638 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 

transmission meets both of the 

following: 

(1) Is for a Schedule II drug, as 

defined and updated in 21 CFR 1308.12. 

(2) Uses the standard identified in 

paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section. 

■ 3. Section 162.1302 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 162.1302 Standards for referral 

certification and authorization transaction. 

* * * * * 

(d) For the period on and after [DATE 

180 DAYS AFTER THE AFTER 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE 

IN THE Federal Register], the Quantity 

Prescribed (460–ET) field must be 

treated as required where the 

transmission meets both of the 

following: 

(1) Is for a Schedule II drug, as 

defined and updated in 21 CFR 1308.12. 

(2) Uses the standard identified in 

paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section. 

■ 4. Section 162.1802 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 162.1802 Standards for coordination of 

benefits information transaction. 

* * * * * 

(d) For the period on and after [DATE 

180 DAYS AFTER THE PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register], the Quantity Prescribed (460– 

ET) field must be treated as required 

where the transmission meets both of 

the following: 

(1) Is for a Schedule II drug, as 

defined and updated in 21 CFR 1308.12. 

(2) Uses the standard identified in 

paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section. 

Dated: December 18, 2018. 

Alex M. Azar II, 

Secretary, Department of Health and Human 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2019–00554 Filed 1–30–19; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4120–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 25 

[IB Docket No. 18–314; FCC 18–165] 

Further Streamlining FCC Rules 

Governing Satellite Services 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC) 

proposes to create a new, optional, 

unified license to include both space 

stations and earth stations operating in 

a geostationary-satellite orbit, fixedsatellite service satellite network; and to 

repeal or modify unnecessarily 

burdensome rules governing satellite 

services, such as annual reporting 

requirements. 

DATES: Comments are due March 18, 

2019. Reply comments are due April 16, 

2019. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by IB Docket No. 18–314, by 

any of the following methods: 

• FCC website: http://apps.fcc.gov/ 

ecfs. Follow the instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– 

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clay 

DeCell, 202–418–0803. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 18– 

165, adopted and released November 15, 

2018. The full text of the NPRM is 

available online at https://docs.fcc.gov/ 

public/attachments/FCC-18-165A1.pdf. 

The NPRM is also available for 

inspection and copying during business 

hours in the FCC Reference Information 

Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, 

Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities, 

send an email to FCC504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (TTY). 

Comment Filing Requirements 

Interested parties may file comments 

and reply comments on or before the 

dates indicated in the DATES section 

above. Comments may be filed using the 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS). 

• Electronic Filers. Comments may be 

filed electronically using the internet by 

accessing the ECFS, http://apps.fcc.gov/ 

ecfs. 

• Paper Filers. Parties who file by 

paper must include an original and one 

copy of each filing. 

Filings may be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th Street SW, Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand 

deliveries must be held together with 

rubber bands or fasteners. Any 

envelopes must be disposed of before 

entering the building. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 

Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 

20701. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW, 

Washington DC 20554. 

• Persons with Disabilities. To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

persons with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), or 

to request reasonable accommodations 

for filing comments (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.), send an email to FCC504@

fcc.gov or call 202–418–0530 (voice) or 

202–418–0432 (TTY). 

Ex Parte Presentations 

Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.1200(a), this 

proceeding will be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance 

with the Commission’s ex parte rules. 

Persons making ex parte presentations 

must file a copy of any written 

presentation or a memorandum 

summarizing any oral presentation 

within two business days after the 

presentation (unless a different deadline 

applicable to the Sunshine period 

applies). Persons making oral ex parte 

presentations are reminded that 

memoranda summarizing the 

presentation must (1) list all persons 

attending or otherwise participating in 

the meeting at which the ex parte 

presentation was made, and (2) 

summarize all data presented and 

arguments made during the 

presentation. If the presentation 

consisted in whole or in part of the 

presentation of data or arguments 

already reflected in the presenter’s 

written comments, memoranda or other 

filings in the proceeding, the presenter 

may provide citations to such data or 

arguments in his or her prior comments, 

memoranda, or other filings (specifying 

the relevant page and/or paragraph 

numbers where such data or arguments 

can be found) in lieu of summarizing 

them in the memorandum. Documents 

shown or given to Commission staff 

during ex parte meetings are deemed to 

be written ex parte presentations and 

must be filed consistent with 47 CFR 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 639 

