Part 25 Satellite Streamlining Considered Welcome, Though Actual Use Unclear
The small satellite streamlining order on Thursday's FCC agenda (see 1907110071) is expected to get 5-0 approval. But it remains undetermined how operators will use the new licensing option, experts told us. To them, the draft is a substantial improvement over the current licensing regime, at least for a portion of smallsat operators.
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.
Small commercial smallsat operators haven't had a proper home in the licensing structure, with Part 5 experimental licenses, Part 97 amateur licenses and Part 25 licensing all being ill fits, said Dan Oltrogge, director of Analytical Graphics' Center for Space Standards and Innovation. He said the Part 25 process is expensive and long, and cubesat operators might not be experimental so it's not clear if they can use Part 5 licensing. Satellite lawyer Steve Goodman of Butzel Long said the proposed smallsat process, with a $30,000 fee, "is somewhere in between" traditional, expensive Part 25 licensing and the lack of protections in an experimental license.
The draft order says some applicants now may seek experimental licenses because of the big cost difference between it and the Part 25 fee, even though the experimental license is for noncommercial use. The FCC said the order doesn't change existing satellite authorization options, which will remain.
Under the order, the streamlined Part 25 would be for 10 or fewer satellites under a single license, though there would be no limit on the number of applications that could be filed, and those satellites could be up for up to six years. It says maximum mass of the satellites, including propellant, is limited to 180 kilograms. They must be deployed no higher than 600 kilograms, or have propulsion capabilities for collision avoidance and de-orbiting, and have a unique telemetry marker. The FCC says allowing more than 10 per streamlined Part 25 would require a more intensive review and entail a larger constellation than most small satellite operators seem to be aiming for.
Operators of large proposed constellations could break up the constellation into multiple smallsat applications, but it doesn't take many of those before filing one expensive Part 25 application makes more sense than a cluster of smallsat applications, Goodman said. For a commercial operator planning legions of satellites, "if you can't afford the application, you certainly can't afford the constellation," he said. Goodman said commercial operators conversely might use the smallsat process for a preliminary small batch of satellites being used for testing and demonstration purposes, and would then do a Part 25 application for the bulk of the constellation.
Satellite Industry Association President Tom Stroup said the process is possible for other operators, such as geostationary, raising issues about whether they're subsidizing FCC staff with their higher regulatory fees, but the idea is smallsats will go through a streamlined process and take less time. The draft estimates the cost of processing the streamlined applications at $30,000. It said as it gets experience processing the streamlined Part 25s, the fee might be adjusted, but generally they will be less resource intensive than regular Part 25 non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) applications.
The satellite industry has raised red flags with the agency about proposed FY 2019 regulatory fees broadly. EchoStar's docket 19-105 filing Thursday backed the Satellite Industry Association on phasing in the "extraordinary" fee increases proposed for satellite and earth stations (see 1907160061). The company wants a proceeding about possible expansion of the pool of regulatory fee payers to include non-U.S.-licensed satellite operators given U.S. market access. EchoStar said the proceeding also could look at redistributing the fee burdens among geostationary and NGSO to better align them with the regulatory costs and benefits.