Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70541

1This task is not related to the work of the newly

chartered Commission which is examining the

impacts of certain legal restrictions on persons

eligible for LSC-funded legal assistance. That effort,

being undertaken pursuant to Board of Directors

Resolution 2000–009, is focused on the effects of

certain legal restrictions on LSC recipients’ ability

to provide equal access to justice to low income

persons. The regulations review is, instead, focused

on comprehensive review of LSC’s regulations to

support the development of a regulatory agenda for

2001.

regulatory compliance requirements for

efficiency, unnecessary duplication and

implications for the delivery of high

quality, appropriate legal services.’’ LSC

Strategic Directions 2000—2005, page 8.

Pursuant to this directive, LSC,

through its Board of Directors’

Operations and Regulations Committee,

which provides overall direction on LSC

regulatory policy and establishes

priorities for LSC rulemaking activities,

is in the process of conducting a

thorough review of LSC’s regulations.

With this notice, LSC is soliciting public

input for the consideration of the

Committee and the Board in pursuit of

this task.1

Victor M. Fortuno,

General Counsel and Vice President for Legal

Affairs.

[FR Doc. 00–29871 Filed 11–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7050–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 25 and 101

[IB Docket No. 00–203; FCC–00–369]

Partial Band Licensing and Loading

Standards for Earth Stations in the

FSS That Share Spectrum With

Terrestrial Services, Blanket Licensing

for Small Aperture Terminals in the CBand, Routine Licensing of 3.7 Meter

Transmit and Receive Stations at CBand, and Deployment of

Geostationary-Orbit FSS Earth

Stations in the Shared Portion of the

Ka-Band

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document proposes rules

that will promote more efficient use and

sharing of the radio spectrum between

FSS earth stations and terrestrial fixed

service stations by requiring the

showing of actual or planned use of the

spectrum when access to that spectrum

is denied to potential new users. The

proposed rules also promote efficient

sharing of spectrum by requiring the use

of previously agreed interference

analysis models during subsequent

frequency coordinations. In addition,

they are designed to provide wider

access to electronic commerce in

underserved rural areas of America by

facilitating the deployment of small

antenna terminals in C-band satellite

networks under a single authorization,

with prior frequency coordination.

Finally, this document seeks comment

on how to facilitate the deployment of

GSO FSS earth stations without

individual site-by-site licensing in the

portion of the Ka-band that is shared

with terrestrial fixed services.

DATES: Submit comments on or before

January 8, 2001. Submit reply comments

on or before February 9, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edward R. Jacobs, Planning &

Negotiations Division, International

Bureau. (202) 418–0624 or via electronic

mail: ejacobs@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No.

00–203, adopted October 13, 2000 and

released October 24, 2000. The full text

of this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC

Reference Center (Room CY–A257) 445

12th Street SW., Washington, DC and

may also be purchased from the

Commission copy contractor,

International Transcription Services

(ITS), Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

Summary of the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking

1. In this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking, the Commission considers

a series of filings concerning the

application of our part 25 rules to FixedSatellite Service (FSS) earth stations in

bands shared on a primary basis with

the terrestrial Fixed Service (FS).

Specifically, Onsat Network

Communications, Inc. (Onsat) petitions

for a declaratory order that our part 25

rules permit the licensing, under a

single authorization, of small aperture

terminal satellite earth station networks

in the C-band (3700–4200 MHz and

5925–6425 MHz). These C-band small

aperture terminal earth station

networks, or CSATs, are technically

similar to the very small aperture

terminal earth station networks, or

VSATs, currently deployed in the Kuband (11.7–12.2 GHz and 14.0–14.5

GHz). The Fixed Wireless

Communications Coalition (FWCC)

petitions for a declaratory ruling

regarding partial-band licensing of FSS

earth stations and a rulemaking to

amend part 25 of the Commission’s

rules to set loading requirements.

Hughes Network Systems (Hughes)

seeks consideration of its proposal to

deploy geostationary orbit FSS earth

stations in the shared portion of the Kaband (17.7–19.7 GHz and 27.5–29.5

GHz). We address all but Onsat’s

petition for waiver of § 25.212(d) of the

Commission’s rules regarding routine

licensing of 3.7 meter transmit and

receive earth stations at C-band.

Specifically, we deny Onsat’s petition

for declaratory order, but propose to

amend our rules to permit the licensing,

under a single authorization and with

prior coordination, of a limited class of

small aperture terminal earth station

networks in the C-band to communicate

with geostationary satellites. We will

issue a separate licensing decision on

the specific application for the Onsat

system that Onsat filed several months

after its Petition for Declaratory Order.

