, Globalstar argues that the Commission
    would need to license any new services on a non-interference basis
    with MSS and ATC phones and accept interference from those services
    and equipment.[^183]

### S-Band Sharing Plan

66. We establish a spectrum sharing plan in the S-band in which CDMA MSS
    operators will share 5 megahertz of spectrum with fixed and mobile
    except aeronautical mobile operators at 2495-2500 MHz. Because of
    our decision that CDMA MSS operators now will share 3.1 megahertz of
    spectrum in the L-band, we find that establishing a spectrum sharing
    plan in the S-band serves the public interest, in part, by promoting
    spectral efficiency. In particular, CDMA MSS operators need
    approximately 1.4 megahertz of spectrum in the S-band for every 1
    megahertz in the L-band to operate efficiently due to the technical
    and regulatory constraints associated with the two frequency
    bands.[^184] The capacity of a CDMA MSS L-band uplink channel is
    technically limited by the total noise caused by the sum of the CDMA
    MSS users transmitting simultaneously in the uplink channel. In the
    S-band, the MSS downlink channel capacity is constrained by PFD
    regulatory limits placed on the satellite systems to protect any
    fixed system operating in the band. The ratio of the uplink channel
    capacity to the downlink channel capacity, for channels of equal
    bandwidth, is approximately 1.4 to 1. Thus, CDMA MSS operators need
    essentially exclusive access to about 11.5 megahertz (8.25 megahertz
    unshared in L-band x 1.4) in the S-band to utilize their spectrum
    most efficiently, i.e, to retain the 1 to 1.4 proportion of spectrum
    usage. Since CDMA MSS operators have essentially exclusive access to
    16.5 megahertz of spectrum at S-band, 5 megahertz of that spectrum
    can now be shared with other services. We note that this spectrum
    sharing plan in the S-band is appropriate because the original Big
    LEO band plan was based on up to four CDMA MSS operators sharing the
    spectrum, and the sole remaining CDMA MSS operator should not expect
    to have unfettered access to 11.35 megahertz in the L-band and 16.5
    megahertz in the S-band.[^185]

67. We disagree with those commenters arguing that ISM equipment would
    need to be moved. MSS, BAS and private radio licensees have operated
    in this band for many years under the provisions of footnote 5.150
    of the ITU radio regulations without significant interference
    problems. We also disagree with Verizon Wireless that no incumbents
    would need to be relocated from the 2495-2500 MHz band. There are
    grandfathered stations in the BAS and private radio services that
    may need to be relocated eventually to accommodate BRS use of the
    band.[^186] In this Order, however, we decline to set forth a
    specific relocation plan for the remaining grandfathered incumbents
    at 2495-2500 MHz, including BAS and private land mobile operators.
    We will provide a relocation plan, if necessary, when we address the
    remaining issues in ET Docket No. 00-258 concerning AWS relocation.

68. We also decline to reallocate a portion of S-band spectrum for other
    uses, including use by unlicensed devices and other licensed
    services such as critical infrastructure services. Because handling
    MDS/ITFS spectrum issues is a priority, we believe that we should
    address MDS/ITFS before we consider other uses, such as critical
    infrastructure services, in the S-band. Moreover, we note that we
    have already allocated or are considering allocating other spectrum
    to unlicensed services.[^187] Therefore, we find no compelling
    reason to add unlicensed or critical infrastructure services to this
    band.

### Fixed and Mobile Allocation at 2495-2500 MHz

69. We find that the public interest would be served by adding a new
    allocation at the 2495-2500 MHz band for fixed and mobile except
    aeronautical mobile services on a primary basis. The allocation will
    allow us to group together spectrum "neighbors" with technically
    compatible characteristics.[^188] Specifically, in a separate
    proceeding, the Commission has undertaken a comprehensive evaluation
    of the 2500-2690 MHz band that is licensed to ITFS and MDS providers
    and is adjacent to the spectrum under consideration here.[^189]
    Because we are considering proposals to restructure the 2500-2690
    MHz band, this is a particularly apt time to add a fixed and mobile
    except aeronautical mobile allocation to the 2495-2500 MHz band.
    Doing so allows us to integrate the spectrum at 2495-2500 MHz into a
    larger 2495-2690 MHz band plan and, as a result, establish a new
    BRS/EBS band plan and adopt service rules for both the 2495-2500 MHz
    and 2500-2690 MHz bands that would allow for the provision of
    similar services.[^190]

70. Integrating the fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile
    allocation at 2495-2500 MHz band with the 2500-2690 MHz band could
    also provide opportunities to promote the development of new and
    innovative AWS. We note that, in the *First Report and Order* in ET
    Docket No. 00-258, the Commission added a mobile except aeronautical
    mobile allocation to the 2500-2690 MHz band to provide additional
    near-term and long-term flexibility, thereby making that band
    potentially available for advanced mobile and fixed wireless
    services.[^191] As part of the AWS inquiry in ET Docket No. 00-258,
    we recognized that the public demand for mobile services, as
    evidenced by terrestrial services' high subscribership growth, and
    the need for additional spectrum to continue development, supported
    the identification of new spectrum that could be made available for
    fixed and mobile services.[^192] In proposing a restructured
    2500-2690 MHz band, the Commission stated that "we anticipate that
    the streamlined regulations and revised spectrum plan adopted in
    this proceeding will facilitate the provision of advanced wireless
    communications services by incumbent licensees."[^193] We anticipate
    that we could offer similar opportunities for the 2495-2500 MHz band
    as part of a reallocation to fixed and mobile terrestrial services.

71. Furthermore, we agree with those commenters suggesting that some
    spectrum immediately below 2500 MHz, combined with the restructuring
    of MDS/ITFS spectrum in the 2500-2690 MHz band, would serve as
    suitable replacement spectrum for MDS providers that currently
    operate at 2150-2162 MHz.[^194] In a companion order adopted today,
    we further discuss the benefits of restructuring the 2500-2690 MHz
    MDS/ITFS band into a new 2495-2690 MHz BRS/EBS band, which includes
    a guard band from 2495-2496 MHz.[^195]

### Technical Feasibility of Sharing S-Band Spectrum

72. From a technical perspective, we find that CDMA MSS operators should
    be able to share spectrum at 2495-2500 MHz with fixed and mobile
    terrestrial operators, specifically, BRS. CDMA MSS operators can
    share this spectrum with BRS operators since BRS operations are
    likely to be in urban, suburban, and somewhat developed rural areas
    while the greatest demand for CDMA MSS operations is likely to be in
    very rural and undeveloped areas with little or no existing
    communications infrastructure. An MSS user in an urban setting may
    still be able to access the CDMA MSS system through ATC operations
    even if the top 4 megahertz of the CDMA MSS downlink were to be
    unavailable. As discussed further below, ATC operations will be
    moved down 5 megahertz in frequency in the S-band so that ATC base
    stations do not overlap the new fixed and mobile allocation.[^196]
    In the *ATC Order*, the Commission separated ATC base stations, by 2
    megahertz, from the edge of the fixed and mobile terrestrial
    allocation at 2500 MHz. The fixed and mobile terrestrial allocation
    will now start at 2495 MHz instead of 2500 MHz. By moving the ATC
    band, we have even greater frequency separation (*i.e.*, 2 megahertz
    plus 1 megahertz guard band from 2495-2496 MHz) to protect BRS and
    we ensure that CDMA MSS operators can provide service in urban
    areas. Additionally, to further protect the CDMA MSS downlink
    operations in rural areas at the 2495-2500 MHz band, we restrict the
    use of mobile services by making the allocation for "mobile except
    aeronautical," thereby eliminating the possible use of airborne
    mobile transmitters in this band. Further, the BRS will be
    restricted to using low power operations in the 2496-2500 MHz
    band.[^197] With these allocation changes the CDMA MSS downlink in
    the 2495-2500 MHz band should remain viable.

73. BRS will be protected from MSS interference because CDMA MSS systems
    currently are restricted in the level of power they can transmit by
    existing PFD limits.[^198] In general, PFD limits are put in place
    to allow terrestrial services, such as fixed and mobile, to share
    co-frequency with space services. Thus, current and future CDMA MSS
    operators must accept any interference from the terrestrial services
    within this band.

74. In addition to the 1 megahertz guard band from 2495 to 2496 MHz,
    strict OOB limits on the BRS operations at 2496 MHz and above, and
    power limits on BRS stations operating in the 2496-2500 MHz band
    will be implemented to protect CDMA MSS downlink operations just
    below the new band edge at 2495 MHz. The guard band, OOB and power
    limits should allow MSS providers to operate without unnecessary
    restrictions or significant interference in the 2483.5-2495 MHz
    band. CDMA MSS operators will still have access to the guard band.
    They will not be protected, however, from interference in this
    spectrum. We expect future CDMA MSS entrants to be aware of any OOB
    emissions from equipment operating in the 2496-2500 MHz band that
    may fall into the guard band. Accordingly, we adopt United States
    footnote, US391, to read as follows:

> In the band 2495-2500 MHz, the mobile-satellite service
> (space-to-Earth) shall not receive protection from non-Federal
> Government stations in the fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile
> services operating in that band.

### Ancillary Terrestrial Component Operations in the S-Band

75. We note 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.[^199] 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. Additionally, we find that
    moving ATC operations down five megahertz will not change our
    analysis in the *ATC Order* with regard to interference to
    unlicensed services and BAS. For example, ATC base station
    transmissions will be separated from BAS channel A8 (2450-2467 MHz)
    by at least 20.5 megahertz, from BAS channel A9 (2467-2483.5 MHz) by
    at least 4 megahertz, and from unlicensed devices operating in the
    2400-2483.5 MHz band (such as WI-FI) by at least 4 megahertz.[^200]
    In the *ATC Order*, the Commission adopted an out-of-channel
    emissions limit of ‑44.1 dBW/30 kHz at the edge of the MSS
    licensee\'s authorized frequency assignment, which protects adjacent
    channel operations that are separated in frequency by at least 2
    megahertz, and thus, operations below 2483.5 MHz are fully
    protected. Furthermore, with regard to the grandfathered fixed
    terrestrial services in the 2483.5-2500 MHz band, the coordination
    needed by the CDMA MSS operator to prevent interference will not
    change.[^201] Lastly, section 25.255 of the Commission's rules
    allows other services to file a complaint with the Commission if the
    ATC operator fails to resolve the interference caused by its
    operations.[^202]

76. We also disagree with WCA's claim that the Commission stated that
    ATC may not operate below 2490 MHz. In the *ATC Order*, the
    Commission stated that: "\[t\]o prevent the actions we take today
    from prejudicing the outcome of the \[*Big LEO Spectrum Sharing
    NPRM*\], . . . we will permit CDMA licensees to deploy ATC in the
    1610-1615.5 MHz portion of the 1.6 GHz band and the 2492.5-2498 MHz
    portion of the 2.4 GHz band."[^203] Thus, the Commission did not
    base its conclusion on any technical limitations, but, rather,
    deferred a decision on ATC operations below 2492.5 MHz as part of a
    notice and comment proceeding. In addition, as discussed above, we
    believe that moving ATC operations below 2490 MHz will not impact
    other in-band and OOB 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.[^204] Thus, we find no
    basis for WCA's claim.

77. In moving this ATC band, we note that we have not received an
    application for development and deployment of ATC equipment in this
    band at this time. As such, we should not be causing any operator to
    incur redesign or redeployment costs as a result of moving the ATC
    band.

## Government Space Stations in the Big LEO Bands 

78. In response to the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, the National
    Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) filed
    comments on behalf of the DOD and the Department of Homeland
    Security (DHS) in support of expanding Federal Government access to
    the Big LEO bands.[^205] The bands 1610-1626.5 and 2483.5-2500 MHz
    already are available for U.S. Government earth stations to operate
    with non-government space stations. Accordingly, NTIA argues that
    making these bands available for use by U.S. Government MSS
    satellite systems merely would extend what the national allocation
    table currently allows.[^206] According to Lockheed, Federal
    Government use of CDMA technology in the Big LEO CDMA spectrum bands
    would both minimize disruptions to currently operating systems and
    allow the government to take advantage of the significant
    development work that has already occurred in producing CDMA-based
    equipment to operate in these bands.[^207] Iridium opposes NTIA's
    proposal, arguing that the DOD already uses the Iridium system,
    which satisfies the DOD's requirements for globally secure MSS
    communications.[^208] Globalstar also opposes NTIA's proposal,
    contending that the U.S. Government pays less for MSS services on
    Big LEO systems as compared to the costs incurred if the U.S.
    Government built and launched its own redundant system.[^209]
    Globalstar also claims that encryption technology enables commercial
    satellite systems to provide the U.S. Government with as much
    security as a U.S. Government-owned satellite system.[^210]

79. Discussions of Government and non-Government sharing spectrum
    generally have been ongoing for some time, and continue to progress.
    Rather than view Government/non-Government sharing in a piecemeal
    fashion, *i.e.*, in a rulemaking proceeding dedicated to specific
    bands and technologies, we intend to continue our work with NTIA and
    others in the Federal Government to address spectrum sharing issues
    in general. As a result, we do not expand Federal Government access
    to the Big LEO bands.

