**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | *  | IB Docket No. 98-172         |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Redesignation of the 17.7-19.7   | ** | RM-9005                      |
| GHz Frequency )                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  | RM-9118                      |
| Band, Blanket Licensing of       | *) |                              |
| Satellite ) IB Docket No. 98-172 | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
| Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2  | *  |                              |
| GHz and ) RM-9005                | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
| 27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, ) |    |                              |
| RM-9118                          | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| and the Allocation of Additional | ** |                              |
| Spectrum )                       |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
| in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and         | *) |                              |
| 24.75-25.25 GHz )                | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
| Frequency Bands for Broadcast )  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Satellite-Service Use )          | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**SECOND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION**

**Adopted: November 19, 2002 Released: November 26, 2002**

By the Commission:

# INTRODUCTION

1.  In this Second Order on Reconsideration, we grant in part a Petition
    for Reconsideration filed in this proceeding by the Hughes
    Electronics Corporation (Hughes) and deny in its entirety a Petition
    for Reconsideration filed by the Satellite Industry Association
    (SIA).[^1] In response to the *Hughes Reconsideration Petition*, we
    alter the 18 GHz band plan to make the fixed-satellite service (FSS)
    the sole primary spectrum allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.[^2]
    We take this action in recognition of our recent decision to make
    additional spectrum available to current, co-primary users of the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band.[^3] We also permit the blanket licensing of
    geostationary orbiting (GSO) FSS facilities in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    and 29.25-29.5 GHz bands and -- consistent with the band clearing
    procedures that we have adopted in other proceedings -- we adopt
    provisions designed to ensure the orderly migration and timely
    reimbursement of terrestrial fixed service (FS) incumbents in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band. These changes to our rules will help promote
    the efficient use of spectrum for existing and future users.[^4]

# BACKGROUND

2.  Until recently, many different services shared the 18 GHz band on a
    co-primary basis.[^5] The services that possessed essentially equal
    rights to the 18 GHz band included the terrestrial FS, the FSS and
    feeder links for the mobile satellite service (MSS).[^6] On June 8,
    2000, however, the Commission adopted the *18 GHz Order* which,
    among other things, concluded that terrestrial FS and ubiquitously
    deployed FSS earth stations generally could not share the same 18
    GHz spectrum.[^7] In the *18 GHz Order*, therefore, the Commission
    separated most terrestrial FS operations from most FSS operations by
    allocating separate sub-bands to each service; however, the
    Commission retained co-primary allocations for GSO FSS and FS
    operations in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.[^8]

3.  Despite constraints on the ability of GSO FSS to offer ubiquitous
    service in the same spectrum as FS, the Commission retained the
    co-primary allocation for both services in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band
    because it found "no other spectrum available" in which terrestrial
    FS operators might relocate existing links and accommodate
    reasonable FS expansion; therefore, the Commission reasoned that a
    co-primary FS allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band represented the
    most "equitable and balanced approach to meeting the current needs
    of the various existing and future operations in the 18 GHz
    band."[^9] The Commission recognized that a co-primary allocation at
    18.3-18.58 GHz failed to "provide \[the\] full 1000 \[megahertz\] of
    unshared Ka-band downlink spectrum for GSO FSS operation" that many
    GSO FSS licensees had requested; however, the Commission speculated
    that changes to satellite designs and the development of innovative
    new sharing arrangements might one day make sharing between the GSO
    FSS and FS feasible.[^10]

4.  In response to the original *18 GHz Order*, we received petitions
    for reconsideration from several parties, including Hughes
    Electronics Corporation (Hughes), a proponent of GSO FSS
    operations.[^11] On November 1, 2001, we released a *First Order on
    Reconsideration* in this proceeding that resolved many of the
    petitioners' concerns.[^12] We deferred action, however, on two
    elements of Hughes' petition: (1) that we reconsider the co-primary
    allocation for FS in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band; and (2) that we permit
    blanket licensing of earth stations receiving in certain portions of
    the 18 GHz band. [^13]

5.  Shortly after we adopted our *First Order on Reconsideration*, the
    United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued
    an order rejecting a separate challenge to the *18 GHz Order* from
    Teledesic LLC, another FSS licensee in the 18 GHz band.[^14] In
    December 2001, the D.C. Circuit rejected those elements of
    Teledesic's appeal not rendered moot by our *First Order on
    Reconsideration.*[^15] Concluding that the Commission's *18 GHz
    Order* was entitled to the heightened degree of deference
    traditionally accorded decisions regarding spectrum management, the
    D.C. Circuit upheld the relocation policies and procedures adopted
    in the *18 GHz Order* that Teledesic had challenged.[^16] The court
    found that the Commission's spectrum management goals and the
    regulatory means used to implement them in the *18 GHz Order* were
    both permissible and reasonable and that the rules' safeguards
    against unreasonable bargaining by terrestrial operators during the
    relocation process were adequate.[^17]

6.  Since that time, we have expanded the eligibility requirements to
    enable the vast majority of FS operators in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band
    to access other spectrum. On May 16, 2002, we adopted the *CARS
    Eligibility Order*, which permitted all multichannel video
    programming distributors (MVPDs) to become eligible for Cable
    Television Relay Service (CARS) licenses in the 12.7-13.2 GHz and
    17.7-18.3 GHz bands.[^18] Lifting eligibility restrictions on
    licenses in the 12.7-13.2 GHz and 17.7-18.3 GHz bands reversed a
    longstanding Commission policy that had allowed franchised cable
    systems and wireless cable systems to become CARS licensees, but
    denied the same opportunity to non-eligible competitors to
    traditional cable systems, such as private cable operators (PCOs),
    which are dependent on the 18 GHz band. Although the 12.7-13.2 GHz
    and 17.7-18.3 GHz bands exhibit somewhat different technical
    characteristics than the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, MVPD licensees who
    operate in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band are, following adoption of the
    *CARS Eligibility Order*, generally eligible for licenses in these
    alternative CARS bands.[^19]

7.  In this Second Order on Reconsideration, we address the two
    remaining elements of Hughes' reconsideration petition against the
    *18 GHz Order*: the appropriate allocation of the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band and the merits of authorizing blanket-licensed GSO FSS earth
    stations in that spectrum. We also address a petition from the SIA
    against our *First Order on Reconsideration.*

# DISCUSSION

8.  While we do not grant reconsideration merely to re-litigate matters
    already resolved, we may respond to arguments that raise new issues
    or facts not previously considered[^20][^21] In this case, recent
    changes in the frequency spectrum available for use by terrestrial
    FS licensees alter one of the fundamental precepts upon which the
    Commission based its decision in the *18 GHz Order* to retain a
    co-primary allocation for terrestrial FS in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.
    As described more fully below, we grant, in part, Hughes' petition
    for reconsideration due to changed circumstances. Accordingly, we
    alter the Table of Frequency Allocations to reflect FSS as the sole
    primary spectrum allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, we permit
    the blanket licensing of GSO FSS earth stations in this spectrum and
    the 29.25-29.5 GHz band, and we apply current relocation and
    reimbursement procedures to ensure the timely migration of
    terrestrial FS incumbents from the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.

## Sole Primary FSS Allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz Band

9.  In its Petition for Partial Reconsideration, Hughes raises two
    principal objections to the Commission's allocation of the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band in the *18 GHz Band Order*. First, Hughes
    contends that granting a co-primary allocation for both GSO FSS and
    FS in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band effectively results in only 720
    megahertz of spectrum becoming available for use by ubiquitously
    deployed GSO FSS earth stations, which represents an "unexplained
    break from previous Commission decisions" that were premised on
    ensuring the availability of 1000 megahertz of spectrum for
    ubiquitously deployed GSO FSS earth stations.[^22] Second, Hughes
    asserts that the Commission granted insufficient weight to evidence
    in the record and, as a result, improperly balanced the equities
    between satellite and fixed uses when it established a co-primary
    allocation for both GSO FSS and FS in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.
    Therefore, Hughes urges the Commission to reconsider its actions and
    designate additional spectrum in the 18 GHz band "as unshared
    primary spectrum for satellite downlinks to ubiquitous earth
    terminals."[^23] We grant Hughes' petition for reconsideration,
    albeit on different grounds from those that Hughes pleads.

10. As a preliminary matter, we disagree with Hughes' contention that
    the decision to allocate less than a full 1000 megahertz for GSO FSS
    use in the 18 GHz band somehow was unexplained in the *18 GHz
    Order.*[^24] On the contrary, the *18 GHz Order* explained that,
    while a co-primary allocation for both GSO FSS and FS would still
    permit gateway-type satellite facilities in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band,[^25] an exclusive primary designation for GSO FSS in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band at that time would have not only inhibited
    competition in the MVPD market by precluding reasonable expansion of
    MVPD systems that compete with traditional coaxial cable
    operators,[^26] but also threatened to impose unnecessarily high
    burdens on GSO FSS operators and to delay the deployment of advanced
    services in this band due to the perceived need to relocate tens of
    thousands of FS links.[^27] Similarly, we do not find persuasive
    Hughes' argument that the Commission's *18 GHz Order* must be
    arbitrary because it left a larger percentage of satellite needs
    unmet than terrestrial needs.[^28] Reasoned decision-making does not
    require splitting the difference where the amount of spectrum
    available is insufficient to meet the needs of all parties,
    particularly where, as here, the Commission found that any
    additional GSO FSS allocation would have adversely affected
    competition in the MVPD market and imposed unworkable relocation as
    a condition of GSO FSS operation in the band.[^29] In light of the
    record available to the Commission at the time, therefore, we find
    that the Commission's analysis offered sufficient explanation of its
    attempt to balance the competing demands for 18 GHz spectrum between
    satellite and terrestrial uses.

11. Despite our finding that the Commission's *18 GHz Order* reached an
    appropriate compromise among competing service models at the time,
    we find that changed circumstances now warrant a different balance
    of equities between satellite and terrestrial uses of the band;
    therefore, we grant that portion of Hughes' petition for
    reconsideration that seeks sole primary spectrum for GSO FSS use in
    the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.

12. We are now in a position to be able to agree with Hughes' assertion
    that the demand for advanced satellite broadband offerings supports
    exclusively allocating a full 1000 megahertz for GSO FSS in the 18
    GHz band. The benefits of allocating matched bands of 1000 megahertz
    each for GSO FSS downlinks and uplinks in the Ka-band -- including
    enhanced delivery of ubiquitous broadband satellite service -- are
    well documented and need not be repeated at length here.[^30]
    Indeed, until the Commission's analysis in the *18 GHz Order* found
    no reasonable alternative for accommodating private wireless cable
    operators in any other band except the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, Hughes
    rightly observes that the Commission had rejected band plans that
    made less than a 1000 megahertz allocation of exclusive primary
    spectrum to GSO FSS use because it found that these plans would have
    resulted "in a significant loss of system capacity and revenue" for
    GSO FSS systems.[^31] The problem with allocating the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band exclusively for GSO FSS use was *not* a lack of public interest
    benefits from granting a full 1000 megahertz of spectrum to GSO FSS
    at 18 GHz, but rather the excessive *costs* of achieving that 1000
    megahertz exclusive allocation through reallocation of the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band -- both to MVPDs and to potential GSO FSS
    users.[^32]

13. In adopting the *18 GHz Order*, the Commission understood that it
    had allocated 1000 megahertz of spectrum for GSO FSS uplinks in the
    28 GHz band and sought to allocate an equal amount of spectrum for
    GSO FSS downlinks in the 18 GHz band. After the Commission's
    analysis failed to identify any alternative arrangement that could
    either relocate terrestrial FS to another band or identify
    additional 18 GHz spectrum for exclusive GSO FSS use, however, the
    Commission ultimately allocated 720 megahertz for exclusive primary
    use by GSO FSS and an additional 280 megahertz for co-primary use by
    both GSO FSS and FS. As repeatedly stated in the *18 GHz Order,* the
    Commission limited the amount of spectrum designated for exclusive,
    primary use by GSO FSS licensees to 720 megahertz, rather than 1000
    megahertz, because the incumbent FS licensees in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band, which use wireless facilities to compete with traditional
    coaxial cable television providers, had no other spectrum in which
    to operate.[^33] Accordingly, the Commission concluded that
    "ensuring the continued viability of the competitive multichannel
    video systems in this portion of the spectrum necessitates providing
    for shared \[co-primary\] use of the spectrum \[from 18.3 GHz\] up
    to 18.58 GHz."[^34]

14. In the *CARS Eligibility Order*, however, we enhanced the
    eligibility of MVPDs to access the 12.7-13.2 GHz and 17.7-18.3 GHz
    bands.[^35] We concluded that "all MVPDs, whatever their primary
    means of program distribution or system architecture and regardless
    of whether they hold a local franchise, should be eligible to hold
    CARS licenses upon a demonstrated need for such spectrum and absent
    a finding of adverse consequences to currently eligible users of
    CARS."[^36] Greater and more equitable access to spectrum in both
    the 12 GHz band and other portions of the 18 GHz band has opened new
    opportunities for MVPD licensees currently in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band not available at the time the Commission adopted the *18 GHz
    Order*.[^37] Following adoption of the *CARS Eligibility Order*,
    therefore, the condition that prevented the Commission from
    identifying a full 1000 megahertz for GSO FSS downlinks -- the lack
    of alternative spectrum for terrestrial FS operations in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band -- no longer exists. The survival of the private
    wireless cable industry no longer depends exclusively upon the
    preservation of a co-primary FS allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band. While we reached our decision to expand eligibility in the
    CARS bands independent of pending allocation proceedings, our *CARS
    Eligibility Order* stated that this proceeding represented the
    proper proceeding to resolve issues pertaining to the appropriate
    allocation of the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, including the reimbursement
    of relocation expenses for incumbent licenses. [^38]