1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 

47 CFR 1.49(f) or for which the 

Commission has made available a 

method of electronic filing, written ex 

parte presentations and memoranda 

summarizing oral ex parte 

presentations, and all attachments 

thereto, must be filed through the 

electronic comment filing system 

available for that proceeding, and must 

be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, 

.xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants 

in this proceeding should familiarize 

themselves with the Commission’s ex 

parte rules. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This document contains proposed 

new and modified information 

collection requirements. The 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burdens, 

invites the general public and the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) to 

comment on the information collection 

requirements contained in this 

document, as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– 

13. In addition, pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on 

how we might further reduce the 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees. 

Synopsis 

Under the Commission’s rules, 

satellite operators must follow separate 

application and authorization processes 

for the satellites and earth stations that 

make up their networks and have no 

option for a single, unified network 

license. In this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, we propose to create a 

new, optional, unified license to include 

both space stations and earth stations 

operating in a geostationary-satellite 

orbit, fixed-satellite service (GSO FSS) 

satellite network. In addition, we 

propose to repeal or modify 

unnecessarily burdensome rules in Part 

25 governing satellite services, such as 

annual reporting requirements. These 

proposals would greatly simplify the 

Commission’s licensing and regulation 

of satellite systems. 

Comprehensive Authorization for Space 

Station and Earth Station Operations 

Background. The Commission issues 

separate licenses for earth stations and 

space stations in a satellite network 

based on the different application 

requirements in 47 CFR 25.114, for 

space stations, and 47 CFR 25.115, for 

earth stations. The goal of these 

decades-old, dual licensing paths is to 

provide for interference-free operation 

of both the ground component and 

space component of the satellite 

network. The satellite licensee, 

however, is often held responsible for 

the operation of both the space stations 

and earth stations in its satellite 

network. Internationally, this is done 

through coordination of the entire 

satellite network (earth stations and 

space stations) by the satellite operator. 

Domestically, conditions are often 

imposed in satellite licenses that require 

the satellite licensee to ensure 

compliance with earth station power 

limits as well. These earth station power 

limits derive from satellite network 

coordination, the Commission’s ‘‘twodegree spacing’’ policies, or other 

sources. For example, GSO FSS satellite 

applicants in ‘‘two-degree spacing’’ 

bands certify that the earth stations in 

their networks will comply with certain 

prescribed routine power limits, unless 

other power levels are successfully 

coordinated with adjacent satellite 

operators. At the same time, earth 

station applicants in the same ‘‘twodegree spacing’’ bands must either 

demonstrate or certify compliance with 

these same routine power limits, unless 

otherwise coordinated by the satellite 

operator. Similarly, earth station 

licensees are often required to comply 

with any other, relevant conditions in 

the satellite license as well. These 

overlaps arise with respect to operations 

coordinated between satellite operators; 

however, site-specific coordination of 

earth stations with terrestrial stations 

are rarely included in space station 

authorizations and must be conducted 

at each specific earth station site 

selected. Observance of restrictions from 

terrestrial coordination is the 

responsibility of earth station licensees, 

who may or may not be owned or 

controlled by the space station operator. 

Terrestrial operations, in contrast, 

may sometimes be performed under a 

single authorization for both base 

stations and user terminals. In its 

comments, EchoStar Satellite Operating 

Corporation and Hughes Network 

Systems, LLC (together, EchoStar) urge 

the Commission to adopt a similar, 

comprehensive authorization for 

satellite services. EchoStar argues that 

such a comprehensive authorization 

would offer satellite-service providers 

additional flexibility to configure their 

networks of satellites, gateway earth 

stations, and user terminals. 

Proposal. We propose to adopt an 

optional licensing structure of a single 

network license for GSO FSS space 

stations and earth stations. In addition 

to providing greater flexibility, this 

could dramatically simplify how we 

authorize earth stations. Today, earth 

station applicants are required to submit 

information that duplicates, and indeed 

is more burdensome than, the technical 

information provided by satellite 

operators in space station applications. 