## Miscellaneous Issues

### Sections 316 and 312 of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended

80. Globalstar claims that the Commission is modifying its license and
    that such modification to Globalstar's "existing rights to operate
    in \[its\] assigned spectrum" violates the hearing requirement under
    section 316 of the Act.[^211] According to Globalstar, section 316
    mandates the Commission to provide notice of any proposed license
    changes in writing to the licensee and to allow the licensee to
    object to those proposed changes.[^212] In addition, Globalstar
    states that, under section 316, the Commission has the burden of
    introducing evidence and the burden of proof at a hearing.[^213]
    Globalstar further contends that these procedures have not been
    initiated.[^214] Globalstar claims, instead, that the Commission has
    unjustifiably concluded, on a tentative basis in the *Big LEO
    Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, that modifying the Big LEO band plan will
    serve the public interest.[^215] Globalstar concludes that the
    Commission never indicated that it would take spectrum away based on
    a vague "traffic" or "consumer demand" standard and that the
    Commission may only do so on a prospective basis so that adequate
    notice of the standard is provided.[^216]

81. Additionally, Globalstar claims that taking away some of its
    spectrum may be considered a revocation, implicating section 312 of
    the Act.[^217] Globalstar argues that section 312 also mandates that
    the Commission provide notice and a hearing to the affected
    licensee.[^218]

82. ICO supports Globalstar, arguing initially that the reallocation of
    Globalstar's spectrum to Iridium or other providers would
    essentially be a partial revocation of Globalstar's license.[^219]
    Alternatively, ICO argues that the reallocation would constitute a
    license modification.[^220] Either way, ICO argues, the Commission
    must adhere to the hearing requirements under sections 312 and 316
    because the Commission is not adopting rules of general
    applicability and because factual questions regarding Iridium's and
    Globalstar's spectrum use are critical to the Commission's
    decision.[^221] In addition, ICO contends that the evidence provided
    in the record fails to satisfy the burden of proof requirement
    imposed on the Commission under sections 312 and 316 to justify the
    reallocation of spectrum.[^222]

83. Iridium claims that section 316 does not apply to this
    proceeding.[^223] Iridium argues that the *Big LEO Order* clearly
    stated that a reduction in spectrum may occur if one CDMA system
    remained.[^224] Iridium contends that the license itself states that
    the spectrum assignment could be changed.[^225] Iridium concludes,
    therefore, that Globalstar has no unconditional right to use the
    spectrum and that any change in Globalstar's spectrum assignment
    would not constitute a "modification" under section 316.[^226]

84. Iridium further contends that a spectrum reallocation plan of
    general applicability that is adopted in a rulemaking proceeding
    does not constitute a license "modification" under section
    316.[^227] Iridium explains that, in this proceeding, the proposed
    band plan change affects all Big LEO operators, not just Globalstar,
    and that the proposed change stems from policy considerations
    regarding efficient spectrum use.[^228] As a result, Iridium
    reiterates that section 316 does not apply. Nevertheless, Iridium
    claims that Globalstar had notice that the spectrum could be
    redistributed if only one CDMA operator remained as well as an
    opportunity to protest, thereby satisfying the procedural due
    process mandated by section 316.[^229] In addition, Iridium argues
    that section 312 does not apply to this proceeding. According to
    Iridium, section 312 involves the revocation of a license due to a
    violation by a licensee of the Act or the Commission's rules.[^230]
    Iridium concludes that no evidence in this proceeding suggests that
    the Commission plans to sanction Globalstar for any such
    violation.[^231]

85. *Section 316.* We disagree with Globalstar and ICO that the hearing
    requirement of section 316 applies to this proceeding. Rather,
    Iridium is correct that this spectrum sharing plan does not fall
    under section 316 because the spectrum sharing plan has been adopted
    pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding that generally affects all MSS
    providers operating in that band.[^232] Our actions in this Order
    simply modify the U.S. Table of Frequency Allocations to promote
    greater spectrum efficiency by allowing other operators to use the
    spectrum when the prior CDMA MSS applicants failed to implement
    their operations.

86. Assuming *arguendo* that our actions today are determined to be "in
    substance and effect\[, \] individual in impact and condemnatory in
    purpose,"[^233] we are not modifying Globalstar's license through
    implementation of the spectrum sharing plan. A license modification
    under section 316 occurs only if an "unconditional right conferred
    by the license is substantially affected."[^234] Globalstar's
    license is not changing as result of today's decision - CDMA MSS
    operators still have access to the Big LEO spectrum previously
    assigned to them. Moreover, the Globalstar license never conferred
    an unconditional right to operate in the entire spectrum originally
    assigned for shared use by multiple CDMA systems. Globalstar's
    license to operate in Big LEO spectrum stems from the spectrum
    sharing plan adopted in the *Big LEO Order*, in which Globalstar
    expressed its support for sharing the Big LEO spectrum with three
    other CDMA MSS providers.[^235] As a result of this band sharing
    plan and agreement, Globalstar should have had no reason to believe
    it had the sole right to the spectrum if other operators failed to
    implement their systems and, in fact, proceeded as if it expected to
    share the spectrum. For example, to enable sharing with the other
    CDMA MSS operators, Globalstar modified its system so it could serve
    more customers simultaneously.[^236] Similarly, under the spectrum
    sharing plan adopted today, Globalstar will be sharing a portion of
    that spectrum with other operators: TDMA operators and terrestrial
    wireless operators. Moreover, Globalstar may need to change
    parameters of operation in shared parts of the band, but not the
    physical equipment requiring a license modification.

87. Nor do we find that implementation of the new spectrum sharing plan
    constitutes an indirect modification of Globalstar's license. In
    *Western Broadcasting*, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals adopted,
    as the controlling legal principle, the following meaning of
    "modification" for purposes of section 316: "Indirect modifications
    include factual circumstances where it is alleged that a new grant
    may create objectionable electrical interference to an existing
    licensee and the existing licensee is protected by Commission policy
    or regulation from such interference."[^237] No new grants resulting
    from our sharing band plan adopted today will create "objectionable
    interference." With regard to CDMA MSS systems sharing with TDMA MSS
    systems, Globalstar and Iridium already have demonstrated that they
    can share a portion of the 1.6 GHz band without undue interference.
    With regard to the upper portion of the S-band, sharing with BRS
    handsets and BRS base stations also will not cause "objectionable
    interference" particularly because CDMA MSS operators could switch
    their users to other frequencies in the S-band. In a concurrent
    order, we are also limiting the power of BRS base stations in the
    upper portion of the S-band to minimize the interference
    potential.[^238] Similarly, we find that Globalstar is not protected
    from such interference by Commission policy or regulation, given how
    the Big LEO band plan was originally established, *i.e.*, requiring
    Globalstar to share its CDMA MSS spectrum with other operators. For
    all of these reasons, we conclude that section 316 does not apply to
    the instant proceeding and, therefore, a hearing is not required.

88. As a result of today's decision, only Iridium's license needs to be
    modified so that it can access the additional 3.1 megahertz in the
    1618.25-1621.35 MHz band.[^239] We delegate authority to the
    International Bureau to modify Iridium's license as outlined in this
    Order, having concluded, as required by section 316, that such
    action would serve the public interest.[^240] The TDMA and CDMA MSS
    providers will share the 3.1 megahertz, thereby making better use of
    that spectrum. Oppositions to the modification must be filed with
    the Commission within thirty days from the International Bureau's
    release of its order modifying Iridium's license.

89. *Section 312.* We disagree with Globalstar's and ICO's contention
    that changing the band plan constitutes a "revocation" under section
    312 of the Act. In particular, we disagree with ICO's claim that
    "redistribution of Globalstar spectrum would be no different from
    the Commission's action in *P & R Temmer v. FCC* where the court
    found that the Commission had revoked, rather than modified, a
    license when it reassigned 15 of 20 channels authorized under an SMR
    license for failure to meet a condition of the license."[^241] Not
    only does the court in that case fail to cite to or discuss section
    312, it states that the Commission revoked *channels*, not licenses.
    Significantly, the court proceeded to analyze the facts under
    section 316 to determine whether the license had been modified,
    which the court found it had not.[^242] We find that the facts in
    the instant case do not support a determination that a license has
    been revoked. In fact, no channels are being reassigned. Thus, we
    find no basis for applying section 312 to this proceeding.

### Other ATC Issues

90. In the *ATC Order*, the Commission adopted rules allowing MSS
    operators to implement ATC in the 1610-1615.5 MHz band and the
    2492.5-2498 MHz band.[^243] We then sought comment on whether to
    allow MSS operators to implement ATC in the remaining portions of
    the Big LEO bands.[^244] Only the Globalstar Committee directly
    addressed this issue, arguing that the Commission should allow CDMA
    operators to implement ATC in all CDMA-licensed spectrum. According
    to the Globalstar Committee, the restriction of Globalstar's ATC
    deployment forces it to operate at a competitive disadvantage with
    respect to other MSS operators allowed to implement ATC operations
    in all of their assigned spectrum.[^245] Based on our review of the
    record, no MSS provider has demonstrated that it needs more spectrum
    for ATC. Thus, we find no reason to believe that CDMA operators need
    more spectrum to implement ATC operations and decline to change the
    amount of Big LEO spectrum that is currently available for ATC.

91. With regard to allowing ATC operations generally in the Big LEO
    bands, Lockheed suggests that the Commission consider the
    ramifications of ATC operations in the portions of the Big LEO bands
    under review in this proceeding.[^246] According to Lockheed,
    allowing ATC in the CDMA MSS Big LEO spectrum could hinder the
    sharing of spectrum among CDMA MSS licensees.[^247] Lockheed argues
    that allowing ATC in this spectrum also may result in band
    segmentation among operators, thereby losing the flexibility that
    exists within the current CDMA allocation.[^248]

92. To the extent that Lockheed attempts to argue that we should
    reconsider allowing ATC operations in the CDMA MSS portions of the
    Big LEO bands, we find that Lockheed should have filed such a
    request on reconsideration of the *ATC Order* in IB Docket No.
    01-185, not as comments filed in IB Docket No. 02-364. We decline to
    address Lockheed's concerns about allowing ATC operations in the
    non-ATC portion of CDMA Big LEO spectrum because we declined to
    expand ATC beyond the spectrum originally designated for the CDMA
    MSS Big LEO bands.

93. Finally, the Globalstar Committee argues that the Commission should
    reconfirm that Iridium must operate its ATC system so that its
    terrestrial system is fully integrated with the MSS system.[^249] We
    do not find it necessary to reiterate compliance requirements for
    MSS operators utilizing ATC operations in the Big LEO spectrum. MSS
    operators should be well aware of those requirements.

### International Law

94. Globalstar claims that modifying the existing band plan would
    violate international laws. According to Globalstar, Iridium
    concedes that its system is unable to direct frequency use below
    1621.35 MHz in the United States without activating those
    frequencies in countries where the foreign administration might not
    have licensed Iridium to use frequencies below 1621.35 MHz.[^250]
    For example, Globalstar argues that its local service provider in
    Australia has experienced interference from Iridium in the
    1619.9550-1621.1850 MHz band, a band in which Iridium is not
    licensed.[^251] Globalstar contends that Iridium's limitation poses
    a problem for the United States because, as a member of the ITU, it
    must recognize the right of other countries to control radio
    frequencies within their borders.[^252] Thus, Globalstar maintains
    that the Commission should not modify the Big LEO band plan in the
    United States unless and until Iridium can prove that it can comply
    with the technical international restrictions placed on its L-band
    use.[^253]

95. We disagree. We find that the spectrum sharing plan outlined above
    will not violate international laws. First, international
    allocations exist on a secondary basis for TDMA MSS downlink systems
    in the 1613.8-1626.5 MHz band.[^254] Thus, TDMA MSS operators may
    provide MSS services in frequencies below 1621.35 MHz as long as
    they have coordinated the use of the spectrum for downlink
    operations with each affected Administration. Therefore, as long as
    Iridium coordinates its use of its spectrum with affected
    Administrations, including license modifications where necessary, we
    are not aware of any ITU restrictions that would prevent Iridium, or
    any TDMA MSS system, from complying with international law by
    operating in the shared spectrum. In addition, apart from
    Globalstar's unconfirmed allegation of interference from Iridium in
    Australia, the Commission has not received any complaints of harmful
    interference from Administrations arising from Iridium's use of CDMA
    MSS spectrum under the STA. Should we, as the space station
    licensing Administration, receive complaints of harmful interference
    from other Administrations, we will expect the system operators to
    coordinate their shared use of the spectrum as set forth above.

#  further notice of proposed rulemaking

96. In the attached *Report and Order*, we adopt provisions that permit
    TDMA and CDMA MSS operators to share 3.1 megahertz of spectrum at
    1618.25-1621.35 MHz, based on the record before us. In adopting
    these provisions, we have approved a sharing plan that provides the
    opportunity for Iridium to have greater capacity to serve its
    customers' needs, while at the same time not causing significant
    harm to Globalstar's ability to serve its current and future
    customers. We recognize, however, that Iridium's current TDMA MSS
    satellite system is capable of operating on frequencies as low as
    1616 MHz, and thus an opportunity for further sharing between
    Globalstar and Iridium could exist at 1616-1618.25 MHz. We issue
    this *Further Notice* in IB Docket No. 02-364, to explore whether
    and how such additional sharing may be possible.

97. In adopting this *Further Notice*, we also recognize that a portion
    of the remaining CDMA MSS unshared spectrum in this band
    (1610-1618.25 MHz) is constrained by other uses in this and adjacent
    bands, and that these constraints limit CDMA MSS operators' ability
    to provide certain services on frequencies below 1616 MHz. In
    particular, CDMA MSS operations must protect radio astronomy
    operations at 1610.6-1613.8 MHz pursuant to footnote 5.372 of the
    ITU radio regulations and section 2.106 of our rules. In addition,
    CDMA MSS operations must protect aeronautical radionavigation
    operations, including GPS operations below 1610 MHz. Globalstar has
    indicated in its filings that these constraints preclude its ability
    to provide aviation services below 1616 MHz.[^255] For instance,
    Globalstar argues that the restrictions on aircraft earth stations
    (AES) as outlined in RTCA/DO262 and RTCA/DO228[^256] limit the
    center frequency of their uplink transmissions to above 1616 MHz in
    order to meet OOB limitations below 1613.8 MHz.[^257] Iridium
    counters that "Globalstar could prevent its out of band emissions
    from interfering in spectrum below 1614 MHz if it employed better
    filter technology"[^258] Globalstar claims that it was making use of
    state-of-the-art filter techniques to meet the out-of-band
    requirements.[^259] Globalstar also indicates that a spectrum
    sharing scenario that limited Globalstar\'s exclusive spectrum to
    1616 MHz and below would make its ability to deploy ATC dependent on
    the effectiveness and outcome of the coordination process.[^260]
    Iridium, on the other hand, alleges that these constraints would not
    render Globalstar unable to provide these services.[^261]

98. It appears that, based upon a CDMA transmit spectrum and a carrier
    frequency of 1616 MHz, a significant amount of filtering would have
    to be used to meet the OOB requirements set forth in RTCA/DO262 and
    RTCA/DO228 at 1613.8 MHz. If so, Globalstar likely would be required
    to maintain a center frequency above 1616 MHz to avoid violating the
    OOB limitation of RTCA/DO262. However, we do not have sufficient
    information to decide whether restrictions on Globalstar's
    operations would deter the sharing of additional spectrum in the
    L-band. Thus, by seeking comment in this *Further Notice*, we intend
    to develop a record to determine whether an additional 2.25
    megahertz of spectrum could be shared at 1616-1618.25 MHz.

99. Specifically, in this *Further Notice*, we invite comment on whether
    and how additional sharing may be possible in the future, with
    specific attention paid to the following issues. First, parties
    should discuss how to ensure that shared use of this band does not
    adversely impact the ability of both CDMA and TDMA MSS operators to
    provide a wide-range of services, including aviation services.
    Second, we seek comment on whether and how sharing of this spectrum
    by TDMA and CDMA MSS operators would impact CDMA MSS operators'
    ability to provide viable ATC services. Further, we seek comment on
    how any additional sharing requirements might impact the ability of
    Globalstar to provide global communications. For example,
    Globalstar's French license starts at 1615 MHz, and Globalstar's
    Italian and Russian licenses are limited to frequencies above 1616
    MHz.[^262]

100. We also seek comment on what benefits might be gained by permitting
     additional sharing and how any technical limitations should be
     weighed in comparison against these benefits. We are particularly
     interested in any alternative sharing approaches that take into
     account any technical limitations and that would permit us to make
     the most efficient use of this spectrum.