We deny FWCC’s request for a

declaratory ruling requiring partial-band

licensing of FSS earth stations. We

propose, however, to adopt rules

directed at addressing FWCC’s concerns

about effective and equitable use of

spectrum in bands shared by the FS and

FSS. Finally, we seek comment on, and

alternatives to, the recent ex parte

pleading filed by Hughes in the 18 GHz

Proceeding, concerning the proposed

deployment of earth stations for

geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) FSS

systems in the shared portion of the Kaband without individual site-by-site

licensing.

2. The FWCC Petitions. On May 5,

1999, FWCC filed a Request for

Declaratory Ruling and Petition for

Rulemaking (together, ‘‘FWCC

Petitions’’) asking the Commission to

impose various conditions on FSS earth

stations in bands that are shared on a

co-primary basis with FS operations.

FWCC’s Petitions reference the

following bands: 3700–4200, 5925–6425

and 6425–7125 MHz and 10.7–11.7,

12.7–13.25, 17.7–19.7, and 27.5–29.5

GHz. The Fixed-Satellite Service is a

radiocommunication service between

earth stations at given positions, when

one or more satellites are used; the FSS

also may include feeder links for other

space radiocommunication services.

The terrestrial fixed service (FS) is a

radiocommunication service between

fixed points. FWCC states that its

proposals seek to maximize efficient use

of the radio spectrum for both satellite

and point-to-point terrestrial fixed

operations.

3. FWCC avers that, while parts 25

and 101 of the Commission’s rules

provide for sharing on a co-primary

basis in certain radio spectrum bands by

the FSS and FS, in reality sharing has

70542 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules

not occurred on an equitable basis.

Rather, FWCC contends that, in actual

practice, band sharing has been on

terms disadvantageous to the FS. FWCC

alleges that satellite earth station

operators receive preferential access to

shared spectrum because: (1) The

Commission licenses earth stations for

the entire allocated band and with no

loading requirements, while point-topoint terrestrial operations are limited

to frequencies actually needed and are

subject to stringent spectrum efficiency

requirements, and (2) the Commission

licenses earth stations for all azimuths

and thus earth stations can deny

coordination to terrestrial stations.

Thus, FWCC requests a declaratory

ruling that would require FSS operators

to demonstrate ‘‘actual need’’ for the

spectrum requested at the time of

licensing. Specifically, FWCC proposes

that the Commission change its policy

of authorizing earth stations to use the

entire pertinent frequency bands and

instead require that an FSS earth station

using spectrum shared with point-topoint terrestrial services be licensed to

use no more than twice the amount of

spectrum for which it is able to

demonstrate ‘‘actual need.’’ FWCC also

includes a parallel request for a rule that

would require FSS earth station

applicants to show demonstrated need

for the spectrum they seek.

4. FWCC also petitions, pursuant to

§ 1.401 of the Commission’s rules, for

amendments to part 25 of the

Commission’s rules that would require

FSS earth stations licensed for more

than minimal amounts of spectrum

shared with FS operators to meet

minimum loading standards. Further,

FWCC proposes to require all FSS earth

stations to accept interference from new

terrestrial facilities on the same basis as

they accept any interference in the

initial coordination. FWCC states that

the objective of these rule changes

would be the adoption of spectrum

management standards that would

achieve in practice the ‘‘co-equal’’

sharing specified in parts 25 and 101 of

the Commission’s rules.

5. Numerous satellite and earth

station licensees, users of these services,

and industry associations representing

the satellite industry oppose the FWCC

Petitions. The Fixed Point-to-Point

Section of the Wireless Communications

Division of the Telecommunications

Industry Association (TIA FS/WCD)

filed reply comments supporting

FWCC’s requests.

6. Upon review of the record, we

conclude that FWCC raises issues

meriting further consideration. We

propose specific rules to address the

concerns of the Fixed Service

community, and we seek comment as to

whether the evolving requirements of

both satellite and terrestrial systems

necessitate a further revision of our

current policies and rules to ensure

efficient and equitable use of the radio

spectrum in bands shared on a coprimary basis by the FSS and FS. We

seek comment on the extent of the FS

and FSS sharing problem and propose

rules on the issues of loading and

interference coordination. On the issue

of demonstrating actual need, we deny

FWCC’s request for a declaratory ruling

and its parallel request to amend

§ 25.130 of the Commission’s rules to

limit the amount of spectrum the

Commission would license to FSS earth

stations to no more than twice the

amount of spectrum for which the

licensee has demonstrated ‘‘actual

need.’’ We do, however, incorporate

into the proposed rules the related

concept of a ‘‘demonstrated use’’

requirement triggered by the denial by

an FSS operator of an FS applicant’s

request to coordinate spectrum. We

believe that this proposal is a more

effective and equitable approach for

addressing the concerns FWCC has

raised in its pleadings.

