WPCH
2 B J Z
Courier Courier CG Times CG Times Bold X @ `7X@HP LaserJet 4_230_1 HPLAS4.PRS 4x
@ \_ )^X@ 2 6 Z [
3| x
an Times Roman Bold HP LaserJet 4 PostScript itional) HPLA4POS.PRS x
@ hhhh: hX@ 3| x 2 1 X L M L L < ? x x x , 2x 6X @ `7X@ 8 w C ; , Xw P E37XPD 7 z C ; , c!Xz _ p i7XV " G ( $ , hG P E37hP [dCYdddd d7>d< d< $8 YYdCC dd oo CY Ⱦ ( ((x((( (((((( (C! W> < q *"xxxxWWxxxWWkkxxx 1610.0 1626.5/2483.5 2500 MHz frequency bands and to operate the system in the United
X K -
x = States in the 1610.0 1621.35/2483.5 2500 MHz frequency bands. See LQP Amendment (Nov.
15, 1994), at 29. On November 15, 1994, LQP amended its application in light of the rules
X -
x and policies adopted by the Commission to govern "Big LEO" service. . 4
X -
Ѝ x Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies Pertaining to a
x Mobile Satellite Service in the 16101626.5/2483.52500 MHz Frequency Bands, 9 F.C.C. Rcd.
5936 (1994) (" Big LEO Order"). . By Public Notice,
x Report No. DS1481 (November 21, 1994), we sought comment on LQP's amended application.
x = AMSC filed a Petition to Defer Processing, Constellation filed Consolidated Comments, MCHI
x filed a Consolidated Petition to Deny, Motorola filed Consolidated Comments and Petition to
x > Defer and/or Deny, and TRW filed a Petition to Deny. MCHI filed Comments in Support of
x O Opposition to LQP Request for Waiver of Power Flux Density Limits, and LQP filed a
x Consolidated Response and letter responding to MCHI's Comments in Support of Opposition to
x > LQP Request for Waiver of Power Flux Density Limits. MCHI and TRW filed Consolidated
X 1 -
x Replies. LQP filed a letter opposing TRW's Consolidated Reply. For the reasons discussed
X - below, we grant LQP's application, as amended, subject to certain conditions.
X -
Ѝ x If it becomes necessary to implement our interim spectrum sharing plan, code division
x multiple access ("CDMA") operators will have the option of operating in the 16121622.60 MHz
x frequency bands in addition to the 2483.52500 MHz frequency bands for the duration of the
X = - interim plan. See Big LEO Order at 53.
X
-
# 2. x LQP is a Delaware limited partnership whose sole general partner is Loral General
x / Partner, Inc. (LGP). LGP is indirectly 100% owned by Loral Corporation. LGP owns 51% of
x L the LQP partnership interests. It directly holds 2%, while 49% is held by Loral Globalstar, L.P.,
x = a Delaware limited partnership wholly owned by LGP. Qualcomm Limited Partner, Inc., wholly
owned by Qualcomm Incorporated, owns the other 49% of the LQP partnership interest.
X b -
3. x LQP proposes to construct, launch, and operate a satellite system called Globalstar
x / consisting of 48 operational, nongeostationary satellites and eight inorbit spares. The 48
x operational satellites would orbit the earth in a circular orbit at an altitude of 1,414 kilometers.
x Six satellites spaced at 60 degree intervals will occupy each of eight orbital planes at an
x inclination of 52 degrees with a 45 degree separation between planes. LQP proposes to provide
x mobile voice, data, facsimile, position location, and other mobile satellite services ("MSS") for
both domestic and international subscribers.
X -
4. x LQP requests feeder links in the 50255225 MHz (uplink) and 68757075 MHz
x (downlink) frequency bands. It acknowledges that it may be required to share these frequencies
x with other geostationary or nongeostationary satellite systems. It also requests a waiver of the
power flux density limit in the 2483.52500 MHz mobile satellite service band. " e 0*0*0* " Ԍ
X - ԙ ' II. Discussion Đ T P
X -
5. x Financial Qualifications. Applicants for space station authorizations in the Big LEO
x > service must demonstrate the financial qualifications set forth in Section 25.143(b)(3) of the
X -
x { Commission's rules. \
X - Ѝ x 47 C.F.R. 25.143(b)(3). \ Specifically, an applicant must demonstrate that it has the financial
x < resources to meet the estimated costs of the construction, launch, and firstyear operation for the
x [ satellite system. This can be demonstrated through evidence of the company's current assets,
x operating revenues, or irrevocably committed debt or equity financing. If it is relying on internal
funds, an applicant must also provide evidence of a management commitment.