# CONCLUSION

101. In the attached *Report and Order*, we adopt a spectrum sharing
     plan that should promote more efficient use of spectrum in the Big
     LEO bands while avoiding harmful interference to the operators in
     those bands. In the L-band, TDMA and CDMA MSS operators will
     maximize spectrum use through coordination of the 3.1 megahertz
     previously used by only one MSS operator. In the S-band, CDMA MSS
     operators will share the spectrum with fixed and mobile except
     aeronautical services in the top 5 megahertz, both of which are
     expected to provide services in separate geographic regions --
     terrestrial services in more urban-based areas and CDMA MSS
     operators in more rural-based areas. In addition, opening up the 5
     megahertz at 2495-2500 MHz to a fixed and mobile allocation will
     complement the restructuring of the adjacent BRS/EBS band at
     2500-2690 MHz, and assist in accommodating the relocation of MDS
     from the 2150-2160/62 MHz band.

#  procedural matters

102. *Comment Dates.* Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the
     Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested parties
     may file comments on the *Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* in
     IB Docket No. 02‑364 on or before 30 days after Federal Register
     publication and reply comments on or before 45 days after Federal
     Register publication. Comments may be filed using the Commission's
     Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper
     copies.[^263] All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
     Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications
     Commission.

103. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file
     via the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally,
     only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. In
     completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their
     full names, Postal Service mailing addresses, and the applicable
     docket number, IB Docket No. 02-364. Parties may also submit an
     electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions
     for e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to
     ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body of
     the message: "get form \<your e-mail address\>". A sample form and
     directions will be sent in reply.

104. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four
     copies of each filing. If parties want each Commissioner to receive
     a personal copy of their filing, they must file an original plus
     nine copies. Paper 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). The
     Commission's contractor, NATEK, Inc., will receive hand-delivered
     or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary
     at 236 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Suite 110, Washington,
     D.C. 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00
     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, Capital Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class
     mail, Express Mail, and Priority Mail should be addressed to 445
     12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20054.

105. Comments and reply comments will be available for public inspection
     during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th
     Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. Comments are also available on the
     ECFS, at
     http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/websql/prod//ecfs/comsrch_v2.hts.

106. *Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification for the Report and
     Order*. A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Certification for
     this Report and Order, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
     5 U.S.C. § 604, is contained in Appendix D.

107. *Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the Fourth Report and
     Order*. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the Fourth
     Report and Order, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
     U.S.C. § 604, is contained in Appendix E.

108. *Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification*. As required by
     Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. § 603, the
     Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
     (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on small
     entities of the proposals suggested in this document. The IRFA is
     set forth in Appendix F. Written public comments are requested on
     the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with the same
     filing deadlines as comments filed in this *Further Notice of
     Proposed Rulemaking*. Comments must have a separate and distinct
     heading designating them as responses to the IRFA.

109. *Paperwork Reduction Act.* This *Report and Order and Fourth Report
     and Order* does not contain either a proposed or modified
     information collection, and therefore, there is no need to seek
     comments from the general public and the Office of Management and
     Budget.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

110. IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 4(i), 7, 302(a), 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(a), 303(c), 303(e),
     303(f) and 303(r), the Report and Order, Fourth Report and Order,
     and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ARE ADOPTED and that
     Parts 2, 25, 74, 90 and 101 of the Commission\'s Rules ARE AMENDED,
     as specified in Appendix B, effective 30 days after publication in
     the Federal Register.

111. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission\'s Consumer Information
     Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this
     *Report and Order, Fourth Report and Order, and Further Notice of
     Proposed Rulemaking*, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility
     Analysis, 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

     **APPENDIX A**

     **LIST OF COMMENTERS**

**[Comments]{.underline}**

American Petroleum Institute and

the United Telecom Council

Blue Sky Information Services

Globalstar Canada Co.

Iridium Satellite, LLC

L/Q Licensee, Inc., Globalstar, L.P.

and Globalstar USA, L.L.C.

License-Exempt Alliance

Lockheed Martin Corporation

National Telecommunications and

Information Administration

Official Creditors' Committee of Globalstar, L.P.

Verizon Wíreless

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

ICO Global Communications (Holdings) Limited

IEEE Local and Metropolitan Area Networks

Standards Committee

Iridium Constellation LLC

Iridium Satellite, LLC

L/Q Licensee, Inc., Globalstar, L.P.

and Globalstar USA, L.L.C.

Official Creditors' Committee of Globalstar, L.P.

Wireless Communications Association International, Inc.

**[Ex Partes]{.underline}**

Cornell University

Globalstar, LLC

Globalstar, L.P.

Iridium Satellite, LLC

Sioux Valley Wireless

Sprint Corporation

Wi-Fi Alliance

Wireless Communications Association International, Inc.

**[Congressional Letters]{.underline}**

Honorable Anna G. Eshoo

Honorable Michael M. Honda

**APPENDIX B**

**FINAL RULES**

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 C.F.R. parts 2, 25, 74, 90, and 101 as follows:

**PART 2 -- FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS;**

**GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS**

1\. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

**AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 302a, 303, and 336, unless otherwise
noted.**

2\. Section 2.106, the Table of Frequency Allocations, is amended as
follows:

a\. Revise page 52.

b\. In the list of United States footnotes, add footnote US391.

c\. In the list of non-Federal Government footnotes, revise footnote
NG147.

**[§ 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.]{.underline}**

The revisions and additions read as follows:

**\* \* \* \* \***

+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 24        | 24        | 24        | 24        | 24        | ISM     |
| 83.5-2500 | 83.5-2500 | 83.5-2500 | 83.5-2500 | 83.5-2495 | Eq      |
|           |           |           |           |           | uipment |
| FIXED     | FIXED     | FIXED     | MOBILE-   | MOBILE-   | (18)    |
|           |           |           | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |         |
| MOBILE    | MOBILE    | MOBILE    |           |           | Sa      |
|           |           |           | (space-   | (space-   | tellite |
| MOBILE-   | MOBILE-   | MOBILE-   | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |         |
| SATELLITE | SATELLITE | SATELLITE | US319     | US319     | Communi |
|           |           |           |           |           | cations |
| (space-   | (space-   | (space-   | US380     | US380     | (25)    |
| to-Earth) | to-Earth) | to-Earth) | US391     |           |         |
| 5.351A    | 5.351A    | 5.351A    |           | R         | Private |
|           |           |           | R         | ADIODETER | Land    |
| Radi      | RADI      | RADI      | ADIODETER | MINATION- | Mobile  |
| olocation | OLOCATION | OLOCATION | MINATION- |           | (90)    |
|           |           |           |           | SATELLITE |         |
|           | R         | R         | SATELLITE | (         | Fixed   |
|           | ADIODETER | adiodeter | (         | space-to- | Mi      |
|           | MINATION- | mination- | space-to- |           | crowave |
|           |           | satellite |           | Earth)    | (101)   |
|           | SATELLITE |           | Earth)    | 5.398     |         |
|           | (         | (space-   | 5.398     |           |         |
|           | space-to- | to-Earth) |           | 5.150     |         |
|           |           | 5.398     |           | 5.402     |         |
|           | Earth)    |           |           | US41      |         |
|           | 5.398     |           |           | NG147     |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 5.150     |           | 5.150     | 5.150     | 2495-2500 |         |
| 5.371     |           | 5.400     | 5.402     |           |         |
| 5.397     |           | 5.402     | US41      | FIXED     |         |
| 5.398     |           |           |           |           |         |
| 5.399     |           |           |           | MOBILE    |         |
| 5.400     |           |           |           | except    |         |
| 5.402     |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | aer       |         |
|           |           |           |           | onautical |         |
|           |           |           |           | mobile    |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | MOBILE-   |         |
|           |           |           |           | SATELLITE |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | (space-   |         |
|           |           |           |           | to-Earth) |         |
|           |           |           |           | US319     |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | US380     |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | R         |         |
|           |           |           |           | ADIODETER |         |
|           |           |           |           | MINATION- |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | SATELLITE |         |
|           |           |           |           | (         |         |
|           |           |           |           | space-to- |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | Earth)    |         |
|           |           |           |           | 5.398     |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | 5.150     |         |
|           |           |           |           | 5.402     |         |
|           |           |           |           | US41      |         |
|           |           |           |           | US391     |         |
|           |           |           |           | NG147     |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
|           | 5.150     |           |           |           |         |
|           | 5.402     |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 2500-2520 | 2500-2520 |           | 2500-2655 | 2500-2655 | D       |
|           |           |           |           |           | omestic |
| FIXED     | FIXED     |           |           | FIXED     | Public  |
| 5.409     | 5.409     |           |           | US205     | Fixed   |
| 5.410     | 5.411     |           |           |           |         |
| 5.411     |           |           |           | MOBILE    | \(21\)  |
|           | FIXED-    |           |           | except    |         |
| MOBILE    | SATELLITE |           |           |           | Instru  |
| except    | (space-   |           |           | aer       | ctional |
| aer       | to-Earth) |           |           | onautical | TV      |
| onautical | 5.415     |           |           | mobile    | Fixed   |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| mobile    | MOBILE    |           |           |           | \(74\)  |
| 5.384A    | except    |           |           |           |         |
|           | aer       |           |           |           |         |
| MOBILE-   | onautical |           |           |           |         |
| SATELLITE | mobile    |           |           |           |         |
| (space-   | 5.384A    |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| to-Earth) | MOBILE-   |           |           |           |         |
| 5.403     | SATELLITE |           |           |           |         |
| 5.351A    | (space-   |           |           |           |         |
|           | to-Earth) |           |           |           |         |
| 5.405     | 5.403     |           |           |           |         |
| 5.407     | 5.351A    |           |           |           |         |
| 5.412     |           |           |           |           |         |
| 5.414     | 5.404     |           |           |           |         |
|           | 5.407     |           |           |           |         |
|           | 5.414     |           |           |           |         |
|           | 5.415A    |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 2520-2655 | 2520-2655 | 2520-2535 |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     | FIXED     | FIXED     |           |           |         |
| 5.409     | 5.409     | 5.409     |           |           |         |
| 5.410     | 5.411     | 5.411     |           |           |         |
| 5.411     |           |           |           |           |         |
|           | FIXED-    | FIXED-    |           |           |         |
| MOBILE    | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |           |           |         |
| except    |           |           |           |           |         |
|           | (space-   | (space-   |           |           |         |
| aer       | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |           |           |         |
| onautical | 5.415     | 5.415     |           |           |         |
| mobile    |           |           |           |           |         |
| 5.384A    | MOBILE    | MOBILE    |           |           |         |
|           | except    | except    |           |           |         |
| BROA      |           |           |           |           |         |
| DCASTING- | aer       | aer       |           |           |         |
|           | onautical | onautical |           |           |         |
| SATELLITE | mobile    | mobile    |           |           |         |
| 5.413     | 5.384A    | 5.384A    |           |           |         |
| 5.416     |           |           |           |           |         |
|           | BROA      | BROA      |           |           |         |
|           | DCASTING- | DCASTING- |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |           |           |         |
|           | 5.413     | 5.413     |           |           |         |
|           | 5.416     | 5.416     |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.403     |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.415A    |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 5.339     | 5.339     | 2535-2655 | 5.339     | 5.339     |         |
| 5.403     | 5.403     |           | US205     |           |         |
| 5.405     | 5.418B    | FIXED     |           |           |         |
| 5.412     | 5.418C    | 5.409     |           |           |         |
| 5.418     |           | 5.411     |           |           |         |
| 5.418B    |           |           |           |           |         |
| 5.418C    |           | MOBILE    |           |           |         |
|           |           | except    |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | aer       |           |           |         |
|           |           | onautical |           |           |         |
|           |           | mobile    |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.384A    |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | BROA      |           |           |         |
|           |           | DCASTING- |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | SATELLITE |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.413     |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.416     |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.339     |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.418     |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.418A    |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.418B    |           |           |         |
|           |           | 5.418C    |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
|           |           |           |           |           | Page 52 |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+

\* \* \* \* \*

UNITED STATES (US) FOOTNOTES

\* \* \* \* \*

US391  In the band 2495-2500 MHz, the mobile-satellite service
(space-to-Earth) shall not receive protection from non-Federal
Government stations in the fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile
services operating in that band.

\* \* \* \* \*

NON-FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (NG) FOOTNOTES

\* \* \* \* \*

NG147  In the band 2483.5-2500 MHz, stations in the fixed and mobile
services that are licensed under Part 74 (Television Broadcast Auxiliary
Stations), Part 90 (Private Land Mobile Radio Services), or Part 101
(Fixed Microwave Services) of the Commission's Rules, which were
licensed as of July 25, 1985, and those whose initial applications were
filed on or before July 25, 1985, may continue to operate on a primary
basis with the mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite
services, and in the segment 2495-2500 MHz, these grandfathered stations
may also continue to operate on a primary basis with stations in the
fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile services that are licensed
under Part 27 (Miscellaneous Wireless Communication Services) of the
Commission's Rules.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 25 -- SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS**

3\. Amend section 25.149 by revising paragraph (a)(2)(iii) to read as
follows:

**[§ 25.149 Application requirements for ancillary terrestrial
components in the mobile-satellite service networks operating in the
1.5/1.6 GHz, 1.6/2.4 GHz and 2 GHz mobile-satellite
service.]{.underline}**

###### (a) \*\*\* {#a .unnumbered}

\(2\) \*\*\*

\(iii\) In the 1610-1626.5 MHz/2483.5-2500 MHz bands (Big LEO bands),
ATC operations are limited to the 1610-1615.5 MHz, 1621.35-1626.5 MHz,
and 2487.5-2493.0 MHz bands and to the specific frequencies authorized
for use by the MSS licensee that seeks ATC authority.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 74 -- EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES**

4\. Amend section 74.602 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:

**[§ 74.602 Frequency assignment.]{.underline}**

###### (a) \*\*\* {#a-1 .unnumbered}

###### (2) In the band 2483.5-2500 MHz, no applications for new stations or modification to existing stations to increase the number of transmitters will be accepted. Existing licensees as of July 25, 1985, and licensees whose initial applications were filed on or before July 25, 1985, are grandfathered and their operations are on a co-primary basis with the mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite services, and in the segment 2495-2500 MHz, their operations are also on a co-primary basis with Part 27 fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile service operations. {#in-the-band-2483.5-2500-mhz-no-applications-for-new-stations-or-modification-to-existing-stations-to-increase-the-number-of-transmitters-will-be-accepted.-existing-licensees-as-of-july-25-1985-and-licensees-whose-initial-applications-were-filed-on-or-before-july-25-1985-are-grandfathered-and-their-operations-are-on-a-co-primary-basis-with-the-mobile-satellite-and-radiodetermination-satellite-services-and-in-the-segment-2495-2500-mhz-their-operations-are-also-on-a-co-primary-basis-with-part-27-fixed-and-mobile-except-aeronautical-mobile-service-operations. .unnumbered}

