**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the matter of                 | *  | ET Docket No. 98-206         |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Amendment of Parts 2, 25 of the  | ** |                              |
| Commission\'s Rules to Permit    |    |                              |
| Operation of NGSO FSS Systems    | *  |                              |
| Co-Frequency with GSO and        | *) |                              |
| Terrestrial Systems in the       | ** |                              |
| Ku-Band                          |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**SECOND MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER**

**Adopted: February 3, 2003 Released: February 11, 2003**

By the Commission:

# introduction & Executive summary

1.  In this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order ("Second MO&O"), we
    address the Petitions for Reconsideration from Skybridge L.L.C.
    ("Skybridge"); and Hughes Communications, Inc., Hughes
    Communications Galaxy, Inc. and Hughes Network Systems, a division
    of Hughes Electronics Corporation (\"Hughes\") filed in response to
    the *First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule
    Making* ("*First R&O*") in ET Docket No. 98-206.[^1] This proceeding
    addresses, *inter alia*, a request by Skybridge to allow
    non-geostationary orbit ("NGSO") fixed satellite services ("FSS") to
    share various frequencies in the Ku-Band with existing geostationary
    orbit ("GSO") satellite services and terrestrial services.[^2] Our
    action herein addresses aspects of the Skybridge Reconsideration
    Petition relating to NGSO FSS sharing with terrestrial services and
    Federal Government operations, as well as the Hughes Reconsideration
    Petition relating to our radio frequency ("RF") safety rules
    requiring warning labels and recommending professional installation
    for NGSO FSS subscriber antennas. We defer consideration of
    remaining reconsideration issues regarding GSO FSS and NGSO FSS
    sharing raised by Skybridge to a future order.

2.  As discussed below, we deny Hughes' Reconsideration Petition and
    grant in part and deny in part Skybridge's Reconsideration Petition
    Specifically, we make the following determinations in response to
    petitioners' requests for reconsideration:

-   We grant Skybridge's request and amend our Rules to allow, under
    certain conditions, NGSO FSS Earth-to-space ("uplink") operations in
    the 13.15-13.2125 GHz portion of the 12.75-13.25 GHz band. In making
    this change we conclude that NGSO FSS can implement measures to
    protect incumbent broadcast auxiliary service ("BAS") and cable
    television relay service ("CARS") mobile pickup operations from
    harmful interference.[^3]

-   We grant Skybridge's request and state that power flux density
    ("PFD") limits for NGSO FSS in the 10.7-11.7 GHz band are sufficient
    to protect services in the band without the need for individual
    coordination. This ensures incumbent services are protected against
    harmful interference without creating an unnecessary burden on NGSO
    FSS licensees.

-   We grant Skybridge's request and amend our Rules to clarify the
    definition of NGSO FSS earth station gateways to limit use only for
    NGSO FSS backbone support.

-   We grant Skybridge's request and adopt the International
    Telecommunications Union's ("ITU") effective isotropically radiated
    power ("EIRP") limit on federal radiolocation operations in the
    13.75-14.0 GHz band, and permit NGSO FSS operations to claim
    protection from these radiolocation operations.

-   We deny Skybridge's request, maintain the EIRP density limit to
    protect against interference to the National Aeronautics and Space
    Administration ("NASA") tracking data and relay satellite system
    ("TDRSS") operations across the 10 megahertz of the 13.77-13.78 GHz
    band, and deny the request to restrict this protection to only 6
    megahertz.

-   We deny Skybridge's request to require NGSO FSS licensees and radio
    astronomy service ("RAS") entities to use the protection levels and
    calculation methods in the ITU's Article 29.[^4] We will maintain
    the requirement in footnote US355 that NGSO FSS licensees in the
    10.7-11.7 GHz band coordinate with RAS entities to reach "mutually
    acceptable agreements."[^5] This flexible approach will allow the
    use of Article 29 procedures or any other procedure deemed
    appropriate by the interested parties.

-   We deny Hughes's Petition to revisit language in the First R&O
    recommending professional installation of two-way NGSO FSS antennas.
    We continue to find that the language is neither overly broad nor
    unnecessary, and is harmonious with the language of other NGSO FSS
    orders.[^6]

# BACKGROUND

3.  On July 3, 1997, Skybridge requested modification of the
    Commission's Rules to permit NGSO FSS systems to share portions of
    the Ku-Band with various incumbent operations.[^7] On March 6, 1998,
    Northpoint Technology, Ltd. ("Northpoint") filed a Petition for
    Rulemaking to allow the operation of a terrestrial one-way,
    point-to-multipoint fixed service in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band.[^8] On
    November 24, 1998, the Commission responded to the Skybridge and
    Northpoint Petitions for Rulemaking adopting the subject *Notice* to
    address their requests.[^9]

4.  In the *Notice*, the Commission proposed to allow on a co-primary
    basis NGSO FSS gateway downlink operations in the 10.7-11.7 GHz
    band; NGSO FSS gateway uplink operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz,
    13.8-14.0 GHz, and 14.4-14.5 GHz bands; NGSO FSS service downlinks
    in the 11.7-12.7 GHz band; and NGSO FSS service uplinks in the
    14.0-14.5 GHz band.[^10] In addition, the Commission proposed to
    apply the PFD limits adopted at the 1997 World Radiocommunication
    Conference ("WRC-97"), existing coordination procedures and other
    techniques to facilitate sharing between NGSO operations and
    terrestrial services.[^11] It also sought comment on the WRC-97
    provisional equivalent PFD ("EPFD") limits[^12] for NGSO sharing
    with GSO operations and requested thorough analysis concerning the
    adequacy of these limits. The Commission proposed to not allow NGSO
    FSS gateway uplink operations in the 13.75-13.8 GHz and 17.3-17.8
    GHz bands due to potential interference with Federal Government
    operations in the 13.75-13.8 GHz band, and a potential sharing
    conflict with broadcast satellite services ("BSS") and Federal
    Government radiolocation services in the 17.3-17.8 GHz band.[^13]
    The Commission sought comment on these and alternative approaches.

5.  In the *First R&O*, the Commission decided to allow NGSO FSS
    operations in the bands proposed in the *Notice*. The Commission
    declined to permit NGSO FSS gateway uplink operations in the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band in order to protect BAS/CARS pickup
    operations, while permitting NGSO FSS gateway uplinks in the
    13.75-13.8 GHz band subject to constraints to ensure sharing with
    Federal Government operations. The Commission also adopted NGSO FSS
    PFD limits to allow sharing with terrestrial operations, EPFD limits
    to allow sharing with other satellite operations, as well as other
    regulatory requirements to ensure spectrum sharing in these bands
    (*e.g*., coordination requirements, operational definitions and
    other service rules). The Commission found that the adopted
    technical criteria would ensure NGSO FSS operations could share
    spectrum with incumbent services without causing harmful
    interference or unduly constraining future growth of incumbent
    services, while allowing flexibility in implementing NGSO FSS
    systems. In the *First R&O,* the Commission also determined that
    Northpoint's proposed terrestrial fixed service could share the
    12.2-12.7 GHz band with NGSO FSS and BSS operations. The Commission
    designated these operations as a new multipoint video and data
    distribution service ("MVDDS") and proposed technical and service
    rules for MVDDS in the *Further Notice* portion of the adopted item.

6.  Several parties petitioned for reconsideration of various portions
    of the *First R&O.*[^14] Reconsideration issues concerning MVDDS use
    of the 12.2-12.7 GHz band were addressed in the *Memorandum Opinion
    and Order and Second Report and Order* ("*First MO&O and Second
    R&O*").[^15] Here we address reconsideration requests to the *First
    R&O* raised by Hughes and Skybridge concerning spectrum sharing with
    terrestrial operations (other than those already addressed for the
    12.2-12.7 GHz band), Federal Government operations, and the RAS; the
    definition for NGSO FSS gateway earth stations; and RF safety
    requirements for two-way NGSO FSS terminals. Two replies to the
    Skybridge Reconsideration Petition were received,[^16] and no
    replies to the Hughes Reconsideration Petition were received. We
    defer the remaining issues on NGSO and GSO sharing raised in
    petitions for reconsideration to a Third Memorandum Opinion and
    Order.[^17]

# Discussion

## NGSO FSS and BAS/CARS Sharing of 13.15-13.2125 GHz Band

7.  In the *First R&O*, the Commission allowed NGSO FSS gateway uplinks
    in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band, but excluded them from the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz portion of the band to protect BAS/CARS mobile
    pickup operations. The exclusion of NGSO FSS operations extended the
    scope of the existing BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations' exclusive
    use at the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band, within a 50 km radius of the
    top-100 television markets, to include all 211 markets in the United
    States.[^18] The Commission noted that BAS/CARS mobile pickup
    operations often receive flexible authorizations to operate
    nationwide on any available channel in that band to facilitate
    electronic news gathering ("ENG") operations which move to the scene
    of breaking news events. The Commission stated that such flexible
    nationwide mobile use would be difficult to coordinate with NGSO FSS
    uplink gateway operations and thus created a "carve-out" of four
    channels in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band at 13.15-13.2125 GHz
    exclusively for BAS/CARS mobile pickup uses. This action was also
    intended to encourage the congregation of mobile operations to these
    four channels to prevent interference from NGSO FSS uplinks.