X -
6. x To demonstrate its financial qualifications, LQP relies on the financial resources of its
x ultimate majority owner, Loral Corporation. LQP estimates that its costs to build and launch the
x 56 satellites in this system, and to operate the system for one year after the launch of the first
x satellite, will be approximately $1.554 billion. LQP reports that Loral Corporation has current
x = assets of $1.8 billion and operating income of $400 million. LQP provides a letter from Michael
x B. Targoff, Loral Corporation's Senior Vice President and Secretary, stating that, absent a
x material change in circumstances, Loral Corporation is "fully committed" to expending the
x x necessary funds, or to taking all reasonable steps to cause LQP to raise and expend the necessary
x funds, to finance the construction, launch, and operation of the Globalstar system for one year
X K - after the launch of the first satellite. Ky
X u - Ѝ x LQP Consolidated Response to Petitions and Comments at attachment A.
X -
? 7. x TRW asserts that LQP has understated the cost of its proposed system by at least $856
x million, and that as a consequence, the costs of construction, launch, and one year of operation
X -
x Z exceed the current assets and operating income of Loral Corporation. R *
X - Ѝ x TRW Petition at 49.R LQP responds that its cost
x projection is based on a firm, fixedprice contract awarded to Space Systems/Loral, Inc. ("SSL")
X - to design, construct, and launch the Globalstar satellites. Q
X M - Ѝ x LQP Response at 12.Q
X -
\ 8. x TRW has not presented any evidence that the SSL contract is not valid or that the contract
x does not cover the needed services. TRW merely uses independent, unrelated data to suggest that
x the projected costs are unrealistic. Thus, there is no reason to conclude that LQP's specifically
X N -
x contracted price is unreliable. Absent evidence of misrepresentation or patent implausibility, the
Bureau is not in a position to question an applicants's cost projections.
X -
9. x AMSC, TRW, and MCHI allege that, even assuming LQP's cost estimates to be
x = reasonable, LQP has failed to submit information sufficient to demonstrate its compliance with " 0*((Z "
X -
x L our financial requirements. z
X y - Ѝ x AMSC Petition at 5; TRW Petition at 10; MCHI Petition at 20.z Specifically, they claim LQP cannot rely on the current assets and
x - operating revenues of Loral Corporation because Loral Corporation states that it will "expend the
X -
x necessary funds, or take all reasonable steps to cause LQP to raise and expend the necessary
x funds" (emphasis added). AMSC and MCHI assert, based on SEC filings, that Loral Corporation
x intends primarily to fund the system from external sources and not internal assets or income.
X -
x y They submit that, based on LQP's stated intent to seek external financing, it cannot reasonably
x " claim at the same time to rely on internal funding. Therefore, they argue, the letter is
X _ -
x insufficient, and LQP must submit evidence of ready external financing. k
_y
X
- Ѝ x AMSC Petition at 56; MCHI Petition at 2022.k MCHI also argues that
X H -
x LQP's reliance on internal assets despite its intent to seek outside sources of funding calls its
X 1 - candor into question. R 1*
X - Ѝ x MCHI Petition at 22.R
X
-
@ 10. x In the Big LEO Order, the Commission stated that "[t]he availability of internal funds
X
-
x K sufficient to cover a system's costs provides adequate assurance at the time the Commission acts
x on the application, that the system can be built and launched. Current assets provide a general
X -
x measure of a company's ability to finance the project itself or to raise funds from lenders and
X
-
x equity investors on the basis of its on-going operations." j
X 3 - Ѝ x Big LEO Order at 31 (emphasis added). j LQP has submitted adequate evidence
x y to show that Loral Corporation has current assets and operating income sufficient to construct
x the system, and Loral Corporation has provided an unequivocal statement that it is prepared to
x expend the funds necessary to construct, launch, and operate the proposed system for one year.
x The Commission's rules and policies do not require more. We have also reviewed the alleged
x j inconsistencies between LQP's statements to the Commission and its statements in SEC filings
x concerning its financing plans. We conclude that the statements are entirely consistent, and raise
no substantial material question of fact that would require a hearing as to the applicant's candor.