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 90 -- PRIVATE LAND MOBILE RADIO SERVICES**

5\. Amend section 90.20 by revising paragraph (d)(73) to read as
follows:

**[§ 90.20 Public Safety Pool.]{.underline}**

###### \* \* \* \* \* {#section .unnumbered}

###### (d) \*\*\* {#d .unnumbered}

###### (73) Available only on a shared basis with stations in other services, and subject to no protection from interference due to the operation of industrial, scientific, or medical (ISM) devices. In the band 2483.5-2500 MHz, no applications for new stations or modification to existing stations to increase the number of transmitters will be accepted. Existing licensees as of July 25, 1985, and licensees whose initial applications were filed on or before July 25, 1985, are grandfathered and their operations are on a co-primary basis with the mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite services, and in the segment 2495-2500 MHz, their operations are also on a co-primary basis with Part 27 fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile service operations. {#available-only-on-a-shared-basis-with-stations-in-other-services-and-subject-to-no-protection-from-interference-due-to-the-operation-of-industrial-scientific-or-medical-ism-devices.-in-the-band-2483.5-2500-mhz-no-applications-for-new-stations-or-modification-to-existing-stations-to-increase-the-number-of-transmitters-will-be-accepted.-existing-licensees-as-of-july-25-1985-and-licensees-whose-initial-applications-were-filed-on-or-before-july-25-1985-are-grandfathered-and-their-operations-are-on-a-co-primary-basis-with-the-mobile-satellite-and-radiodetermination-satellite-services-and-in-the-segment-2495-2500-mhz-their-operations-are-also-on-a-co-primary-basis-with-part-27-fixed-and-mobile-except-aeronautical-mobile-service-operations. .unnumbered}

###### \* \* \* \* \* {#section-1 .unnumbered}

6\. Amend section 90.35 by revising paragraph (c)(74) to read as
follows:

**[§ 90.35 Industrial/Business Pool.]{.underline}**

###### \* \* \* \* \* {#section-2 .unnumbered}

\(c\) \*\*\*

\(74\) Available only on a shared basis with stations in other services,
and subject to no protection from interference due to the operation of
industrial, scientific, or medical (ISM) devices. In the band
2483.5-2500 MHz, no applications for new stations or modification to
existing stations to increase the number of transmitters will be
accepted. Existing licensees as of July 25, 1985, and licensees whose
initial applications were filed on or before July 25, 1985, are
grandfathered and their operations are on a co-primary basis with the
mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite services, and in the
segment 2495-2500 MHz, their operations are also on a co-primary basis
with Part 27 fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile service
operations.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 101 -- FIXED MICROWAVE SERVICES**

7\. Amend section 101.147 by revising paragraph (f)(2) to read as
follows:

**[§ 101.147 Frequency assignments.]{.underline}**

###### \* \* \* \* \* {#section-3 .unnumbered}

\(f\) \*\*\*

\(2\) Stations licensed in this band under this part prior to March 1,
1996, are grandfathered and may continue their authorized operations.
Stations licensed in the 2483.5-2500 MHz portion of the band as of July
25, 1985, and licensees whose initial applications were filed on or
before July 25, 1985, are grandfathered, and may continue operations,
subject only to license renewal, on a co-primary basis with with the
mobile-satellite and radiodetermination-satellite services, and in the
segment 2495-2500 MHz, their operations are also on a co-primary basis
with Part 27 fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile service
operations.

\* \* \* \* \*

**APPENDIX C**

**TECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR RATIO OF CDMA MSS BIG LEO**

**L-BAND CAPACITY TO S-BAND CAPACITY**

Globalstar claims that the capacity of a mobile-satellite system (MSS)
L-Band uplink channel is approximately 1.4 times greater than the
capacity of an equivalent MSS S-Band downlink channel.[^264] The uplink
capacity is limited by, among other things, the total system noise
which, for a CDMA system, includes the additional noise caused by all
other CDMA users in the same channel. The downlink capacity, however, is
constrained by the power flux density (PFD) limits placed on satellite
systems to avoid interference with terrestrial systems operating in the
same band. These PFD limits constrain the power output of the satellite
and, therefore, the number of users served from a single satellite
because each CDMA user consumes a certain amount of the satellite
downlink power to create the link.

The following link budget tables, Table C.1, "CDMA Uplink Link Budget,"
and Table C.2, "CDMA Downlink Link Budget," provide calculations for the
number of users that can occupy Big LEO CDMA uplink and downlink
channels under two different conditions. Tables C.1 and C.2 show two
different budgets: The link budgets contained in Column A were developed
under the assumption that the system link margin is zero because the
system has the maximum possible number of users. Column B contains the
link budget developed under the assumptions that all users have a 7 dB
link margin. This link margin is commonly used in developing commercial
mobile-satellite systems. The ratio for the number of uplink users to
downlink users in Column A is (148/98) = 1.51. The ratio for the number
of uplink users to downlink users in Column B is (28/20) = 1.40. The
average of both of these ratios is 1.46 which is approximately equal to
Globalstar's stated ratio of 1.4.

**Table C.1 - CDMA Uplink Link Budget**[^265]

  ------------------------------ ------------ -- ------------ -----------
                                 **Column A**    **Column B** **Unit**

                                                              

  Number of Users                148             28           

                                                              

  Frequency                      **1615**        **1615**     MHz

  Range                          **1740**        **1740**     Km

  Receive Noise Temperature      **500**         **500**      K

  Receiver Noise Density         **-201.6**      **-201.6**   dBW/Hz

  Receiver Bandwidth             **1.23**        **1.23**     MHz

  Date Rate                      **4.8**         **4.8**      Kbps

  Channel Activity Factor        **0.5**         **0.5**      \#

                                                              

  Nominal Max User EIRP          0.0             0.0          dBW

  Spreading Loss                 **-161.4**      **-161.4**   dB

  Received Wanted Signal Level   **-161.4**      **-161.4**   dBW

                                                              

  Receive Antenna Gain           **15.7**        **15.7**     dB

  User Signal @ Satellite        **-145.7**      **-145.7**   dBW
  Receiver                                                    

  Average Data Rate              **2.4**         **2.4**      Kbps

  Energy per Bit (Eb)            -179.5          -179.5       dBW/Hz

                                                              

  Interference Power             -124.6          -131.9       dBW

  Spreading BW                   1.23            1.23         MHz

  Spreading BW                   60.9            60.9         dBHz

  Interference Power Density     -184.8          -192.3       dBW/Hz
  (Io)                                                        

                                                              

  Resulting Eb/(No+Io)           5.3             12.3         dB

  Coherent Combining Gain        1.0             1.0          dB

  Required Eb/(No+Io)            **6.3**         **6.3**      dB

  Margin                         0.0             7.0          dB
  ------------------------------ ------------ -- ------------ -----------

**Table C.2 - CDMA Downlink Link Budget**

  ---------------------------- ------------ ------- ------------ ---------------
                               **Column A**         **Column B** **Units**

                                                                 

  Number of Users              98                   20           

                                                                 

  Frequency                    **2495.5**           **2495.5**   MHz

  Receive Noise Temperature    **293.7**            **293.7**    K

  Receiver Noise Density (No)  **-203.9**           **-203.9**   dBW/Hz

  Receiver Bandwidth           **1.23**             **1.23**     MHz

  Date Rate                    **2.4**              **2.4**      Kbps

                                                                 

  Maximum PFD                  -144.0               -144.0       dBW/m^2^ 4 kHz

                                                                 

  Wanted Signal PFD            -163.9               -157.0       dBW/m^2^ 4 kHz

  Bandwidth Conversion         24.9                 24.9         dB

  User gain                    **2.6**              **2.6**      dB

  Antenna Isotropic Area       -29.4                -29.4        dBm^2^

  Wanted Signal Power @        -165.8               -158.9       dBW
  Receiver                                                       

  Date Rate                    33.8                 33.8         dBHz

  Energy-per-Bit (Eb)          -199.6               -192.7       dBW/Hz

                                                                 

  Unwanted Signal Power        -144.0               -144.2       dBW/m^2^ 4 kHz

  User gain                    **2.6**              **2.6**      dBi

  Antenna Isotropic Area       -29.4                -29.4        dBm^2^

  Bandwidth Conversion         24.9                 24.9         dB/4kHz

  Unwanted Signal Power        -146.0               -146.1       dBW

  Spreading Bandwidth          60.9                 60.9         dBHz

  Interference Density (Io)    -206.9               -207.0       dBW/Hz

                                                                 

  Resulting Eb/(No+Io)         2.5                  9.5          dB

  Coherent Combining Gain      **2.5**      ** **   **2.5**      dB

  Resulting Eb/(No+Io)         5.0                  12.0         dB

  Required Eb/(No+Io)          **5.0**      ** **   **5.0**      dB

  Margin                       0.0                  7.0          dB
  ---------------------------- ------------ ------- ------------ ---------------

# Appendix D {#appendix-d .unnumbered}

# Final Regulatory Flexibility CERTIFICATION {#final-regulatory-flexibility-certification .unnumbered}

***Report and Order***

1.  The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),[^266]
    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."[^267] The RFA generally defines the term "small entity"
    as having the same meaning as the terms "small business," "small
    organization," and "small governmental jurisdiction."[^268] In
    addition, the term "small business" has the same meaning as the term
    "small business concern" under the Small Business Act.[^269] 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).[^270] The SBA has developed a small
    business size standard for Satellite Telecommunications, which
    consists of all such companies having \$12.5 million or less in
    annual revenue.[^271]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
112. Pursuant to the RFA, the Commission incorporated an Initial
     Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) into the *Big LEO Spectrum
     Sharing NPRM*.[^272] We received no comments in response to the
     IRFA. For the reasons described below, we now certify that the
     policies and rules adopted in the present Report and Order will not
     have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
     entities.

113. In this *Report and Order* the Commission adopts a spectrum sharing
     plan that allows TDMA mobile-satellite service (MSS) operators to
     share the L-band at 1618.25-1621.35 MHz with CDMA MSS operators.
     The Commission also allocates spectrum in the S-band at 2495-2500
     MHz for fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile services on a
     primary basis, which will share this band with CDMA MSS operators
     providing MSS services. We believe that the spectrum sharing plan
     in the Big LEO bands will improve spectral efficiency by increasing
     the number of providers and consumer users without harming current
     MSS operations.

114. We find that our action will not affect a substantial number of
     small entities because only MSS operators in the Big LEO L- and
     S-bands will be affected. In particular, two Big LEO MSS licensees
     currently are authorized to provide MSS in the United States. We
     find that neither of these licensees are 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 Report and Order will not
     have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
     entities. The Commission will send a copy of the *Report and Order*
     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 *Report and Order* 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).

**APPENDIX E**

**FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS**

***Fourth Report and Order***

1.  As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)[^273] an Initial
    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the
    *Third Notice*.[^274] The Commission sought written public comments
    on the proposals in the *Third Notice*, including comment on the
    IRFA. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
    conforms to the RFA.[^275]

## Need for, and Objectives of, the Fourth Report and Order 

115. This *Fourth Report and Order* continues our efforts to promote the
     provision of advanced wireless services (AWS) to the public, which
     in turn supports our obligations under section 706 of the
     Communications Act of 1934, as amended[^276] and, more generally,
     serves the public interest by promoting rapid and efficient radio
     communication facilities. Adding a fixed and mobile except
     aeronautical mobile allocation to the 2495-2500 MHz band
     potentially provides suitable spectrum for relocation of Multipoint
     Distribution Service (MDS) licensees in the 2150-2160/62 MHz band.
     Also, adopting this allocation has the potential to help free up
     the entire 2150-2160/62 MHz band for the provision of AWS, the
     2150-2155 MHz portion of which has already been reallocated for
     AWS,[^277] and the 2155-2160/62 MHz portion of which has been
     tentatively identified as suitable for AWS.[^278] In addition, an
     MDS relocation to the 2495-2500 MHz band could provide an
     opportunity to integrate the spectrum at 2495-2500 MHz into a
     larger 2495-2690 MHz band plan and establish a new Broadband Radio
     Service (BRS).

## Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to the IRFA

116. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the rules
     and policies proposed in the IRFA.

## Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rules Will Apply

117. 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 rules adopted herein.[^279] The RFA generally
     defines the term "small entity" as having the same meaning as the
     terms "small business," "small organization," and "small
     governmental jurisdiction."[^280] In addition, the term "small
     business" has the same meaning as the term "small business concern"
     under the Small Business Act.[^281] A "small business concern" is
     one which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not
     dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any
     additional criteria established by the Small Business
     Administration (SBA).[^282]

118. [Fixed Microwave Services.]{.underline} Fixed microwave services
     include common carrier,[^283] private operational-fixed,[^284] and
     broadcast auxiliary radio services.[^285] At present, there are
     approximately 22,015 common carrier fixed licensees and 61,670
     private operational-fixed licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio
     licensees in the microwave services. The Commission has not created
     a size standard for a small business specifically with respect to
     fixed microwave services. For purposes of this analysis, the
     Commission uses the SBA small business size standard for the
     category "Cellular and Other Telecommunications," which is 1,500 or
     fewer employees.[^286] The Commission does not have data specifying
     the number of these licensees that have more than 1,500 employees,
     and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision
     the number of fixed microwave service licensees that would qualify
     as small business concerns under the SBA's small business size
     standard. Consequently, the Commission estimates that there are up
     to 22,015 common carrier fixed licensees and up to 61,670 private
     operational-fixed licensees and broadcast auxiliary radio licensees
     in the microwave services that may be small and may be affected by
     the rules and policies proposed herein. We note, however, that the
     common carrier microwave fixed licensee category includes some
     large entities.

119. [Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS).]{.underline} BAS involves a
     variety of transmitters, generally used to relay broadcast
     programming to the public (through translator and booster stations)
     or within the program distribution chain (from a remote news
     gathering unit back to the stations). The Commission has not
     developed a definition of small entities specific to broadcast
     auxiliary licensees. The SBA has developed small business size
     standards, as follows: 1) For TV BAS, we will use the small
     business size standard for Television Broadcasting, which consists
     of all such companies having annual receipts of no more than \$12.0
     million;[^287] 2) For Aural BAS, we will use the small business
     size standard for Radio Stations, which consists of all such
     companies having annual receipts of no more than \$6
     million;[^288] 3) For Remote Pickup BAS, we will use the small
     business size standard for Television Broadcasting when used by a
     TV station and the small business size standard for Radio Stations
     when used by a radio station.