8.  Skybridge urges the Commission to reconsider the decision to exclude
    NGSO FSS operations from the 13.15-13.2125 GHz segment of
    12.75-13.25 GHz band. Skybridge claims this exclusion will seriously
    impair NGSO FSS operations in this and neighboring bands. Although
    the amount of spectrum affected by the decision is small, Skybridge
    argues the impact of the exclusion is considerable because the
    exclusion divides the available uplink spectrum, thus complicating
    channelization.[^19] Skybridge argues that this division of the band
    will require separate transponders for the band below 13.15 GHz and
    above 13.2125 GHz, and the implementation of additional radio
    frequency filtering to suppress out of band emissions that otherwise
    would not be needed. Moreover, Skybridge explains that the
    satellites in question are used all over the world and may serve the
    U.S. only a small portion of the time. Nevertheless, compatibility
    with the U.S. exclusion will require significant changes to the
    specifications of these satellites and earth stations, modifications
    to the frequency plans, and significantly impact spectrum usage
    internationally.[^20] Skybridge also contends that use of NGSO FSS
    allocated service downlink spectrum at 11.7-12.7 GHz band is
    constrained by this exclusion because the gateway uplink spectrum at
    12.75-13.25 GHz corresponds with service downlinks at 11.7-12.7 GHz.
    Skybridge argues that having the NGSO FSS uplink spectrum narrower
    than its accompanying downlink spectrum further limits bandwidth
    channelization flexibility and exacerbates the burden of the
    exclusion.

9.  Skybridge argues that our goal of protecting BAS/CARS operations can
    be accomplished without resorting to an outright exclusion of NGSO
    FSS from any segment of the 12.75-13.25 GHz band, because sharing
    between NGSO FSS and BAS/CARS operations is feasible.[^21] Skybridge
    contends that there is no technical analysis in the record that
    supports a conclusion that sharing is not possible between NGSO FSS
    and BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band,
    and argues that the general assertions of sharing infeasibility by
    the Society of Broadcast Engineers are insufficient to justify such
    a conclusion.[^22] Skybridge contends that the current use of the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band by GSO FSS entities demonstrates that sharing
    between satellite and BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations is
    technically feasible and supported by our Rules.[^23] Skybridge
    relies on the lack of any limitation on FSS operations in Section
    74.602 of the Rules[^24] or domestic footnote NG53 to the Table of
    Frequency Allocations,[^25] and the nine or more GSO FSS
    authorizations recognized in the *First R&O,* in opposing SBE's
    assertion that as a matter of law BAS/CARS pickup operations enjoy
    an exclusive right against FSS operations in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
    band.[^26] Skybridge argues that permitting GSO FSS but not NGSO FSS
    operations in this band is unjustified.[^27]

10. Boeing supports Skybridge's request that the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band
    be opened to NGSO FSS.[^28] Boeing similarly states that sharing
    between NGSO FSS gateway earth stations and terrestrial services is
    feasible and contends that our gateway earth station definition and
    siting requirements will sufficiently limit the proliferation of
    gateway earth stations and any detrimental impact on BAS/CARS
    incumbent and future use. Skybridge and Boeing's arguments on this
    issue were unopposed.

11. ***Decision***. On reconsideration, we modify our rules to permit
    NGSO FSS uplink operations in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band outside a
    50 km radius of the top 100 television markets. We find that NGSO
    FSS gateway uplink operations can share this band with fixed and
    mobile operations outside of the major television markets, where
    BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations are least prevalent. We agree with
    the petitioner that the outright exclusion of NGSO FSS operations
    from the 13.15-13.2125 GHz segment of the 12.75-13.25 GHz band could
    unnecessarily impair NGSO FSS use of the 12.75-13.25 GHz band, as
    well as other bands allocated for NGSO FSS.[^29] Further, we find
    that this "carve-out" of the 13.15-13.2125 GHz as adopted could
    limit the use by NGSO FSS links in the 13.2125-13.25 GHz portion due
    to satellite transponder design and the need for additional radio
    frequency filtering.

12. We find that NGSO FSS gateway uplinks can operate in the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band subject to these reasonable sharing
    conditions. We modify our Rules to only disallow NGSO FSS use of the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band within a 50 km radius of the top 100
    television markets identified in Section 76.51 of our Rules.[^30] In
    reconsidering the exclusion of NGSO FSS from the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
    band, we note SBE's January 12, 2000 comments requesting an outright
    exclusion of NGSO FSS gateway links in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz portion
    in the top 100 television markets. We believe it is important to
    restrict NGSO FSS gateway operations in these areas on this portion
    of the spectrum to ensure BAS/CARS mobile pickup deployment
    flexibility where their use is most prevalent.

13. Further, we modify our rules to permit NGSO FSS gateway operations
    in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz on a co-primary basis outside the 50 km
    radius of the top 100 television markets identified in Section
    76.51.[^31] This will allow NGSO FSS use of the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
    band throughout a significant portion of the United States and will
    address the petitioner's concerns regarding the effective use of
    NGSO FSS allocated spectrum. In the areas where the 13.15-13.2125
    GHz band will be used, we find that our NGSO FSS siting and
    coordination policies subject to a future proceeding will be
    sufficient to protect the less intense BAS/CARS mobile use outside
    of the top 100 television markets. Further, this decision is
    consistent with the discussion of the *First R&O*, as well as
    Skybridge's own petition, identifying geographic separation as an
    important part of ensuring that NGSO FSS operations do not hinder
    BAS/CARS mobile and temporary fixed BAS/CARS use of this band.[^32]

14. To further protect BAS/CARS mobile pickup deployment flexibility, we
    adopt an EIRP limit of 3.2 dBW at zero degree elevation from an NGSO
    FSS gateway earth station transmitting in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
    portion. We find it is appropriate to adopt this additional EIRP
    limit towards the horizon for the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band due to the
    need to minimize the size of the area around a NGSO FSS gateway
    earth station where mobile BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations may
    have to coordinate use.[^33] This limit is based upon a 20 dB
    reduction in the maximum sidelobe EIRP of an NGSO FSS gateway earth
    station, when the earth station main beam is pointing at 5 degrees.
    This EIRP limit relies on calculations based on information
    contained in the Skybridge L.L.C. Application to Launch and Operate
    a Global Network of Low Earth Orbit Communications Satellites
    Providing Broadband Services in the Fixed Satellite Service, File
    No. 48-SAT-P/LA-97, dated February 28, 1997; and Comments of SBE to
    ET Docket No.98-142, dated September 21, 1998.

15. The record demonstrates this 20 dB reduction is achievable through
    standard attenuation measures such as berms or leveraging of natural
    shielding or it may already be achieved by systems that do not
    operate at low elevation angles.[^34] This will reduce the required
    coordination distance from 150 kilometers to 15 kilometers, assuming
    worst case free space propagation loss along 0° elevation from the
    NGSO FSS gateway transmitter. We observe that the comments of Boeing
    discuss limiting the necessary separation distances between NGSO FSS
    gateway earth stations and BAS/CARS operations by limiting energy
    levels emitted near the horizon.[^35] We further note that only
    Skybridge and Boeing filed requests for reconsideration of the
    "carve out" of the 13.15 GHz band and it appears from their filings
    that they anticipated limiting their EIRP towards the horizon as a
    means of sharing with BAS/CARS mobile operations. Therefore, we do
    not find that this additional limit that applies only to the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band is overly burdensome. This EIRP limit ensures
    that present and future mobile operations have deployment
    flexibility in the four channels of the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band, and
    are protected against interference from the broad diversity of
    implementations anticipated by NGSO FSS operations. Where system
    requirements necessitate use of the previously prohibited
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band, NGSO FSS licensees are free to employ those
    methods most appropriate to satisfy each licensee's system
    requirements so long as they meet this lower elevation angle power
    limit.

16. Further we reiterate our decision in the *First R&O* that no gateway
    earth station authorizations shall be issued in this band until a
    proceeding has been completed addressing coordination between NGSO
    FSS and BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations in this band.[^36] In the
    proceeding to follow, the Commission will address coordination
    concerns of both predictable and sporadic events, such as breaking
    news events. The Commission will seek comment on the complex sharing
    scenarios implicated by potentially high-elevation angle mobile
    pickups sharing with NGSO FSS uplink and downlink operations. The
    Commission will pay close attention to the current BAS/CARS
    licensing procedures and coordination practices that rely on
    informal consensual negotiations relying on a strong community of
    mutual interests. The Commission will consider what obligations both
    NGSO FSS gateway and mobile pickup operations should observe in
    order to ensure equitable band sharing and what coordination/sharing
    can occur without unnecessary burdens and regulatory oversight. We
    will also consider the kind of notification that will be necessary
    to inform BAS/CARS stations of new gateway earth stations including
    whether gateway earth station applications should be put on public
    notice. We find it is necessary to address the process in a
    proceeding to ensure that the various parties' interests are served
    and that mobile operations continue to have the flexibility needed
    to serve the public effectively. We are confident that our decisions
    here will complement the proposals in our future proceeding to
    ensure the protection of mobile pickup operations from harmful
    interference while avoiding an unnecessarily burdensome regulatory
    environment that would hinder the development of NGSO FSS systems.