15. In the *18 GHz Order*, the Commission did not quantify the number or
    distribution of terrestrial FS facilities licensed in the 18.3-18.58
    GHz band, but suggested there was an "extremely large" number of a
    FS stations operating in the band.[^39] In the Commission's *18 GHz
    Order*, the burden of relocating this number of terrestrial FS
    stations -- measured by the number of channels of the already
    deployed FS facilities -- was viewed as potentially rendering the
    band "unattractive" for GSO FSS licensees.[^40]

16. We have reexamined both the number and the national distribution of
    terrestrial FS licensees in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band to determine the
    feasibility of relocating the incumbent FS licensees from that
    portion of the 18 GHz band.[^41] Our records indicate not only that
    incumbent PCO licensees operate fewer actual facilities than
    suggested by the examination of the number of *channels* that was
    undertaken in the *18 GHz Order*, but also that incumbent PCO
    licensees operate with greater geographic concentration than was
    originally envisioned.[^42] The records of licensed PCO facilities
    in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band indicate that they are concentrated in
    relatively few geographic areas. Indeed, the Commission has
    authorized only approximately 500 facilities to operate in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band throughout the United States, and -- as
    indicated in Figure 1 below -- a large majority of those operations
    are located in metropolitan areas.[^43]

    ![](media/image1.png){width="5.957638888888889in"
    height="4.198611111111111in"}

17. In addition to reexamining the number and distribution of PCO
    systems using the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, we have reviewed the
    potential for relocating the actual incumbent licensees in this band
    to other spectrum in light of the availability of additional
    spectrum -- including the 12.7-13.2 GHz and 17.7-18.3 GHz bands. We
    have considered the level of congestion and the frequency paths of
    existing systems in this potential relocation spectrum, including
    the paths of incumbent point-to-multipoint PCOs already located in
    the 12.7-13.2 GHz and 17.7-18.3 GHz bands. While the
    point-to-multipoint PCOs tend to configure their stations in a
    hub-and-spoke pattern, each of the "spokes" that comprise a PCO's
    system can experience interference from only a discrete range
    angles. If the PCO systems were relocated to the 12.7-13.2 GHz and
    17.7-18.3 GHz frequency bands, the geographic separation of the
    incumbent systems and the relocated PCO would produce relatively few
    instances where the frequency paths would intersect in a way that
    would require site shielding or other mitigation measures necessary
    to prevent mutually unacceptable interference. Because it appears
    that sufficient capacity exists in this relocation spectrum to
    reasonably accommodate most incumbent licensees, we now believe that
    any impact on PCO licensees, other incumbent FS licensees and the
    new GSO FSS entrants will be modest.

18. We have no illusion that relocation of incumbent FS facilities from
    the 18.3-18.58 GHz band will be easy to accomplish.[^44] On further
    examination, however, we now recognize that the number and
    geographic concentration of terrestrial FS operations permit GSO FSS
    licensees to operate across large portions of the country without
    the immediate need to relocate incumbent FS licensees. The limited
    FS deployment in rural areas is particularly important in view of
    the emphasis that Hughes places on the ability of its proposed
    satellite system to serve rural areas. Moreover, we conclude that
    the actual number and concentration of incumbent FS licensees --
    combined with the enhanced ability of MVPDs to access spectrum in
    the 12.7-13.2 and 17.7-18.3 GHz bands -- will make relocation more
    feasible than we had originally anticipated. Finally, while the
    relocation picture for FS operators looks more sanguine than
    originally envisioned, decisions about the attractiveness of
    complying with the incumbent-relocation procedures adopted for any
    particular band are best left to the new entrants to the band: the
    Ka-band GSO FSS licensees. If relocation is truly too expensive to
    undertake, the GSO FSS licensees will not pay to relocate the
    incumbent FS licensees and must instead operate within the
    constraints created by the interference environment that the
    incumbent FS licensees establish for a period of ten years.[^45] In
    addition, ten years should be a sufficient amount of time for
    incumbent FS licensees to determine whether they want to relocate or
    coexist on a non-interfering basis with primary FSS licensees.

19. In light of the increased eligibility of MVPDs to apply for licenses
    in, or be relocated to, other spectrum in the CARS bands at
    12.7-13.2 GHz and at 17.7-18.3 GHz and upon a more detailed review
    of the number and concentration of incumbent FS operators in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band, we believe granting an exclusive 1000 megahertz
    allocation to GSO FSS will still provide for an opportunity for PCOs
    to remain competitive in the MVPD market.[^46] This action, together
    with prior decisions allocating 720 megahertz of spectrum for GSO
    FSS downlinks, creates a total of 1000 megahertz of unshared
    downlink spectrum for the GSO FSS. The 1000 megahertz of exclusively
    allocated GSO FSS downlink spectrum brings the GSO FSS downlink band
    into parity with the 1000 megahertz of uplink spectrum in the 28 GHz
    band plan already allocated for this service and, consistent with
    our prior findings, provides a reasonable opportunity for GSO FSS
    licensees to operate the type of satellite service proposed.[^47]

## Blanket Earth Station Licensing

20. Where an operator intends to deploy a large number of
    transmit-receive earth stations across a widely dispersed geographic
    area, the coordination and licensing of individual earth stations,
    with its attendant costs and administrative delays, may impede or
    even prevent system deployment.[^48] In such cases, permitting the
    blanket licensing of earth stations offers significant public
    interest benefits.[^49] Blanket licensing not only enables
    accelerated deployment of service to the public by swiftly licensing
    a large number of terminals, but also allows the Commission to
    maintain control and exercise oversight of the spectrum as required
    by Section 301 of the Communications Act.[^50]

### Blanket Licensing in the 18.3-18.58 GHz Band

21. In the *18 GHz Order*, the Commission adopted a blanket licensing
    procedure for GSO FSS earth stations in the unshared portions of the
    Ka-band.[^51] Under the procedures adopted in the *18 GHz Order* and
    subsequently affirmed in the *First Order on Reconsideration*, a GSO
    FSS licensee could apply for a blanket earth authorization that
    would permit the licensee to construct and operate a specified
    number and type of qualified earth stations.[^52] The license term
    for the blanket authorization coincides with the underlying space
    station license.[^53] Moreover, in recognition of a consensus among
    participants in an industry working group on Ka-band blanket
    licensing, the Commission adopted specific technical conditions for
    uplink and downlink operations, which obviates the need for
    coordination among non-Government systems operating in the
    Ka-band.[^54]

22. The Commission, however, declined to adopt the same type of
    blanket-licensing procedure in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band that it
    adopted for the other 720 megahertz of the GSO FSS bands because, as
    with other shared bands in the 18 GHz range, the Commission
    concluded that the blanket licensing of ubiquitous GSO FSS earth
    stations was inconsistent with a co-primary terrestrial FS
    allocation.[^55] Having now established GSO FSS as the sole primary
    allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, however, we can apply the
    blanket-licensing provisions adopted in the *18 GHz Order* and
    affirmed in our *First Order on Reconsideration* to terminals GSO
    FSS licensees propose to operate in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band. Blanket
    licensing of earth station facilities in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band
    remains consistent with the Commission's original intention in the
    *18 GHz Notice* to permit blanket licensing in all unshared
    bands.[^56] As with the other unshared bands in the 18 GHz range,
    moreover, we find that permitting blanket licensing of the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band may accelerate system deployment and reduce the
    administrative burden associated with site-by-site licensing
    mechanisms. Accordingly, we modify Part 25 of our rules to extend
    these blanket-licensing procedures to the 18.3-18.58 GHz band. As
    specified in Appendix A, we also adopt transition provisions
    designed to implement blanket licensing in the band.[^57] Finally,
    due to our decision to permit blanket licensing of GSO FSS earth
    terminals in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, we dismiss as moot that
    portion of Hughes' petition that sought streamlined licensing of
    earth terminals as a secondary alternative to blanket licensing of
    facilities in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.[^58]

### Blanket Licensing in the 29.25-29.5 GHz Band

23. In its Petition, Hughes states that the "the 29.25-29.5 GHz band is
    currently, and was intended to be, available under the Commission\'s
    Rules for ubiquitous GSO FSS earth terminals on a shared basis with
    MSS feeder links."[^59] We disagree. In the *18 GHz Order*, blanket
    licensing of earth stations was not envisioned for the 29.25-29.5
    GHz band.[^60] As indicated above, blanket licensing is generally
    not appropriate in shared bands. In this case, GSO FSS operators
    share the 29.25-29.5 GHz band with MSS feeder links, and
    uncoordinated and ubiquitous deployment of GSO FSS earth stations
    could have affected the co-directional use of the frequency band
    by non-geostationary (NGSO) MSS feeder link systems. 

24. NGSO MSS feeder link stations are large satellite earth station
    complexes that transmit communications traffic between the public
    switched telephone network and orbiting NGSO MSS satellites.[^61] On
    reconsideration, however, we note that no NGSO MSS feeder link earth
    stations actually operate in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band in the United
    States today.[^62] Given the time, cost and complexity of operating
    NGSO MSS feeder links,[^63] moreover, we do not anticipate that the
    number of operational NGSO MSS feeder link stations in the
    29.25-29.5 GHz band will materially increase in the future.[^64]
    Therefore, ubiquitously deploying GSO FSS stations in the same band
    in which NGSO MSS feeder links may eventually operate is unlikely to
    cause significant problems for present or future NGSO MSS feeder
    link systems, provided that NGSO MSS and GSO FSS operators
    coordinate. Part 25 of our rules already provides a number of
    mechanisms to ensure coordination of ubiquitously deployed earth
    stations with other users.[^65] Accordingly, we will permit GSO FSS
    operators to deploy ubiquitous earth stations in the 29.25-29.5 GHz
    band and require them to comply with our Part 25 rules for
    coordination of these facilities. Specifically, when a GSO
    FSS operator applies to the Commission to deploy earth stations in
    the 29.25-29.5 GHz frequency band, we require it to demonstrate how
    it will coordinate with NGSO MSS feeder link systems under Section
    25.258 of our rules.[^66]  In addition, a GSO FSS operator who seeks
    blanket licensing of terminals must demonstrate how it will protect
    other GSO FSS systems under Section 25.138 of our
    rules.[^67]  Finally, GSO FSS licensees that deploy ubiquitous earth
    stations must comply with the annual earth-station reporting
    requirements contained in Section 25.145 of our rules.[^68] We
    believe that requiring coordination of NGSO MSS feeder links and GSO
    FSS earth stations consistent with our Part 25 rules will permit
    nearly ubiquitous deployment of services without compromising the
    interference protection that other users of the band are entitled to
    receive. We modify Part 25 of our Rules consistent with this
    decision.[^69]

25. The services currently authorized to use the 29.25-29.5 GHz band are
    NGSO MSS feeder links and, after the effective date of today's
    order, blanket licensed GSO FSS earth stations. In addition, Section
    101.4 of our rules permits certain FS operations to occur in the
    29.25-29.5 GHz band that were authorized under Parts 21 of the
    Commission's rules prior to 1996.[^70] In practice, FS licensees in
    the band use these authorizations on an infrequent and irregular
    basis to operate back-up facilities when other forms of wireline
    services are unavailable or non-existent.[^71] The Commission's
    records indicate that all but one of the thirty FS licensees
    authorized in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band must operate on a temporary
    basis of less than six months at a remote point where wire-line
    communications are not practicable.[^72] GSO FSS earth stations must
    take these co-primary FS operations into account when deploying
    blanket earth stations in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band.[^73]

## Relocation and Reimbursement of Incumbent Operators

26. Under our 18 GHz transition rules that apply to all GSO FSS segments
    in the 18 GHz range except for the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, FSS
    licensees may enter into negotiations with co-primary terrestrial
    fixed services for the purpose of agreeing to terms under which the
    terrestrial licensees would either relocate or accept a sharing
    arrangement.[^74] If no voluntary agreement is reached within two
    years for non-public safety incumbents, an FSS licensee may initiate
    involuntary relocation pursuant to Section 101.91 of our rules.[^75]
    In the *18 GHz Order*, the Commission found that a two-year time
    period for non-public safety incumbents and a three-year time period
    for public safety incumbents provided a reasonable balance between
    the needs of new FSS operators to gain access to spectrum and the
    needs of existing FS operators to ensure that relocated facilities
    are provided that meet their needs.[^76] In the event that agreement
    is not reached in any negotiation period, an FSS licensee has the
    option of invoking involuntary relocation provisions of our
    rules.[^77] Under involuntary relocation, a terrestrial fixed
    station must be relocated provided that the FSS licensee guarantees
    payment of relocation costs,[^78] completes all activities necessary
    for implementing the replacement facilities,[^79] and builds and
    tests the replacement system for comparability.[^80] Terrestrial
    fixed service operators need not relocate until the alternative
    facilities are available for a reasonable time -- in this case, one
    year -- to make adjustments, determine comparability, and ensure a
    seamless handoff.[^81] Finally, under our rules, GSO FSS operators
    generally no longer remain responsible for covering relocation costs
    that terrestrial incumbents incur more than ten years from the
    adoption date of the *18 GHz* *Order*.[^82] In the *18 GHz Order*,
    the Commission described these relocation procedures as a proven
    "system that should lead to efficient relocation and ultimately to
    the band segmentation that we conclude serves the public interest"
    and added that these rules should "provide reasonable flexibility to
    FSS licensees to establish their operations in a timely and economic
    manner."[^83]