120. According to Commission staff review of BIA Publications, Inc.
     Master Access Television Analyzer Database, as of May 16, 2003,
     about 814 of the 1,220 commercial television stations in the United
     States had revenues of \$12 million or less. We note, however,
     that, in assessing whether a business concern qualifies as small
     under the above definition, business (control) affiliations[^289]
     must be included.[^290] 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. There are also 2,127
     low power television stations (LPTV).[^291] Given the nature of
     this service, we will presume that all LPTV licensees qualify as
     small entities under the SBA size standard. According to Commission
     staff review of BIA Publications, Inc., Master Access Radio
     Analyzer Database, as of May 16, 2003, about 10,427 of the 10,945
     commercial radio stations in the United States had revenue of \$6
     million or less. We note, however, that many radio stations are
     affiliated with much larger corporations with much higher revenue,
     and, that in assessing whether a business concern qualifies as
     small under the above definition, such business (control)
     affiliations are included. Our estimate, therefore, likely
     overstates the number of small businesses that might be affected by
     our action.

121. [MDS, Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service.]{.underline}
     Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service (MMDS) systems, often
     referred to as "wireless cable," transmit video programming to
     subscribers using the microwave frequencies of MDS and
     Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS).[^292] In connection
     with the 1996 MDS auction, the Commission defined "small business"
     as an entity that, together with its affiliates, has average gross
     annual revenues that are not more than \$40 million for the
     preceding three calendar years.[^293] The SBA has approved of this
     standard.[^294] The MDS auction resulted in 67 successful bidders
     obtaining licensing opportunities for 493 Basic Trading Areas
     (BTAs).[^295] Of the 67 auction winners, 61 claimed status as a
     small business. At this time, we estimate that of the 61 small
     business MDS auction winners, 48 remain small business licensees.
     In addition to the 48 small businesses that hold BTA
     authorizations, there are approximately 392 incumbent MDS licensees
     that have gross revenues that are not more than \$40 million and
     are thus considered small entities.[^296]

122. In addition, the SBA has developed a small business size standard
     for Cable and Other Program Distribution,[^297] which includes all
     such companies generating \$12.5 million or less in annual
     receipts.[^298] According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there
     were a total of 1,311 firms in this category that had operated for
     the entire year.[^299] Of this total, 1,180 firms had annual
     receipts of under \$10 million, and an additional 52 firms had
     receipts of \$10 million or more but less than \$25 million.[^300]
     Consequently, we estimate that the majority of providers in this
     service category are small businesses that may be affected by the
     proposed rules and policies.

## Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

123. Although the *Fourth Report and Order* imposes no compliance
     requirements, future Commission decisions may impose some
     requirements.

## Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

124. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives
     that it has considered in developing its 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 and reporting requirements under the rule for such
     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 such small entities."[^301]

125. The *Fourth Report and Order* recognizes that there are
     grandfathered stations in the BAS and private radio services that
     may need to be relocated to accommodate the addition of a fixed and
     mobile except aeronautical mobile allocation in the 2495-2500 MHz
     band, and the potential use of this band by the BRS. But because
     the BAS and private radio services have been sharing use of the
     2495-2500 MHz band on an interference-free basis for some time, the
     addition of a fixed and mobile except aeronautical mobile
     allocation to this band may not cause interference to these
     operations. A specific relocation plan for the remaining
     grandfathered incumbents in the 2495-2500 MHz band, including BAS
     and private radio service operators, will be provided, if
     necessary, when the remaining issues concerning AWS relocation are
     addressed.

126. Finally, no significant alternatives were suggested by commenters
     and nor do we think there are any other alternatives that would
     have a lesser impact on small businesses.

**Report to Congress:** The Commission will send a copy of the *Fourth
Report and Order*, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.[^302] In addition,
the Commission will send a copy of the *Fourth Report and Order*,
including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A
copy of the *Fourth Report and Order* and FRFA (or summaries thereof)
will also be published in the Federal Register.[^303]

**APPENDIX F**

**INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

***Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking***

1.  The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)[^304] requires that an agency
    prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis 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.\"[^305] The RFA generally
    defines "small entity" as having the same meaning as the terms
    "small business," "small organization," and "small governmental
    jurisdiction."[^306] In addition, the term "small business" has the
    same meaning as the term "small business concern" under the Small
    Business Act.[^307] A "small business concern" is one which: (1) is
    independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field
    of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established
    by the Small Business Administration (SBA).[^308] The SBA has
    developed a small business size standard for Satellite
    Telecommunications, which consists of all such companies having
    \$12.5 million or less in annual revenue.[^309]

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
127. The Commission established the original Big LEO band plan in
     1994[^310] and has modified that plan in the attached *Report and
     Order*. In that *Report and Order*, the Commission allows the TDMA
     and CDMA mobile-satellite service (MSS) operators to share 3.1
     megahertz in the L-band at 1618.25-1621.35 MHz. The spectrum
     sharing plan in the L-band should promote the efficient use of
     spectrum by increasing the number of licensees that use the
     spectrum. We recognize, however, that Iridium, the current TDMA MSS
     operator, is capable of operating in spectrum as far down as 1616
     MHz. Thus, the purpose of the attached *Further Notice* is to
     initiate and conduct a review of whether it would be feasible for
     the TDMA and CDMA MSS operators to share an additional 2.25
     megahertz of spectrum at 1616-1618.25 MHz. This proposed band plan
     change is designed to further improve spectral efficiency within
     the L-band.

128. The proposal in the *Further Notice* impacts only Big LEO MSS
     licensees and currently, only two MSS licensees are operating in
     the Big LEO bands. We do not consider these entities to be small
     businesses because small businesses would not likely be able to
     satisfy the capital requirements for launching and operating these
     satellite systems. Thus, the change we propose will not have a
     substantial economic impact on small entities.

     4\. The Commission therefore certifies, pursuant to the RFA, that
     the proposal in this *Further Notice*, if adopted, will not have a
     significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
     entities. If commenters believe that the proposals discussed in the
     *Further Notice* require additional RFA analysis, they should
     include a discussion of these issues in their comments and
     additionally label them as RFA comments. The Commission will send a
     copy of the *Further Notice*, including a copy of this Initial
     Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel for
     Advocacy of the SBA. In addition, a copy of the *Further Notice*
     and this initial certification will be published in the Federal
     Register.[^311]

[^1]: Low Earth Orbit satellites (LEOs) are classified as Big LEOs or
    Little LEOs. Big LEOs provide voice and data communications above 1
    GHz, while Little LEOs provide data communications below 1 GHz.

[^2]: The decision to allocate the 2495-2500 MHz band for fixed and
    mobile except aeronautical mobile services constitutes the Fourth
    Report and Order in ET Docket No. 00-258.

[^3]: 47 U.S.C. §§ 316(a)(1), 312(c).

[^4]: *See generally 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, Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 04-135 (adopted
    June 10, 2004) (*MDS/ITFS Order*).

[^5]: *See generally* Spectrum Policy Task Force Report, ET Docket No.
    02-135, November 2002. This document is available at
    http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228542A1.doc.

[^6]: *See infra* Section II.

[^7]: CDMA is a digital transmission technique that involves modulating
    the signal by a code that is independent of the information data and
    spreading the signal over a wide bandwidth. The signal is
    reconstituted in receivers through application of a synchronized
    de-correlation code. The spreading of the signal and the use of
    coded modulation allows several CDMA systems to operate
    simultaneously in the same frequencies without mutual interference.

[^8]: Radio communication channels between satellites and service
    subscribers' terminals are commonly referred to as "service links,"
    a term frequently employed in this Order. We also use the
    more-specific terms "service uplinks" and "service downlinks" to
    denote service-link transmission from mobile terminals to satellites
    or *vice versa*. *See also infra* note 11.

[^9]: TDMA is a technique for using the same frequency band for
    transmission in alternating time slots in the same band. Both
    Motorola and Ellipsat also proposed to use frequency division
    multiple access, *i.e.*, to divide assigned frequency bands into
    multiple channels with different center frequencies.

[^10]: Public Notice, Report No. DS-1068, 6 FCC Rcd 2083 (1991).

[^11]: The radio communication links in both directions between MSS
    satellites and end-users' transceivers are "service links." *See
    supra* note 8. A counterpart term, "feeder links," refers to the
    links between the satellites and fixed earth stations, called
    "gateways," where caller ID and routing are performed.

[^12]: The Commission had previously issued only one MSS license. That
    license, granted in 1989 to AMSC, authorized construction of a GSO
    system with 50-state coverage and assigned the 1545-1559 MHz and
    1646.5-1660.5 MHz bands for service links. *See Amendment of Parts
    2, 22 and 25 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate Spectrum for and
    to Establish Other Rules and Policies Pertaining to the Use of Radio
    Frequencies in a Land Mobile Satellite Service for the Provision of
    Various Common Carrier Services*, GEN Docket No. 84-1234, Memorandum
    Opinion and Order, FCC 89-183, 4 FCC Rcd 6041 (1989).

[^13]: *Final Acts of the 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference,*
    Malaga-Torremolinos (1992)*.* A station lawfully using a frequency
    band for service of a type for which the band is allocated on a
    primary basis is entitled to protection against interference from
    stations that use the band for secondary-status services. Stations
    operating in a secondary service cannot claim interference
    protection from stations lawfully operating in a primary service.
    *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 2.104(d) and 2.105(c) (2003).

[^14]: *Amendment of Section 2.106 of the Commission's Rules to Allocate
    the 1610-1626.5 MHz and the 2483.5-2500 MHz Bands for Use by the
    Mobile-Satellite Service, Including Non-Geostationary Satellites*,
    Report and Order, FCC 93-547, 9 FCC Rcd 536 (1994). Prior to WRC-92,
    Motorola had urged the Commission to recommend adoption of a
    *primary* international allocation for MSS downlinks in the
    1613.8-1626.5 MHz band, but the Commission declined to do so because
    of the concern about possible interference with radionavigation
    services. *See Inquiry Relating to Preparation for the International
    Telecommunication Union World Administrative Radio Conference for
    Dealing with Frequency Allocations in Certain Parts of the
    Spectrum*, Report, GEN Docket No. 89-554, Report, FCC 91-188, 6 FCC
    Rcd 3900, 3907, ¶¶ 51, 57 (1991).

[^15]: *MSS Above 1 GHz Negotiated Rulemaking Committee*, CC Docket No.
    92-166, Public Notice, DA 92-1691, Report No. DS-1265, 7 FCC Rcd
    8614 (1992). The Commission chartered the NR Committee pursuant to
    the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, 5 U.S.C. §§ 581 *et seq*.

[^16]: *Report of MSS Above 1 GHz Negotiated Rulemaking Committee*,
    (April 6, 1993), Annex 1, Attach. 1 at 5-33. The majority coalition
    proposed use of polarization discrimination to prevent interference
    between CDMA and TDMA operations. Under the majority coalition's
    plan, TDMA transmission would be righthand-circular-polarized, and
    CDMA transmission in frequencies used for TDMA operation would be
    lefthand-circular-polarized.

[^17]: *Id.* at § 2.1. Motorola recommended, however, that if all
    operational systems are of the same kind (*e.g.*, either all CDMA or
    all TDMA bi-directional), they should all share a single, common
    uplink band.

[^18]: *Id.*, Annex 1, Attach. 2 at 8 and 99.

[^19]: Specifically, Motorola contended that the 2483.5-2500 MHz band
    was unsuitable for Iridium downlinks because pertinent ITU limits on
    power flux density (PFD) precluded downlink operation in that band
    with link margins that the Iridium system would need to achieve
    desired service quality for two reasons. First, Motorola argued that
    worldwide coordination of Iridium downlinks in that band would be
    impossible due to the large number of terrestrial radio stations
    operating therein. In addition, Industrial, Scientific, and Medical
    transmission in that band would interfere with same-frequency
    Iridium downlink reception in metropolitan areas. *Id.* at 122-123.

[^20]: *Id.* at 102. Motorola also argued that it needed to operate its
    system in the upper portion of the 1.6 GHz band because downlink
    transmission in frequencies below 1616 MHz would interfere with
    radio astronomy observation; and regulatory limits on transmission
    power in the 1610-1616 MHz band were too restrictive for TDMA
    systems. *Id.* Motorola had accordingly amended the Iridium
    application in August 1992 to request assignment of 1616-1626.5 MHz
    instead of 1610-1626.5 MHz. File No. 43-AMEND-DSS-92.

[^21]: *See generally* Jointly Filed Comments of Motorola and LQL (Oct.
    7, 1993) and Joint Spectrum Sharing Proposal of Constellation,
    Ellipsat, and TRW (Oct. 8, 1993) (filed in CC Docket No. 92-166).

[^22]: *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,
    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 94-11, 9 FCC Rcd 1094 (1994)
    (*Big LEO NPRM*).

[^23]: *Id*. at 1105-1106, ¶¶ 21-22.

[^24]: *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, n.52 (1994) (*Big LEO
    Order*), modified on recon., FCC 96-54, 11 FCC Rcd 12861 (1996).

[^25]: *Big LEO NPRM*, 9 FCC Rcd at 1110, 1111, ¶¶ 31-32.

[^26]: *Id.* at 1113-1114, ¶ 37.

[^27]: *Id.* at 1112, ¶ 33.

[^28]: *Id.* at 1111, ¶ 32. The Commission inferred that 11.5 MHz would
    suffice to accommodate four NGSO-CDMA systems, simply because four
    applicants were proposing such systems and three of them jointly
    advocated reservation of 11.5 MHz (at 1610-1621.5 MHz) for NGSO-CDMA
    uplinks. *Id.* at 1110-1111, ¶ 31. The Commission noted, moreover,
    that Motorola had indicated in a recent pleading that 5.25 MHz would
    suffice for bi-directional service-link transmission for a single
    TDMA system. *Id.*

[^29]: *See* attachment to Joint Proposal and Supplemental Comments
    (filed Sept. 9, 1994). The parties to the settlement agreement
    promised to amend their applications to conform to the proposed band
    plan and withdraw previously-filed petitions to deny in the event
    the Commission adopted their joint recommendations. *Id.* at 12.

[^30]: Letter from Philip L. Verveer, Counsel for LQL, to William F.
    Caton, Acting Secretary, FCC, CC Docket No. 92-166 (dated Sept. 13,
    1994).

[^31]: *See supra* note 24.

[^32]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5945, 5955, ¶¶ 15, 45.

[^33]: *Id.* at 5955, ¶ 44.