Under a single network license, these 

separate earth station requirements 

would be unnecessary. 

A single satellite network license 

could also expedite the deployment of 

new earth stations, and therefore 

services to the public. In general, we 

anticipate that the satellite operator— 

particularly an operator with different 

ownership than the earth stations with 

which it communicates—would use 

contractual agreements with earth 

station end users to ensure it has the 

technical and administrative means to 

guarantee compliance with its network 

parameters and authorization, much as 

it does today. Because a separate earth 

station license would not be required, in 

cases where terrestrial coordination is 

unnecessary, a new end user may be 

able to begin providing service as soon 

as it had contracted with the satellite 

operator, without seeking additional 

Commission approval. Similarly, an 

earth station could begin operating 

under the network license of another 

satellite as soon as an agreement was 

reached with the new satellite operator, 

subject to any required coordination. 

Thus, if successfully implemented, 

satellite network licenses could 

eliminate the need for many, if not 

most, earth station applications, which 

make up the bulk of applications 

received in the satellite services today. 

We expect that a comprehensive 

satellite network license would 

generally follow the application 

requirements for space stations and 

would be held by the space station 

operator. It would contain all authority 

necessary to operate space stations and 

blanket-licensed earth stations, and 

conditional authority to operate earth 

stations requiring individual 

coordination, subject to successful 

completion of the coordination. Other 

earth station requirements, such as 

build-out conditions, would be 

incorporated into the single license. 

We propose initially to limit this 

unified license to GSO FSS space 

stations and earth stations in bands in 

which the Commission has adopted 

standard power limits under our twodegree spacing policy, excluding 

frequencies under 10 GHz at this time. 

In these bands, the Commission has 

adopted standard power limits on both 

uplink and downlink transmissions and 

has a well-defined sharing environment 

and licensing regime. We invite 

comment, however, on expanding such 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
640 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 

a licensing structure to other bands and 

services, in particular bands subject to 

47 CFR 25.136 in which the 

Commission has already adopted 

detailed sharing rules between the FSS 

and other services. We also request 

comment on the integration of earth 

station and space station requirements 

into a single license, including whether 

certain services, frequency bands, or 

types of operation would prove easier or 

more difficult to authorize under a 

single satellite network license than 

others. Specifically, we seek comment 

on the costs and benefits associated 

with different scopes for a unified 

license option. And while we are 

proposing a unified licensing structure, 

whereby one license would cover both 

space and earth stations, we invite 

comment on whether a similar approval 

process could be implemented for 

market access requests that include 

authority for multiple earth stations. 

Specifically, we propose that under a 

unified license, the GSO FSS applicant 

would submit the space station 

application information required by 47 

CFR 25.114 and 25.140. If the operator 

certified compliance with standard 

uplink power levels in 47 CFR 25.140, 

it would not need to provide any 

additional information on earth station 

performance or verified performance 

currently required by 47 CFR 25.115(a) 

or 25.132. The applicant would need to 

certify under 47 CFR 25.115(i) that the 

use of any contention protocol will be 

reasonable. Site coordination and other 

issues specific to the particular 

locations of earth stations would be 

completed and notified separately by 

the earth station end user, as described 

below. 

A space station operator and licensee 

under a joint space station and earth 

station license would need to maintain 

sufficient control over all the operations 

under the license required of a 

Commission licensee pursuant to 

Commission precedent. As noted, we 

anticipate that this control could be 

exercised through contractual means 

where necessary, but we invite 

comment on the issues of control 

residing with the space station operator, 

and on what kinds of contractual 

provisions would be appropriate to 

address such issues. Similarly, we seek 

comment on whether any changes to our 

control provisions in 47 CFR 25.271 

would be necessary to accommodate our 

unified license proposal. We also seek 

comment on whether, as an alternative 

or addition to the unified license 

proposal herein, we should maintain 

separate licenses for earth stations 

communicating with GSO FSS space 

stations, but permit such earth station 

applicants to certify that they will 

comply with the terms and conditions 

of the space station network with which 

the earth station will communicate as a 

substitute for filing the technical 

information about the proposed earth 

station operations currently required to 

be submitted by earth station applicants 

under Schedule B to the earth station 

application. We seek comment on the 

costs and benefits to both the 

Commission and applicants from this 

alternative proposal. 