27. Having now established GSO FSS as the sole primary allocation in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band, we apply the relocation provisions adopted in
    the *18 GHz Order* and subsequently affirmed in both the *First
    Order on Reconsideration* and the D.C. Circuit's *Teledesic*
    decision to terminals GSO FSS licensees propose to operate in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band.[^84] We permit terrestrial FS licensees
    currently operating in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band to continue to
    operate existing facilities, subject to the right of a GSO FSS
    operator to relocate the FS facility to a different frequency within
    the radio spectrum or another comparable facility.[^85] A relocated
    terrestrial FS licensee is entitled to compensation for expenses
    related to relocation from the new GSO FSS entrant for a period of
    ten years from the adoption date of this Order. We hereby extend our
    existing 18 GHz transition procedures to the 18.3-18.58 GHz band and
    modify our rules accordingly. We also take this opportunity to
    correct a typographical error repeated in some of our rules that
    caused the rules to depart from the Commission's *18 GHz
    Order*.[^86]

## Other Issues

28. We deny the *SIA Reconsideration Petition* against the *First Order
    on Reconsideration* in this proceeding.[^87] SIA argues that the
    Commission's *First Order on Reconsideration* emphasized the speed
    of relocation over other policies that inform our relocation
    procedures, such as a previously announced intention to provide for
    the growth and development of both the satellite and terrestrial
    services.[^88] SIA next contends that this perceived shift in
    emphasis toward speedy relocation of incumbents from the 18 GHz band
    is not served by the "comparable facilities policy," which,
    according to SIA, permits incumbents "an absolute right to have
    their aging equipment replaced with brand new equipment if it cannot
    be retuned" and a right "to hold out for 'premiums' over and above
    the cost of replacement facilities."[^89] SIA claims that the
    Commission has dismissed proposals that would have cleared the band
    more quickly and at lower expense to the GSO FSS licensees in the
    band.

29. SIA's challenge to our relocation procedures is without merit. SIA
    concedes that many goals -- not just the rate at which a given band
    is cleared -- continue to inform the Commission's "comparable
    facilities" policy toward incumbent relocation.[^90] Other goals
    include: (i) ensuring continuous service to those that use the
    incumbent's facilities;[^91] (ii) preventing interference to the new
    entrant;[^92] (iii) promoting more efficient use of the spectrum by
    both the new entrant and the departing incumbent;[^93] and (iv)
    encouraging cooperation among potentially adverse parties by
    promoting incumbents' voluntary migration from the band.[^94]
    Indeed, the Commission has on many occasions considered, and
    rejected, alternatives to our longstanding comparable facilities
    policy[^95] as too divisive, too disruptive, too slow, or too
    confiscatory in light of our overall spectrum management goals.[^96]

30. Principally on these grounds, the D.C. Circuit upheld our relocation
    policies for the 18 GHz band as reasonable in light of our spectrum
    policy goals in December, 2001.[^97] In *Teledesic v. FCC,* the D.C.
    Circuit rejected Teledesic's contention that the Commission failed
    to adequately consider alternatives to the comparable facilities
    policy ultimately adopted for the 18 GHz band.[^98] The court
    concluded that, because the 18 GHz band relocation policies were
    consistent with the Commission's overall approach to accommodating
    new technologies in occupied spectrum bands, the Commission "was not
    required to give as extensive a justification as it would have had
    it unveiled the policy for the first time."[^99] The D.C. Circuit
    held that, where -- as here -- a party proposes alternative
    relocation mechanisms inconsistent with the Commission\'s
    well-explained goals, "the Commission was not required to analyze
    each of those suggestions in detail."[^100]

31. SIA's challenge to our relocation rules resembles Teledesic's
    challenge of our rules before the D.C. Circuit. Like Teledesic, SIA
    challenges the compensation mechanism articulated under our rules
    governing the comparable facilities policy for incumbent relocation.
    SIA also claims that the Commission improperly rejected proposals
    that would have cleared the band more quickly and at lower expense
    to the GSO FSS licensees in the band. We disagree. We find, as the
    D.C. Circuit did, that the Commission adequately supported its
    chosen relocation mechanism for the 18 GHz band and adequately
    considered alternatives in light of both our overall spectrum
    management goals and our well-established policies for incumbent
    relocation. We previously stated, and state again today, that the
    Commission was not *changing* relocation policies in the *18 GHz
    Order*, but rather "*applying* an established policy that it has
    employed in other similar circumstances."[^101] Consistent with
    *Teledesic* and *McLaughlin* and contrary to the contentions of SIA,
    reasoned decision making does not require us to revisit all possible
    alternatives in detail when we apply an established regime, such as
    our comparable facilities policies, to a recurrent problem, such as
    incumbent band relocation. Thus, we again affirm for reasons
    previously stated that the Commission's comparable facilities policy
    for relocation of incumbent spectrum users in the 18 GHz band will
    best serve our multivalent policy goals for incumbent relocation.
    [^102]

32. Separately, SIA also questions whether displaced FS licensees
    require a one-year testing period upon relocation. SIA states that,
    while it supports a "testing" approach in principle, one year is too
    long a time to constitute a reasonable time for displaced FS
    licensees in most cases.[^103] SIA claims that, because new entrants
    incur most of an incumbents' relocation expenses prior to testing
    new facilities, a one-year time period for testing would require new
    entrants to reimburse incumbents' relocation expenses earlier than
    if the Commission adopted a shorter testing period for the new
    equipment.[^104] Accordingly, SIA claims the one-year testing period
    would needlessly increase the already "front-loaded" capital
    requirements of satellite operators.[^105] SIA also claims, without
    elaboration, that the one-year testing period might encourage FS
    licensees to delay relocation, presumably because displaced FS
    licensees might use the possibility of returning to the original
    band to extract additional concessions from the new entrant.[^106]
    Therefore, SIA asserts that a thirty-day testing period is more
    appropriate than a one-year testing period.[^107]

33. We disagree. The Commission first adopted the one-year testing
    policy in 1992.[^108] Comprehensively testing comparable facilities
    requires time and, depending on whether radio-transmission
    facilities are involved, may require the displaced incumbent to test
    during different times of the year to account for seasonal
    variations in signal propagation.[^109] To ensure that displaced
    incumbents obtain facilities that "are equivalent in every respect
    to their original facilities,"[^110] we generally have allowed a
    one-year period for testing in a wide variety of relocation
    decisions issued since 1992 that have involved both satellite- and
    ground-based new entrants.[^111] In this case, SIA has not provided
    us with sufficient evidence to depart from our longstanding
    precedent of allowing one year for the testing of displaced
    incumbents' new facilities. We remain unconvinced by SIA's
    unsupported contention that the one year period might cause
    excessive payments for, or delays in, the relocation of incumbents'
    facilities. Our experience to date with the relocations required in
    certain spectrum allocated to the Personal Communications Service
    (PCS) has not indicated that a one-year testing period causes
    excessive payments or delays. We, therefore, decline to depart from
    our precedent and reaffirm the one-year period for new facilities
    testing by incumbent FS licensees who are displaced from the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band. To help alleviate SIA's concerns, however, we
    will carefully review any claims of inequitable payments or
    unjustifiable delay and we caution all parties against abusing the
    relocation procedures that we have adopted. Cooperation will best
    ensure a timely and cost-effective transition for everyone involved.

# CONCLUSION

34. We grant in part and deny in part Hughes' petition for
    reconsideration. We alter the Table of Frequency Allocations to
    reflect FSS as the sole primary spectrum allocation in the
    18.3-18.58 GHz band; we authorize the blanket licensing of GSO FSS
    earth stations in this spectrum and in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band; and
    we adopt relocation and reimbursement procedures to ensure the
    timely migration of terrestrial FS incumbents from the 18.3-18.58
    GHz band. We deny SIA's petition for reconsideration. Our relocation
    policies and our one-year testing window have been adequately
    justified and alternatives adequately explored in light of our
    overall spectrum management goals.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

35. IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 301, 302,
    303(c), 303(e), 303(f), 303(r) and 403 of the Communications Act of
    1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 151, 154(i), 154(j), 301, 302,
    303(c), 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), and 403, this *Order* IS ADOPTED.

36. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration of
    Hughes Electronics Corporation is GRANTED, IN PART, AND DENIED IN
    PART.

37. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration of the
    Satellite Industry Association is DENIED.

38. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, as
    required by section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and as set
    forth in Appendix B, IS ADOPTED.

39. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission\'s Consumer and
    Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL
    SEND a copy of this *Order*, including the Final Regulatory
    Flexibility Analysis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
    Business Administration.

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding is terminated pursuant to
    sections 4(i) and 4(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
    amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 154(i) and 154(j).

> FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
>
> Marlene H. Dortch
>
> Secretary

#   {#section .unnumbered}

# APPENDIX A: Final Rules

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 2, 21, 25, 74, 78, and
101 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended 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.

1.  Section 2.106 is amended as follows:

###### (a) Revise page 69. {#a-revise-page-69. .unnumbered}

###### (b) In the list of non-Federal Government (NG) footnotes, revise NG144. {#b-in-the-list-of-non-federal-government-ng-footnotes-revise-ng144. .unnumbered}

The additions and revisions read as follows:

**§ 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.**

+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 18.3-22.5 |           |           |           |           | Page 69 |
| GHz (SHF) |           |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| Inte      |           |           | United    |           | FCC     |
| rnational |           |           | States    |           | Rule    |
| Table     |           |           | Table     |           | Part(s) |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| Region 1  | Region 2  | Region 3  | Federal   | No        |         |
|           |           |           | G         | n-Federal |         |
|           |           |           | overnment | G         |         |
|           |           |           |           | overnment |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| See       |           |           | 18.3-18.6 | 18.3-18.6 | Sa      |
| previous  |           |           |           |           | tellite |
| page for  |           |           | FIXED-    | FIXED-    |         |
| 18.1-18.4 |           |           | SATELLITE | SATELLITE | Communi |
| GHz       |           |           |           |           | cations |
|           |           |           | (space-   | (space-   | (25)    |
|           |           |           | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |         |
|           |           |           | G117      | NG164     |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 18.4-18.6 |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED-    |           |           |           |           |         |
| SATELLITE |           |           |           |           |         |
| (space-   |           |           |           |           |         |
| to-Earth) |           |           |           |           |         |
| 5.484A    |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| MOBILE    |           |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
|           |           |           | US334     | US334     |         |
|           |           |           |           | NG144     |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 18.6-18.8 | 18.6-18.8 | 18.6-18.8 | 18.6-18.8 | 18.6-18.8 |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| Earth     | EARTH     | EARTH     | EARTH     | EARTH     |         |
| exp       | EXP       | EXP       | EXP       | EXP       |         |
| loration- | LORATION- | LORATION- | LORATION- | LORATION- |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| satellite | SATELLITE | SATELLITE | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |         |
| (passive) | (passive) | (passive) | (passive) | (passive) |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     | FIXED     | FIXED     | FIXED-    | FIXED-    |         |
|           |           |           | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |         |
| FIXED-    | FIXED-    | FIXED-    |           |           |         |
| SATELLITE | SATELLITE | SATELLITE | (space-   | (space-   |         |
|           |           |           | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |         |
| (space-   | (space-   | (space-   | US255     | US255     |         |
| to-Earth) | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |           |           |         |
| 5.522B    | 5.522B    | 5.522B    | G117      | NG164     |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| MOBILE    | MOBILE    | MOBILE    | SPACE     | SPACE     |         |
| except    | except    | except    | RESEARCH  | RESEARCH  |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| aer       | aer       | aer       | (passive) | (passive) |         |
| onautical | onautical | onautical |           |           |         |
| mobile    | mobile    | mobile    | US254     | US254     |         |
|           |           |           | US334     | US334     |         |
| Space     | SPACE     | Space     |           | NG144     |         |
| research  | RESEARCH  | research  |           |           |         |
| (passive) |           | (passive) |           |           |         |
|           | (passive) |           |           |           |         |
| 5.522A    |           | 5.522A    |           |           |         |
| 5.522C    | 5.222A    |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 18.8-19.3 |           |           | 18.8-20.2 | 18.8-19.3 |         |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
| FIXED     |           |           | FIXED-    | FIXED-    |         |
|           |           |           | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |         |
| FIXED-    |           |           |           |           |         |
| SATELLITE |           |           | (space-   | (space-   |         |
| (space-   |           |           | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |         |
| to-Earth) |           |           | G117      | NG165     |         |
| 5.523A    |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | US334     |         |
| MOBILE    |           |           |           | NG144     |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 19.3-19.7 |           |           |           | 19.3-19.7 | Sa      |
|           |           |           |           |           | tellite |
| FIXED     |           |           |           | FIXED     |         |
|           |           |           |           |           | Communi |
| FIXED-    |           |           |           | FIXED-    | cations |
| SATELLITE |           |           |           | SATELLITE | (25)    |
| (space-   |           |           |           | (space-   |         |
| to-Earth) |           |           |           |           | Au      |
| (Ear      |           |           |           | to-Earth) | xiliary |
| th-space) |           |           |           | NG166     | Bro     |
| 5.523B    |           |           |           |           | adcast. |
| 5.523C    |           |           |           | US334     | (74)    |
| 5.523D    |           |           |           | NG144     |         |
| 5.523E    |           |           |           |           | Cable   |
|           |           |           |           |           | TV      |
| MOBILE    |           |           |           |           | Relay   |
|           |           |           |           |           | (78)    |
|           |           |           |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           |           | Fixed   |
|           |           |           |           |           | Mi      |
|           |           |           |           |           | crowave |
|           |           |           |           |           | (101)   |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| 19.7-20.1 | 19.7-20.1 | 19.7-20.1 |           | 19.7-20.1 | Sa      |
|           |           |           |           |           | tellite |
| FIXED-    | FIXED-    | FIXED-    |           | FIXED-    |         |
| SATELLITE | SATELLITE | SATELLITE |           | SATELLITE | Communi |
|           |           |           |           |           | cations |
| (space-   | (space-   | (space-   |           | (space-   | (25)    |
| to-Earth) | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |           | to-Earth) |         |
| 5.484A    | 5.484A    | 5.484A    |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | MOBILE-   |         |
| Mobile-   | MOBILE-   | Mobile-   |           | SATELLITE |         |
| satellite | SATELLITE | satellite |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | (space-   |         |
| (space-   | (space-   | (space-   |           | to-Earth) |         |
| to-Earth) | to-Earth) | to-Earth) |           |           |         |
|           |           |           |           | 5.525     |         |
| 5.524     | 5.524     | 5.524     |           | 5.526     |         |
|           | 5.525     |           |           | 5.527     |         |
|           | 5.526     |           |           | 5.528     |         |
|           | 5.527     |           |           | 5.529     |         |
|           | 5.528     |           |           | US334     |         |
|           | 5.529     |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+