[^34]: PFD is a measure of the power, incident on the Earth's surface,
    from a satellite or constellation of satellites. PFD is a limit
    commonly placed on satellite systems to ensure that they can share
    with the terrestrial fixed and mobile services. PFD is also a major
    constraint on the amount of information that may be transmitted from
    a satellite to its earth stations.

[^35]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5956, ¶¶ 47, 48.

[^36]: *Id.* at 5959-5960, ¶¶ 55-56.

[^37]: RAS operations obtain information about the universe through
    radio reception. *Id.* at 5976, ¶ 100. RAS operates in the
    1610.6-1613.8 MHz frequency band on a co-primary basis, which
    entitles RAS to protection against harmful interference. *Id.*

[^38]: *See, e.g., Amendment of Parts 2 and 25 to Implement the Global
    Mobile Personal Communications by Satellite (GMPCS) Memorandum of
    Understanding and Arrangements*, IB Docket No. 99-67, Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 02-134, 17 FCC
    Rcd 8903, 8907, ¶ 5 (2002). The International Civil Aviation
    Organization selected two satellite radionavigation systems for use
    as components of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) for
    aeronautical applications: the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System
    (GPS) and GLONASS. *Id.* at 8906, ¶ 3. The Russian Federation plans
    to move GLONASS to below 1606 MHz by 2005. *Id.* at 8907, ¶ 5.

[^39]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5960, ¶ 55.

[^40]: *Id.* at 5959, 5960, ¶ 55 and n.65.

[^41]: *Id.* at 5960, 5961, ¶¶ 55, 57.

[^42]: We note that the International Bureau together with the Office of
    Engineering and Technology granted two of the licenses. *See infra*
    note 43.

[^43]: *See Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P.*, Order and Authorization,
    DA 95-128, 10 FCC Rcd 2333 (Int'l Bur. 1995), erratum, 10 FCC Rcd
    3926 (1995) (*Globalstar License Order*), recon. denied, 11 FCC Rcd
    18502 (1996), modification granted, 11 FCC Rcd 16410 (1996)
    (assigning feeder-link frequencies); *TRW, Inc.*, Order and
    Authorization, DA 95-130, 10 FCC Rcd 2263 (Int'l Bur. 1995),
    erratum, 10 FCC Rcd 3924 (1995), recon. denied, 11 FCC Rcd 18502
    (1996), modification granted, 11 FCC Rcd 20419 (1996) (assigning
    feeder-link frequencies); *Mobile Communications Holdings, Inc.*,
    Order and Authorization, DA 97-1367, 12 FCC Rcd 9663 (Int'l Bur. and
    OET 1997); and *Constellation Communications, Inc.*, Order and
    Authorization, 12 FCC Rcd 9651 (Int'l Bur. and OET 1997); *see also*
    *AirTouch Satellite Services US, Inc*., Order and Authorization, DA
    99-2010, 14 FCC Rcd 17328 (Int'l Bur. 1999) (blanket license for
    GLOBALSTAR transceivers), and Radio Station Authorization granted
    Feb. 27, 1998, Call Sign E970199, File No. SES-LIC-19970310-00343
    (license for GLOBALSTAR control/gateway station in Texas).

[^44]: *Motorola Satellite Communications, Inc.*, Order and
    Authorization, DA 95-131, 10 FCC Rcd 2268 (Int'l Bur. 1995)
    (*Iridium License Order*), erratum, 10 FCC Rcd 3925 (1995), recon.
    denied, 11 FCC Rcd 18502 (1996), modification granted, 11 FCC Rcd
    13952 (1996) (assigning feeder-link frequencies), further
    modification granted, 14 FCC Rcd 9829 (1999) (authorizing additional
    in-orbit spares); *see also U.S. Leo Services, Inc.*, Order and
    Authorization, DA 96-1790, 11 FCC Rcd 13962 (Int'l Bur. 1996)
    (license for Iridium control/gateway earth station in Arizona);
    *U.S. Leo Services, Inc.*, Order and Authorization, DA 96-1962, 11
    FCC Rcd 20474 (Int'l Bur. 1996) (blanket license for Iridium
    transceivers); and *Motorola Satellite Communications, Inc.*, Order
    and Authorization, DA 97-229, 12 FCC Rcd 1456 (Int'l Bur. 1997)
    (licenses for Iridium control stations in Hawaii).

[^45]: Letter from Donald H. Gips, Chief, International Bureau, FCC, to
    Lon C. Levin, Bruce D. Jacobs, and Glenn S. Richards, Counsel for
    AMSC (dated Jan. 31, 1997).

[^46]: *See* Public Notice, Report No. SPB-114 (Jan. 15, 1998).

[^47]: *Mobile Communications Holdings, Inc.*, Memorandum Opinion and
    Order, FCC 03-122, 18 FCC Rcd 11650 (2003); *Constellation
    Communications Holdings, Inc.*, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC
    03-217, 18 FCC Rcd 18822 (2003). Neither MCHI nor Constellation
    filed for reconsideration or judicial review within the statutory
    time limits for requesting such relief, so the decisions declaring
    their licenses void are final.

[^48]: *See Applications of Space Station System Licensee, Inc., et
    al.*, Memorandum Opinion and Order, DA 02-307, 17 FCC Rcd 2271,
    2275, ¶ 5 (2002) (*Iridium Transfer of Control Order*).

[^49]: For purposes of this Order, we refer to the buyer and assignee of
    the Iridium system and its licenses and authorizations as "Iridium."
    Iridium consists of two holding companies, Iridium Holdings LLC and
    Iridium Carrier Holdings LLC, and three subsidiaries. Iridium
    Holdings LLC directly owns Iridium Satellite LLC, which, in turn,
    directly owns Iridium Constellation LLC. Iridium Carrier Holdings
    LLC directly owns Iridium Carrier Services, LLC. *See Iridium
    Transfer of Control Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 2274, ¶ 4.

[^50]: *Id.* at 2275, ¶ 7.

[^51]: *See id*.

[^52]: *See New Globalstar Corporation Seeks Consent to Assignment and
    Transfer of Control of Licenses and Authorizations Held by
    Globalstar, L.P. Subsidiaries and Affiliates*, IB Docket No. 03-136,
    Public Notice, DA 03-1932, 18 FCC Rcd 11538 (Int'l Bur. 2003); *see
    also* *Satellite Communications Services Information Regarding
    Actions Taken*, Public Notice, Report No. SES 00567, at 25-26 (Int'l
    Bur., rel. Jan. 7, 2004); *Policy Branch Information*, Public
    Notice, DA 04-18, 19 FCC Rcd 77, 79 (Int'l Bur. 2004) (withdrawing
    the application for assignment and transfer of control).

[^53]: *See International Authorizations Granted*, IB Docket No. 04-4,
    Public Notice, DA 04-628, 19 FCC Rcd 4079 (Int'l Bur. 2004). The
    Globalstar system has remained in continuous operation since it
    began providing service.

[^54]: *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*).

[^55]: *Id.* at 1971, ¶ 14.

[^56]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.149(a)(2)(iii).

[^57]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106; *see also* footnotes 5.150 and US41.
    Radiocommunication services operating in a band designed for ISM use
    must accept harmful interference which may be caused by these
    applications.

[^58]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5959-61, ¶¶ 54-57.

[^59]: *Id.* at 5960, ¶ 55.

[^60]: *Review of the Spectrum Sharing Plan Among Non-Geostationary
    Satellite Orbit Mobile Satellite Service Systems in the 1.6/2.4 GHz
    Bands*, IB Docket No. 02-364, Report and Order and Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 03-15, 18 FCC Rcd 1962, 1966-1967,
    2087-2092, ¶¶ 5, 261-277 (2003) (*Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*).
    The *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM* also granted, in part, a
    petition for rulemaking filed by Iridium asking the Commission to
    revise its rules to allow TDMA systems to operate in additional
    spectrum in the 1610-1626.5 MHz band. *See* Petition for Rulemaking
    of Iridium Satellite LLC (filed July 26, 2002) (Iridium Petition).
    Because only one CDMA system had been implemented, Iridium urged the
    Commission to shift the dividing line between the segment reserved
    for CDMA uplink transmission and that reserved for bi-directional
    TDMA operation from 1621.35 MHz to 1615.5 MHz, which would increase
    the available bandwidth for Iridium's TDMA service links from 5.15
    megahertz to 11 megahertz. Iridium asserted that it would need the
    additional spectrum to meet anticipated growth in demand for Iridium
    service. Iridium Petition at 7-12.

[^61]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2089-2092, ¶¶
    267-273.

[^62]: *Id.* at 2090-2092, ¶¶ 269-273.

[^63]: Letter from Jennifer D. Hindin, Counsel for Iridium, to Thomas S.
    Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau, FCC (dated
    April 14, 2003); Letter from Peter D. Shields, Counsel for Iridium,
    to Thomas S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, International Bureau,
    FCC (dated April 25, 2003); Iridium Request for Special Temporary
    Authority to Provide MSS in the 1618.85-1621.35 MHz Frequency Band
    Until May 13, 2003 (filed May 2, 2003).

[^64]: Letter from William F. Adler, Counsel for Globalstar, to Thomas
    S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC (dated May 1, 2003).

[^65]: Request for Extension of Special Temporary Authority for Iridium
    Constellation LLC to Provide Global Mobile Satellite Service in the
    1620.10-1621.35 MHz Frequency Band (filed June 9, 2003).

[^66]: Letter from William D. Wallace, Counsel for Globalstar, to Thomas
    S. Tycz, Chief, Satellite Division, FCC (dated June 11, 2003).

[^67]: *Iridium Constellation, LLC and Iridium, US LP, Request for
    Special Temporary Authorization*, Order, DA 03-1949 (Sat. Div.,
    Int'l Bur. 2003).

[^68]: *Modification of Licenses held by Iridium Constellation, LLC and
    Iridium, US LP*, Order, DA 03-2906, 18 FCC Rcd 20023, (Sat. Div.,
    Int'l Bur. 2003).

[^69]: *Id.* at 20027. The Satellite Division also stipulated that the
    temporary authorization was "without prejudice to Commission action"
    in this rulemaking proceeding. *Id.* at 20028, ¶ 13.

[^70]: *Iridium Constellation, LLC, Request for Special Temporary
    Authority*, Order, DA 03-3926, 18 FCC Rcd 25814 (Sat. Div., Int'l
    Bur. 2003); *Iridium Constellation, LLC, Request for Special
    Temporary Authority*, Order, DA 04-1669 (Sat. Div., Int'l Bur., rel.
    June 9, 2004).

[^71]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2087, 2089, ¶¶
    261, 266.

[^72]: Iridium Comments at 6.

[^73]: Joint Reply Comments of L/Q Licensee, Inc., Globalstar, L.P. and
    Globalstar USA, L.L.C. (Joint Reply Comments) at 3; ICO Reply
    Comments at 12.

[^74]: Joint Reply Comments at 3.

[^75]: Joint Reply Comments at 3-4.

[^76]: ICO Reply Comments at 12.

[^77]: *Id.*

[^78]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5959, n.65; *see also supra* *¶*
    18.

[^79]: *See* Iridium Petition at 4-5 (initially requesting 5.85
    megahertz of additional spectrum in the 1.6 GHz or L-band). In its
    subsequent filings, however, Iridium requests 5.35 megahertz of
    additional spectrum in the 1.6 GHz band. Iridium Comments at 32.
    Thus, we base our analysis on Iridium's request for 5.35 megahertz
    of additional spectrum.

[^80]: Iridium Comments at 10-30; Iridium Reply Comments at 6-9.

[^81]: Iridium Comments at 15. An Iridium beam covers approximately
    ten-thousand square miles.

[^82]: Iridium Reply Comments at 5.

[^83]: Iridium Comments at 7.

[^84]: *Id.* at 7-8. Iridium is comparing the data rate of the voice
    services used by Globalstar and Iridium. A faster data rate
    generally results in a clearer reproduction of the voice.

[^85]: *Id.* at 30-32.

[^86]: *Id.* at 4-5. Under Iridium's proposed band plan, Iridium would
    receive at least 5.35 megahertz of additional spectrum while 10
    megahertz of CDMA MSS spectrum would be "reclaimed" for other
    purposes. *Id.* at 25-26, 36.

[^87]: *Id.* at 31-34.

[^88]: *See generally* Joint Comments of L/Q Licensee, Inc., Globalstar,
    L.P. and Globalstar USA, L.L.C. (Joint Comments); Joint Reply
    Comments; Lockheed Martin Corporation Comments (Lockheed Comments);
    Comments of Globalstar Canada Company (Globalstar Canada Comments);
    Comments of the Official Creditors' Committee of Globalstar, L.P.
    (Globalstar Committee Comments). According to the Globalstar
    Committee, Iridium has failed to demonstrate that it has the
    capacity constraints to justify a change in the band plan.
    Globalstar Committee Comments at 4.

[^89]: Joint Comments at 6.

[^90]: *Id.* at 7.

[^91]: *Id.* at 8; *see also* Letter from William Wallace, Counsel for
    Globalstar, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, IB Docket No.
    02-364, Attach., Big LEO Band Plan at 4-5 (dated Feb. 6, 2004)
    (stating that Globalstar requires at least four or five channels for
    standard voice and data services and two channels for simplex
    telemetry service). Globalstar also explains that, to satisfy
    Federal Aviation Administration standards for its aviation
    equipment, it must operate its aviation services above 1616 MHz in
    the L-band, and that market demands require Globalstar to allocate
    two separate channels for aviation services. Joint Comments at 7;
    *see also* Letter from Thomas Gutierrez, Counsel for Globalstar, to
    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC at 2 (dated June 3, 2004)
    (*Globalstar June 3 Ex Parte*).

[^92]: Joint Comments at 10-11; *see also* Globalstar Committee Comments
    at 3-4. According to Globalstar, it must protect RAS observations at
    1610-1613.8 MHz by establishing exclusion zones because mobile earth
    terminals (METs) may not operate with RAS on a co-channel basis
    during that time. Globalstar states that, as a result, transmissions
    from METs must be moved into one of two frequency blocks. In
    particular, Globalstar states that MET transmissions will be placed
    in spectrum at 1616.2 MHz or higher for certain exclusion zones and
    in spectrum at 1613.8 MHz or higher for smaller exclusion zones.
    Joint Comments at 10-11. Globalstar also states that the protection
    requirements imposed hinders its ability to transmit power and
    distribute calls. *Id.* at 11.

[^93]: Joint Comments at 11; *see also* Globalstar Committee Comments at
    6 ("Reducing the spectrum available to Globalstar would severely
    hinder Globalstar's ability to offer competitive MSS services . . .
    and will hamper Globalstar's efforts to deploy an ATC platform that
    will enable truly ubiquitous network coverage.").