We also seek comment on creating a 

new application fee category in 47 CFR 

1.1107 for unified space station/earth 

station licenses based on the fees for 

geostationary space station applications, 

and comment on the appropriate values 

for the various types of applications. 

The benefit of a new fee category would 

be to appropriately reflect the dual earth 

station and space station elements of the 

unified license. This new application 

fee category could include initial license 

applications, license modifications, 

license transfers, and requests for 

special temporary authority. 

Alternatively, we seek comment on 

applying the current space station 

application fees to unified license 

applications as well. In this regard, we 

expect that the majority of Commission 

staff review of a unified license 

application would concern the 

information currently provided in space 

station applications. 

Some earth stations operate in bands 

shared with other users, such as 

terrestrial operators, and require sitebased coordination to ensure successful 

operation. These earth station 

coordination agreements are currently 

submitted in individual, searchable 

earth station files. To maintain 

transparency and ease of access to sitespecific earth station coordination 

information, we propose to require earth 

station end users to separately file this 

information with the Commission, as 

today is done in the context of a license 

application, rather than to have all earth 

station coordination agreements 

submitted in the single network license 

file. These filings would be made under 

a normal earth station call sign and file 

number in the International Bureau 

Filing System for ease of searchability; 

however, they would not constitute an 

application for authorization. Rather, 

these filings would demonstrate that the 

earth station has been successfully 

coordinated, and therefore can fulfill the 

coordination requirements in a unified, 

network license under which it wishes 

to operate. We anticipate that 

Commission staff would review the 

coordination filings for completeness 

and accuracy, and after a positive 

determination place the filings on 

public notice for comment under 47 

CFR 25.151. After the comment period, 

the Commission would indicate its 

approval of the filings in the 

International Bureau Filing System 

before the earth station operations could 

commence under any unified network 

license, subject to the terms and 

restrictions of both the license and 

coordination agreements. This process 

for reviewing coordination filings is 

necessarily site-specific and would be 

conducted in substantially the same 

way as it is today in a license 

application; however, other elements of 

the earth station application that are 

today required and reviewed by 

Commission staff before public notice 

would not be necessary, lowering the 

overall burden on both earth station 

operators and Commission staff. We 

invite comment on this procedure and 

ways to simplify and streamline the 

submission and any review of these 

filings. More broadly, we seek comment 

on the costs of implementing unified 

space station and earth station license 

for both operators and the Commission, 

including administrative costs, and on 

the benefits of such a license for both 

the Commission and licensees. 

To maintain the validity of its 

coordination filings, an earth station 

end user would be required to fulfill the 

buildout requirements for the type of 

earth station. This period is usually one 

year. In bands shared with other 

services, an earth station buildout 

requirement can prevent warehousing of 

spectrum to prevent deployment in 

other services. Other showings specific 

to the particular earth station location or 

configuration, such as antenna height 

restrictions under Part 17 or radiation 

hazard limits under Part 1, section I, 

could be submitted in an individual 

earth station file as well. Where only 

certifications are required, and are today 

made by the licensee under a blanket 

earth station license, we propose the 

satellite operator and joint licensee be 

made responsible for such certifications 

and for ensuring, through contractual or 

other means, that these requirements are 

met by earth stations communicating 

with its space station. 

Build-Out Requirements for Certain 

Individually Licensed Earth Stations 

The Spectrum Frontiers proceeding 

identified certain frequency bands for 

flexible wireless use, while at the same 

time allowing for the deployment of a 

limited number of earth stations that, 

under certain conditions, would be 

either entitled to protection from 

terrestrial stations (receive earth 

stations) or not required to protect 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 641 

terrestrial stations (transmit earth 

stations). These individually licensed 

earth stations are expected to be used as 

gateway stations and not to serve 

individual consumers. Current satellite 

design contemplates the use of very 

narrow beams pointed to the locations 

where these gateway earth stations will 

be located. Therefore, certainty about 

these gateway locations is required early 

in the satellite design process. 