\* \* \* \* \*

**NON-FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (NG) FOOTNOTES**

\* \* \* \* \*

NG144 Stations authorized as of September 9, 1983 to use frequencies in
the bands 17.7-18.3 GHz and 19.3-19.7 GHz may, upon proper application,
continue operations. Fixed stations authorized in the 18.3-19.3 GHz band
that remain co-primary under the provisions of 47 C.F.R. §§ 21.901(e),
74.502(c), 74.602(g), 78.18(a)(4), and 101.147(r) of this chapter may
continue operations consistent with the provisions of those sections.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 21 \-- DOMESTIC PUBLIC FIXED RADIO SERVICES**

2.  Section 21.901 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 21.901 Frequencies.**

\(e\) Frequencies in the band segments 18,580-18,820 MHz and
18,920-19,160 MHz that were licensed or had applications pending before
the Commission as of September 18, 1998 may continue those operations
for point-to-point return links from a subscriber\'s location on a
shared co-primary basis with other services under parts 25, 74, 78 and
101 of this chapter until June 8, 2010. Prior to June 8, 2010, such
stations are subject to relocation by licensees in the fixed-satellite
service. Such relocation is subject to the provisions of §§ 101.85
through 101.97 of this chapter. After June 8, 2010, such operations are
not entitled to protection from fixed-satellite service operations and
must not cause unacceptable interference to fixed-satellite service
station operations. No applications for new licenses will be accepted in
these bands after June 8, 2000.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 25\--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS**

3.  The authority citation for Part 25 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 701-744. Interprets or applies sec. 303, 47 U.S.C.
303. 47 U.S.C. sections 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309 and 332, unless
otherwise noted.

4.  Section 25.115 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 25.115 Application for earth station authorizations.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) *Earth stations operating in the 20/30 GHz Fixed-Satellite Service
with U.S.-licensed or non-U.S. licensed satellites:* \* \* \* \* Earth
stations belonging to a network operating in the 18.3-18.8 GHz,
19.7-20.2 GHz, 28.35-28.6 GHz or 29.25-30.0 GHz bands may be licensed on
a blanket basis. \* \* \* \*

5.  Section 25.138 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 25.138 Blanket Licensing Provisions of GSO FSS Earth Stations in the
18.3-18.8 GHz (space-to-Earth), 19.7--20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth),
28.35-28.6 GHz (Earth-to-space), and 29.25--30.0 GHz (Earth-to-space)
bands.**

\(a\) All applications for a blanket earth station license in the GSO
FSS in the 18.3-18.8 GHz, 19.7--20.2 GHz, 28.35-28.6 GHz, and
29.25--30.0 GHz bands that meet the following requirements shall be
routinely processed:

\* \* \* \* \*

6.  Section 25.145 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 25.145 Licensing conditions for the Fixed-Satellite Service in the
20/30 GHz bands**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(h\) Policy governing the relocation of terrestrial services from the
18.3 to 19.3 GHz band: Frequencies in the 18.3-19.3 GHz band listed in
Parts 21, 74, 78, and 101 of this chapter have been reallocated for
primary use by the Fixed-Satellite Service, subject to various
provisions for the existing terrestrial licenses. Fixed-Satellite
Service operations are not entitled to protection from the co-primary
operations until after the period during which terrestrial stations
remain co-primary has expired. (see §§ 21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(g),
78.18(a)(4), and 101.147(r)).

\* \* \* \* \*

7.  Section 25.202(a)(1) is amended to read as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

3.7-4.2^1^ 5.091-5.25^12,14^

6.7-7.025^12^ 5.925-6.425^1^

10.7-10.95^1,12^ 12.75-13.15^1,12^

10.95-11.2^1,2,12^ 13.2125-13.25^1,12^

11.2-11.45^1,12^ 13.75-14^4,12^

11.45-11.7^1,2,12^ 14-14.2^5^

11.7-12.2^3^ 14.2-14.5

12.2-12.7^13^ 15.43-15.63^12,15^

18.3-18.58^1,10,16^ 17.3-17.8^9^

18.58-18.8^6,10,11^ 27.5-29.5^1^

18.8-19.3^7,10^ 29.5-30

19.3-19.7^8,10^ 48.2-50.2

19.7-20.2^10^ \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....

37.6-38.6 \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....

40-41 \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....

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

^1^This band is shared coequally with terrestrial radiocommunication
services.

^2^Use of this band by geostationary satellite orbit satellite systems
in the fixed-satellite service is limited to international systems;
i.e., other than domestic systems.

^3^Fixed-satellite transponders may be used additionally for
transmissions in the broadcasting-satellite service.

^4^This band is shared on an equal basis with the Government
radiolocation service and grandfathered space stations in the Tracking
and Data Relay Satellite System.

^5^In this band, stations in the radionavigation service shall operate
on a secondary basis to the fixed-satellite service.

^6^The band 18.58-18.8 GHz is shared co-equally with existing
terrestrial radiocommunication systems until June 8, 2010.

^7^The band 18.8-19.3 GHz is shared co-equally with terrestrial
radiocommunications services until June 8, 2010, except for operations
in the band 19.26-19.3 GHz and for low power systems operating under
Section 101.147(r)(10), which shall operate on a co-primary basis until
October 31, 2011.

^8^The use of the band 19.3-19.7 GHz by the fixed-satellite service
(space-to-Earth) is limited to feeder links for the mobile-satellite
service.

^9^The use of the band 17.3-17.8 GHz by the Fixed-Satellite Service
(Earth-to-space) is limited to feeder links for the Direct Broadcast
Satellite Service, and the sub-band 17.7-17.8 GHz is shared co-equally
with terrestrial fixed services.

^10^This band is shared co-equally with the Federal Government
fixed-satellite service.

^11^The band 18.6-18.8 GHz is shared co-equally with the non-Federal
Government and Federal Government Earth exploration-satellite (passive)
and space research (passive) services.

^12^Use of this band by non-geostationary satellite orbit systems in the
fixed-satellite service is limited to gateway earth station operations.

^13^Use of this band by the fixed-satellite service is limited to
non-geostationary satellite orbit systems.

^14^ See 47 CFR 2.106, footnotes S5.444A and US344, for conditions that
apply to this band.

^15^ See 47 CFR 2.106, footnotes S5.511C and US359, for conditions that
apply to this band.

^16^ The band 18.3-18.58 GHz is shared co-equally with terrestrial
radiocommunications services until November 19, 2012.

\* \* \* \* \*

8.  Section 25.258 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 25.258 Sharing between NGSO MSS Feeder links Stations and GSO FSS
services in the 29.25-29.5 GHz Bands.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(b\) Licensed GSO FSS systems shall, to the maximum extent possible,
operate with frequency/polarization selections, in the vicinity of
operational or planned NGSO MSS feeder link earth station complexes,
that will minimize instances of unacceptable interference to the GSO FSS
space stations. Earth station licensees operating with GSO FSS systems
shall be capable of providing earth station locations to support
coordination of NGSO MSS feeder link stations under paragraphs (a) and
(d) of this section. Operation of ubiquitously deployed GSO FSS earth
stations in the 29.25-29.5 GHz frequency band shall conform to the rules
contained in Section 25.138.

\* \* \* \* \*

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

**DISTRIBUTIONAL SERVICES**

9.  The authority citation for Part 74 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 4, 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1066, 1032; 47 U.S.C.
158, 303

10. Section 74.502 of our rules is amended to read as follows:

**§ 74.502 Frequency assignment.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(c\) Aural broadcast STL and intercity relay stations that were
licensed or had applications pending before the Commission as of
September 18, 1998 may continue those operations in the band
18,760-18,820 and 19,100-19,160 MHz on a shared co-primary basis with
other services under parts 21, 25, and 101 of this chapter until June 8,
2010. Prior to June 8, 2010, such stations are subject to relocation by
licensees in the fixed-satellite service. Such relocation is subject to
the provisions of §§ 101.85 through 101.97 of this chapter. After June
8, 2010, such operations are not entitled to protection from fixed-
satellite service operations and must not cause unacceptable
interference to fixed-satellite service station operations. No
applications for new licenses will be accepted in these bands after June
8, 2000.

\* \* \* \* \*

11. Section 74.551(d) of our rules is modified to read as follows:

**§  74.551**  **Equipment changes.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the bands
18.3-18.58, 18.76-18.82 GHz and 19.1-19.16 GHz. Notwithstanding other
provisions of this section, licensees of stations that remain co-primary
under the provisions of §  74.502(c) may not make modifications to their
systems that increase interference to satellite earth stations, or
result in a facility that would be more costly to relocate.

\* \* \* \* \*

12. Section 74.602 of our rules is amended to read as follows:

**§ 74.602 Frequency assignment.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(g\) The following frequencies are available for assignment to
television STL, television relay stations and television translator
relay stations. Stations operating on frequencies in the sub-bands
18.3-18.58 GHz and 19.26-19.3 GHz that were licensed or had applications
pending before the Commission as of September 18, 1998 may continue
those operations on a shared co-primary basis with other services under
parts 21, 25, 78, and 101 of this chapter. Such stations, however, are
subject to relocation by licensees in the fixed-satellite service. Such
relocation is subject to the provisions of §§ 101.85 through 101.97 of
this chapter. No new applications for new licenses will be accepted in
the 19.26-19.3 GHz band after June 8, 2000, and no new applications for
new licenses will be accepted in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band after November
19, 2002. The provisions of § 74.604 do not apply to the use of these
frequencies. Licensees may use either a two-way link or one or both
frequencies of a frequency pair for a one-way link and shall coordinate
proposed operations pursuant to procedures required in § 101.103(d) of
this chapter.

\* \* \* \* \*

13. Section 74.651(d) of our rules is modified to read as follows:

**§  74.551**  **Equipment changes.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(e\) Permissible changes in equipment operating in the bands 18.3-18.58
GHz and 19.26-19.3 GHz. Notwithstanding other provisions of this
section, licensees of stations that remain co-primary under the
provisions of § 74.602(g) may not make modifications to their systems
that increase interference to satellite earth stations, or result in a
facility that would be more costly to relocate.

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 78\--CABLE TELEVISION RELAY SERVICE**

14. The authority citation for Part 78 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: Secs. 4(i), 301 and 303(r), Federal Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 4(i), 301 and 303(r))

15. Section 78.18 of our rules is amended as follows:

**§ 78.18 Frequency assignments.**

\(a\) \* \* \* \*

\(4\) The Cable Television Relay Service is also assigned the following
frequencies in the 17,700-19,700 MHz band. These frequencies are
co-equally shared with stations in other services under parts 25, 74,
and 101 of this chapter. Cable Television Relay Service stations
operating on frequencies in the sub-bands 18.3-18.58 GHz and 19.26-19.3
GHz that were licensed or had applications pending before the Commission
as of September 18, 1998 may continue those operations on a shared
co-primary basis with other services under parts 25, 74, and 101 of this
chapter. Such stations, however, are subject to relocation by licensees
in the fixed-satellite service. Such relocation is subject to the
provisions of §§ 101.85 through 101.97 of this chapter. No new
applications for part 78 licenses will be accepted in the 19.26-19.3 GHz
band after June 8, 2000, and no new applications for part 78 licenses
will be accepted in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band after November 19, 2002.