7. In particular, we propose to amend

§ 25.203 of the Commission’s rules to

require an FSS earth station that has

been licensed to operate in C- or Kuband shared frequencies for 24 months

or longer to demonstrate, in response to

the denial of a request of an FS

applicant to coordinate spectrum, that

the FSS earth station denying

coordination is using, has recently used,

or has imminent plans to use the

requested spectrum. If the FSS earth

station licensee cannot make such a

demonstration during the coordination,

then the FS station may be successfully

coordinated and the FSS earth station

must not cause unacceptable

interference to, nor is it protected from

interference from, the FS station on that

spectrum in the future. We propose to

exempt from the rule those FSS earth

stations that are licensed for 40 MHz or

less of bandwidth in each direction. At

the same time, we propose to amend

§ 101.141 of the Commission’s rules to

shorten the loading period for FS

licensees in the C- and Ku-bands from

30 to 24 months. Modification of the

part 25 and 101 rules in this manner

would give both the FSS and FS

licensees a comparable period of time in

which to put their spectrum to use

before it is susceptible to re-licensing to

others. We ask for comment as to

whether these part 25 and 101 rules

should apply in other bands where the

FSS and FS share spectrum on a coprimary basis.

8. We also propose to amend parts 25

and 101 to require that an FSS earth

station or FS licensee accepting a

particular interference analysis model in

order to coordinate successfully the

location of its station must accept use of

the same model in subsequent

coordinations. We propose that these

rule changes to parts 25 and 101 would

apply across all frequency bands where

the services share a primary service

allocation. Further, we propose to

amend part 25 such that, if a C- or Kuband FSS earth station licensee, during

coordination, accepts a level of

interference along a set of azimuths

recognized to be below normally

permissible interference objectives, the

licensee may not subsequently claim

protection from interference from future

FS applicants on those same frequencies

within that same set of azimuths. We

ask for comment as to whether this part

25 rule should apply at other bands

where the FS and FSS share frequencies

on a co-primary basis. We further

propose that these amended rules would

apply to all FSS earth stations and FS

stations upon the effective date of the

Report and Order in this proceeding.

9. The Onsat Petition. On September

10, 1999, Onsat filed a Petition for

Declaratory Order that § 25.115(c) of the

Commission’s rules permits the

licensing of Very Small Aperture

Terminal (VSAT) satellite earth station

networks, under a single authorization

and with prior coordination, in the Cband. In the same filing, Onsat

petitioned for a waiver to permit routine

licensing of its proposed earth stations,

which would have an antenna diameter

smaller than those allowed to be

routinely licensed under our existing

rules. We will evaluate Onsat’s

particular antenna size waiver request

in a separate licensing order. We expect

to consider later, in an earth station

streamlining proceeding, the more

general issues of what antenna sizes and

power densities may be licensed

routinely under this rule. Onsat

advocates such licensing of technically

identical remote earth station terminals

to permit operators to configure their Cband systems quickly without the

expense and administrative effort

involved in licensing individual earth

stations. In support of its petition, Onsat

contends that its proposal would further

Commission objectives with regard to

universal service and deregulation.

10. In its petition Onsat argues that

small aperture terminal earth station

technology is less expensive and more

flexible than are other types of satellite

technology, and that these types of earth

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70543

stations can be coordinated easily to

prevent interference with terrestrial and

satellite operations in the C-band. Onsat

proposes that, if granted a license for an

earth station system consisting of a hub

station and a specified number of

technically identical remote earth

stations, it would submit to the

Commission a frequency coordination

report for each station before placing it

into operation.

11. FWCC initially opposed Onsat’s

petition on the ground that Onsat’s

proposed service would further

exacerbate FS/FSS frequency

coordination difficulties in the C-band,

incorporating by reference a copy of its

Petitions and arguing that the

Commission should not act on Onsat’s

requests unless and until we acted

favorably on FWCC’s Petitions. FWCC

later withdrew its opposition after Onsat

agreed to modify its petition to limit

both the amount of C-band spectrum its

proposed system would use and the

number of geostationary satellite orbital

positions toward which its remote earth

stations would be directed.