Given that, there is a disconnect 

between the one-year earth station 

buildout requirement and the time 

allowed for a satellite to be launched 

and brought into operation (for instance, 

a geostationary satellite has to be 

operational five years from the grant of 

the authorization). Having a gateway 

earth station built within one year could 

mean that a significant investment 

would remain unused for as long as four 

years. Moreover, without a satellite to 

communicate with, this gateway earth 

station would not even be able to meet 

the buildout rule. Therefore, we propose 

to better align the buildout requirements 

for space stations and associated 

gateway earth stations to ensure 

certainty and allow a more efficient 

satellite design. We propose that earth 

stations authorized through 47 CFR 

25.136 have a buildout requirement 

defined by the date the associated 

satellite becomes operational, up to five 

years for a GSO satellite or six years for 

an NGSO satellite if the satellite is put 

into operation at the end of its milestone 

period, but in any event no less than the 

one year period currently applicable. 

This means that, if the associated 

satellite is already in orbit or is 

launched within one year of the date of 

the earth station application, the oneyear buildout requirement remains 

applicable to this earth station. We seek 

comment on this proposal. 

Annual Reporting Requirements for 

Satellite Operators 

Section 25.170 requires satellite 

operators to annually disclose any 

authorized satellites or spectrum 

unavailable for service, a contact point 

to resolve interference, and the 

construction progress of any authorized 

replacement satellites. EchoStar urges 

the Commission to repeal these annual 

reporting requirements as unnecessary 

burdens on satellite operators. While 

these requirements were recently 

consolidated and harmonized, our 

experience has been that staff do not 

make regular use of most of these 

reports. We further believe that the 

requested information often may be 

duplicative or unnecessary. We 

therefore propose to remove the annual 

reporting requirement for satellite 

operators, except to retain the 

requirement that satellite operators 

confirm yearly their point of contact 

information, which is necessary to 

resolve any interference disputes, and 

for continuing operations purposes. We 

propose, however, to move this 

requirement to an adjacent rule, 47 CFR 

25.171, covering satellite points of 

contact. We seek comment on this 

proposal. 

Out-of-Band Emissions 

The out-of-band emissions rule in 47 

CFR 25.202(f) was adopted in 1973 to 

limit unwanted emissions that may 

cause harmful interference to operators 

in adjacent bands. The limits, however, 

are outdated and have led to confusion 

among some operators. For example, 

some have apparently interpreted the 

attenuation schedule prescribed in 47 

CFR 25.202(f) to take as a reference the 

in-band power spectral density of the 

emission, which would make a 

significant portion of the assigned 

frequency band unusable because it 

would require an abrupt 25 dB 

attenuation at band edge. We expect that 

updating this rule to conform to 

internationally harmonized standards 

would eliminate most such 

misinterpretations—misinterpretations 

which could otherwise encourage 

inefficient satellite designs or deter the 

construction and launch of some 

satellites altogether. 

In place of this decades-old provision, 

therefore, we propose to adopt a clear, 

up to date international standard, 

Recommendation ITU–R SM.1541–6, 

‘‘Unwanted emissions in the out-ofband domain,’’ which was developed 

with U.S. input. Rather than requiring 

an abrupt attenuation at band edge, this 

out-of-band mask provides for a smooth 

transition starting at band edge. We seek 

comment on this proposal. We believe 

this ITU Recommendation is reasonably 

available to interested parties because it 

is available free of charge on the ITU 

website, https://www.itu.int/rec/R-RECSM.1541-6-201508-I/en, and would also 

be made available for inspection at 

Commission headquarters. 

Dismissal of Applications 

The Commission requires all 

applications under Part 25 to be 

substantially complete when filed. An 

application that is not substantially 

complete will be returned to the 

applicant under the rules without the 

ability to correct the substantial defects 

and maintain its original filing. 

EchoStar notes that space station 

applications are complex, and that 

under this policy errors in an 

application could cause it to be returned 

and lose its place in the first-come, firstserved queue. EchoStar therefore 

suggests that we allow applicants to 

correct any errors or omissions within 

60 days of a Commission request. 