[^94]: Joint Comments at 12-16. The Globalstar Committee argues that
    giving Iridium more spectrum does not serve the public interest
    because, given Iridium's small customer base, any capacity
    constraints would likely be caused by the Iridium TDMA system's
    inefficient use of spectrum. *See* Globalstar Committee Comments at
    6-7; *see also* Globalstar Committee Reply Comments at 3 (stating
    that "adoption of Iridium's proposed band plan would essentially
    reward additional spectrum to Iridium for implementing a spectrally
    inefficient system -- a result that is neither logical nor in the
    public interest.").

[^95]: Joint Comments at 14.

[^96]: *See* Joint Reply Comments at 10-19; *see also* Globalstar
    Committee Reply Comments at 4-5.

[^97]: Joint Reply Comments at 18-19.

[^98]: Joint Comments at 30.

[^99]: *Id.* at 15-16; Joint Reply Comments at 17-18.

[^100]: *Id.* at 2-4 (stating that Iridium "voluntarily insisted upon
    the terms and conditions underlying the current band plan.").

[^101]: Joint Comments at 22-24.

[^102]: Lockheed Comments at 4-5.

[^103]: *Id.*

[^104]: *Id.* at 5.

[^105]: *Id.*

[^106]: Globalstar Canada Comments at 2.

[^107]: *Id.* at 3.

[^108]: *See generally* Comments of Blue Sky Information Services in
    Response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Blue Sky Comments).

[^109]: *Id.* at 6.

[^110]: *Id.* at 7.

[^111]: *See id.* at 4-5.

[^112]: *See, e.g.*, Cornell University Comments at 4-6.

[^113]: Globalstar Canada Comments at 3. Globalstar Canada contends that
    Iridium traffic would violate Canadian law and that a grant of
    spectrum to Iridium at 1619.9-1621.2 MHz and below would have an
    extra-territorial effect, particularly given the Iridium system's
    technical limitations. *Id*.

[^114]: *See* Joint Reply Comments at 19-22.

[^115]: Cornell University Comments at 4.

[^116]: *Id.* at 7-8.

[^117]: *See* Letter from Paul J. Feldman, Counsel for Cornell
    University, to James Ball, Chief, Policy Division, International
    Bureau, FCC (dated Dec. 17, 2003).

[^118]: Iridium Reply Comments at 9.

[^119]: *Id.*

[^120]: *Id.* at 9-10.

[^121]: *Id.* at 10-11.

[^122]: *Id.* at 30.

[^123]: GLONASS is expected to shift frequencies by 2005 so that its
    highest L-band frequency is 1605.375 MHz.

[^124]: Iridium Reply Comments at 31.

[^125]: *Id.* at 33.

[^126]: *Id.* at 29.

[^127]: *Id.* at 8-9.

[^128]: *Facilitating Opportunities for Flexible, Efficient, and
    Reliable Spectrum Use Employing Cognitive Radio Technologies,
    Authorization and Use of Software Defined Radios*, ET Docket No.
    03-108, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order, FCC 03-322, 18 FCC
    Rcd 26859, 26860, ¶ 1, 26885-86, ¶ 72 (2003) (*Cognitive Radio
    Technologies NPRM*). Coordinated spectrum sharing allows more users
    to utilize a particular frequency band. *Id.*

[^129]: *Id.* at 26885-86, ¶ 72.

[^130]: *Id.* at 26886, ¶ 73.

[^131]: *See Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for the
    Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit, Fixed Satellite Service in the
    Ka-Band*, IB Docket No. 02-19, Report and Order, FCC 03-137, 18 FCC
    Rcd 14708, 14711, ¶ 10 (2003) (adopting a sharing plan for licensees
    in Ka-Band spectrum designated for NGSO fixed satellite service
    operations, in which the Commission stated that the sharing plan had
    to be, among other things, technology neutral so that the Commission
    would not favor any particular technology or operational method);
    *see also Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for the
    Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit, Fixed Satellite Service in the
    Ku-Band,* IB Docket No. 01-96, Report and Order, FCC 02-123, 17 FCC
    Rcd 7841, 7850 (2002) (same). In addition, adopting a band plan that
    requires spectrum users to share is consistent with the report of
    the Commission's Spectrum Policy Task Force regarding the need for
    more flexibility in spectrum policy. *See* Spectrum Policy Task
    Force Report.

[^132]: *Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5960, ¶ 55. As a related matter,
    we find that we are not constrained by the rules adopted in the
    *Space Station Licensing Reform First Report and Order*. *See
    Amendment of the Commission's Space Station Licensing Rules and
    Policies*, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking in IB Docket No. 02-34 and First Report and Order in IB
    Docket No. 02-54, FCC 03-102, 18 FCC Rcd 10760 (2003) (*Space
    Station Licensing Reform First Report and Order*). The Commission
    adopted, among other rules, section 25.157(g), which prescribes
    ground rules for redistributing spectrum for NGSO satellite systems
    in the event of license cancellations. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.157(g).
    We believe, however, that the statements made in the *Big LEO Order*
    establish the expectations regarding that spectrum and not section
    25.157(g). In fact, the Commission adopted section 25.157(g) without
    addressing the spectrum redistribution issues that had previously
    been framed in this proceeding. *Space Station Licensing Reform
    First Report and Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 10787-10790, ¶¶ 60-65.
    Moreover, the Commission acknowledged that it could "always . . .
    consider initiating a rulemaking proceeding to determine whether
    available spectrum should be reallocated." *Id.* at 10788, ¶ 62. We
    chose the rulemaking option in this proceeding. Therefore, we
    decline to apply section 25.157(g) procedures to this proceeding.

[^133]: *See infra* Section IV.

[^134]: *See infra* ¶ 88.

[^135]: *See supra* ¶¶ 28-29.

[^136]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.216.

[^137]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.213.

[^138]: *Iridium License Order*, 10 FCC Rcd at 2270, ¶ 14. "We require
    Motorola to complete all radio astronomy site coordination before it
    initiates operation of the Iridium system. We also remind Motorola
    that it will have to terminate operations if unacceptable
    interference should occur to Radio Astronomy observation." *Id.*

[^139]: *See Ka-Band NGSO FSS Report and Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 14716, ¶
    25.

[^140]: *See supra* Section II.

[^141]: *See supra* ¶¶ 28-29; *cf.* Letter from Peter D. Shields,
    Counsel for Iridium, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC at 3
    (dated June 7, 2004) (*Iridium June 7 Ex Parte*) (stating that "the
    STA experience has conclusively demonstrated that Iridium operations
    within the same spectrum as Globalstar do not create harmful
    interference to Globalstar.").

[^142]: Joint Reply Comments at 36-37.

[^143]: *See, e.g.*, *Promoting Efficient Use of Spectrum Through
    Elimination of Barriers to the Development of Secondary Markets*, WT
    Docket No. 00-230, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
    Rulemaking, FCC 03-113, 18 FCC Rcd 24817 (2003).

[^144]: *See, e.g.*, *Establishment of an Interference Temperature
    Metric to Quantify and Manage Interference and to Expand Available
    Unlicensed Operation in Certain Fixed, Mobile and Satellite
    Frequency Bands*, ET Docket No. 03-237, Notice of Inquiry and Notice
    of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 03-289, 18 FCC Rcd 25309, 25311, ¶¶ 5-6
    (2003) (*Interference Temperature NOI/NPRM*). In the *Interference
    Temperature NOI/NPRM*, we stated that "we have implemented new
    licensing schemes under which bands of spectrum are assigned to
    licensees on a geographic basis and those licensees are provided
    flexibility to determine the type of services and the technologies
    and technical implementation designs used to provide those services.
    The primary restrictions we apply to technical operations under
    these licenses are those necessary to ensure that interference is
    not caused to services operating in adjacent geographic areas or in
    adjacent or nearby frequency bands. These restrictions typically
    take the form of limits on signal strength at the edge of a
    licensee's service area and limits on maximum transmitter power,
    antenna height and out-of-band emissions. These restrictions, in
    turn, tend to convey certain rights on the other neighboring or
    nearby licensees which are protected by such rules." *Id.* at 25311,
    ¶ 6.

[^145]: *Id.*

[^146]: *See, e.g.*, *Facilitating the Provision of Spectrum-Based
    Services to Rural Areas and Promoting Opportunities for Rural
    Telephone Companies To Provide Spectrum-Based Services,* WT Docket
    No. 02-381, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 03-222, 18 FCC Rcd
    20802, 20805-20806, ¶ 3 (2003) (stating that "the Commission took
    steps to facilitate spectrum leasing in secondary markets, building
    upon existing, flexible, market-based policy efforts to encourage
    more efficient use of spectrum").

[^147]: For example, pursuant to our authority under sections 309 and
    316, we could create a new band plan that would split the 3.1
    megahertz of spectrum or hold a comparative hearing. *See* 47 U.S.C.
    §§ 309, 316.

[^148]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2091, ¶ 271.

[^149]: *Id.* at 2091, ¶ 272.

[^150]: *See generally* Comments of the American Petroleum Institute and
    the United Telecom Council (API/UTC Comments); Comments of
    Licensed-Exempt Alliance (LEA Comments); Comments of IEEE Local and
    Metropolitan Area Networks Standards Committee (IEEE 802 Comments);
    Iridium Comments; Iridium Reply Comments. The Wireless
    Communications Association International, Inc. (WCA) supports any
    service in those portions of the S-band, be it MSS or unlicensed
    services, as long as such allocation did not adversely affect
    MDS/ITFS operators. WCA Comments at 2-3.

[^151]: Iridium Reply Comments at 12.

[^152]: *Id.* at 13.

[^153]: LEA Comments at 1-2.

[^154]: *Id.* at 2.

[^155]: *Id.* at 3. LEA states that at least 1,500 wireless Internet
    service providers are providing unlicensed broadband service to
    approximately 600,000 subscribers in the United States. *Id.* at 4.

[^156]: *Id.* at 7.

[^157]: *Id.* at 8.

[^158]: *Id.*

[^159]: *Id.* at 9 (citing IEEE 802 Comments at 3).

[^160]: IEEE 802 Reply Comments at 3; IEEE 802 Comments at 4-5.

[^161]: API/UTC Comments at 4-5. According to API/UTC, "there is a
    critical infrastructure industry need for licensed Internet Protocol
    (IP) delivery systems . . . ." *Id.*

[^162]: *Id.* at 5.

[^163]: *Id.* at 6.

[^164]: *See generally* Letter from John T. Scott, III, Counsel for
    Verizon Wireless, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated July
    7, 2003) (attaching Reply Comments of Verizon Wireless, ET Docket
    No. 00-258, filed April 28, 2003) (Verizon Wireless Reply Comments,
    ET Docket No. 00-258)).

[^165]: Verizon Wireless Reply Comments, ET Docket No. 00-258, at 2.

[^166]: *Id.* at 5-6.

[^167]: IEEE 802 Reply Comments at 2.

[^168]: Verizon Wireless Reply Comments, ET Docket No. 00-258, at 7-8;
    *but see* IEEE 802 Reply Comments at 2 (IEEE 802 does not support
    Verizon Wireless' alternative conclusion that MDS be relocated to
    the 2490-2500 MHz band).

[^169]: Verizon Wireless Reply Comments, ET Docket No. 00-258, at 8.

[^170]: *See, e.g.*, WCA Reply Comments at 6-7 (arguing that, despite
    Verizon Wireless contentions, incumbents in the 2483.5-2500 MHz
    band, including BAS licensees, industrial, scientific and medical
    (ISM) equipment, private land mobile operations and fixed microwave
    services would need to be moved); WCA Reply Comments at 7-9 (WCA
    contends that relocating MDS to 2490-2500 MHz would pose harmful
    interference among MDS, MSS/ATC, and BAS).

[^171]: *See* Letter from Paul J. Sinderbrand, Counsel for WCA, to
    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated June 3, 2004); Letter from
    Thomas Knippen, Vice President and General Manager W.A.T.C.H. TV
    Company, to Michael K. Powell, Chairman, FCC (dated June 1, 2004).

[^172]: *See generally* Joint Comments; *see also* Globalstar Committee
    Comments at 11 (stating that "\[o\]nly MSS allows customers to
    instantly establish communications virtually anywhere in the world
    without the need to establish a terrestrial infrastructure.").

[^173]: Joint Comments at 17.

[^174]: *Id.* at 18; *see also* Globalstar Committee Reply Comments at 6
    (stating that the Commission decreased the available amount of
    spectrum for MSS operators from 70 megahertz (*i.e.*, 1990-2025
    MHz/2165-2200 MHz) to 40 megahertz (*i.e.*, 2000-2020 MHz/2180-2200
    MHz) in the 2 GHz band).

[^175]: Joint Comments at 19.

[^176]: *Id.* In its reply comments, Globalstar notes that new uses for
    MSS continue to be discovered, citing as an example, a contract
    awarded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to
    develop an Internet protocol that would allow users to connect from
    different platforms on land, at sea, or in the air. Joint Reply
    Comments at 29.

[^177]: Joint Comments at 20-21.

[^178]: Lockheed Comments at 5.

[^179]: Joint Reply Comments at 31.

[^180]: *Id.*; *see also* Globalstar Committee Reply Comments at 7.

[^181]: Joint Reply Comments at 30.

[^182]: *Id.* at 34-35.

[^183]: Joint Comments at 21.

[^184]: An explanation of how the Commission calculates the 1 to 1.4
    ratio is available in the Technical Appendix. *See also* Letter from
    William Wallace, Counsel for Globalstar, to Marlene H. Dortch,
    Secretary, FCC, Attach., Big LEO Band Plan at 12 (dated Sept. 15,
    2003) (*Globalstar Sept. 15 Ex Parte*).

[^185]: *See supra* Section II.

[^186]: The grandfathered status of the incumbents in this band are set
    forth in conforming changes to Parts 2, 74, 90 and 101 of our rules,
    *infra* Appendix B.

[^187]: *See, e.g.*, *Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast Bands*,
    ET Docket No. 04-186, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 04-113, 19
    FCC Rcd 10018 (2004); *Unlicensed Operation in the Band 3650--3700
    MHz*, ET Docket No. 04-151, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC
    04-100, 19 FCC Rcd 7545 (2004); *Cognitive Radio Technologies NPRM*;
    *Interference Temperature NOI/NPRM*.

[^188]: As a result, this reallocation supports a guiding principle in
    the Spectrum Policy Task Force Report. *See* Spectrum Policy Task
    Force Report at 4.

[^189]: *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, Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking and Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 03-56, 18
    FCC Rcd 6722 (*MDS/ITFS NPRM*).

[^190]: In a companion item adopted in WT Docket 03-66, we capitalize on
    these possibilities and take steps to integrate the 2495-2500 MHz
    and 2500-2690 MHz bands as part of a larger restructuring of the 2.5
    MHz licensees. *See* *generally MDS/ITFS Order.*

[^191]: *See* *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, First Report and
    Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 01-256, 16 FCC Rcd
    17222, 17223, ¶ 2 (2001).