12. We deny Onsat’s petition for a

declaratory order, but hereby propose

rules that include the elements of the

Onsat proposal. One of the

Commission’s chief goals is to foster

wide access to electronic commerce and

data through the Internet and other

networks, particularly in underserved

rural areas. We have sought to ensure

that multiple service providers bring

broadband access to all Americans. The

service proposed by Onsat is an

innovative means for bringing highspeed data services to rural Americans

much more rapidly than might be

accomplished by wireline or terrestrial

wireless service. We propose to amend

part 25 of the Commission’s rules to

allow the licensing, under a single

authorization and with prior

coordination, of C-band small aperture

terminal earth station networks, which

we will term ‘‘CSATs’’ to distinguish

these small aperture terminal earth

stations from the VSAT operations in

the Ku-band.

13. At the same time, we note the

concerns of the fixed wireless

community that the C-band is congested

and that authorization of CSATs could

add to coordination difficulties between

the FS and FSS. We therefore seek

comment on those aspects of CSAT

service that affect the concerns and

issues raised by FWCC. We tentatively

conclude that the limitations proposed

by Onsat in its modified petition are

appropriate limitations that can be

applied generally to other prospective

CSAT applicants. In a letter from its

attorney, Onsat agrees to coordinate

only 20 MHz at three different orbital

slots. Thus, we propose to limit CSAT

networks to operations using no more

than 20 MHz of C-band spectrum, and

to limit their flexibility to three satellite

locations within the visible

geostationary satellite arc. We further

request comment on whether our rules

should limit this C-band service to rural

areas, or, alternatively, whether our

rules should permit CSAT network

service wherever frequency

coordination allows the installation of

earth stations. Although certain

characteristics of the proposed Onsat

system are discussed in this NPRM, our

focus is on generally-applicable

policies, procedures and rules for the

operation of this type of small aperture

terminal system in the C-band. Because

Onsat only recently filed an application

to provide this service, we will decide

the issue of whether to grant the request

for the proposed Onsat system in a

separate licensing order.

14. The Hughes Ex Parte Letter. We

ask for comment on a recent ex parte

pleading filed by Hughes in the 18 GHz

Proceeding (13 FCC Rcd 19923)

concerning the proposed deployment of

earth stations for geostationary satellite

orbit (GSO) FSS systems in the shared

portion of the Ka-band without

individual site-by-site licensing. These

shared bands are 18.3–18.58 GHz and

29.25–29.5 GHz. In the 18 GHz band,

GSO FSS (downlink) and FS share

portions of the band. In the 28 GHz

band, GSO FSS (uplink) and NGSO MSS

feeder links share portions of the band.

Hughes contends that the Commission

has the power to authorize GSO FSS

earth stations under a ‘‘blanket’’

licensing approach in these shared

bands. Hughes observes that GSO FSS

earth stations would operate in the

receive mode in the 18 GHz band and

thus would not cause interference to

terrestrial users sharing the band, but

could receive harmful interference from

FS transmissions operating in the band.

Hughes urges the Commission to allow

GSO FSS earth stations to receive

signals in the 18 GHz shared band, with

the option of registering for interference

protection on a site-by-site basis in

accordance with the coordination

procedures of §§ 25.203 and 25.251 of

the Commission’s rules. Hughes also

suggests that any fees for such

registration must be ‘‘consumertolerant’’ (such as a single low charge

for a batch of 1000 registrations, e.g.,

$295). In the 29.25–29.5 GHz band that

is shared with MSS feeder links, Hughes

contends that the provisions of § 25.258

of the Commission’s rules that deal with

intersystem coordination and sharing

between NGSO MSS feeder link stations

and GSO FSS services are sufficient to

allow the deployment of a large number

of pre-coordinated GSO FSS earth

stations under a single authorization.

15. We invite comment on whether

such deployment of GSO FSS earth

stations in both the 29.25–29.5 GHz and

18.3–18.58 GHz bands would be

practicable. In particular, we seek

comment on whether Hughes’ request

for an expedited and simplified

licensing procedure for satellite user

earth terminals at Ka-band would raise

the same kinds of concerns that FWCC

has presented in its instant filings. In

this regard, we note that one of the

fundamental tenets of the 18 GHz band

segmentation plan was to separate

services that would be widely deployed.