EchoStar also proposes that applications 

be accepted for filing automatically 

within 30 days of filing, unless the 

Commission determines otherwise. 

We invite comment on these 

suggestions, including any effect on our 

policy for ‘‘major’’ amendments under 

47 CFR 25.116 that are considered as 

newly filed applications under the 

Commission’s space station queue or 

processing round regimes. We also ask 

how proposals for cure periods can be 

crafted to prevent the filing of 

placeholder applications designed to 

reserve the position of a woefully 

incomplete application in the firstcome, first-served queue. Should we 

specify minimum criteria for acceptance 

for filing? If so, what should they be? 

Notification of Minor Earth Station 

Modifications 

When an earth station operator makes 

certain minor modifications to its 

licensed earth station that do not 

increase the risk of interference, such as 

changes that do not increase power, add 

frequencies, or repoint the antenna 

beyond any coordinated range, the 

Commission requires only a notification 

of such changes within 30 days of the 

modification. In an ex parte filing, 

Iridium argues that such modifications 

within the scope of the authorization 

and described in 47 CFR 25.118(a)(4) 

should not even require a notification to 

the Commission because they do not 

impact other service providers. 

Similarly, Iridium asks that the 

Commission clarify that the addition of 

new transceiver and antenna 

combinations to an existing blanket 

earth station license do not require prior 

Commission notification when they 

meet the requirements currently listed 

in 47 CFR 25.118(a)(4). 

We believe Iridium’s proposed 

changes would streamline minor earth 

station changes that do not pose a risk 

of additional interference to other users, 

and therefore propose to implement 

them. However, we invite comment on 

whether such rule changes would have 

any impact on the reliability of 

information filed with the Commission 

in earth station applications. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission 

has prepared this Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 

possible significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities by 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
642 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 

the policies and rules proposed in this 

Notice. We request written public 

comments on this IRFA. Commenters 

must identify their comments as 

responses to the IRFA and must file the 

comments by the deadlines for 

comments on the Notice provided above 

in the DATES section. The Commission 

will send a copy of the Notice, 

including this IRFA, to the Chief 

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. In addition, 

the Notice and IRFA (or summaries 

thereof) are being published in the 

Federal Register. 

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the 

Proposed Rules 

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

seeks comment on creating a new, 

streamlined license for both space 

stations and earth stations and other 

streamlining measures for the 

authorization of earth stations. It also 

proposes to remove the annual reporting 

requirements for satellite operators, 

updating the out-of-band emission 

limits for satellite operators, and other 

corrections in 47 CFR part 25. 

B. Legal Basis 

The proposed action is authorized 

under Sections 4(i), 11, 303, and 316 of 

the Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303, 

316. 

C. Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities To Which the 

Proposed Rules May Apply 

The RFA directs agencies to provide 

a description of, and, where feasible, an 

estimate of, the number of small entities 

that may be affected by the proposed 

rules, if adopted. The RFA generally 

defines the term ‘‘small entity’’ as 

having the same meaning as the terms 

‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ 

and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 

In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ 

has the same meaning as the term 

‘‘small business concern’’ under the 

Small Business Act. 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). 

Satellite Telecommunications. This 

category comprises firms ‘‘primarily 

engaged in providing 

telecommunications services to other 

establishments in the 

telecommunications and broadcasting 

industries by forwarding and receiving 

communications signals via a system of 

satellites or reselling satellite 

telecommunications.’’ The category has 

a small business size standard of $32.5 

million or less in average annual 

receipts, under SBA rules. For this 

category, Census Bureau data for 2012 

show that there were a total of 333 firms 

that operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 299 firms had annual receipts of 

less than $25 million. Consequently, we 

estimate that the majority of satellite 

telecommunications providers are small 

entities. 

D. Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements for Small Entities 

The NPRM proposes to remove the 

reporting requirements for satellite 

operators and on creating a new, 

streamlined network license for both 

satellites and earth stations, in addition 

to other streamlining measures for the 

licensing of earth stations. These would 

reduce paperwork costs for such 

satellite and earth station operators. 