\* \* \* \* \*

16. Section 78.109 of our rules is amended as follows:

**§ 78.109**  **Equipment changes.**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(d\) *Permissible changes in equipment operating in the bands
18.3-18.58 GHz and 19.26-19.3 GHz.* Notwithstanding other provisions of
this section, licensees of stations that remain co-primary under the
provisions of § 78.18(a)(4) may not make modifications to their systems
that increase interference to satellite earth stations, or result in a
facility that would be more costly to relocate, unless the modifications
are needed as a result of a Commission requirement..

\* \* \* \* \*

**PART 101---FIXED MICROWAVE SERVICES**

The authority citation for Part 101 continues to read as follows:

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, and 303.

17. Section 101.83 of our rules is amended as follows:

**§  101.83**  **Modification of station license.**

Permissible changes in equipment operating in the band 18.3-19.3 GHz:
Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, stations that remain
co-primary under the provisions of § 101.147(r) may not make
modifications to their systems that increase interference to satellite
earth stations, or result in a facility that would be more costly to
relocate.

\* \* \* \* \*

18. Section 101.85 of our rules is amended as follows:

**§ 101.85 Transition of the 18.3-19.3 GHz band from the terrestrial
fixed services to the fixed-satellite service (FSS).**\
\
Fixed services (FS) frequencies in the 18.3-19.3 GHz bands listed in §§
21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(g), and 78.18(a)(4) and § 101.147(a) and
(r) of this chapter have been allocated for use by the fixed-satellite
service (FSS). The rules in this section provide for a transition period
during which FSS licensees may relocate existing FS licensees using
these frequencies to other frequency bands, media or facilities.\

\(a\) FSS licensees may negotiate with FS licensees authorized to use
frequencies in the 18.3-19.30 GHz bands for the purpose of agreeing to
terms under which the FS licensees would:\
(1) Relocate their operations to other frequency bands, media or
facilities; or alternatively

\(2\) Accept a sharing arrangement with the FSS licensee that may result
in an otherwise impermissible level of interference to the FSS
operations.

\(b\) (1) FS operations in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band that remain
co-primary under the provisions of §§ 21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(d),
78.18(a)(4) and § 101.147(r) of this chapter will continue to be
co-primary with the FSS users of this spectrum until November 19, 2012
or until the relocation of the fixed service operations, whichever
occurs sooner.

\(2\) FS operations in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band that remain co-primary
under the provisions of §§ 21.901(e), 74.502(c), 74.602(d), 78.18(a)(4)
and § 101.147(r) of this chapter will continue to be co-primary with the
FSS users of this spectrum until June 8, 2010 or until the relocation of
the fixed service operations, whichever occurs sooner, except for
operations in the band 19.26-19.3 GHz and low power systems operating
pursuant to § 101.47(r)(10), which shall operate on a co-primary basis
until October 31, 2011.

\(3\) If no agreement is reached during the negotiations pursuant to §
101.85(a), an FSS licensee may initiate relocation procedures. Under the
relocation procedures, the incumbent is required to relocate, provided
that the FSS licensee meets the conditions of § 101.91.

\* \* \* \* \*

19. Section 101.147(r) is amended to read as follows:

**§ 101.147 Frequency assignments**

\* \* \* \* \*

\(r\) *17,700 to 19,700 and 24,250 to 25,250 MHz*: Operation of stations
using frequencies in these bands is permitted to the extent specified
below.

> \(i\) Until November 19, 2012, stations operating in the band
> 18.3-18.58 GHz that were licensed or had applications pending before
> the Commission as of November 19, 2002 shall operate on a shared
> co-primary basis with other services under Parts 21, 25, and 74 of the
> Commission\'s rules;
>
> \(ii\) Until October 31, 2011, operations in the band 19.26-19.3 GHz
> and low power systems operating pursuant to section 101.47(r)(10)
> shall operate on a co-primary basis;
>
> \(iii\) Until June 8, 2010, stations operating in the band 18.58-18.8
> GHz that were licensed or had applications pending before the
> Commission as of June 8, 2000 may continue those operations on a
> shared co-primary basis with other services under Parts 21, 25, and 74
> of the Commission\'s rules;
>
> \(iv\) Until June 8, 2010, stations operating in the band 18.8-19.3
> GHz that were licensed or had applications pending before the
> Commission as of September 18, 1998 may continue those operations on a
> shared co-primary basis with other services under Parts 21, 25, and 74
> of the Commission\'s rules;
>
> \(v\) After November 19, 2012, stations operating in the band
> 18.3-18.58 GHz are not entitled to protection from fixed-satellite
> service operations and must not cause unacceptable interference to
> fixed-satellite service station operations.
>
> \(vi\) After June 8, 2010, operations in the 18.58-19.30 GHz band are
> not entitled to protection from fixed-satellite service operations and
> must not cause unacceptable interference to fixed-satellite service
> station operations.
>
> \(vii\) After November 19, 2002, no new applications for Part 101
> licenses will be accepted in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.
>
> \(viii\) After June 8, 2000, no new applications for Part 101 licenses
> will be accepted in the 18.58-19.3 GHz band.
>
> \(ix\) Licensees may use either a two-way link or one frequency of a
> frequency pair for a one-way link and must coordinate proposed
> operations pursuant to the procedures required in Sec. 101.103. (Note,
> however, that stations authorized as of September 9, 1983, to use
> frequencies in the band 17.7-19.7 GHz may, upon proper application,
> continue to be authorized for such operations, consistent with the
> above conditions related to the 18.58-19.3 GHz band.)

\* \* \* \* \*

**APPENDIX B:**

# Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis {#final-regulatory-flexibility-analysis .unnumbered}

1.  As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),[^112] an
    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible
    significant economic impact on small entities was incorporated in
    the *18 GHz Notice*.[^113] The Commission sought written public
    comments on the proposals in the *18 GHz Notice*, including comment
    on the IRFA. In its *18 GHz Order*, the Commission concluded that
    the rules adopted in that Order would not, under the RFA, affect
    small entities disproportionately.[^114] Many of the rules adopted
    in the *18 GHz Order* pertained to entities, such as licensees of
    geostationary and non-geostationary space stations, which, because
    of their size, do not qualify as small entities. While a few of the
    rules adopted concerned terrestrial facilities, such as microwave
    services, which qualify as small entities because of their size, the
    Commission concluded that "procedures do not affect small entities
    disproportionately and it is likely no additional outside
    professional skills are required to complete the annual report
    indicating the number of small antenna earth stations actually
    brought into service."[^115] We received no petitions for
    reconsideration of that Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

2.  Subsequently, the Commission addressed issues unrelated to its RFA
    analysis in its *First Order on Reconsideration*. The *First Order
    on Reconsideration* altered several previously adopted rules,
    including changing the power flux density value for the 18.3-18.8
    GHz frequency band and extending the same ten-year comparable
    facilities relocation policy to all FS operations in the 18 GHz
    band. The *First Order on Reconsideration* also decided no longer to
    require the use of the Legacy List coordination process. Finally,
    the Commission considered the impact of it rule changes on small
    entities and concluded that the rules adopted would not, under the
    RFA, affect small entities disproportionately.[^116]

3.  In this *Second Order on Reconsideration*, we address issues
    unrelated to earlier RFA analysis and promulgate additional final
    rules. This additional Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
    conforms to the RFA.[^117]

## Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules

4.  This *Second Order on Reconsideration* grants, in part, a Petition
    for Reconsideration filed in this proceeding by the Hughes
    Electronics Corporation (Hughes). This Order also denies a Petition
    for Reconsideration filed by the Satellite Industry Association
    (SIA) filed against the *First Order on Reconsideration*.[^118] In
    response to the *Hughes Reconsideration Petition*, the Commission
    alters the 18 GHz band plan to make the fixed-satellite service
    (FSS) the sole primary spectrum allocation in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band. The Commission's actions recognize the increased number of
    frequency spectrum options that the Commission has recently made
    available to licensees in the terrestrial fixed service (FS), the
    other primary service currently located in the 18.3-18.58 GHz
    band.[^119] The Commission also allows the blanket licensing of GSO
    FSS facilities in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band and 29.25-29.5 GHz bands
    and -- consistent with the band clearing procedures that we have
    adopted in other portions of the frequency spectrum -- the
    Commission adopts provisions designed to ensure the orderly
    migration and timely reimbursement of terrestrial FS incumbents in
    the 18.3-18.58 GHz band. These changes to the Commission's rules
    will help promote the efficient use of spectrum for existing and
    future users.

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

5.  No comments were submitted in direct response to the IRFA.

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

6.  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 adopted rules.[^120] The RFA generally defines the
    term \"small entity\" as having the same meaning as the terms
    \"small business,\" \"small organization,\" and \"small governmental
    jurisdiction.\"[^121] In addition, the term \"small business\" has
    the same meaning as the term \"small business concern\" under the
    Small Business Act.[^122] 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).[^123] A
    small organization is generally \"any not-for- profit enterprise
    which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its
    field.\"[^124] Nationwide, as of 1992, there were approximately
    275,801 small organizations.[^125] \"Small governmental
    jurisdiction\" generally means \"governments of cities, counties,
    towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts,
    with a population of less than 50,000.\"[^126] As of 1992, there
    were approximately 85,006 such jurisdictions in the United
    States.[^127] This number includes 38,978 counties, cities, and
    towns; of these, 37,566, or 96 percent, have populations of fewer
    than 50,000.[^128] The Census Bureau estimates that this ratio is
    approximately accurate for all governmental entities. Thus, of the
    85,006 governmental entities, we estimate that 81,600 (91 percent)
    are small entities. Below, we further describe and estimate the
    number of small entity licensees that may be affected by the adopted
    rules.

***Satellite Telecommunications.*** The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for Satellite Telecommunications Carriers, which
consists of all such companies having \$12.5 million or less in annual
receipts.[^129] In addition, a second SBA size standard for Other
Telecommunications includes "facilities operationally connected with one
or more terrestrial communications systems and capable of transmitting
telecommunications to or receiving telecommunications from satellite
systems," [^130] and also has a size standard of annual receipts of
\$12.5 million or less. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there
were 324 firms in the category Satellite Telecommunications, total, that
operated for the entire year.[^131] Of this total, 273 firms had annual
receipts of \$5 million to \$9,999,999 and an additional 24 firms had
annual receipts of \$10 million to \$24,999,990.[^132] Thus, under this
size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. In
addition, according to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 439 firms
in the category Satellite Telecommunications, total, that operated for
the entire year.[^133] Of this total, 424 firms had annual receipts of
\$5 million to \$9,999,999 and an additional 6 firms had annual receipts
of \$10 million to \$24,999,990.[^134] Thus, under this second size
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.

***Space Stations (Geostationary).*** Commission records reveal that
there are 15 space station licensees. We do not request nor collect
annual revenue information, and thus are unable to estimate of the
number of geostationary space stations that would constitute a small
business under the SBA definition, or apply any rules providing special
consideration for Space Station (Geostationary) licensees that are small
businesses.

***Fixed Satellite Transmit/Receive Earth Stations.*** Currently there
are 10 operational fixed-satellite transmit/receive earth stations
authorized for use in the 18.3-18.58 GHz and 29.25-29.5 GHz bands. We do
not request or collect annual revenue information, and thus are unable
to estimate the number of earth stations that would constitute a small
business under the SBA definition.

***Broadcast Auxiliary Service.*** (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 U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) has developed small business size
standards, as follows: 1) For TV BAS, we will use the size standard for
Television Broadcasting, which consists of all such companies having
annual receipts of no more than \$12.0 million;[^135] 2) For Aural BAS,
we will use the size standard for Radio Stations, which consists of all
such companies having annual receipts of no more than \$6 million;[^136]
3) For Remote Pickup BAS we will use the small business size standard
for Television Broadcasting when used by a TV station and that for Radio
Stations when used by such a station.

According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 906 Television
Broadcasting firms, total that operated for the entire year.[^137] Of
this total, 734 firms had annual receipts of \$9,999,999.00 or less and
an additional 71 had receipts of \$10 million to \$24,999,999.00.[^138]
Thus, under this standard, the majority of firms can be considered
small.

According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 4,476 Radio
Stations (firms), total, that operated for the entire year.[^139] Of
this total 4,265 had annual receipts of \$4,999,999.00 or less, and an
additional 103 firms had receipts of \$5 million to
\$9,999,999.00.[^140] Thus, under this standard, the great majority of
firms can be considered small.

***Fixed Microwave Services.*** (FS) includes common carrier,
private-operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio services.
Presently 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 SBA has developed a small
business size standard for Cellular and other Wireless
Telecommunications, which consists of all such companies having 1,500 or
fewer employees.[^141] According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there
were 977 firms in this category, total, that operated for the entire
year.[^142] Of this total, 965 firms had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and an additional 12 had employment of 1,000 employees or
more.[^143] Thus, under this standard, virtually all firms can be
considered small. Microwave services in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band include
point-to-point Private Cable Operator (PCO) systems, Cable Television
Relay Systems and common carrier systems. Private point-to-point PCO
systems use ninety-eight percent of the operational channels in the
band; Cable Television Relay Systems less than two percent of the
operational channels; and common carrier systems use less than one
percent of the operational channels in the band.