We also seek comment on how

deployment of a large number of FSS

earth stations over the entire shared

portions of the Ka-band, with specific

site location information, would impact

existing and future MSS feeder link

operations. If deployment would be

practicable, we ask how such a licensing

procedure could be implemented to

ensure that the requirements of both the

satellite and terrestrial users would be

met in the 18 GHz band. We invite

comment on whether we should apply

to the portion of the 18 GHz band

shared by the FSS and FS each of the

rules that we propose in this NPRM. We

also invite comment on whether, if we

were to allow deployment in the shared

portion of the Ka-band of a large number

of pre-coordinated GSO FSS earth

stations under a single authorization, we

should limit the earth stations to

communications with only the specific

satellites that are a part of a single

satellite system. This limitation on the

number of satellite locations would be

similar to our proposal to limit the

authorization of CSAT networks in the

C-band to only three satellite locations.

Further, we ask for general comment on

the issue of registration fees and,

specifically, on Hughes’ proposal that

any registration fees for interference

protection should be in the range of

$295 for a batch of 1000 registrants. We

also invite alternative proposals to

achieve the objectives of the Hughes

proposal, within the scope and overall

objectives of this proceeding.

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

small entities by the policies and rules

proposed in this Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking. We request written public

70544 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules

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 of Proposed

Rulemaking provided above in

paragraphs 103–106. The Commission

will send a copy of the Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, including this

IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy

of the Small Business Administration.

See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). In addition, the

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and

IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be

published in the Federal Register.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the

Proposed Rules

We initiate this rulemaking

proceeding to obtain comment and

develop a record on certain proposals in

frequency bands shared between the

space and terrestrial fixed services, as

well as to provide for the blanket

licensing of small aperture antenna

terminals in the C-band (CSATs).

Specifically, this NPRM proposes to

amend § 25.203 of the Commission’s

rules to require an earth station licensed

for 36 months or longer to demonstrate,

in response to a request of a terrestrial

fixed service applicant to coordinate

spectrum, that the earth station is using,

has recently used, or has imminent

plans to use the requested spectrum.

Additionally, the item proposes to

amend § 25.203 of the Commission’s

rules to require that an earth station

licensee that accepted a particular

interference analysis model in order to

successfully coordinate location of its

station must accept use of the same

model in subsequent coordinations.

Further, if an earth station licensee,

during coordination, accepts a level of

interference along a set of azimuths

recognized to be below normally

permissible interference objectives, the

licensee may not subsequently claim

protection from interference from future

terrestrial fixed service applicants on

those same frequencies within that same

set of azimuths. With respect to

licensing of CSATs in the C-band, we

propose to amend § 25.115 of the

Commission’s rules to model CSAT

licensing procedures on the streamlined

procedure successfully used since 1992

for licensing small earth stations to GTE

Spacenet in the C-band. Additionally,

the proposed rule changes will require

CSAT applicants in the C-band to

complete frequency coordination for

each individual earth station antenna,

but will allow blanket licensing for a

system of technically-identical earth

stations so coordinated, with simplified

reporting to the Commission. These

proposals will facilitate the efficient and

equitable use of the shared radio

spectrum by satellite and terrestrial

fixed service operators through a

modification of the coordination and

licensing procedures for earth station

licensees. These proposals will promote

efficient use of the spectrum shared

between the satellite and terrestrial

services, and will allow the efficient

introduction of new satellite

technologies that will provide wide

access to electronic commerce in

underserved, rural areas of America.

B. Legal Basis

The proposed action is authorized

under sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 301, and 303

of the Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),

301, and 303.

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). A small

organization is generally ‘‘any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently

owned and operated and is not

dominant in its field.’’ Nationwide, as of

1992, there were approximately 275,801

small organizations. ‘‘Small

governmental jurisdiction’’ generally

means ‘‘governments of cities, counties,

towns, townships, villages, school

districts, or special districts, with a

population of less than 50,000.’’ As of

1992, there were approximately 85,006

such jurisdictions in the United States.

This number includes 38,978 counties,

cities, and towns; of these, 37,566, or 96

percent, have populations of fewer than

50,000. The Census Bureau estimates

that this ratio is approximately accurate

for all governmental entities. Thus, of

the 85,006 governmental entities, we

estimate that 81,600 (91 percent) are

small entities. Below, we further

describe and estimate the number of

small entity licensees that may be

affected by the proposed rules, if

adopted.

1. Cable Services

The SBA has developed a definition

of small entities for cable and other pay

television services, which includes all

such companies generating $11 million

or less in revenue annually. This

definition includes cable systems

operators, closed circuit television

services, direct broadcast-satellite

services, multipoint distribution

systems, satellite master antenna

systems and subscription television

services. According to the Census

Bureau data from 1992, there were 1,788

total cable and other pay television

services and 1,423 had less than $11

million in revenue. The Commission

has developed its own definition of a

small cable system operator for the

purposes of rate regulation. Under the

Commission’s rules, a ‘‘small cable

company,’’ is one serving fewer than

400,000 subscribers nationwide. Based

on our most recent information, we

estimate that there were 1,439 cable

operators that qualified as small cable

system operators at the end of 1995.