[^192]: *See* VoiceStream Wireless Corporation Reply Comments, ET Docket
    No. 00-258, at 8-9 (filed Nov. 8, 2001) (calculating an average of
    648,000 United States customers per megahertz on 190 megahertz of
    spectrum allocated to terrestrial wireless services versus less than
    5,000 global customers per megahertz on the spectrum that is
    allocated to MSS).

[^193]: *MDS/ITFS NPRM*, 18 FCC Rcd at 6725, ¶ 2.

[^194]: *See supra* ¶ 62; *cf.* Letter from Luisa L. Lancetti, Vice
    President for Sprint, to Marlene H. Dortch, FCC (dated June 3, 2004)
    (supporting the reallocation of the 2494-2500 MHz band to MDS);
    Letter from Joel Brick, Technical Director for Sioux Valley
    Wireless, to Michael K. Powell, Chairman, FCC (dated May 30, 2004)
    (supporting the reallocation of 6-8 megahertz of S-band spectrum for
    MDS). This option has been discussed in this proceeding and in ET
    Docket No. 00-258, the Commission's AWS proceeding. In ET Docket No.
    00-258, the Commission previously identified spectrum in the
    2150-2162 MHz band (which is currently licensed as MDS channels 1
    and 2) as spectrum that could be used for AWS. In the *Second Report
    and Order* in ET Docket No. 00-258, the Commission reallocated the
    2150-2155 MHz band as part of a 90 megahertz allocation for AWS.
    *See 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, Second Report
    and Order, FCC 02-304, 17 FCC Rcd 23193 (2002) (*Second Report and
    Order*). Reallocation of the 2155-2162 MHz band is subject to a
    pending rulemaking. *See 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,
    Third Report and Order, Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and
    Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 03-16, 18 FCC Rcd 2223,
    2253-2257, ¶¶ 62-73 (2003).

[^195]: *See generally MDS/ITFS Order.*

[^196]: *See infra* ¶¶ 75-77.

[^197]: *See generally MDS/ITFS Order*.

[^198]: *See* ITU Radio Regulations, Resolution 46, Annex 2.1.2.3.1.

[^199]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.149(a)(2)(iii). In the Big LEO bands, ATC
    operations are limited to the 1610-1615.5 MHz, 1621.35-1626.5 MHz
    and 2492.5-2498 MHz bands. *Id.*

[^200]: *See ATC Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2209, App. C3, § 4.2.2. In that
    Order, the Commission stated that interference with unlicensed
    devices is a non-issue because ATC base stations are greater than 25
    megahertz from these users. *Id.* at 2062-2063, ¶ 205.

[^201]: *See id.* at 2206-2207, App. C3, § 4.2.1; *see also* 47 C.F.R. §
    25.254(a)(3).

[^202]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.255.

[^203]: *ATC Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2057, ¶ 192.

[^204]: *See id.* at 2058-2063, ¶¶ 196-206.

[^205]: NTIA Comments at 3, 4.

[^206]: *Id.* at 6.

[^207]: Lockheed Comments at 4.

[^208]: Iridium Reply Comments at 13.

[^209]: Globalstar Reply Comments at 32.

[^210]: *Id.* at 32.

[^211]: 47 U.S.C. § 316.

[^212]: Joint Comments at 31.

[^213]: *Id.*

[^214]: *Id.*

[^215]: *Id.*

[^216]: *Id.* at 31-33 (citing the *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, 18
    FCC Rcd at 2087, ¶ 261).

[^217]: *Id.* at 32 n.62 (citing 47 U.S.C. § 312).

[^218]: *Id.* at 32 n.62.

[^219]: ICO Reply Comments at 14.

[^220]: *Id.*

[^221]: *Id.* at 15.

[^222]: *Id.* at 16. With regard to section 312, ICO claims that the
    Commission has no authority to revoke the license in this case
    because Globalstar has complied with its license terms. *Id.* at 16.

[^223]: Iridium Reply Comments at 26.

[^224]: *Id.* at 27.

[^225]: *Id.*

[^226]: *Id.*

[^227]: *Id.* at 28.

[^228]: *Id.*

[^229]: *Id.* at 28-29.

[^230]: *Id.* at 26 n.66.

[^231]: *Id.* at 26-27 n.66.

[^232]: *See, e.g.*, *California Citizens Band Association v. FCC*, 375
    F.2d 43, 51-52 (9th Cir. 1967) (holding that rulemaking proceedings
    that are general in nature are not restricted by the hearing
    requirements of section 316, but rather are governed by only the
    procedural protections of the Administrative Procedure Act).

[^233]: *Id.*

[^234]: *P & R Temmer v. FCC*, 743 F.2d 918, 927-28 (D.C. Cir. 1984).

[^235]: *See Big LEO Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at 5955-5956, ¶¶ 44-48.

[^236]: *See* *Loral/Qualcomm, L.P., For Authority to Construct, Launch,
    and Operate Globalstar, a Low Earth Orbit Satellite System to
    Provide Mobile Satellite Services in the 1610-1626.5 MHz/2483.5-2500
    MHz Bands*, Order and Authorization, DA 95-128, 10 FCC Rcd 2333,
    2335 (Int'l Bur. 1995).

[^237]: *Western Broadcasting Company v. FCC*, 674 F.2d 44, 49 (D.C.
    Cir. 1982) (*Western Broadcasting*); *see also AMSC Subsidiary
    Corporation*, 216 F.3d 1154, 1160 (2000) (finding that section 316
    does not apply when the increased likelihood of interference is too
    speculative).

[^238]: *See generally MDS/ITFS Order*.

[^239]: Section 316 of the Act and section 1.87(a) of the Commission's
    rules authorize the Commission to modify a license on its own
    motion. 47 U.S.C § 316; 47 C.F.R. § 1.87(a).

[^240]: 47 U.S.C. § 316; *see also California Metro Mobile
    Communications, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission*, 365 F.3d
    38 (C.A.D.C. 2004) (stating that the proposed modification must
    promote the public interest, convenience and necessity).

[^241]: *See* ICO Reply Comments at 14 n.45.

[^242]: *P & R Temmer v. FCC* at 926-928.

[^243]: *ATC Order*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2057, ¶ 192.

[^244]: *Id.* at 2057, ¶¶ 192, 193, at 2091, ¶ 273. For the L-band, the
    Commission specifically stated that "the disposition of the spectrum
    from 1615.5-1621.35 MHz will be determined by the Commission's
    ruling on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking." *Id.* at 2057, ¶ 192.
    For the S-band, the Commission noted that the remainder of the
    spectrum from 2483.5-2492 MHz and 2480-2500 MHz would not be
    considered in the *ATC Order*. *Id.* at 2057, ¶ 193.

[^245]: Globalstar Committee Comments at 10.

[^246]: Lockheed Comments at 5.

[^247]: *Id.* at 6.

[^248]: *Id.*

[^249]: Globalstar Committee Comments at 8-9.

[^250]: Joint Reply Comments at 25.

[^251]: *Id.* at 27 and Attach. B (Letter from Robert Sakker, Executive
    Director, Localstar Holdings Pty Limited, to Regional Manager,
    Australian Communications Authority (dated July 14, 2003)).

[^252]: Joint Reply Comments at 25.

[^253]: *Id.* at 27-28.

[^254]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106.

[^255]: *See* Letter from Thomas Gutierrez, Counsel for Globalstar, to
    Richard Engelman, International Bureau, FCC at 1 (dated June 1,
    2004) (*Globalstar June 1 Ex Parte*); *see also* *Globalstar June 3
    Ex Parte* at 1-2.

[^256]: The RTCA, Inc (formerly known as Radio Technical Commission on
    Aeronautics) is an industry advisory group that acts as a Federal
    Advisory Group to develop consensus-based recommendations on
    aviation issues. The RTCA publishes documents that contain minimum
    operational standards for transmitters aboard aircraft. Document
    RTCA/DO262 entitled "Minimum Operational Performance Standards for
    Avionics Supporting Next Generation Satellite Systems (NGSS)"
    contains both in-band and out-of-band emission limitations for
    satellite transmitters operating in, among others, the Big LEO
    bands. RTCA/DO228 entitled "Minimal Operational Performance
    Standards for Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) Airborne
    Antenna Equipment" contains interference criteria for airborne GNSS
    receivers-antenna systems.

[^257]: *Globalstar June 1 Ex Parte* at 1.

[^258]: Letter from Peter D. Shields, Counsel for Iridium, to Marlene H.
    Dortch, FCC at 1 (dated June 2, 2004) (*Iridium June 2 Ex Parte*).

[^259]: *Globalstar June 3 Ex Parte* at 1. In addition, Globalstar
    claims that the restrictions on aircraft earth stations, as outlined
    in RTCA/DO262, limit the center frequency of their uplink
    transmissions to above 1614 MHz due to peak-power limitations.
    *Globalstar June 1 Ex Parte* at 1*.* Iridium states that RTCA/DO262
    specifically relaxed in-band and OOB requirements within the Big LEO
    L-band. *See Iridium June 2 Ex Parte* at 1. Globalstar responded
    with additional detailed information on how the in-band power limits
    were met at 1614 MHz, and explained that it was unable to satisfy
    the in-band restrictions below 1614 MHz. *See Globalstar June 3 Ex
    Parte* at 1-2. Iridium subsequently argued that Globalstar could
    choose to operate with a transmit power level lower than one watt if
    it chose to do so and, therefore, could operate below 1614 MHz. *See
    Iridium June 7 Ex Parte*.

[^260]: Letter from William D. Wallace, Counsel for Globalstar, to
    Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC at 1-2 (dated May 28, 2004).

[^261]: *See Iridium June 7 Ex Parte.*

[^262]: *See* *Globalstar June 3 Ex Parte*.

[^263]: *See* *Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
    Proceedings*, GC Docket No. 97-113, Memorandum Opinion and Order on
    Reconsideration, FCC 98-254, 13 FCC Rcd 21517 (1998); Report and
    Order, 13 FCC Rcd 11322 (1998).

[^264]: Letter from William Wallace, Counsel for Globalstar, to Marlene
    H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, Attach., Big LEO Band Plan at 12 (dated
    Sept. 15, 2003) ("Ratio of users per L-band to S-band channel is
    about 1.4 to 1 to achieve equivalent capacity.").

[^265]: Note that the items in bold were taken from the Amendment to
    Globalstar System Application, file no. 19-DSS-P-91(48) and
    CSS-91-014 dated Nov. 15, 1994 .

[^266]: 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).

[^267]: 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).

[^268]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^269]: 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."

[^270]: 15 U.S.C. § 632.

[^271]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517410.

[^272]: *Big LEO Spectrum Sharing NPRM*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2214-2215, App.
    E.

[^273]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 603. The RFA (codified at 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).

[^274]: *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 System*s, ET Docket No. 00-258, Third Report and
    Order, Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Second Memorandum
    Opinion and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 2223 (2003) (*Third Notice*).

[^275]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604.

[^276]: Section 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
    codified at 47 U.S.C. § 157.

[^277]: *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, Second Report
    and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 23193, 23212 (2002).

[^278]: *See Third Notice*, 18 FCC Rcd at 2255.

[^279]: 5 U.S.C. § 604(a)(3).

[^280]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^281]: 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."

[^282]: 15 U.S.C. § 632.

[^283]: *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 101 et seq. (formerly, Part 21 of the
    Commission's Rules) for common carrier fixed microwave services
    (except MDS).

[^284]: Persons eligible under parts 80 and 90 of the Commission's Rules
    can use Private Operational-Fixed Microwave services. *See* 47
    C.F.R. Parts 80 and 90. Stations in this service are called
    operational-fixed to distinguish them from common carrier and public
    fixed stations. Only the licensee may use the operational-fixed
    station, and only for communications related to the licensee's
    commercial, industrial, or safety operations.

[^285]: Auxiliary Microwave Service is governed by Part 74 of Title 47
    of the Commission's Rules. *See* 47 C.F.R. Part 74. This service is
    available to licensees of broadcast stations and to broadcast and
    cable network entities. Broadcast auxiliary microwave stations are
    used for relaying broadcast television signals from the studio to
    the transmitter, or between two points such as a main studio and an
    auxiliary studio. The service also includes mobile television
    pickups, which relay signals from a remote location back to the
    studio.

[^286]: 13 CFR § 121.201, NAICS code 513322 (changed to 517212 in
    October 2002).

[^287]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 515120.

[^288]: *Id*., NAICS code 515112.

[^289]: "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 to power to control both." 13 C.F.R. §
    121.103(a)(1).

[^290]: "SBA counts the receipts or employees of the concern whose size
    is at issue and those of all its domestic concern's size." 13 C.F.R.
    § 121.103(a)(4).

[^291]: FCC News Release, "Broadcast Station Totals as of September 30,
    2002" (Nov. 6, 2002).

[^292]: *Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 of the Commission's Rules with
    Regard to Filing Procedures in the Multipoint Distribution Service
    and in the Instructional Television Fixed Service and Implementation
    of Section 309(j) of the Communications Act -- Competitive Bidding*,
    Report and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9589, 9593, ¶ 7 (1995) (*MDS Auction
    R&O)*.

[^293]: 47 C.F.R. § 21.961(b)(1).

[^294]: *See* Letter to Margaret Wiener, Chief, Auctions and Industry
    Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC, from
    Gary Jackson, Assistant Administrator for Size Standards, Small
    Business Administration (dated Mar. 20, 2003) (noting approval of
    \$40 million size standard for MDS auction).

[^295]: Basic Trading Areas (BTAs) were designed by Rand McNally and are
    the geographic areas by which MDS was auctioned and authorized.
    *See* *MDS Auction R&O*, 10 FCC Rcd at 9608, ¶ 34.

[^296]: 47 U.S.C. § 309(j). Hundreds of stations were licensed to
    incumbent MDS licensees prior to implementation of section 309(j) of
    the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. § 309(j). For these
    pre-auction licenses, the applicable standard is SBA's small
    business size standard for "other telecommunications" (annual
    receipts of \$12.5 million or less). *See* 13 C.F.R. § 121.201,
    NAICS code 517910.

[^297]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517510.

[^298]: *Id.*

[^299]: U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of
    Organization)," Table 4 (issued October 2000).

[^300]: *Id.*

[^301]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).

[^302]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A).

[^303]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604(b).

[^304]: *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).

[^305]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).

[^306]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

[^307]: 5 U.S.C § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of
    "small business concern" in 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."

[^308]: 15 U.S.C. § 632.

[^309]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517410.

[^310]: *See generally* *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), modified on recon., FCC 96-54, 11 FCC Rcd 12861 (1996)..

[^311]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).