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

7.  The rules adopted in this *Second Order on Reconsideration* involve
    no reporting requirements, and it is likely no additional outside
    professional skills will be necessary to comply with the rules and
    requirements here listed.

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

8.  The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives
    that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may
    include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) the
    establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
    timetables that take into account the resources available to small
    entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
    compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small
    entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards;
    and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof,
    for small entities.[^144] The decisions of this *Second Order on
    Reconsideration* should positively affect both large and small
    businesses by providing a faster, more efficient, and less
    economically burdensome coordination and licensing procedure.

**F. Report to Congress**

9.  The Commission will send a copy of this *Second Order on
    Reconsideration*, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to
    Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, *see* 5 U.S.C. §
    801 (a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the
    *Second Order on Reconsideration*, including this FRFA, to the Chief
    Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of
    this *Second Order on Reconsideration* and FRFA (or summaries
    thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.[^145]

[^1]: *See* Hughes Electronics Corp., *Petition for Partial
    Reconsideration*, IB Docket No. 98-172, RM-9005, RM-9118 (filed,
    Oct. 6, 2000) (*Hughes Reconsideration Petition*), *available at* \<
    [http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/
    retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id\_
    document=6511958976](http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/ retrieve.cgi? native_or_pdf=pdf&id_ document=6511958976)
    \>; Satellite Industry Association, *Petition for Reconsideration*,
    IB Docket No. 98-172 (filed Jan. 7, 2002) (*SIA Reconsideration
    Petition*), *available at* \<[http://gullfoss2.fcc.
    gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=65129
    77790]()\>. The SIA is a national trade association that represents
    U.S. satellite manufacturers, service providers and launch-service
    companies. *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 1.

[^2]: For purposes of this proceeding, we use the "18 GHz band" to refer
    to those frequencies between 17.7 and 19.7 GHz and the term
    "Ka-band" to refer generally to those frequencies between
    approximately 18 and 31 GHz.

[^3]: *Amendment of Eligibility Requirements in Part 78 Regarding 12 GHz
    Cable Television Relay Service*, Report and Order, CS Docket No.
    99-250, FCC No. 02-149, 17 FCC Rcd 9930 (2002) (*CARS Eligibility
    Order*), *available at*
    \<<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-149A1.doc>\>.

[^4]: We note that United States Government geostationary and
    non-geostationary satellite systems in the fixed-satellite service
    are authorized to operate in the 17.8‑20.2 GHz band in accordance
    with footnote US334 in the United States Table of Frequency
    Allocations and that coordination between non‑Government operations,
    both terrestrial and satellite, and these Government operations will
    continue to remain in effect. Nothing in this *Second Order on
    Reconsideration* changes the relationship between Government and
    non-Government systems. *See* *Amendment of Part 2 of the
    Commission's Rules to Allocate Spectrum for the Fixed-Satellite
    Service in the 17.8-20.2 GHz Band for Government Use*, Memorandum
    Opinion and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9931 (1995).

[^5]: *Reallocation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use*, Report and Order, IB Docket
    No. 98-172, 15 FCC Rcd 13430 (2000) (*18 GHz Order*), *aff'd sub
    nom. Teledesic, LLC v. FCC*, 275 F.3d 75 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Typical
    terrestrial FS in the 18 GHz band include point-to-point microwave
    communications, Cable Television Relay Service (CARS), broadcasting
    auxiliary, and electronic newsgathering (ENG) activities.

[^6]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13434-35, ¶¶ 9-10. Until 2000, the
    18 GHz band was allocated as follows: the 17.7-18.8 GHz band for GSO
    FSS and FS co-primary use; the 18.8-19.3 GHz band for NGSO/FSS and
    FS co-primary use; the 19.3-19.7 GHz band for MSS feeder link and FS
    co-primary use; and the 19.7-20.2 GHz band for GSO FSS primary use.
    *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13435, ¶ 10.

[^7]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13435-36, ¶ 11.

[^8]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13446-47, ¶ 35.

[^9]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13447, ¶ 35.

[^10]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13444, ¶ 30.

[^11]: *Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 1.

[^12]: *Reallocation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use*, First Order on
    Reconsideration, 16 FCC Rcd 19808 (2001) (*First Order on
    Reconsideration*). For a comprehensive procedural history of the 18
    GHz proceeding, *see First Order on Reconsideration*, 16 FCC Rcd at
    19810-18, ¶¶ 3-20.

[^13]: *See First Order on Reconsideration,* 16 FCC Rcd at 19816-17, ¶
    15.

[^14]: *See generally Teledesic*, 275 F.3d at 75.

[^15]: *Teledesic*, 275 F.3d at 85.

[^16]: *Teledesic*, 275 F.3d at 84-85.

[^17]: *Teledesic*, 275 F.3d at 85-87.

[^18]: *CARS Eligibility* Order, 17 FCC Rcd at 9930, ¶ 1. For purposes
    of this proceeding, we use the term "12 GHz band" to refer
    specifically to the frequency spectrum between 12.7-13.2 GHz and the
    term "CARS band" to refer collectively to those sections of the
    frequency spectrum between 12.7-13.2 GHz and 17.7-18.3 GHz.

[^19]: Terrestrial FS licenses in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band also are
    generally eligible to obtain licenses for private operational fixed
    point-to-point microwave service (OFS) licenses in the 23 GHz band.
    *See* *CARS Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9937, ¶ 18. While the
    opportunities in the 23 GHz were found to be somewhat limited "for
    transmission of a multitude of video channels," we concluded that
    the 23 GHz OFS band could continue to offer a viable mechanism "for
    transmission of a limited number of video channels and transmission
    of data." *See* *CARS Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9937, ¶ 18.

[^20]: ^.^

[^21]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.106; *Reorganization and Revision of Parts 1,
    2, 21 and 94 of the Rules to Establish a New Part 101 Governing
    Terrestrial Microwave Fixed Radio Services*, Memorandum Opinion and
    Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 3129, 3145 &
    n.97 (denying petitioner's request on grounds that "present\[ed\] no
    new data or arguments in support of its position") (*citing WWIZ,
    Inc.*, 37 FCC 685, 686 (1964), *aff'd sub nom.*, *Lorain Journal Co.
    v. FCC*, 351 F.2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965)); *see also* 47 C.F.R. §
    1.429(c).

[^22]: *Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 6.

[^23]: *Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 6.

[^24]: *Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 6.

[^25]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13447-46, ¶ 36.

[^26]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13447, ¶ 35.

[^27]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13447-46, ¶ 36.

[^28]: *Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 10.

[^29]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13447-46, ¶ 36; *see also FCC v.
    WNCN Listeners Guild*, 450 U.S. 582, 594-95 (1981) ("\[T\]he
    Commission\'s decisions must sometimes rest on judgment and
    prediction rather than pure factual determinations. In such cases
    complete factual support for the Commission's ultimate conclusions
    is not required since 'a forecast of the direction in which future
    public interest lies necessarily involves deductions based on the
    expert knowledge of the agency.'") (citation omitted). We also note
    that Hughes' demand for equitable percentages of unmet spectrum
    needs among competing services might, if credited, add to the
    already considerable incentive for parties to overstate their
    spectrum needs to ensure a larger spectrum allocation for their
    particular service.

[^30]: *See, e.g., Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1, 2, 21, and 25 of the
    Commission's Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band,
    to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to Establish Rules
    and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Service and for Fixed
    Satellite Services*, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 19005, 19029, ¶ 58
    (1996) (recounting comments from multiple parties indicating that
    1000 megahertz of 28 GHz spectrum represents the "minimum amount of
    spectrum needed to operate commercially viable GSO FSS systems" and
    allocating 1000 megahertz of spectrum in the 28 GHz band for this
    purpose with different portions of the available bandwidth subject
    to certain constraints) (*28 GHz Order*).

[^31]: *See, e.g., 28 GHz Order,* 11 FCC Rcd at 19021, ¶ 38.

[^32]: *See, e.g., 18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13446, ¶ 35 ("We
    conclude the proposal \[for a sole primary GSO FSS allocation in
    18.3-18.58 GHz band\] would place in jeopardy the viability of the
    extremely large number of fixed stations, CARS, wireless PCOs and
    other links.") (citation omitted); *id.* ("We also conclude that GSO
    FSS licensees would have a difficult time implementing ubiquitous
    earth stations in this segment due to the large number of
    terrestrial fixed services operating in this band.") (citation
    omitted).

[^33]: *See, e.g., 18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13447, ¶ 35 ("there is
    currently no other spectrum available" for FS systems licensed to
    operate in the 18.3-18.55 GHz band); *id.* ("GE Americom . . . fails
    to recognize that there is no other spectrum available" for private
    cable operators).

[^34]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13450, ¶ 40. While 18 GHz
    terrestrial FS licensees that are not PCOs can be relocated to
    wireline facilities or other alternative media upon displacement
    from the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, *see, e.g., First Order on
    Reconsideration*, 16 FCC Rcd at 19834-35, ¶ 61; *see also* 47 C.F.R.
    § 101.91(b), the Commission's *18 GHz Order* did not directly
    address these alternative media and instead focused on what, if any,
    *wireless* facilities might be available for the relocation of
    existing and planned terrestrial FS operations in the 18 GHz band.
    *See generally 18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13446-47, ¶¶ 35-36.

[^35]: *CARS Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9942, ¶ 31. Prior to our
    adoption of the *CARS Eligibility Order*, MVPDs could not carry
    video in the 17.7-18.142 GHz band.

[^36]: *CARS Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9934, ¶ 10.

[^37]: *CARS Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9942, ¶ 31.

[^38]: *CARS Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9942, ¶ 31 (holding that
    reallocation and relocation issues "would be best addressed in the
    *18 GHz Redesignation* *Proceeding*").

[^39]: Defining a "link" as a single point-to-point or
    point-to-multipoint channel, the Commission identified approximately
    170,000 fixed "links" in the 18.14-18.58 GHz band. *18 GHz Order*,
    15 FCC Rcd at 13446, ¶ 34 & n.68. A subsequent analysis that
    reflects more recent usage and licensing data indicates that
    nationwide there are at most 104,000 "links" in the 18.14-18.58 GHz
    band. Moreover, fewer than 200 licensees transmit over fewer than
    2100 paths in this band.

[^40]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13448, ¶ 36.

[^41]: While we are effecting the relocation only of FS operations in
    the 18.3-18.58 GHz band, such facilities generally integrate
    channels down to 18.14 GHz.

[^42]: The channeling plan for the 18.3-18.58 GHz band provides for
    channels of six megahertz each; therefore, a single PCO facility
    could theoretically place up to 46 channels across the 18.3-18.58
    GHz band. Defining a "link" as one point-to-point channel or one
    point-to-multipoint channel, as was done in the *18 GHz Order*, may
    have presented a misleading estimate of the actual number of
    *facilities* located in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band.

[^43]: We surveyed major cities to better understand the number of
    licensed point-to-point and point-to-multipoint systems. In the
    thirty-two cities surveyed, less than 1500 "paths" existed within
    point-to-multipoint and point-to-point systems that would need to be
    accommodated. For paths within point-to-multipoint systems, up to 72
    channels may be integrated across the entire 18.142 to 18.58 GHz
    band that is authorized for point-to-multipoint operation.

[^44]: The 12.7-13.2 GHz band, for example, currently supports four
    radio services, including CARS, which is the most active user of the
    band. *See Amendment of Parts 2 and 25 of the Commission's Rules to
    Permit Operation of NGSO FSS Systems Co-Frequency with GSO and
    Terrestrial Systems in the Ku-Band Frequency Range*, Memorandum
    Opinion and Order and Second Report and Order, 17 FCC Rcd 9614,
    9633-34, ¶ 52 (2002) (*MVDDS Order*).

[^45]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 101.85(b).

[^46]: In addition to the CARS bands at 12.7-13.2 GHz and at 17.7-18.3
    GHz, incumbent FS licensees in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band not only
    remain eligible to obtain OFS licenses in the 23 GHz band*, see CARS
    Eligibility Order*, 17 FCC Rcd at 9937, ¶ 18, but also continue to
    have recourse to a host of alternative media that may constitute
    "comparable facilities" under our rules, including fiber optic
    cable, or satellite facilities. *See, e.g., First Order on
    Reconsideration*, 16 FCC Rcd at 19834, ¶ 61 (holding that our
    comparable facilities policy permits relocation of wireless
    incumbents to "whatever comparable facilities are available,
    including alternative media," such as fiber optic cable).

[^47]: Specifically, the 29.25-29.50 GHz band is available for shared
    use by the GSO FSS under the Commission's rules for ubiquitous GSO
    FSS earth terminals. *See Rulemaking To Amend Parts 1, 2, 21, and 25
    of the Commission\'s Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz
    Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, to
    Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution
    Service and for Fixed Satellite Services*, Third Report and Order,
    12 FCC Rcd 22310, 22326-27, ¶ 41 (1997).

[^48]: *See 18 GHz Notice*, 13 FCC Rcd at 19943, ¶ 43 (noting that "the
    future deployment of satellite earth stations may be hindered" if
    individual coordination were required for each earth station
    facility and tentatively concluding that individual coordination
    would "add to the cost and time to implement satellite services and
    will adversely affect the ability of the public to receive these new
    satellite services . . ."); *see also id.* at 19954, ¶ 67
    (tentatively concluding that blanket licensing in the GSO FSS and
    NGSO FSS bands serves the public interest because blanket licensing
    would "eliminate delay and undue administrative burden").