Since then, some of those companies

may have grown to serve over 400,000

subscribers, and others may have been

involved in transactions that caused

them to be combined with other cable

operators. Consequently, we estimate

that there are fewer than 1,439 small

entity cable system operators.

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 66,690,000

subscribers in the United States.

Therefore, we found that an operator

serving fewer than 666,900 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 666,900 subscribers or

less totals 1,450. We do not request nor

do 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.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70545

2. International Services

The Commission has not developed a

definition of small entities applicable to

licensees in the international services.

Therefore, the applicable definition of

small entity is generally the definition

under the SBA rules applicable to

Communications Services, Not

Elsewhere Classified (NEC). This

definition provides that a small entity is

expressed as one with $11.0 million or

less in annual receipts. According to the

Census Bureau, there were a total of 848

communications services providers,

NEC, in operation in 1992, and a total

of 775 had annual receipts of less than

$9.999 million. The Census report does

not provide more precise data.

3. Fixed Satellite Transmit/Receive

Earth Stations

Currently there are over 7500

authorized fixed satellite transmit/

receive earth stations authorized for use

in bands shared with the terrestrial

fixed service. We do not request or

collect annual revenue information, and

thus are unable to estimate the number

of the earth stations that would

constitute a small business under the

SBA definition.

4. Mobile Satellite Earth Station Feeder

Links

There are two licensees operating in

spectrum shared with terrestrial fixed

services. We do not request or collect

annual revenue information, and thus

are unable to estimate of the number of

mobile satellite earth stations that

would constitute a small business under

the SBA definition.

5. Space Stations (Geostationary)

Commission records reveal that there

are six space station licensees licensed

in spectrum shared on a co-primary

basis with the terrestrial fixed service in

the C- and Ku-bands. We do not request

or collect annual revenue information,

and thus are unable to estimate of the

number of geostationary space stations

that would constitute a small business

under the SBA definition.

6. Space Stations (Non-Geostationary)

There are four Non-Geostationary

Space Station licensees licensed in

spectrum shared on a co-primary basis

with the terrestrial fixed service in the

C- and Ku-bands. We do not request or

collect annual revenue information, and

thus are unable to estimate of the

number of non-geostationary space

stations that would constitute a small

business under the SBA definition.

7. Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and

Other Program Distribution Services

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

applicable to broadcast auxiliary

licensees. Therefore, the applicable

definition of small entity is the

definition under the Small Business

Administration (SBA) rules applicable

to radio broadcasting stations (SIC 4832)

and television broadcasting stations (SIC

4833). These definitions provide that a

small entity is one with either $5.0

million or less in annual receipts for a

radio broadcasting station or $10.5

million in annual receipts for a TV

station. 13 CFR 121.201, SIC CODES

4832 and 4833. There are currently

3,237 FM translators and boosters, 4913

TV translators. The FCC does not collect

financial information on any broadcast

facility and the Department of

Commerce does not collect financial

information on these auxiliary broadcast

facilities. 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. These

stations would likely have annual

revenues that exceed the SBA maximum

to be designated as a small business (as

noted, either $5 million for a radio

station or $10.5 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.

8. Microwave Services

Microwave services includes common

carrier, private operational fixed, and

broadcast auxiliary radio services. At

present, there are over 13,500 common

carrier stations, and approximately

18,00 private operational fixed stations

and broadcast auxiliary radio stations in

the microwave services in spectrum that

is potentially affected by this

rulemaking. Additionally, these stations

represent the following distinct

licensees among the various radio

services: LMDS (121), DEMS (2),

Common Carrier Fixed (PTP and LTTS)

(1028), Private Operational Fixed PTP

(1511), and Fixed Broadcast Auxiliary

(806). Inasmuch as the Commission has

not yet defined a small business with

respect to microwave services, we will

utilize the SBA’s definition applicable

to radiotelephone companies—i.e., an

entity with no more than 1,500 persons.

13 CFR 121.201, SIC CODE 4812. 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

The Commission’s existing part 25

rules on FSS operations contain

reporting requirements for FSS systems,

and we propose to modify these

reporting requirements to eliminate

duplicative costs of filing multiple

applications for one particular type of

service at C-band. In addition, we

propose to add an annual reporting

requirement to indicate the number of

satellite earth stations actually brought

into service. The proposed blanket

licensing procedures do not affect small

entities disproportionately and it is

likely no additional outside professional

skills are required to complete the

annual report indicating the number of

small antenna earth stations actually

brought into service. We seek comment

on these proposed changes.