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and 

Significant Alternatives Considered 

The RFA requires an agency to 

describe any significant, specifically 

small business, alternatives that it has 

considered in reaching its proposed 

approach, which may include the 

following four alternatives (among 

others): ‘‘(1) The establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) the clarification, 

consolidation, or simplification of 

compliance and reporting requirements 

under the rules 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.’’ 

The NPRM seeks comment on 

particular measures to streamline the 

licensing of earth stations, which would 

reduce economic impacts on small 

entities. It does not envision increasing 

the economic impacts on small entities. 

Specifically, the NPRM requests 

comment on eliminating the need for 

earth station operators, including small 

entities, to notify the Commission of 

certain minor modifications to their 

earth stations. The NPRM also seeks 

comment on relaxing the acceptability 

for filing standard for part 25 

applications, including earth station 

applications. And it invites comment on 

a clearer, modern standard for out of 

band emissions, including those from 

earth stations. Other streamlining 

measures are also proposed, and 

comment is sought on ways to further 

reduce burdens in implementing the 

proposals in the NPRM. 

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed 

Rules 

None. 

Incorporation by Reference 

In § 25.108, we propose to incorporate 

by reference Recommendation ITU–R 

SM.1541–6, ‘‘Unwanted emissions in 

the out-of-band domain,’’ from August 

2015, which is available online for free 

at https://www.itu.int/rec/R-RECSM.1541-6-201508-I/en, Copyright 2015, 

for use in § 25.202. This contains a 

standard for out-of-band emissions that 

we propose to require satellite and earth 

station licensees to comply with. In 

addition to being freely available online, 

this document would be made available 

for inspection at FCC Headquarters and 

it available for purchase from the 

International Telecommunications 

Union, Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva 

20 Switzerland, www.itu.int. We 

therefore believe this material is 

reasonably available to interested 

parties. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 25 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Earth stations, Incorporation 

by reference, Satellites. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Cecilia Sigmund, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the 

Secretary. 

Proposed Rules 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 25 as follows: 

PART 25—SATELLITE 

COMMUNICATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 25 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 

307, 309, 310, 319, 332, 605, and 721, unless 

otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Amend § 25.108 by adding 

paragraph (c)(10) to read as follows: 

§ 25.108 Incorporation by reference. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(10) Recommendation ITU–R 

SM.1541–6, ‘‘Unwanted emissions in 

the out-of-band domain,’’ August 2015, 

https://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-SM.1541- 

6-201508-I/en, Copyright 2015. 

Incorporation by reference approved for 

§ 25.202(f). 

■ 3. Amend § 25.118 by 

■ a. Removing paragraph (a)(4) and 

■ b. Revising paragraph (b). 

The revision reads as follows: 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 21 / Thursday, January 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 643 

§ 25.118 Modifications not requiring prior 

authorization. 

* * * * * 

(b) Earth station modifications, 

notification not required. 

Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this 

section: 

(1) Equipment in an authorized earth 

station may be replaced without prior 

authorization and without notifying the 

Commission if the new equipment is 

electrically identical to the existing 

equipment. 

(2) Licensees may make other changes 

to their authorized earth stations, 

including the addition of new 

transceiver/antenna combinations, 

without notifying the Commission, 

provided the modification does not 

involve: 

(i) An increase in EIRP or EIRP 

density (either main lobe or off-axis); 

(ii) Additional operating frequencies; 

(iii) A change in polarization; 

(iv) An increase in antenna height; 

(v) Antenna repointing beyond any 

coordinated range; or 

(vi) A change from the originally 

authorized coordinates of more than 1 

second in latitude or longitude for 

stations operating in frequency bands 

shared with terrestrial systems or more 

than 10 seconds of latitude or longitude 

for stations operating in frequency 

bands not shared with terrestrial 

systems. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Add § 25.123 to read as follows: 

§ 25.123 Combined space station and 

earth station authorization 

A single license may be issued that 

authorizes the operations of a GSO FSS 

space station and earth stations in a 

satellite network in the following bands: 

10.95–11.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) 

11.45–12.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) 

13.75–14.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) 

18.3–18.8 GHz (space-to-Earth) 

19.7–20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) 

28.35–28.6 GHz (Earth-to-space) 

29.25–30 GHz (Earth-to-space) 

(a) An application for such a 

comprehensive network license must 

contain the information required by 

§§ 25.114 and 25.140 and must certify 

that earth stations accessing the network 

will comply with part 1, subpart I and 

part 17 of this chapter. 