[^49]: *See 18 GHz Notice*, 13 FCC Rcd at 19943-44, ¶ 43; *see also
    Establishment of Policies and Service Rules for Non-Geostationary
    Satellite Orbit, Fixed Satellite Service in Ku-Band,* Notice of
    Proposed Rulemaking, 16 FCC Rcd. 9680, 9693, ¶ 46 (2001)
    (recognizing that "blanket licensing may also be the most practical
    and efficient regulation in this service" and proposing "to adopt
    blanket licensing of earth stations in the Ku-Band NGSO FSS, for
    operations in these specific frequency bands").

[^50]: *See* 47 U.S.C. § 301 ("It is the purpose of this Act, among
    other things, to maintain the control of the United States over all
    the channels of radio transmission; and to provide for the use of
    such channels, but not the ownership thereof, by persons for limited
    period of time, under licenses granted by Federal authority . . .");
    *see also Inquiry Concerning the Deployment of Advanced
    Telecommunications Capability to All Americans in a Reasonable and
    Timely Fashion, and Possible Steps to Accelerate Such Deployment
    Pursuant to Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996*,
    Second Report, 15 FCC Rcd 20913, 21011, ¶ 267 (2000) (noting that
    blanket licensing of earth stations can "facilitate mass market
    deployment of the next generation of satellite high-speed service")
    (*Second Section 706 Report*).

[^51]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13471, ¶ 87.

[^52]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13471, ¶ 87.

[^53]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13471, ¶ 87.

[^54]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13473, ¶ 90.

[^55]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13474, ¶ 94; *see also, e.g.,
    Reallocation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket Licensing
    of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and 27.5-30.0 GHz
    Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional Spectrum in the
    17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands for Broadcast
    Satellite-Service Use*, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 13 FCC Rcd
    19923, 19943-44, ¶43 (1998) (*18 GHz Notice*) (announcing a
    tentative conclusion not to implement blanket licensing of earth
    station facilities in shared bands in the 18 GHz range on grounds
    that "\[i\]f blanket licensing were adopted . . ., then . . . large
    areas could be closed to terrestrial fixed service use").

[^56]: *18 GHz Notice,* 13 FCC Rcd at 19944, ¶44 (proposing a blanket
    licensing procedure for GSO FSS earth stations operating in those
    portions of the Ka-band that the Commission proposed to retain or
    allocate as unshared by other services, including the 18.3-18.55 GHz
    band).

[^57]: *See, e.g.,* Appendix A § 101.85(b)(1) (describing the ten-year
    period during which incumbent FS licensees retain co-primary rights
    in the 18.3-18.58 GHz band with FSS earth station licensees).

[^58]: *See, e.g., Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 18.

[^59]: *Hughes Reconsideration Petition* at 7.

[^60]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13475, ¶ 94; *see also* *18 GHz
    Notice,* 13 FCC Rcd at 19952, ¶ 63 ("We note that coordination of
    ubiquitous earth stations with future MSS/FL operations raises
    questions beyond the GSO/FSS-to-GSO/FSS sharing issues raised in
    other band segments. Moreover, we recognize the need to maintain
    access to feeder link spectrum for future mobile satellite systems.
    For these reasons, we propose not to implement blanket licensing in
    the 29.25-29.5 GHz band at this time."). 

[^61]: *See, e.g., Iridium LLC Concerning Use of the 1990-2025/2165-2200
    MHz and Associated Frequency Bands for a Mobile-Satellite System,*
    Order and Authorization, 16 FCC Rcd 13778, 13778 ¶ 2 n.4 (2001)
    (*Iridium Authorization*).

[^62]: The Commission has authorized three NGSO MSS fixed earth stations
    to transmit in the 29.1-29.25 GHz band, but has not authorized any
    NGSO MSS stations to transmit in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band. *See U.S.
    Leo Services, Inc., for a License to Construct and Operate
    Transmit-Receive Gateway Fixed Earth Station Facilities for Use with
    the Iridium System in the 19.4-19.6 GHz and 29.1-29.3 GHz Bands*,
    Order and Authorization, DA No. 96-1790, 11 FCC Rcd 13962 (Int'l
    Bur. 1996) (authorizing the use of the 29.1-29.25 GHz band for
    transmissions from a site in Tempe, Arizona); *Iridium U.S., L.P.,*
    File No. SES-LIC-19960116-01966, Call Sign E960131, *available at*
    <http://dettifoss.fcc.gov/servlet/ib.page.FetchLicense?filing_key=-2099732445>
    (visited, Oct. 3, 2002) (same); *Motorola Satellite Communications,
    Inc., for Licenses to Construct and Operate Transmit-Receive Fixed
    Earth Station Facilities Near Chandler, Arizona and Sunset Beach,
    Hawaii for Use as Part of the System-Control Component of the
    Iridium System, Transmitting in the 29.1-29.3 GHz Band*, Order and
    Authorization, DA-97-229, 12 FCC Rcd 1456 (Int\'l Bur. 1997)
    (authorizing the use of 29.1-29.25 GHz band for transmissions from a
    site near Sunset Beach, Hawaii); *Motorola Satellite Communications,
    Inc.*, File No. SES-LIC-19960412-01429, Call Sign E960272
    \<<http://dettifoss.fcc.gov/servlet/ib.page.FetchLicense?filing_key=-2099744958>\>
    (visited, Oct. 3, 2002) (same); *General Dynamics Satellite
    Communications Services, Inc.*, File No. SES-LIC-19971029-01558,
    Call Sign E980049, *available at*
    \<[http://dettifoss.fcc.gov/servlet/ib.page.Fetch
    License?filing_key=-2099822974](http://dettifoss.fcc.gov/servlet/ib.page.Fetch License?filing_key=-2099822974)\>
    (authorizing the use of 29.1-29.25 GHz band for transmissions from a
    site in Hawaii) (visited, Oct. 3, 2002). NGSO MSS earth station
    applicant must comply with Sections 25.203(h), 25.203(k) and related
    provisions of our rules to receive authority to operate in the
    29.25-29.5 GHz band. *See, e.g.,* 47 C.F.R. § 25.203(h), 25.203(k)
    (imposing additional technical requirements on NGSO MSS feeder link
    applicants in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band).

[^63]: *See, e.g.,* 47 C.F.R. § 25.250 (restricting the operation of
    NGSO MSS feeder links in the 29.1-29.5 GHz band); 47 C.F.R. § 25.257
    (same); 47 C.F.R. § 101.147(y) (same).

[^64]: In 2001, Boeing and Iridium received authorizations to configure
    their 2 GHz NGSO MSS space stations to communicate with Ka-band
    feeder link earth stations. *See, e.g., Iridium Authorization*, 16
    FCC Rcd at 13782-83, ¶ 11; *Boeing Company Concerning Use of the
    1990-2025/2165-2200 MHz and Associated Frequency Bands for a
    Mobile-Satellite System*, Order and Authorization, 16 FCC Rcd 13691,
    13695-96 ¶ 10-11 (2001) (*Boeing Authorization*). Boeing, however,
    recently applied to reconfigure its authorized 2 GHz MSS space
    stations in a manner that, if granted, would render useless any
    planned NGSO MSS feeder link operations in the Ka-band. *Application
    of Boeing Company for Modification of Authority for Use of the
    1990-2025/2165-2200 MHz and Associated Frequency Bands for a
    Mobile-Satellite System*, File No. SAT-MOD-20020726-00113 (filed,
    July 17, 2002) (pending); *Satellite Space Applications Accepted for
    Filing*, Public Notice, Report No. SAT-00115 (rel., Aug. 1, 2002),
    *available at*
    \<<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-224926A1.pdf>
    \>.

[^65]: *See, e.g.,* 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.258(a)-(d) (describing requirements
    for both NGSO MSS and GSO FSS licensees), 25.203(h) (requiring prior
    coordination and stipulating that "\[s\]ites and frequencies for GSO
    and NGSO earth stations, operating in a frequency band where both
    have a co-primary allocation, shall be selected to avoid earth
    station antenna mainlobe-to-satellite antenna mainlobe coupling . .
    . to minimize the possibility of harmful interference between these
    services."), 25.203(k) ("An applicant for an earth station that will
    operate with a geostationary satellite or non-geostationary
    satellite in a shared frequency band in which the non-geostationary
    system is (or is proposed to be) licensed for feeder links, shall
    demonstrate in its applications that its proposed earth station will
    not cause unacceptable interference to any other satellite network
    that is authorized to operate in the same frequency band ..."); *see
    also, e.g., Rulemaking to Amend Parts 1,2,21 and 25 of the
    Commission\'s Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band,
    to Reallocate the 29.5.30.0 GHz Frequency Band,* Memorandum Opinion
    and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 11436 (2001) (clarifying provisions concerning
    inter-system sharing in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band).

[^66]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.258(b) ("Licensed GSO FSS systems shall, to
    the maximum extent possible, operate with frequency/polarization
    selections, in the vicinity of operational or planned NGSO MSS
    feeder link earth station complexes, that will minimize instances of
    unacceptable interference to the GSO FSS space stations").

[^67]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.138.

[^68]: *See* 25.145(g)(4) (requiring licensees to "submit to the
    Commission a yearly report indicating the number of earth stations
    actually brought into service under its blanket licensing
    authority"); *see also 18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13472, ¶ 89
    (adopting requirement that GSO FSS licensees "include the number of
    earth stations actually brought into service in a yearly report to
    the Commission").

[^69]: *See* Appendix A.

[^70]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 101.4(a) ("All systems subject to parts 21 and
    94 of this chapter in effect as of July 31, 1996 . . . are subject
    to the requirements under part 21 or part 94 of this chapter as
    contained in the CFR edition revised as of October 1, 1995 and
    amended in the Federal Register through July 31, 1996, as
    applicable, indefinitely."); *Reorganization and Revision of Parts
    1, 2, 21, and 94 of the Rules to Establish a New Part 101 Governing
    Terrestrial Microwave Fixed Radio Services*, Report and Order, 11
    FCC Rcd 13449, 13477-78, ¶ 81 (1996) (discussing transition plan for
    incumbent service providers). Of the active fixed licenses in the
    29.25-29.5 GHz band listed in our Universal Licensing System (ULS),
    twenty-four are common carrier point-to-point microwave licenses and
    four are local television (pick-up/relay) licenses. *See*
    [http://wtbwww05.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/UlsQueryLic/UlsQueryLic.exe?
    FNC=goto_query_type\_\_Ahome_html](http://wtbwww05.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/UlsQueryLic/UlsQueryLic.exe?FNC=goto_query_type__Ahome_html)
    (Sept. 24, 2002). All but one license permits only temporary fixed
    operations that do not specify a particular geographic location, may
    not operate for more than six consecutive months at any one location
    and do not operate at all times; however, each license requires
    coordination with other licensed stations prior to operation. *See*
    47 C.F.R. § 21.707 (1995).

[^71]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 101.4 (incorporating by reference 47 C.F.R. §§
    21.1-21.961, 94.1-94.165 (1995)).

[^72]: *See* <http://wtbwww05.fcc.gov/default.sph/UlsQueryLic.exe>
    (Sept. 24, 2002); 47 C.F.R. § 21.707(a)(3) (1995) (limiting a
    temporary fixed station authorized under former Part 21 of our rules
    to "a remote point where the provision of wire facilities is not
    practicable"). After coordination and notification to the
    Commission, legacy Part 21 licensees may deploy more than one
    temporary fixed station within their authorized area. *See, e.g.,*
    47 C.F.R. §§ 21.708(a)-(c) (1995) (requiring legacy Part 21
    temporary fixed licensees to notify Commission of all temporary
    fixed service operations in the band by providing the Commission
    with the exact frequency to be used, the location of the
    transmitter, the commencement and anticipated termination dates of
    service, and other pertinent information).

[^73]: Due to the limited number of the legacy terrestrial licensees,
    the temporary nature of their operations, and the large amount of
    available authorized bandwidth, we anticipate that private
    arrangements among the GSO FSS operators and the terrestrial
    licensees in the 29.25-29.5 GHz band can protect terrestrial
    operations without the need for formal frequency coordination.

[^74]: *See* 47 C.F.R §§ 101.69, 101.71.

[^75]: A terrestrial user contacted by a satellite user may not refuse
    to negotiate and all parties are required to negotiate in good
    faith. 47 C.F.R § 101.89(b). In deciding whether the parties have
    negotiated in good faith, the Commission considers factors including
    whether the satellite operator has made a *bona fide* offer of
    relocation and whether, if the terrestrial user demanded a premium,
    the premium was proportionate to the cost of providing comparable
    facilities. *Id*. "Comparable facilities" are defined in terms of
    "throughput" or capacity, reliability, and operating costs. *Id*. §
    101.89(d).

[^76]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13469, ¶ 81.

[^77]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13469-70, ¶ 82.

[^78]: Relocation costs that FSS licensees must pay include: all
    engineering, equipment, site and FCC fees, and any legitimate and
    prudent transaction expenses incurred by the terrestrial licensee
    that are directly attributable to an involuntary relocation (subject
    to a cap of 2% of the associated "hard costs," which are defined as
    the "actual costs associated with providing a replacement system").
    *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13469, ¶ 82 n.165; 47 C.F.R. §
    101.91(a)(1). FSS licensees are not responsible for transaction
    costs incurred during the negotiation period or for fees that cannot
    be tied legitimately to the provision of comparable facilities. *18
    GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13469, ¶ 82 n.165; 47 C.F.R. §
    101.91(a)(1).