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 reaching its

proposed approach, which may include

the following four alternatives: (1) The

establishment of differing compliance or

reporting requirements or timetables

that take into account the resources

available to small entities; (2) the

clarification, consolidation, or

simplification of compliance or

reporting requirements under the rule

for small entities; (3) the use of

performance, rather than design,

standards; and (4) an exemption from

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof,

for small entities.

This NPRM solicits comment on

alternatives for more efficient spectrum

sharing between satellite earth stations

and terrestrial fixed service stations, as

well as comment on licensing of small

aperture antennas at C-band. This item

should positively impact both large and

small businesses by providing a more

efficient and less economically

burdensome coordination and licensing

procedure for terrestrial fixed stations in

spectrum shared with satellite services.

70546 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Additionally, the proposed licensing

service rules provide for consolidation

of licensing for small antenna earth

stations and minor reporting

requirements to indicate the number of

satellite earth stations brought into

service.

F. Federal Rules that May Duplicate,

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed

Rules

None.

Ordering Clauses

Pursuant to sections 4(i), 7(a), 303(c),

303(f), 303(g), and 303(r) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 157(a),

303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r), this

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is

hereby adopted. FWCC’s Request for

Declaratory Ruling is denied. Onsat’s

Petition for Declaratory Order is denied.

The Commission’s Consumer

Information Bureau, Reference

Information Center, Shall Send a copy

of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,

including the Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief,

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 25

Communications common carriers,

Communications, Radio, Satellites,

Telecommunications.

47 CFR Part 101

Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

Proposed Rule Changes

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, parts 25 and 101 of title 47 of

the Code of Federal Regulations are

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 25—SATELLITE

COMMUNICATIONS

1. 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.

2. Section 25.115 is amended by

redesignating paragraph (c) as (c)(1) and

by adding a new paragraph (c)(2) to read

as follows:

§ 25.115 Application for earth station

authorizations.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) Large Networks of Small Antennas

operating in the 4/6 GHz frequency

bands with U.S.-licensed or non-U.S.

licensed satellites for domestic services.

Applications to license small antenna

network systems operating in the 4/6

GHz frequency band shall be filed

electronically on FCC Form 312, Main

Form and Schedule B.

(i) An initial lead application

providing a detailed overview of the

complete network shall be filed. Such

lead applications shall fully identify the

scope and nature of the service to be

provided, as well as the complete

technical details of each representative

type of small antenna (less than 4.5

meters) that will operate within the

network. Such lead applications shall

not be licensed unless they identify no

more than three discrete geostationary

satellites to be accessed, identify a

maximum of 20 MHz of spectrum to be

used for communication channels, and

identify the maximum number of earth

station sites, the amount of frequency

bandwidth sought, and the general

geographic area in which each type of

small antenna will operate.

(ii) Following the issuance of a license

for the initial lead application, the

licensee shall notify the Commission of

the complete technical parameters of

each individual earth station site before

that site is bought into operation under

the lead authorization. Full frequency

coordination of each individual site

shall be completed prior to filing

Commission notification and conducted

in accordance with § 25.203. Such

notification shall be done by electronic

filing and shall be consistent with the

technical parameters of Schedule B of

FCC Form 312. These individual site

notifications will be routinely

processed. Operation of each individual

site may commence if no comments are

received within a 30-day period after

public notice of the licensee’s

notification filing. Continuance of

operation for the duration of the lead

license term of each individual site shall

be dependent upon successful

completion of the normal public notice

process. If any objections are received to

the newly added remote stations, the

licensee shall not operate those

particular stations until the

coordination dispute is resolved and the

licensee informs the Commission of the

resolution. Each CSAT licensee shall

provide the Commission an annually

updated list of all operational earth

stations in its system. The annual list

also shall include a list of all earth

stations planned for the next 12 months

but not yet built, a list of all earth

stations deactivated during the year, and

a report of any changes in satellite

location applicable to the CSAT

network.

* * * * *

3. Section 25.134 is amended by:

a. Revising the section heading,

b. Redesignating paragraph (a) as

(a)(1) and adding a heading,

c. Adding a new paragraph (a)(2), and

d. Adding a heading to paragraph (b)

to read as follows:

§ 25.134 Licensing provisions of Very

Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) and C-band

Small Aperture Terminal (CSAT) networks.

