NGSO Amendments and ViaSat's Call for a Process Are Raising Questions
Amendments pushed by some satellite operators to their pending non-geostationary orbit​ (NGSO) applications -- as well as the related push by ViaSat for a clear FCC route to propose such amendments without them constituting a major amendment that could get applications removed from the NGSO processing round (see 1801180060) -- are raising an array of questions, including what the FCC might do, satellite officials told us.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Officials said it’s early in the process since ViaSat brought up the issue only earlier this month, and the International Bureau and chairman’s office haven’t discussed anything with other commissioners. One said there’s ambiguity about what constitutes a major amendment, and operators will undoubtedly try to make the case theirs doesn’t rise to that level. The FCC and ViaSat didn’t comment.
SES/O3b and Iridium are clashing over the major amendment issue. O3b’s ask -- to operate feeder links in the 29.1-29.5 GHz and 19.3-19.7 GHz bands on a co-primary basis -- constitute a major amendment because that upgrade from nonconforming to co-primary raises the risk for interference, Iridium said in an IB filing last week backing its push for a petition to deny or remove from processing round O3b’s application (see 1801100044).
Even if O3b’s proposed amendment stays in the processing round, it should be denied since its request to add a mobile satellite service designation in the 19.7-20.2 and 29.5-30 GHz bands isn’t consistent with agency band plans that limit those bands to fixed satellite service operations, Iridium said. It argued that no special circumstances warrant waiving the band plan. O3b didn’t comment. Counsel for a satellite operator said operators are looking to use the same band, and increased use arguably fits into the FCC’s push for more efficient use of spectrum.
OneWeb also is asking for changes to its NGSO application. Boeing wants to hand its over to another operator (see 1801100044).
A key issue with the proposed amendments and ViaSat's proposal is whether the NGSO operators are trying to make changes that reflect the new circumstances resulting from the NGSO rules changes adopted last fall, after the NGSO applications were filed (see 1709260035), or are attempting a do-over to the original application, the satellite operator counsel said. The NGSO order addressed such issues as the international converge requirement and milestones, which typically had been topics of waivers, the counsel said. It’s not clear whether the amendments process ViaSat is pushing is within the guidelines of existing rules or would need another rulemaking, the lawyer said.
The smallsat industry backed the FCC’s approach that let operators try to build in flexibility ahead of time, said Jonathan Rosenblatt, Spire general counsel and a head of the Commercial Smallsat Spectrum Management Association. That flexibility has come with letting smallsat operators file for multiple frequencies that can then be used to coordinate with NTIA without having to go back through an amendment cycle if NTIA rejected a narrower set of frequencies, or with the commission allowing ranges of altitudes and inclinations for smallsats in case launch schedules or launches change when smallsats are secondary payloads on rockets. There's also a need for the agency to formally address issues like these in a smallsat proceeding, Rosenblatt said, saying it's likely on the agency's agenda.