[^79]: These include all engineering and cost analyses of the relocation
    procedure and, identifying and obtaining, on the incumbent's behalf,
    new microwave frequencies and frequency coordination. *See* 47
    C.F.R. § 101.75(a)(2).

[^80]: Replacement systems for involuntarily relocated facilities must
    be at least equivalent to the existing facility with respect to
    throughput, reliability, and operating costs. *See* 47 C.F.R. §
    101.89(d).

[^81]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13469, ¶ 82; *First Order on
    Reconsideration*, 16 FCC Rcd at 19838, ¶ 70.

[^82]: *18 GHz Order,* 15 FCC Rcd at 13470, ¶ 82.

[^83]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13470, ¶ 82.

[^84]: For a discussion of the *Teledesic* decision, *see infra* ¶¶
    30--31.

[^85]: We note that, while our comparable facilities policy seeks to be
    technology neutral and permits the new entrant to provide any
    *comparable* facility to the displaced incumbent, our policies do
    not require the displaced incumbent to accept a material change in
    its regulatory classification, such as a change in regulatory
    classification from a PCO to a cable operator, as a result of the
    relocation.

[^86]: *See infra* Appendix A. As modified, Sections 21.901(e),
    74.502(c), 74.602(g), 78.18(a)(4), and 101.147(r)(viii) implement
    the precise holding of the *18 GHz Order* by providing that no
    applications for new licenses will be accepted for filing in the
    18.58-18.82 and 18.92-19.16 GHz bands. *Compare 18 GHz Order*, 15
    FCC Rcd at 13462, ¶¶ 65-66 (providing that no new *applications* for
    licenses will be accepted in the relevant bands after the Order's
    adoption), *with* 47 C.F.R. §§ 21.901(e)(2), 74.502(c)(2),
    74.602(g), 78.18(a)(4), 74.502(c)(2) and 101.147(r)(viii)(2002)
    (providing that no new *licenses* will be granted in the relevant
    bands after the Order's adoption).

[^87]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 1.

[^88]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 3.

[^89]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 3.

[^90]: *See SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 4 ("Of course, speed is not
    the only policy goal the Commission has articulated. The Commission
    has been concerned first and foremost with ensuring that involuntary
    relocation does not force FS operators to discontinue service.").

[^91]: *See First Order on Reconsideration,* 16 FCC Rcd at 19841, ¶ 77;
    *see also, e.g.,* 47 U.S.C. § 151 (charging the Commission with
    "mak\[ing\] available, so far as possible, to all the people of the
    United States . . . a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide
    wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at
    reasonable charges").

[^92]: *See, e.g., 18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13467, ¶ 76 ("It is a
    central aspect of our decisions in this proceeding that stations in
    the new primary service must be able to establish their operations
    without significant interference from existing stations of any other
    service").

[^93]: *See, e.g., First Order on Reconsideration,* 16 FCC Rcd at 19833,
    ¶ 58 ("We conclude that in the *18 GHz Order*, the Commission
    properly invoked the policy of preventing spectrum warehousing and
    promoting more efficient use of the spectrum by incumbents and new
    entrants alike by compensating incumbents only for the spectrum that
    they are actually using at the time of the relocation") (citing *18
    GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13437, ¶ 14 n.27).

[^94]: *See, e.g., First Order on Reconsideration,* 16 FCC Rcd at 19840,
    ¶ 75 ("we find that new entrants benefit from our policy of seeking
    to ensure that incumbents have every possible reasonable incentive
    to relocate promptly and voluntarily").

[^95]: In the *18 GHz Notice*, for example, the Commission noted that it
    had addressed the same question in earlier proceedings and asked
    commenters to discuss whether the principles adopted in the earlier
    proceedings should apply to this band. *18 GHz Notice,* 13 FCC Rcd
    at 19942-43, ¶ 41 & nn.65-66 (citing *Redevelopment of Spectrum to
    Encourage Innovation in the Use of New Telecommunications
    Technologies*, First Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed
    Rule Making, 7 FCC Rcd 6886 (1992); Second Report and Order, 8 FCC
    Rcd 6495 (1993); Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and
    Order, 8 FCC Rcd 6589 (1993); Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 FCC
    Rcd 1943 (1994); Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 7797
    (1994) (*Second Emerging Technologies Memorandum Order*); *Amendment
    of Section 2.106 of the Commission\'s Rules to Allocate Spectrum at
    2 GHz for Use by the Mobile-Satellite Service*, First Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 12 FCC Rcd 7388,
    7396-7404, 7414-21 (1997)).

[^96]: *See, e.g., 18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13468, ¶ 78 (rejecting a
    proposal to base relocation expenses on the un-amortized cost of the
    replaced equipment); *First Order on Reconsideration,* 16 FCC Rcd at
    19841, ¶ 77 (rejecting a proposal to base relocation expenses on
    un-amortized costs on grounds that "anything less will discourage
    incumbents from relocating").

[^97]: *Teledesic, LLC v. FCC*, 275 F.3d at 78.

[^98]: *See, e.g., Teledesic,* 275 F.3d at 85 ("Teledesic\'s contentions
    fail because the Commission adequately explained both the rationale
    underlying its chosen approach, as well as its reasons for rejecting
    Teledesic\'s proposed alternative.")

[^99]: *Teledesic,* 275 F.3d at 86 (*citing Hall v. McLaughlin*, 864
    F.2d 868, 872 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (holding that where an agency is
    following established policy, the need for a comprehensive statement
    of its rationale is less pressing)).

[^100]: *Teledesic,* 275 F.3d at 87.

[^101]: *First Order on Reconsideration*, 16 FCC Rcd at 19842-43, ¶ 80.

[^102]: We affirmed this conclusion once before. *See First Order on
    Reconsideration*, 16 FCC Rcd at 19840, ¶ 76 (holding that "the
    relocation rules in the *18 GHz Order* struck the correct balance
    between the new entrants' immediate need for spectrum and the need
    of the incumbents to cover the costs associated with early move out
    of the band . . . . by providing a framework that encouraged
    voluntary negotiations between the parties"). We remind parties that
    Section 1.106 of our rules provides that a "petition for
    reconsideration of an order which has been previously denied on
    reconsideration may be dismissed by the staff as repetitious." *See*
    47 C.F.R. § 1.106(k)(iii).

[^103]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 7.

[^104]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 7.

[^105]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 7.

[^106]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 7.

[^107]: *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 7.

[^108]: *See Redevelopment of Spectrum to Encourage Innovation in the
    Use of New Telecommunications* Technologies, First Report and Order
    and Third Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 7 FCC Rcd 6886, 6890, ¶ 24
    (1992) ("If within one year after the new facilities are in
    operation, they are demonstrated by the \[displaced incumbent\] to
    be not comparable to the former facilities, the emerging technology
    service provider must remedy any deficiencies or pay to relocate the
    \[displaced incumbent\] back to the former 2 GHz frequencies.").

[^109]: Seasonal variations in precipitation and foliage density affect
    the propagation of radio waves in this band. At other frequencies,
    seasonal variations in atmospheric ionization, which result from the
    varying distance of the sun to certain areas of the earth, can also
    affect the propagation of radio waves. *See generally, e.g.,*
    Federation of American Scientists, *Radio Frequency Communication* §
    3-1, *available at* \< [http://www.fas.org/spp/military/
    docops/afwa/U3.html](http://www.fas.org/spp/military/ docops/afwa/U3.html)
    \> (visited June 10, 2002).

[^110]: *Second Emerging Technologies Memorandum Order*, 9 FCC Rcd at
    7800, ¶ 22 ("Incumbents will have one year to test their new
    facilities to ensure that they are equivalent in every respect to
    their original facilities."); *see also* *Redevelopment of Spectrum
    to Encourage Innovation in the Use of New Telecommunications
    Technologies*, First Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed
    Rule Making, 7 FCC Rcd 6886, 6890, ¶ 24 (1992) (providing that
    "\[i\]f within one year after the new facilities are in operation,
    they are demonstrated by the \[displaced incumbent\] licensee to be
    not comparable to the former facilities, the \[new entrant\] must
    remedy any deficiencies or pay to relocate the \[incumbent\]
    licensee back to the former . . . frequencies"); *see also* 47
    U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)) (providing that, if, within one year after
    relocation, a Government entity demonstrates to the Commission that
    its new facilities are not comparable to the facilities or spectrum
    from which it was relocated, the new licensee must take reasonable
    steps to remedy any defects of the new facilities, or must pay the
    Government entity for costs incurred to relocate back to its
    original facilities or frequencies").

[^111]: *Creation of Low Power Radio Service*, 15 FCC Rcd 19208, 19234,
    ¶ 65 (2000) ("Any interference caused by the LPFM station should be
    detectable within one year after it commences operation. The
    one-year cure period is similar to the technical requirement that
    each FM permittee resolve at its sole expense all blanketing
    interference complaints for a one-year period beginning with the
    commencement of program tests."); *see also, e.g.*, *MVDDS Order*,
    17 FCC Rcd at 9655, ¶ 93 ("If a DBS provider or customer of record
    lodges a complaint regarding service within one year after MVDDS
    commences operation, the MVDDS licensees must correct interference
    to that customer or cease operation if it is demonstrated that the
    customer is receiving harmful interference from the MVDDS system or
    that the MVDDS signal exceeds the permitted EPFD level at the
    customer location. ").

[^112]: *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).

[^113]: *See Reallocation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use*, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
    IB Docket No. 98-172, 13 FCC Rcd 19923 (1998) (*18 GHz Notice*).

[^114]: 5 U.S.C. § 605(b); *see 18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13514.

[^115]: *18 GHz Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 13514.

[^116]: 5 U.S.C. § 605(b); *see First Order on Reconsideration,* 16 FCC
    Rcd at 19855.

[^117]: 5 U.S.C. § 604.

[^118]: *See* Hughes Electronics Corp., *Petition for Partial
    Reconsideration*, IB Docket No. 98-172, RM-9005, RM-9118 (filed,
    Oct. 6, 2000) (*Hughes Reconsideration Petition*), *available at* \<
    [http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/
    retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id\_
    document=6511958976](http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/ retrieve.cgi? native_or_pdf=pdf&id_ document=6511958976)
    \>; Satellite Industry Association, *Petition for Reconsideration*,
    IB Docket No. 98-172 (filed Jan. 7, 2002) (*SIA Reconsideration
    Petition*), *available at* \<[http://gullfoss2.fcc.
    gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=65129
    77790]()\>. The SIA is a national trade association that represents
    U.S. satellite manufacturers, service providers and launch-service
    companies. *SIA Reconsideration Petition* at 1.

[^119]: *Reallocation of the 17.7-19.7 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket
    Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the 17.7-20.2 GHz and
    27.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Bands, and the Allocation of Additional
    Spectrum in the 17.3-17.8 GHz and 24.75-25.25 GHz Frequency Bands
    for Broadcast Satellite-Service Use*, Report and Order, IB Docket
    No. 98-172, 15 FCC Rcd 13,430 (2000) (*18 GHz Order*), *aff'd sub
    nom. Teledesic, LLC v. FCC*, 275 F.3d 75 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Typical
    terrestrial FS in the 18 GHz band include point-to-point microwave
    communications, Cable Television Relay Service (CARS), auxiliary
    broadcasting and electronic newsgathering (ENG) activities.

[^120]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).

[^121]: *Id.* § 601(6).

[^122]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of
    \"small business concern\" in 15 U.S.C. § 632). Pursuant to the RFA,
    the statutory definition of a small business applies \"unless an
    agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small
    Business Administration and after the opportunity for public
    comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are
    appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such
    definition(s) in the Federal Register.\" 5 U.S.C. § 601(3).

[^123]: Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632 (1996).

[^124]: 5 U.S.C. § 601(4).

[^125]: 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 6
    (special tabulation of data under contract to Office of Advocacy of
    the U.S. Small Business Administration).

[^126]: 5 U.S. C. § 601(5).

[^127]: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, *1992 Census of
    Governments*.

[^128]: *Id.*

[^129]: 13 C.F. R. § 121.201, North American Industry Classification
    System (NAICS) code 517410 (formerly 513340).

[^130]: *Id*. NAICS code 517910 (formerly 513390).

[^131]: U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Receipt Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax:
    1997," Table 4, NAICS code 517410 (issued Oct. 2000).

[^132]: *Id*.

[^133]: U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Receipt Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax:
    1997," Table 4, NAICS code 517910 (issued Oct. 2000).

[^134]: *Id*.

[^135]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 513120.

[^136]: *Id*. at NAICS code 513112.

[^137]: U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Receipts Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income Tax:
    1997," Table 4, NAICS code 513120 (issued Oct. 2000).

[^138]: *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate.

[^139]: *Id.* At NAICS code 513112..

[^140]: *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate.

[^141]: 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 513322.

[^142]: U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series:
    Information, "Employment Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income
    Tax: 1997," Table 5, NAICS code 513310 (issued Oct. 2000).

[^143]: *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate of
    the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer
    employees; the largest category provided is "Firms with 1,000
    employees or more."

[^144]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(c).

[^145]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604(b).