17. In sum, we find that successful sharing between NSGO FSS and
    BAS/CARS operations can be accomplished due to the limited
    deployment of NGSO FSS gateway earth stations and the technical
    limits we are adopting to reduce the interference potential between
    these operations. As indicated in the *First R&O*, a limited number
    of GSO FSS earth stations have coordinated and have been authorized
    to use the 12.75-13.25 GHz band on a case-by-case basis.[^37] We
    believe that similar coordination can be achieved for NGSO FSS
    gateway earth stations. As noted in the *First R&O*, Parts 74 and 78
    of our Rules do not currently address coordination between BAS/CARS
    mobile pickup operations and satellite services.[^38] We will soon
    initiate a proceeding to consider the development of such
    coordination rules both for this band and for sharing between
    BAS/CARS pickup operations and Mobile Satellite Service ("MSS")
    feeder links in the 7 GHz range.[^39] As supported by the comments
    to the *Notice* and as discussed above, we will also adopt certain
    limitations on NGSO FSS use of the 13.15-13.2125 GHz portion in
    order to minimize the effect of NGSO FSS operations on BAS/CARS
    mobile pickup flexibility and deployment. We believe the approach
    discussed above will allow NGSO FSS uplink operations in the
    13.15-13.2125 GHz band without unjustified constraints, while
    ensuring protection of current and future BAS/CARS mobile pickup
    operations.

## PFD Limits at 10.7-11.7 GHz for Protection of FS Receivers

18. In the *First R&O*, the Commission decided to allow NGSO FSS gateway
    downlink operations in the 10.7-11.7 GHz band. To promote sharing,
    it adopted PFD limits for NGSO FSS operations.[^40] These limits
    were supported by findings of the ITU Radiocommunication Sector
    ("ITU-R"),[^41] adopted internationally through agreement at the
    2000 World Radiocommunication Conference ("WRC-2000"),[^42] and were
    generally supported by the record of this proceeding.[^43] The
    studies supporting the limits and the Commission's independent
    analysis indicated that the PFD limits it adopted were adequate to
    protect the vast majority of terrestrial fixed service ("FS")
    operations in the 10.7-11.7 GHz band from NGSO FSS satellite
    transmissions. However, the Commission concluded that because
    individual NGSO FSS systems exhibit different operational
    characteristics (*e.g.*, different minimum angles of operation),
    each NGSO FSS licensee must determine whether incumbent FS
    operations with elevation angles more than 5 degrees above the
    horizon could be affected and must be responsible for ensuring their
    operations do not expose incumbent operations to harmful
    interference, including possible mainbeam-to-mainbeam
    alignments.[^44] The Commission noted a particular concern that the
    PFD limits could expose incumbent public safety FS links to harmful
    interference and pose an unacceptable risk to public safety
    operations.[^45] The Commission directed that such public safety FS
    links should be protected from even the rare likelihood of harmful
    interference. The Commission explained that, rather than tightening
    the pfd limits to address the mainbeam-to-mainbeam interference
    situations, any protection can be accomplished on a case-by-case
    basis and several mitigation techniques were identified.[^46]

19. Skybridge requests that we reconsider the decision to require NGSO
    FSS licensees to coordinate their satellite downlink signals with FS
    links operating at elevation angles greater than 5 degrees above the
    horizon in the 10.7-11.7 GHz band. Skybridge argues that this
    requirement is unnecessary and unworkable. Skybridge argues that the
    agreement of the ITU-R's technical study groups[^47] that PFD limits
    were sufficient to protect FS operations, more than one year prior
    to their ultimate adoption at the WRC-2000, demonstrates that
    concerns for FS link protection were adequately considered and
    addressed by the adopted PFD limits.[^48] Further, Skybridge argues
    that coordination is unworkable because every new NGSO FSS system
    would have to individually coordinate its downlink operations with
    each FS operation within the NGSO FSS service area. It states that
    such individual coordination would necessarily have to rely on a
    database containing detailed information about FS links' path
    length, elevation, azimuth, radio characteristics and sensitivity,
    and the terrain profile around the FS links. It further argues that,
    like the ITU-R which considered and resolved these FS protection
    concerns with PFD limits, the Commission should clarify that
    observance of PFD limits would satisfy our requirement for NGSO FSS
    downlinks to protect high-elevation angle FS links. No fixed service
    entity filed comments in response to Skybridge's request.

20. ***Decision.*** Typically in shared bands, our Rules require
    satellite downlink operations to meet PFD limits to protect
    terrestrial operations, and do not require coordination of the
    downlink signal with each individual terrestrial receiver operating
    in the subject bands.[^49] We note that coordinating with
    terrestrial operations would be especially difficult for NGSO FSS
    downlinks because the satellite signals vary with both time and
    space.[^50] We find that the weight of the record supports a factual
    finding that the adopted PFD limits are sufficient to protect all
    but the rarest deployments of FS operations in this band. On
    reconsideration, we agree with the international and domestic review
    that concludes the likelihood of interference would be *de minimis*.
    In the *First R&O,* the Commission stated that the adopted PFD
    limits were developed through agreements at WRC-2000, which were the
    result of ITU-R studies that considered a variety of deployment
    scenarios, including aggregate interference from GSO FSS satellites
    and multiple NGSO FSS systems.[^51] We continue to find that the ITU
    studies justifying these PFD limits indicate that they are adequate
    to protect the vast majority of terrestrial fixed operations. In
    addition, as the Commission noted in the *First R&O,* the PFD limits
    are the same used for GSO FSS operations in this frequency band and
    have proven to be adequate.[^52] We believe that the high degree of
    conservatism found in the ITU's model[^53] concerning the satellite
    power, satellite pointing direction, and the FS orientation to the
    worst case azimuth coupled together with the conservative protection
    criteria, will protect the majority of links.

21. Concerning the special case identified in the *First R&O,* wherein a
    high elevation angle fixed link might suffer from
    mainbeam--to-mainbeam interference, our review of the ITU analyses
    indicates that they may not have directly considered the higher
    elevation angle case.[^54] Nevertheless, we find that such
    interference occurrences would be rare because the number of fixed
    stations is small and the antenna beamwidths for both the FSS and
    fixed service stations are narrow. Further, links with high
    elevation angles would typically have short path lengths and
    therefore, should benefit from more reliable communications. Given
    the typical reliability of short range links, the benefits of
    partial shielding that the fixed links may have, the limited
    duration and chances of occurrence of any interference events, and
    the conservative nature of the pfd limits, we conclude that the
    adopted PFD limits should be adequate to ensure the protection of
    these fixed links in all but the rarest cases. Further, we agree
    with the petitioner that the technical and logistic complexity of
    identifying and coordinating with these FS links on an individual
    basis would constitute an undue burden, when weighed against the
    disproportionate rarity of any possible interference. Therefore, we
    clarify that it was not our intent to require that individual
    coordination be performed, and, moreover, no rules were adopted
    codifying such a requirement.[^55] However, it was our intention to
    protect all incumbent fixed links above 5° from harmful interference
    by subsequent NGSO FSS entrants, even if the NGSO FSS system meets
    the pfd limits. Accordingly, we will require that the NGSO FSS
    systems take steps to ensure that all existing fixed service links,
    particularly public safety links, with elevation angles above 5
    degrees are protected from harmful interference. This is consistent
    with the co-primary status between NGSO FSS entrants and fixed
    service operations in this band. Given the diversity of NGSO FSS
    systems that may operate in this band, licensees should be given
    flexibility in ensuring that these fixed links are protected. For
    example, some NGSO FSS systems might only operate at higher
    elevation angles or operate with lower pfd levels and thus would not
    pose an interference threat or have difficulty meeting this
    requirement. Other systems with characteristics that may be more
    threatening may opt to model the potential impact of their system on
    high elevation angle fixed links to determine whether the pfd limits
    are adequate.

22. Therefore, on reconsideration, we clarify that our intent with
    regard to paragraph 42 of the *First R&O* was to state that NGSO FSS
    operators must ensure that existing high elevation angle links are
    protected and that the NGSO FSS operators must ensure that harmful
    interference to incumbent operations does not occur, even if the pfd
    levels are met. Further, consistent with the co-primary status of
    NGSO FSS downlink and fixed service operations in the 10.7-11.7 GHz
    band, we also clarify that our Rules protect "first-in" operations
    from harmful interference caused by subsequently deployed
    operations.[^56] We believe that the PFD levels will adequately
    protect incumbent fixed service links from harmful interference due
    to new NGSO FSS downlink operations in this band, but should
    interference occur, the new entrant shall continue to be responsible
    for resolving the interference to an acceptable level. Future fixed
    service links should be designed to consider both NGSO FSS and GSO
    FSS systems in this band at the adopted PFD levels, and will not be
    permitted to claim protection from NGSO FSS operations that are in
    service at the time the FS station becomes operational. These
    provisions will ensure that: existing licensees, including any
    public safety users, are protected from new entrants into the band;
    and that future links are designed appropriately for the sharing
    environment.

## Gateway Earth Station Definition

23. In the *First R&O*, the Commission adopted a functional definition
    for gateway earth stations that reflected a desire to permit
    deployment of NGSO FSS gateway earth stations in shared bands while
    protecting the continued use and growth of those bands by
    terrestrial operations.[^57] The adopted definition, as set forth in
    Section 25.201 of the Rules, limits the use of these earth stations
    to interconnecting multiple non-collocated user earth stations
    operating in frequency bands other than designated gateway
    bands.[^58] The gateway earth station definition also prohibits
    gateway earth stations from connecting to "private communication
    networks." The intent of this prohibition was to prevent gateway
    earth stations from being used to exclusively serve any individual
    customer network and thus prevent the proliferation of large numbers
    of gateway earth stations in certain bands.