(b) An earth station seeking to operate 

in a band shared on an equal basis with 

terrestrial services and under a 

combined space station and earth 

station authorization must submit, in a 

separate earth station file in IBFS and 

under an earth station call sign, any 

coordination or other information 

required by § 25.203. 

(c) An earth station operating under a 

combined space station and earth 

station authorization is not required to 

submit the antenna performance 

information specified in § 25.132. 

■ 5. Amend § 25.133 by revising the 

second sentence of paragraph (a)(1) and 

adding paragraph (a)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 25.133 Period of construction; 

certification of commencement of 

operation. 

(a)(1) * * * Construction of the earth 

station must be completed and the 

station must be brought into operation 

within 12 months from the date of the 

license grant except as may be 

determined by the Commission for any 

particular application and except as 

provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(3) An earth station licensed under 

§ 25.136 may have a buildout period 

associated with the buildout period of a 

communicating space station listed in 

the earth station application. The earth 

station must be brought into operation 

by the date the space station is brought 

into operation, as certified under 

§ 25.173(b), or one year after the date of 

grant of the earth station license, 

whichever is longer. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 25.151 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(10), (11), and (12) and 

adding paragraph (a)(13) to read as 

follows: 

§ 25.151 Public Notice 

(a) * * * 

(10) The receipt of space station 

application information filed pursuant 

to § 25.110(b)(3)(iii); 

(11) The receipt of notifications of 

non-routine transmission filed pursuant 

to § 25.140(d); 

(12) The receipt of EPFD input data 

files from an NGSO FSS licensee or 

market access recipient, submitted 

pursuant to § 25.111(b) or § 25.146(c)(2); 

and 

(13) The receipt of complete 

information under § 25.123. 

§ 25.170 [Removed] 

■ 7. Remove § 25.170. 

■ 8. Revise § 25.171 to read as follows: 

§ 25.171 Contact information reporting 

requirements. 

If contact information filed in space 

station application or pursuant to 

§ 25.170(b) or § 25.172(a)(1) changes, the 

operator must file corrected information 

electronically in the Commission’s 

International Bureau Filing System 

(IBFS), in the ‘‘Other Filings’’ tab of the 

station’s current authorization file. The 

operator must file the updated 

information within 10 days. In addition, 

satellite operators must confirm the 

contact information on June 30 of each 

year. 

■ 9. Amend § 25.202 by revising 

paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 25.202 Frequencies, frequency tolerance, 

and emission limits. 

* * * * * 

(f) Unwanted emissions in the out-ofband domain. The mean power of an 

emission must be attenuated below the 

mean output power of the transmitter in 

accordance with Recommendation ITU– 

R SM.1541–6, ‘‘Unwanted emissions in 

the out-of-band domain’’ (incorporated 

by reference, § 25.108), except as 

provided for SDARS terrestrial repeaters 

and NGSO inter-satellite emissions in 

paragraphs (h) and (i) of this section. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–27972 Filed 1–30–19; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 18–383; RM–11822; DA 18– 

1267] 

Television Broadcast Services; 

Cookeville and Franklin, Tennessee 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: At the request of ION Media 

License Company, LLC. (ION), licensee 

of television station WNPX–TV, channel 

36, Cookeville, Tennessee (WNPX), the 

Commission is proposing to amend the 

Post-Transition Table of DTV 

Allotments by changing WNPX’s 

community of license from Cookeville 

to Franklin, Tennessee, pursuant to 

section 1.420(i) of the Commission’s 

rules. ION asserts that the proposed 

reallotment is consistent with the 

Commission’s second allotment priority 

by providing Franklin with its first local 

transmission service. ION also asserts 

that the proposed reallotment will not 

deprive Cookeville of its sole broadcast 

station because it will continue to be 

served by station WCTE(TV), licensed to 

Upper Cumberland Broadcast Council, 

on channel *22 at Cookeville. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before February 15, 2019 and reply 

comments on or before February 25, 

2019. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS