Satellite Industry Executives Suggest More FCC Exploration of Issues Unaddressed in Part 25 FNPRM

The FNPRM includes a proposal that attempts to make submitting to the ITU more convenient, said Jose Albuquerque, FCC Satellite Division chief. Currently, operators file with the ITU after completing the FCC application, he said. The difficulty is that the full application requires a lot of detail, he said. Operators tend to know the frequency they need before they know all the details of the satellite they want to build and launch, he said. To help avoid satellite warehousing issues, the bureau proposes a bond requirement to be associated with the ITU filing, he said. It decided that having a bond “was the more obvious solution to deal with the problem,” he said.

The bureau also proposes to simplify the procedure of showing compliance with milestones, Albuquerque said. The FNPRM aims to better clarify what's required as a showing of compliance, he said. The bureau may get rid of all intermediate milestones, and focus on requiring milestones at the start and launch of an operation, he said. While there has been some opposition to keeping the spacing rule at two degrees, the bureau suggests keeping a spacing requirement as a baseline, Albuquerque said. There is consensus that the spacing still plays a role, he said.

Some operators are leery of producing test plans, statements of work and other sensitive documents when beginning the filing process, said John Janka, a Latham Watkins communications attorney. There are concerns about making a granular showing and providing details that may be competitively sensitive, he said. Although transparency is important in many procedures, the openness in the current filing process makes it difficult for satellite companies “to start off showing their cards,” or to have to provide more information as they go forward in the licensing process, he said. Such concerns are similar to those expressed in the confidentiality proceeding on Comcast's planned buy of Time Warner Cable, he said.

FCC rules have a “heavy information burden,” and the FNPRM proposals attempt to move toward a more streamlined method, said Daniel Mah, SES regulatory counsel. It’s unclear how the proposals will be conducive to the first-come, first-served concept, he said. There's no register of available slots, he said. Some companies file for an orbital slot and then realize afterward that the slot wasn't available, he said. Mah would like the FCC to make an effort to figure out how foreign-licensed applications fit into the framework, he said. Several foreign-licensed satellites can access the U.S. market, he said. But it’s hard to figure out which ones are authorized in which bands, he said.

The two-degree spacing rule, which SES supports as a baseline, does “an extremely good job at encouraging new entrants in the U.S.,” Mah said. But there is a differential that disfavors a new entrant, he said. “A new entrant pays more for a bond of the same value than an existing operator.”

The technology neutrality element is missing from the FNPRM, said Jennifer Manner, EchoStar vice president-regulatory affairs. There also is little focus on the heavy regulations imposed on the satellite industry, she said. There seems to be a bias toward satellite licensing regulations compared with how the FCC licenses and regulates wireless and wireline industries, she said. The number of rules for satellites is “exponentially more,” she said: This “limits flexibility.” Wireline and wireless companies aren't required to deploy a new cell network if they plan to operate in another band, she added.

Manner questioned whether the FCC has legal jurisdiction to establish a bond requirement. The commission should consider whether a corporate guarantee is possible, she said. “Bonds are a huge expense.” She also called for increased fleet management flexibility.