24. Skybridge requests the Commission reconsider the gateway
    definition's restriction on connections to private communications
    networks.[^59] Skybridge argues that the language of the definition
    it and the Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition ("FWCC")[^60]
    advocated in their *Growth Zone Proposal,* should be adopted by the
    Commission. The proposed language of the Skybridge/FWCC definition
    would prohibit gateway earth stations from connecting to
    "customer-owned or customer-operated private distribution
    networks,"[^61] but the language adopted by the Commission
    prohibited connection to "private communications networks"
    outright.[^62] Skybridge argues that under the definition adopted by
    the Commission legitimate gateway traffic servicing private networks
    is prohibited, while under their definition the Commission's concern
    to prohibit the use of a gateway for the exclusive use of a single
    customer is addressed without unnecessarily restricting the
    licensees' ability to provide satellite services to private
    networks.

25. ***Decision***. We reiterate that our intent in prohibiting
    connection to a "private communications network" was to prevent the
    proliferation of large numbers of gateway earth stations in certain
    bands. However, we agree with the petitioner that the gateway earth
    station definition should not limit connection to all private
    networks, *per se*, and we adopt changes to our Rules to allow
    gateway earth stations to connect to private networks. We also
    modify our Rules to prohibit gateway earth stations' exclusive use
    for the service of a single customer.[^63] Gateway earth stations
    may route communications to and from customers, through the
    satellite, to the public switched telephone network, broadband
    networks and/or private networks. However, under the language
    proposed by Skybridge prohibiting connection to "customer-owned or
    customer-operated private distribution networks" NGSO FSS licensees
    might still operate a gateway earth station for the exclusive use of
    a single customer, which could lead to an undesirable proliferation
    of private NGSO FSS gateway earth stations in shared bands. We adopt
    language clarifying that licensees shall not use gateway earth
    stations for the exclusive use of any single customer. We believe
    this definition will allow gateway links to meet the intended needs
    of NGSO FSS licensees and will facilitate spectrum sharing between
    the gateway earth stations and terrestrial operations. Accordingly,
    the new gateway definition reads as follows:

    [Gateway earth station.]{.underline} A gateway earth station is an
    earth station complex consisting of multiple interconnecting earth
    station antennas supporting the communication routing and switching
    functions of a non-geostationary satellite orbit fixed-satellite
    service (NGSO FSS) system as a whole. A gateway earth station in the
    NGSO FSS: (1) does not originate or terminate radiocommunication
    traffic, but interconnects multiple non-collocated user earth
    stations operating in frequency bands other than designated gateway
    bands, through a satellite with other primary terrestrial networks,
    such as the public switched telephone network (PSTN), and/or
    Internet networks; (2) shall not be for the exclusive use of any
    customer; (3) may also be used for telemetry, tracking, and command
    transmissions for the same NGSO FSS system; (4) may include multiple
    antennas, each required to meet the antenna performance standard in
    Section 25.209(h), located within an area of one second latitude by
    one second longitude; and (5) is considered as a separate gateway
    earth station complex if it is outside of the area of one second
    latitude by one second longitude of (4) above, for the purposes of
    coordination with terrestrial services.

## Radiolocation Operations in the 13.75-14.0 GHz Band

26. In the *First R&O,* the Commission concluded that sharing between
    NGSO FSS and Federal Government radiolocation operations in the
    13.75-14.0 GHz band was feasible despite reservations expressed by
    the Department of Defense ("DoD") and NTIA.[^64] The Commission
    stated that NGSO FSS entities were aware of the presence of
    incumbent high-power radiolocation entities and could be expected to
    design their systems to compensate for potential interference
    concerns. To promote sharing with GSO FSS operations, our Rules
    limit the maximum EIRP of radiolocation operations in the direction
    of the GSO arc to 59 dBW averaged over one second. The ITU agreed at
    WRC-2000 to extend the 59 dBW EIRP limit on radiolocation operations
    from the GSO arc to all possible orbital locations, in order to
    protect NGSO FSS operations.[^65] However, the Commission did not
    adopt the new ITU 59 dBW EIRP limitation over the entire sky and
    maintained this limit with respect to the GSO arc only.[^66] The
    Commission stated that NGSO FSS operations would not be permitted to
    claim protection from radiolocation operations.[^67] Skybridge
    requests that the Commission reconsider its decision declining to
    extend protection to NGSO FSS operations from radiolocation
    operations in the 13.75-14.0 GHz Band.[^68]

27. ***Decision***. In the *First R&O,* the Commission noted the
    important concerns of NTIA for national security if radiolocation
    operations were required to meet the new 59 dBW EIRP limit adopted
    at the WRC-2000.[^69] Indeed, the 13.75-14.0 GHz band is used for
    ship borne radar systems that are critical to U.S. national defense.
    In their past fillings to the Commission, NTIA stated that operating
    requirements of radiolocation systems prevented modifications to
    comply with the proposed 59 dBW EIRP limit across the entire
    sky.[^70] In NTIA's recent filling,[^71] it indicates that
    radiolocation operations will now be able to observe the proposed 59
    dBW EIRP limit without threat to the effectiveness of such
    operations. Accordingly, we grant Skybridge's request to modify our
    Rules, implementing a 59 dBW EIRP limit on radiolocation operations
    in the 13.75-14.0 GHz band with respect to all arcs in the sky,
    extending protection to both GSO and NGSO FSS operations.[^72]
    Finally, we note that NTIA also states that ongoing developmental
    work on radiolocation systems operating in this band may determine
    that a higher EIRP limit at low elevation angles (e.g., at
    elevations angles of less than 2 degrees) is necessary. Based on the
    outcome of this work, NTIA may request that the Commission consider
    adding such a requirement to the rules.

## NASA TDRSS Operations at 13.77-13.78 GHz

28. Prior to the *First R&O*, the Table of Frequency Allocations in
    Section 2.106 of the Rules contained international footnote 5.503,
    which limited FSS EIRP density to protect TDRSS operations to 71 dBW
    in a 6 megahertz band at 13.772-13.778 GHz.[^73] WRC-2000 changed
    the EIRP density limit to 51 dBW per 6 megahertz in footnote 5.503
    to protect TDRSS operations. In the *First R&O*, the Commission
    adopted this EIRP density level, but expanded the bandwidth of
    protection across 10 megahertz at 13.77-13.78 GHz[^74] due to new
    requirements for the International Space Station.[^75] This
    requirement was codified in our domestic footnote US357.[^76]

29. Skybridge requests we reconsider our decision to expand the EIRP
    density limits in footnote US357 for all FSS earth stations across
    the 10 megahertz in the 13.77-13.78 GHz band to protect TDRSS
    systems.[^77] Skybridge argues our decision does not comport with
    the agreements at WRC-2000, which only extended the EIRP limit
    across a 6 megahertz band. Skybridge argues further that the more
    broad protection was not appropriately raised in the *Notice*, or
    debated in the record, and asserts that the technical basis for the
    decision is unclear.

30. ***Decision***. In the *Notice*, the Commission proposed to exclude
    NGSO FSS operations from the entire 50 megahertz at 13.75-13.8 GHz
    in order to protect TDRSS operations.[^78] Nevertheless, it sought
    comment on how NGSO FSS operations could share this band with TDRSS
    operations.[^79] Based on international agreements and additional
    study, it was determined at WRC-2000 and in this proceeding that
    NGSO FSS could share with TDRSS operations if coordination and EIRP
    density limits were applied.[^80] Therefore, we are unconvinced by
    arguments that technical limits to protect TDRSS were not adequately
    raised in the *Notice*. The responses to questions in the *Notice*
    by NTIA provided the necessary record and analysis that spectrum
    sharing was possible between NGSO FSS and TDRSS in this federally
    shared band at 13.75-14.0 GHz subject to certain limits.[^81]

31. In the *First R&O,* the Commission expanded the EIRP density limit
    across four more megahertz than the international requirements in
    5.503 because the United States has an interest in protecting the
    additional TDRSS requirements of the space shuttle and International
    Space Station. Further, we have a completely separate requirement in
    US337 that requires FSS operations to coordinate on a case-by-case
    basis with TDRSS operations throughout the 13.75-13.8 GHz band, so
    specifying the necessary power limits across an additional four
    megahertz in this range is justified, and would otherwise be
    required in the coordination process. We, therefore, deny the
    petitioner's request.

## Coordination with Radio Astronomy Facilities in the 10.7-11.7 GHz

32. In the *First R&O,* the Commission declined to adopt specific
    protection limits or calculation methodologies for sharing between
    NGSO FSS and RAS operations at 10.7 GHz, but noted the ITU's ongoing
    work in drafting new recommendations regarding NGSO FSS/RAS sharing.
    Instead, the Commission adopted a new footnote to the Table of
    Frequency Allocations, US355, which requires coordination by NGSO
    FSS with RAS facilities in the 10.7 GHz range to reach a "mutually
    acceptable agreement" prior to commencing activities.[^82]

33. Skybridge urges that we adopt a change to our footnote US355 to
    require use of the protection levels and calculation methodologies
    specified in ITU Article 29 for sharing with RAS operations.[^83]
    Skybridge did not provide justification for why ITU Article 29
    methodologies should be mandated, nor why their concerns could not
    be accommodated under our current Rule.[^84]

34. ***Decision***. The requirements we adopted in US355 simply require
    parties to coordinate to a "mutually acceptable agreement," thereby,
    permitting the parties to use any methodology or standard
    appropriate for their operations. Because of the wide variance in
    NGSO FSS implementations and RAS sensitivities, it is appropriate
    that we allow licensees this flexibility in employing the most
    current and appropriate techniques for their operations. Therefore,
    we deny the request that US355 mandate the use of ITU Article 29
    standards and procedures.

## RF Safety Requirements for Two-Way NGSO FSS Antenna

35. The *First R&O* amended Table 1 in Section 1.1307(b) to require
    cautionary labeling on NGSO subscriber equipment regarding exposure
    of humans to RF emissions,[^85] and adopted language recommending
    professional installation of two-way subscriber antennas to prevent
    siting antennas in such a way that persons could easily venture into
    the uplink beam.[^86] Hughes petitions the Commission to retract the
    language in the *First R&O* recommending professional installation
    of antennas.[^87] The language of the *First R&O* regarding
    professional installation merely recommends professional antenna
    installation, but does not require it by Commission rule. Moreover,
    contrary to petitioner's assertions,[^88] we find that this language
    is neither overly broad nor unnecessary, and is harmonious with the
    language of other NGSO FSS orders.[^89] We, therefore, dismiss the
    petitioner's request and leave in place our recommendation that
    these antennas be professionally installed. In addition, the
    Commission may examine RF safety concerns and NGSO FSS antenna rules
    on professional installation, labeling, interlocking measures, and
    instructional materials, in a future proceeding. The Commission's
    recommendations in the *First R&O* would not prejudice such a
    proceeding and need not be retracted.

# PROCEDURAL INFORMATION

## Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

36. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The Final Regulatory
    Flexibility Analysis, required by Section 603 of the Regulatory
    Flexibility Act, as amended by the Contract with America Advancement
    Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996), is contained
    in Appendix B.

## Paperwork Reduction Analysis

37. The Second Memorandum Opinion and Order does not contain a proposed
    information collection.

## Further Information

38. For further information concerning this Second Memorandum Opinion
    and Order, contact the Office of Engineering and Technology, James
    Miller, (202) 418-7351, TTY (202) 418-2989, email jjmiller@fcc.gov.

# ORDERING CLAUSES

39. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to the authority contained
    in Sections 4(i), 7(a), 301, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 308,
    and 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.
    §§ 154(i), 157(a), 301, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 308, and
    309(j), this Second Memorandum Opinion and Order IS ADOPTED.

40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, Parts 2, 25, 74, and 78 of the
    Commission\'s Rules ARE AMENDED as specified in Appendix A,
    effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. This
    action is taken pursuant to Sections 4(i), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g),
    303(r), and 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
    U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r) and 309(j) .

41. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for reconsideration of the
    *First R&O* filed by Skybridge IS GRANTED to the extent indicated in
    the Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, and IS OTHERWISE DENIED.

42. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for reconsideration of the
    *First R&O* filed by Hughes IS DENIED.

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

> FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Marlene H. Dortch

Secretary

**APPENDIX A: FINAL RULES**

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the FCC amends 47 C.F.R.
Parts 2, 25, 74, and 78 as follows:

**PART 2 \-- FREQUENCY ALLOCATIONS AND RADIO TREATY MATTERS; GENERAL
RULES AND REGULATIONS**

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

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

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

a\. In the list of United States (US) Non-Government (NG) Footnotes,
footnote NG53 is revised.

b.  In the list of United States (US) Footnotes, footnote US356 is
    revised.

The revisions read as follows:

**§ 2.106 Table of Frequency Allocations.**

\* \* \* \* \*

**US356** In the band 13.75-14 GHz, an earth station in the
fixed-satellite service shall have a minimum antenna diameter of 4.5 m
and the e.i.r.p. of any emission should be at least 68 dBW and should
not exceed 85 dBW. In addition the e.i.r.p., averaged over one second,
radiated by a station in the radiolocation service shall not exceed
59 dBW. Receiving space stations in the fixed-satellite service shall
not claim protection from radiolocation transmitting stations operating
in accordance with the United States Table of Frequency Allocations. ITU
Radio Regulation No. 5.43A does not apply.

\* \* \* \* \*

Non-Federal Government (NG) Footnotes

\* \* \* \* \*

**NG53** The band 13.15-13.20 GHz is reserved for television pickup and
CARS pickup stations inside a 50 km radius of the 100 television markets
delineated in Section 76.51. Outside a 50 km radius of the 100
television markets delineated in Section 76.51, television pickup
stations, CARS stations and NGSO FSS gateway earth stations shall
operate on a primary co-equal basis. The band 13.20-13.2125 GHz is
reserved for television pickup stations on a primary basis and CARS
pickup stations on a secondary basis inside a 50 km radius of the 100
television markets delineated in Section 76.51. Outside a 50 km radius
of the 100 markets delineated in Section 76.51, television pickup
stations and NGSO FSS gateway earth stations shall operate on a
co-primary basis, CARS stations shall operate on a secondary basis.
Fixed television auxiliary stations licensed pursuant to applications
accepted for filing before September 1, 1979, may continue operation on
channels in the 13.15-13.25 GHz band, subject to periodic license
renewals. NGSO FSS gateway uplink transmissions in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
segment shall be limited to a maximum EIRP of 3.2 dBW towards 0 degrees
on the radio horizon. The above provisions shall not apply to GSO FSS
operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band.

\* \* \* \* \*

**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 Sections 4, 301,
302, 303; 307, 309 and 332 of the Communications Act, as amended, 47
U.S.C. Sections 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309 and 332, unless otherwise
noted.

4\. Section 25.201 is amended as follows:

\(a\) New text is added to the preamble.

\(b\) Subsections (1), and (2) are revised.

The revisions read as follows:

**§25.201 NGSO FSS gateway earth station.**

\* \* \* \* \*

Gateway earth station. A gateway earth station is an earth station
complex consisting of multiple interconnecting earth station antennas
supporting the communication routing and switching functions of a
non-geostationary satellite orbit fixed-satellite service (NGSO FSS)
system as a whole. A gateway earth station in the NGSO FSS: (1) does not
originate or terminate radiocommunication traffic, but interconnects
multiple non-collocated user earth stations operating in frequency bands
other than designated gateway bands, through a satellite with other
primary terrestrial networks, such as the public switched telephone
network (PSTN), and/or Internet networks; (2) shall not be for the
exclusive use of any customer; (3) may also be used for telemetry,
tracking, and command transmissions for the same NGSO FSS system; (4)
may include multiple antennas, each required to meet the antenna
performance standard in Section 25.209(h), located within an area of one
second latitude by one second longitude; and (5) is considered as a
separate gateway earth station complex if it is outside of the area of
one second latitude by one second longitude of (4) above, for the
purposes of coordination with terrestrial services.

\* \* \* \* \*

#  {#section .unnumbered}

5\. Section 25.202(a)(1) is revised to modify the table and add new
footnote 14 and read as follows:

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

\* \* \* \* \*

(a)(1) [Frequency band.]{.underline} 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.

+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| Space-to-Earth (GHz)             | Earth-to-space (GHz)              |
+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| 3.7-4.2 ^1^                      | 5.925-6.425 ^1^                   |
|                                  |                                   |
| 10.7-10.95 ^1,\ 12^              | 12.75-13.25 ^1,\ 12,\ 14^         |
|                                  |                                   |
| 10.95-11.2 ^1,\ 2,\ 12^          | 13.75-14 ^4,\ 12^                 |
|                                  |                                   |
| 11.2-11.45^1,\ 12^               | 14-14.2 ^5^                       |
|                                  |                                   |
| 11.45-11.7 ^1,\ 2,\ 12^          | 14.2-14.5                         |
|                                  |                                   |
| 11.7-12.2 ^3^                    | 17.3-17.8 ^9^                     |
|                                  |                                   |
| 12.2-12.7 ^13^                   | 27.5-29.5 ^1^                     |
|                                  |                                   |
| 18.3-18.58 ^1,\ 10^              | 29.5-30                           |
|                                  |                                   |
| 18.58-18.8 ^6,\ 10,\ 11^         | 48.2-50.2                         |
|                                  |                                   |
| 18.8-19.3 ^7,\ 10^               |                                   |
|                                  |                                   |
| 19.3-19.7 ^8,\ 10^               |                                   |
|                                  |                                   |
| 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.]{.underline}, 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
radiocommunication services, until June 8, 2010. After this date, the
sub-band 19.26-19.3 GHz is shared co-equally with existing terrestrial
radiocommunication systems.

^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 broadcasting-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^ Use of this band by NGSO FSS gateway earth station uplink
operations is subject to the provisions of Section 2.106 NG53.

\* \* \* \* \*

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

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

AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303 307, 336(f), 336(h) and 554.

7\. Footnote 2 of Section 74.602 is amended to read as follows:

**§ 74.602 Frequency assignment.**

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

2\. The band 13.15-13.20 GHz is reserved for television pickup and CARS
pickup stations inside a 50 km radius of the 100 television markets
delineated in Section 76.51. Outside a 50 km radius of the 100
television markets delineated in Section 76.51, television pickup
stations, CARS stations and NGSO FSS gateway earth stations shall
operate on a primary co-equal basis. The band 13.20-13.2125 GHz is
reserved for television pickup stations on a primary basis and CARS
pickup stations on a secondary basis inside a 50 km radius of the 100
television markets delineated in Section 76.51. Outside a 50 km radius
of the 100 markets delineated in Section 76.51, television pickup
stations and NGSO FSS gateway earth stations shall operate on a
co-primary basis, CARS stations shall operate on a secondary basis.
Fixed television auxiliary stations licensed pursuant to applications
accepted for filing before September 1, 1979, may continue operation on
channels in the 13.15-13.25 GHz band, subject to periodic license
renewals. NGSO FSS gateway uplink transmissions in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
segment shall be limited to a maximum EIRP of 3.2 dBW towards 0 degrees
on the radio horizon. The above provisions shall not apply to GSO FSS
operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band.

\* \* \* \* \*

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

8\. The authority for part 78 continues to read as follows:\
\
Authority: Secs. 2, 3, 4, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 48 Stat., as amended,
1064, 1065, 1066, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085; 47 U.S.C. 152, 153, 154,
301, 303, 307, 308, 309.

9\. Sections 78.18(l) and 78.18(m) are revised to read as follows:

**§ 78.18 Frequency assignments.**

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

(l) The band 13.15-13.20 GHz is reserved for television pickup and CARS
pickup stations inside a 50 km radius of the 100 television markets
delineated in Section 76.51. Outside a 50 km radius of the 100
television markets delineated in Section 76.51, television pickup
stations, CARS stations and NGSO FSS gateway earth stations shall
operate on a primary co-equal basis. The band 13.20-13.2125 GHz is
reserved for television pickup stations on a primary basis and CARS
pickup stations on a secondary basis inside a 50 km radius of the 100
television markets delineated in Section 76.51. Outside a 50 km radius
of the 100 markets delineated in Section 76.51, television pickup
stations and NGSO FSS gateway earth stations shall operate on a
co-primary basis, CARS stations shall operate on a secondary basis.
Fixed television auxiliary stations licensed pursuant to applications
accepted for filing before September 1, 1979, may continue operation on
channels in the 13.15-13.25 GHz band, subject to periodic license
renewals. NGSO FSS gateway uplink transmissions in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz
segment shall be limited to a maximum EIRP of 3.2 dBW towards 0 degrees
on the radio horizon. The above provisions shall not apply to GSO FSS
operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz band.

\* \* \* \* \*

\(m\) CARS stations may be authorized for use of the band from 13.20 to
13.25 GHz on a secondary basis to Television Broadcast Auxiliary
Stations. CARS stations are also secondary to NGSO FSS gateway earth
station uplink operations. Any CARS application seeking authorization
for use of the 13.20 to 13.25 GHz band must demonstrate that the
applicant has exhausted all spectrum available to it in the 12.70 to
13.20 GHz band. Applications for use of this band must specify whether
the channels are 6 MHz, 12.5 MHz, or 25 MHz wide and give the upper and
lower boundaries and the polarization for each channel.

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

**APPENDIX B: SUPPLEMENTARY FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS**

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),[^90] an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis ("IRFA") was incorporated in the *Notice
of Proposed Rule Making* ("*Notice*") in ET Docket No. 98-206.[^91] The
Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the
*Notice*, including comment on the IRFA. A Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis ("FRFA") conforming to the RFA[^92] was incorporated into the
*Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making ("First
R&O"),* ET Docket No. 98-206. This Supplementary FRFA ("SFRFA") is
included to address certain modifications to the rules adopted in the
*First R&O*.

A.  **Need for, and Objectives of, the Second Memorandum Opinion and
    Order**

    In this Second MO&O, we address the Petitions for Reconsideration
    filed by Skybridge and Hughes in response to the *First R&O* in ET
    Docket No. 98-206. This Second MO&O addresses a request by Skybridge
    to allow NGSO FSS to share various frequencies in the Ku-Band with
    existing GSO satellite services and terrestrial services. Our action
    herein addresses aspects of the Skybridge Reconsideration Petition
    relating to NGSO FSS sharing with terrestrial services and Federal
    Government operations, as well as the Hughes Reconsideration
    Petition which relates only to our RF safety Rules requiring warning
    labels and recommending professional installation for NGSO FSS
    subscriber antennas. We defer consideration of remaining
    reconsideration issues regarding GSO FSS and NGSO FSS sharing raised
    by the Skybridge to a future order. We grant Skybridge's petition in
    part and deny it in part, and deny Hughes' petition. This SFRFA
    addresses the potential impact of granting the Skybridge's requests.

These new satellite and terrestrial operations can increase competition
and provide new advanced services to the public. Specifically, NGSO FSS
systems can provide new high-speed data services and offer additional
competition to other satellite services, and terrestrial wireless and
wireline services. There is, however, extensive use of the requested
frequency bands in the United States and these incumbent operations
provide important and valuable services to the public that we must
protect. By this action, we provide for the introduction of new advanced
services to the public, while permitting incumbent services to operate
without harmful interference.

**B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments In Response
to the IRFA**

No comments were submitted in response to the IRFA.

**C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which
Rules Will Apply**

The RFA generally defines the term \"small entity \" as having the same
meaning as the terms \"small business,\" \"small organization,\" and
\"small governmental jurisdiction.\"[^93] In addition, the term \"small
business\" has the same meaning as the term \"small business concern\"
under the Small Business Act.[^94] 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\").[^95] A small
organization is generally \"any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its
field.\"[^96]

Regarding incumbent cable television operations in the 12.75-13.25 GHz
band, the SBA has developed a definition of small entities for cable and
other program distribution services, which includes all such companies
generating \$12.5 million or less in revenue annually. This definition
includes cable systems operators, closed circuit television services,
DBS services, multipoint distribution systems, satellite master antenna
systems and subscription television services. According to the Census
Bureau, there were 1,788 total cable and other program distribution
services and 1,423 had less than \$12.5 million in revenue.

The Communications Act also contains a definition of a small cable
system operator, which is \"a cable operator that, directly or through
an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed
\$250,000,000.\" The Commission has determined that there are 61,700,000
subscribers in the United States. Therefore, we found that an operator
serving fewer than 617,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator,
if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of
all of its affiliates, do not exceed \$250 million in the aggregate.
Based on available data, we find that the number of cable operators
serving 617,000 subscribers or less totals 1,450. We did not request nor
did we collect information concerning whether cable system operators are
affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed
\$250,000,000, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with greater
precision the number of cable system operators that would qualify as
small cable operators under the definition in the Communications Act.

Regarding incumbent GSO FSS satellite use and the proposed NGSO FSS use
in these requested bands, the Commission has not developed a definition
of small entities applicable to geostationary or non-geostationary orbit
fixed-satellite service applicants or licensees. Therefore, the
applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the Small
Business Administration (SBA) Rules applicable to Communications
Services, Not Elsewhere Classified. This definition provides that a
small entity is one with \$11.0 million or less in annual receipts.[^97]
According to Census Bureau data, there are 848 firms that fall under the
category of Communications Services, Not Elsewhere Classified, which
could potentially fall into the geostationary or non-geostationary orbit
fixed-satellite service category. Of those, approximately 775 reported
annual receipts of \$11 million or less and qualify as small
entities.[^98] Generally, these NGSO and GSO FSS systems cost several
millions of dollars to construct and operate. Therefore the NGSO and GSO
FSS companies, or their parent companies, rarely qualify under this
definition as a small entity.

Regarding Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and other program distribution
services in the Ku-band. This service 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
station). 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;[^99] 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;[^100]
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.[^101] 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.[^102]
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.[^103] 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.[^104] Thus, under this standard, the great majority of
firms can be considered small.

We believe, however, that most, if not all, of these auxiliary
facilities could be classified as small businesses by themselves. We
also recognize that most translators and boosters are owned by a parent
station which, in some cases, would be covered by the revenue definition
of small business entity discussed above. These stations would likely
have annual revenues that exceed the SBA maximum to be designated as a
small business (as noted, either \$6 million for a radio station or \$12
million for a TV station). Furthermore, they do not meet the Small
Business Act\'s definition of a \"small business concern\" because they
are not independently owned and operated.

Incumbent microwave services in the 10.7-11.7 GHz and 12.75-13.25 GHz
bands include common carrier, private operational fixed, and BAS
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.[^105] According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there
were 977 firms in this category, total, that operated for the entire
year.[^106] Of this total, 965 firms had employment of 999 or fewer
employees, and an additional 12 had employment of 1,000 employees or
more.[^107] Thus, under this standard, virtually all firms can be
considered small.

We estimate, for this purpose, that all of the Fixed Microwave licensees
(excluding broadcast auxiliary licensees) would qualify as small
entities under the SBA definition for radiotelephone companies.

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

No modifications of the rules of the *First R&O* in this Second M&O
impose new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements.

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

The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that
it has considered in developing its approach, which may include the
following four alternatives (among others): "(1) the establishment of
differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take
into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small
entities.[^108]

The Commission has adopted technical Rules to facilitate spectrum
sharing between new NGSO FSS systems in the Ku band and existing
services in this spectrum. Wherein we grant in part Skybridge's requests
for reconsideration, we modify these rules to further these goals. We
acknowledge that as the radio spectrum is increasingly used, it becomes
more difficult to accommodate all requests for access to the radio
spectrum, however, this action applies existing frequency coordination
procedures to NGSO FSS systems sharing spectrum with fixed services.
However, frequency coordination should ensure that new operations of
either service will protect existing operations and have access to
spectrum if it is technically possible.

In considering the Skybridge's request for NGSO FSS access to the
13.15-13.2125 GHz band, we considered the impact on terrestrial
operations granting such a request might have. Further we adopted rules
that carefully weigh the complexity of sharing with mobile BAS/CARS
operations could impose against the need for minimal measures to
accommodate sharing in bands increasingly congested by co-primary
satellite and terrestrial use.

Regarding sharing between NGSO FSS systems and broadcast auxiliary
("BAS") operations, the Report and Order stated that the Commission will
adopt some form of geographic protection areas for terrestrial
operations in those bands used by NGSO FSS gateway earth stations. These
protection areas will be further defined in a future proceeding, but are
intended to facilitate the growth of terrestrial operations, while not
unnecessarily hindering the deployment of NGSO FSS systems. Further, to
ensure BAS operations in all areas can continue to operate unencumbered
by new NGSO FSS systems, this *Second M&O* reinforces efforts to
minimize impacts on BAS/CARS entities by retaining the 4 channels at
13.15-13.2125 GHz for exclusive co-primary BAS/CARS use in 50 km areas
around major TV markets and by requiring NGSO FSS operations observe
power limits to ensure continued operations outside those select areas.

*Report to Congress*: The Commission will send a copy of the *Second
M&O*, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant
to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, *see*
5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of
the *Second M&O* including FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration. A copy of the *Second M&O* and FRFA
(or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.
*See* 5 U.S.C. § 604(b).

[^1]: *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,* FCC 00-418, *Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making,* ET Docket No.
    98-206, 16 FCC Rcd 4096 (rel. Dec. 8, 2000) \[hereinafter *First
    R&O*\]; Petition for Reconsideration of SkyBridge L.L.C., ET Docket
    No. 98-206 (Mar. 19, 2001) \[hereinafter Skybridge Reconsideration
    Petition\]; Joint Petition for Partial Reconsideration (Mar. 19,
    2001) \[hereinafter Hughes Reconsideration Petition\].

[^2]: Skybridge Petition for Rule Making (filed July 3, 1997)
    \[hereinafter Skybridge Petition\]. Ku-Band is generally defined as
    frequencies in the 12-18 GHz range.

[^3]: TV pickup stations are land mobile stations used for the
    transmission of material from scenes of events occurring at points
    removed from the TV broadcast studio to the TV broadcast station.
    *See* 47 C.F.R. §§ 74.601(a), 78.5(d) (defining the BAS and CARS
    pickup services); *see* *also* Comments of Society of Broadcast
    Engineers, Inc., ET Docket No. 98-206, January 12, 2000, at 3
    (describing field applications of BAS pickup operations in the 2
    GHz, 7 GHz, and 13 GHz bands).

[^4]: International Telecommunications Union Radio Regulations, Volume
    1, Ch. 1, Article 29.

[^5]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106 US355.

[^6]: *See First R&O* ¶ 252. The Commission will conduct a rule making
    proceeding to review and, where necessary, harmonize the
    Commission's regulations concerning transceiver equipment approval
    for radiofrequency*.*

[^7]: *See* Skybridge Petition.

[^8]: Northpoint Petition for Rule Making (filed March 6, 1998)
    \[hereinafter Northpoint Petition\].

[^9]: *See Notice* ¶¶ 4-13.

[^10]: *Id*. ¶ 14. NGSO FSS applicants generally proposed systems with
    two types of links: service links and gateway links. Service links
    are used to communicate between the satellite and individual
    customers and the gateway links are used as backbone support for the
    system to route customer traffic to other networks. Gateway earth
    stations would be limited in number and essentially serve as feeder
    links or as a hub for the NGSO FSS system.

[^11]: *Id*.

[^12]: EPFD is the sum of the power levels of all possible interfering
    transmissions from all satellites in a particular NGSO constellation
    into a particular GSO earth station receiver. *Id.* ¶ 4

[^13]: *Id*. ¶ 14. Skybridge accepts both the Commission and the ITU's
    conclusions regarding sharing possibilities in the 17.3-17.8 GHz
    band, but asks the Commission to maintain an "open mind." *See*
    Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 49. We urge the petitioner to
    properly observe our rules regarding the filing of petitions for
    reconsideration in the future. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.429(c) (requiring
    petitions for reconsideration to state with particularity how
    Commission action should be changed).

[^14]:
    > Petition for Reconsideration of SkyTower, Inc., ET Docket No.
    > 98-206 (Mar. 12, 2001); Petition for Reconsideration of The Boeing
    > Company, ET Docket No. 98-206 (Mar. 19, 2001); Petition for
    > Reconsideration of DirecTV, Inc., ET Docket No. 98-206 (Mar. 19,
    > 2001); Petition for Reconsideration of EchoStar Satellite
    > Corporation, ET Docket No. 98-206 (Mar. 19, 2001); Hughes
    > Reconsideration Petition; Petition for Reconsideration of PanAmSat
    > Corporation, ET Docket No. 98-206 (Mar. 19, 2001); Petition for
    > Reconsideration of Satellite Broadcasting and Communications
    > Association, ET Docket No. 98-206 (Mar. 19, 2001); Skybridge
    > Reconsideration Petition.

[^15]: *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,* FCC 02-116, *Memorandum
    Opinion and Second Report and Order,* ET Docket No. 98-206, (rel.
    May 23, 2002) \[hereinafter *First MO&O and Second R&O*\].

[^16]: Reply Comments of the Boeing Company, April 9, 2001; Opposition
    to Petitions for Reconsideration of Skybridge L.L.C., April 24,
    2001.

[^17]: The Third Memorandum Opinion and Order will address
    reconsideration requests regarding the technical implementations of
    various GSO and NGSO FSS sharing regimes.

[^18]: *See First R&O* ¶ 126.

[^19]: Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 18.

[^20]: *See* *Id.* at 19 & n.46.

[^21]: *Id.* at 20.

[^22]: See *Id.* at 20, citing the Comments and Replies of the Society
    of Broadcast Engineers on March 2, 1999, March 29, 1999, and January
    12, 2000 discussing sharing possibilities.

[^23]: Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 21-22.

[^24]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 74.602.

[^25]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106 NG53.

[^26]: Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 21.

[^27]: *Id*.

[^28]: Reply Comments of the Boeing Company at 16 (Apr. 9, 2001).

[^29]: While a significant amount of spectrum was made available for
    NGSO FSS use in this proceeding, the "carve-out" at 13.15-13.2125
    GHz could prevent the effective use of other portions of their
    allocated spectrum.

[^30]: *See* Appendix A. We note that our Rules originally afforded
    BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations exclusive use, relative to fixed
    services, of the four channels in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band within
    the top 100 markets, but the *First R&O* extended BAS/CARS mobile
    pickup operations' exclusive use of the band to all 211 television
    markets enumerated in our Rules. This decision reverses the
    extension of exclusive use of the band by BAS/CARS mobile stations
    beyond the top 100 television markets. *See First R&O* ¶ 126
    (discussing extension of BAS/CARS exclusive use in
    47 C.F.R. § 74.602 n.2 from 50 km radius of top 100 markets to all
    U.S. markets).

[^31]: *See* Appendix A.

[^32]: *See First R&O* ¶ 125; Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 22
    (identifying siting away from key urban markets as support for
    feasibility of sharing possibilities in the 13.15-13.2125 GHz band).

[^33]: BAS/CARS mobile pickup operations may need to be deployed
    anywhere in the United States with limited notice to cover news
    events.

[^34]: *See* Comments of Society of Broadcast Engineers, Inc., ET Docket
    No. 98-206, January 12, 2000, ¶ 7 (discussing the shielding
    properties of berms and other natural topographic conditions).

[^35]: *See* Boeing Reply Comments at 22 (April 14, 1999). Given the
    maximum EIRP and sidelobe levels described in Boeing's Comments, it
    appears that the Boeing system's gateway earth stations will meet
    the EIRP limit adopted for the 13.15 GHz band without any additional
    shielding. This is due in part to the minimum operational angle of
    10 degrees.

[^36]: *See First R&O* at 128 ("Further, we will not license any NGSO
    FSS earth station in the 12.75-13.15 GHz and 13.2125-13.25 GHz bands
    until appropriate coordination rules are adopted.").

[^37]: *First R&O* at 50, n.270.

[^38]: *Id.* ¶¶ 125, 28 ("\[S\]ome form of geographic protection area
    will be developed for locating NGSO FSS gateway earth stations that
    should prevent NGSO FSS gateway earth stations from hindering mobile
    and temporary fixed BAS use of this band."). In the separate
    proceeding, we will address the Joint "Growth Zone" Proposal of FWCC
    and Skybridge, for "growth zone" siting restrictions and other
    coordination obligations and procedures between FSS, fixed and
    mobile services. *See* Letter from SkyBridge and FWCC to Magalie
    Roman Salas, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission at 3
    (December 8, 1999) \[hereinafter *Growth Zone Proposal*\]

[^39]: *Amendment Of Parts 2, 25, and 97 Of The Commission\'s Rules With
    Regard To The Mobile Satellite Service Above 1 GHz*, ET Docket
    98-142, *Report and Order*, FCC 02-23, 17 FCC Rcd 2658 (rel. Feb. 7,
    2002); 47 C.F.R. § 25.201 (defining the mobile-satellite service).

[^40]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 25.208; *see also* *First R&O* ¶ 39.

[^41]: *See* ITU-R Working Party 9A (WP 9A) and Joint Working Party 4-9S
    (JWP 4-9S).

[^42]: *See* WRC-2000 *Provisional Final Acts* at Article S21.

[^43]: *See* *First R&O* ¶¶ 35-37 (discussing comments).

[^44]: *See First R&O* ¶ 42; 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.203 & 101.103.

[^45]: *See First R&O* ¶ 42.

[^46]: *See First R&O* ¶ 41.

[^47]: Skybridge points to the conclusions of the ITU-R study groups WP
    9A, JWP 4-9S, and JTG 4-9-11. *See* Skybridge Reconsideration
    Petition at 47.

[^48]: *Id*.

[^49]: *See generally* 47 C.F.R. §25.208.

[^50]: Unlike GSO FSS systems, NGSO FSS satellites are in constant
    motion across the sky in different arcs.

[^51]: *First R&O* ¶ 38.

[^52]: *Id.* ¶ 39.

[^53]: *See* ITU-R Study Groups, *Sharing Between Non-Geostationary
    Satellites in the FSS and the Fixed Service in the 10-12 GHz
    Frequency Range*, France, Doc 4-9S/67-E, *available at*
    http://www.itu.int/itudocr/itu-r/archives/rsg/1998-00/rjwp4-9/49524_ww7.doc.
    Specifically, we note that ITU's modeling is very conservative in
    that it assumed that all of the satellites in view were transmitting
    at the maximum power toward the fixed station. While the model
    employed a very conservative interference threshold for the fixed
    service receiver, it did not specifically address fixed service
    links with elevation angles greater than 5 degrees.

[^54]: We specifically note that some ITU study groups specifically
    addressed analysis of a worst case with main-beam coupling where
    "probability to see a satellite passing the main-beam of the FS
    receiver antenna is the highest, given its latitude and pointing
    elevation." *See* ITU-R Doc 4-9S/67-E, *Sharing Between
    Non-Geostationary Satellites in the FSS and the Fixed Service in the
    10-12 GHz Frequency Range*, France, *available at*
    <http://www.itu.int/itudocr/itu-r/archives/rsg/1998-00/rjwp4-9/49524_ww7.doc>.
    Although the ultimate ITU recommendation did not speak directly to
    the case of elevation angles, we find that the recommendation
    strongly implied consideration of such a case in stating that the
    "specified pfd limits are based on analyses that assumed every
    satellite in the constellation produced emissions at the maximum
    levels allowed by the pfd limits *for all angles of arrival*." *See*
    ITU-R Recommendation SF.1482, *Maximum Allowable Values Of PFD
    Produced At The Earth\'s Surface By NON-GSO Satellites In The FSS
    Operating In The 10.7-12.75 GHz Band* (emphasis added).

[^55]: Especially for the short path links in question, neither the
    Commission's own Universal Licensing System ("ULS") nor third-party
    databases record the variety of information with sufficient
    specificity and accuracy to effectively complete an analysis. We
    conclude that requiring coordination based on these limitations
    could be ultimately unproductive.

[^56]: *See e.g*., 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.203, 101.103*.*

[^57]: *First R&O* ¶ 30. 47 C.F.R. § 25.201 defines NGSO FSS gateway
    earth station as follows:

    > Gateway earth station. A gateway earth station is an earth station
    > complex consisting of multiple interconnecting earth station
    > antennas supporting the communication routing and switching
    > functions of a non-geostationary satellite orbit fixed-satellite
    > service (NGSO FSS) system as a whole. A gateway earth station in
    > the NGSO FSS: (1) does not originate or terminate
    > radiocommunication traffic, but interconnects multiple
    > non-collocated user earth stations operating in frequency bands
    > other than designated gateway bands, through a satellite with
    > other primary terrestrial networks, such as the public switched
    > telephone network (PSTN) and/or Internet networks; (2) is
    > prohibited from connecting directly with a private communication
    > network; (3) may also be used for telemetry, tracking, and command
    > transmissions for the same NGSO FSS system; (4) may include
    > multiple antennas, each required to meet the antenna performance
    > standard in Section 25.209(h), located within an area of one
    > second latitude by one second longitude; and (5) is considered as
    > a separate gateway earth station complex if it is out side of the
    > area of one second latitude by one second longitude of (4) above,
    > for the purposes of coordination with terrestrial services.

[^58]: *Id*.

[^59]: Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 48.

[^60]: *See* *Growth Zone Proposal*, *supra* note 37, at 3.

[^61]: *Id.*

[^62]: 47 C.F.R. § 25.201.

[^63]: *See* Appendix A.

[^64]: *See* *First R&O* ¶ 143.

[^65]: *See* Provisional Final Acts of WRC-2000, No. 5.502.

[^66]: *See* *First R&O* ¶ 143.

[^67]: *See* *Id.* ¶ 143.

[^68]: Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 48-49.

[^69]: *See* *First R&O* ¶ 144.

[^70]: *See* Letter from William T. Hatch, Associate Administrator,
    Office of Spectrum Management, NTIA, to Dale Hatfield, Chief, Office
    of Engineering and Technology (October 20, 2000).

[^71]: *See* Letter from Fredrick R. Wentland, Office of Spectrum
    Management, NTIA, to Fred Thomas, FCC IRAC Liaison Representative
    (Sep. 20, 2002).

[^72]: *See* Appendix A.

[^73]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106; *see also First R&O* ¶ 135; Amendment of
    Parts 2, 25, and 90 of the Commission\'s Rules to Allocate the
    13.75-14.0 GHz Band to the Fixed-Satellite Service*,* ET Docket No.
    96-20, *Report and Order,* 11 FCC Rcd 11951 (1996)**.**

[^74]: *See* *First R&O* ¶ 145.

[^75]: *Id.* ¶ 145

[^76]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106 US357.

[^77]: Skybridge Reconsideration Petition at 48-49.

[^78]: *Notice* ¶ 39.

[^79]: *Id.* ¶¶ 43, 50, & 51.

[^80]: *See First R&O* ¶¶ 145-46 (noting WRC-2000 changes to footnote
    S5.503 were intended to adequately protect TDRSS operations with 51
    dBW/6 megahertz e.i.r.p. density limit, but did not account for
    increased bandwidth needed to support International Space Station
    operations).

[^81]: *Id.* ¶¶ 137-46 (discussing NGSO FSS and TDRSS sharing concerns).

[^82]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 2.106 US355.

[^83]: International Telecommunications Union Radio Regulations, Volume
    1, Ch. 1, Article 29.

[^84]: Again we direct the petitioner to our Rules governing
    requirements and procedures for the filing of petitions for
    reconsideration. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.429 (providing standards for
    admission of new facts in requesting reconsideration of Commission
    action); *see also supra* note 13.

[^85]: 47 C.F.R. § 1.1307(b).

[^86]: *See* *First R&O* ¶ 251 ("*It is recommended* that two-way
    subscriber equipment, such as that used to connect to NGSO FSS
    systems, be installed by professional personnel, thereby minimizing
    the possibility that the antenna will be placed in a location that
    is likely to expose subscribers or other persons to the transmit
    signal at close proximity and for an extended period of time.")
    (emphasis added).

[^87]: Hughes Reconsideration Petition at 4.

[^88]: *Id.* at 3.

[^89]: *See* *Promotion of Competitive Networks in Local
    Telecommunications Markets*, 15 FCC Rcd 22983 ¶¶ 117-19 (2000).

[^90]: *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).

[^91]: *See* *Notice of Proposed Rule Making*, ET Docket No. 98-206, 14
    FCC Rcd. 1131, 1194 (1998).

[^92]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 604.

[^93]: *Id*. § 601(6).

[^94]: *See* *Id.* § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition
    of \"small business concern\" in 15 U.S.C. § 632). Pursuant to the
    RFA, the statutory definition of a small business applies \"unless
    an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the
    Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public
    comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are
    appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such
    definition(s) in the Federal Register.\" *Id.* § 601(3).

[^95]: *See* Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632 (1996).

[^96]: *See* 5 U.S.C. § 601(4).

[^97]: *See* 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICs code 51320.

[^98]: U.S. Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992 Census
    of Transportation, Communications, Utilities, UC92-S-1, Subject
    Series, Establishment and Firm Size, Table 2D, Employment Size of
    Firms: 1992, (issued May 1995).

[^99]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 515120.

[^100]: *Id*. at NAICS code 515111.

[^101]: 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).

[^102]: *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate.

[^103]: *Id.* At NAICS code 513112.

[^104]: *Id.* The census data do not provide a more precise estimate.

[^105]: 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS code 517212.

[^106]: 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).

[^107]: *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."

[^108]: 5 U.S.C. § 603(c)(1) -- (c)(4).