(a) * * *

(1) VSAT networks operating in the

12/14 GHz bands. ***

(2) Large Networks of Small Antennas

operating in the 4/6 GHz frequency

bands. All applications for digital and/

or analog operations will be routinely

processed provided the network

employs antennas that are 4.5 meter or

larger in diameter, that are consistent

with § 25.209, the power levels are

consistent with § 25.211(d) and

§ 25.212(d), and frequency coordination

has been satisfactorily completed. The

use of smaller antennas or nonconsistent power levels require the

filing of an initial lead application

(§ 25.115(c)(2)) that includes all

technical analyses required to

demonstrate operation on a noninterference basis or an affidavit from

the satellite operator that such nonconforming operations have been

successfully coordinated with any and

all affected adjacent satellite operators.

(b) VSAT networks operating in the

12/14 GHz bands. ***

* * * * *

4. Section 25.203 is amended by

redesignating paragraphs (e) through (k)

as (f) through (l) and by adding a new

paragraph (e) to read as follows:

§ 25.203 Choice of sites and frequencies.

* * * * *

(e) The following provisions shall

apply to the coordination of a newly

proposed terrestrial station with an

existing or previously filed FSS earth

station:

(1) When a terrestrial fixed service

license applicant requests but is denied

coordination in spectrum in the 3700–

4200 MHz, 5925–6425 MHz, 6525–6875

MHz or 10.7–11.7 GHz band, a

potentially affected earth station

licensee must demonstrate to the

frequency coordinator that it is actually

using, has recently used, or has

imminent plans to use the spectrum in

question if the earth station licensee

wishes, in the case of a receiving earth

station, to be protected from

interference from the new terrestrial

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 227 / Friday, November 24, 2000 / Proposed Rules 70547

fixed station on that spectrum, or, in the

case of a transmitting earth station, not

to have to protect the new terrestrial

station.

(i) If the earth station licensee cannot

make such a demonstration during the

coordination, then the terrestrial fixed

station may be successfully coordinated

and the earth station must not cause

unacceptable interference to, nor is it

protected from interference from, the

terrestrial fixed station on that spectrum

in the future. In demonstrating use of

the spectrum that has been denied

coordination, the earth station licensee

shall:

(A) For recent use, identify the

timeframes during which each satellite

transponder frequency band was used

within the past 24 months;

(B) For current use, identify each

satellite transponder frequency band in

use at the time of the coordination

request; and

(C) For imminent use, certify the

availability of some form of detailed

information or planned use, e.g., use to

be initiated within the next six months

and supported by contract(s) or other

documentation.

(ii) If, however, the earth station has

been licensed for less than twenty-four

months, all of its licensed bandwidth

will be considered in use for purposes

of the coordination. Earth stations

licensed for 40 MHz or less in each

direction would not be required to

demonstrate use within any timeframe

in order to retain protection for that

spectrum.

(2) If an earth station licensee accepts

a particular interference analysis model

that employs certain interference

mitigating factors, such as terrain or

building blockage, in order to

successfully coordinate its station with

a terrestrial fixed station, then it must

accept the use of that same model in

subsequent coordinations.

(3) If an earth station applicant for

spectrum in the 3700–4200 MHz, 5925–

6425 MHz, 6525–6875 MHz or 10.7–

11.7 GHz band, during its coordination,

accepts a level of interference that is

recognized to be below accepted

interference objectives along a set of

azimuths and elevation angles on part of

the spectrum for which it is applying,

and therefore insufficient to clear the

interference case, then the earth station

licensee is not entitled to protection

from interference from future terrestrial

fixed service applicants on those same

frequencies within that same set of

azimuths and elevation angles.

* * * * *

PART 101—FIXED MICROWAVE

SERVICES

5. The authority citation for Part 101

continues to read as follows:

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

6. Section 101.103(d)(1) is amended

by adding a sentence at the end of the

paragraph to read as follows:

§ 101.103 Frequency coordination

procedures.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(1) * * * Additionally, if a fixed

station licensee accepts a particular

interference analysis model that

employs certain interference mitigating

factors, such as terrain or building

blockage, in order to successfully

coordinate its station with a fixed

satellite service earth station in the

3700–4200 MHz, 5925–6425 MHz,

6525–6875 MHz or 10.7–11.7 GHz

frequency band, then it must accept the

use of that same model in subsequent

coordinations.

* * * * *

7. Section 101.141(a)(3) is amended

by revising the first sentence of footnote

3 to the table to read as follows:

§ 101.141 Microwave modulation.

(a) * * *

(3) * * *

3This loading requirement must be met

within 24 months of licensing.***

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–29870 Filed 11–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U