X -
|
11. x Finally, MCHI asks the Commission to scrutinize whether a transfer of control of LQP
x has occurred. It further argues that LQP has created an ownership structure so complex that
x Loral Corporation may have been effectively insulated from Commission scrutiny, and that LQP
x may not be the appropriate applicant. MCHI maintains that LQP's complex ownership
X | -
x "labyrinth" must be examined at a hearing. U
|
X " - Ѝ x MCHI Petition at 2223.U LQP replies that it has consistently kept the
X e -
x Commission apprised of changes in its ownership structure. It asserts that Loral Corporation
X N - maintains ultimate control of the applicant. T N=
X <& - Ѝ x LQP Response at 1012.T
" 7
0*(( " Ԍ
X -
M 12. x In questioning LQP's "byzantine ownership structure," MCHI includes only one paragraph
x z of vague accusations. We have already found LQP as currently structured to be financially
x qualified. We recognize that in the significant amount of time that has passed since the Big LEO
x applications were filed, LQP has made several revisions to its ownership structure. Several of
x the applicants in this new service, however, have altered their ownership structures over the
x = course of this proceeding to take advantage of new financing possibilities. We recognize that
x some of these changes might be considered "major amendments" under Section 25.116 of the
X _ -
x N Commission's Rules, T _
X - Ѝx 47 C.F.R. 25.116.T jeopardizing eligibility for consideration in this processing group.
x j However, our overriding concern in determining whether a "major amendment" has occurred is
X 1 -
x . whether the applicant has attempted to profit from the sale of an application. 1y
X [ -
Ѝx In this regard, the Big LEO service differs from services in which multiple or cross
x ownership rules may require closer review of ownership changes. Furthermore, the Big LEO
x applicants have each proposed to operate as private carriers. Thus, concerns about ownership
changes that may violate Section 310(b) of the Communications Act are considerably diminished. Unless there is
x evidence of this, we see no reason to prevent applicants from procuring partners to help finance
x the enormous cost of these systems. Regardless of whether there has been a transfer of control
x here, we find no intent to traffick in applications. Consequently, even if a "major" change in
x LQP's ownership has occurred, we find these ownership changes to be in the public interest
x pursuant to Section 25.116(c)(2) of the Commission's Rules, and we will not treat LQP's
X
- application as newly filed.
X = -
0 Ѝ x The only amendment filed by LQP since the last public notice informed the Commission
of a change in ownership that we find to be minor. LQP Amendment (Dec. 16, 1994).
X y -
13. x Technical Qualifications. Applicants seeking authority to construct and launch Big LEO
x systems also must meet certain technical requirements. These requirements include: (1) using
x L a nongeostationary system design; (2) providing mobile satellite service to all locations as far
X 4 -
x > north as 70o latitude and as far south as 55o latitude for at least 75
percent of every 24hour
x . period; (3) providing continuous service throughout the fifty states, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.
x Virgin Islands; and (4) preventing unacceptable interference to other authorized users of the
X - spectrum. q
X - Ѝ x 47 C.F.R. 25.143(b)(2); 47 C.F.R. 25.213.q
X -
>
14. x LQP states that the Globalstar satellites are nongeostationary and will provide continuous
x 0 global coverage between 74 degrees north and 74 degrees south latitude, exceeding the
x = requirements of our rules. Further, the Globalstar system will provide continuous service over
x the entire continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
x Finally, LQP says that the system is capable of providing the required protection for the Radio
X N -
x Astronomy Service, Radio Navigation Satellite Service, Aeronautical Radio Navigation Service, " N 0 0*(( "
X -
x = and International Aeronautical RadioNavigation Service. f
X y - Ѝ x LQP Amendment (Nov. 15, 1994), at 2428.f No commenter has refuted any of
x these claims. We find that LQP's November 15, 1994 amendment has fulfilled all technical
X - requirements of Section 25.143(b)(2) of the Commission's Rules. vy
X -
Ѝ x We note that this license does not authorize MSS earth terminals or gateway earth
x terminals. Gateway earth stations will be licensed in accordance with technical requirements for
x the frequency band to be used. Standards are currently being developed to assure that MSS earth
x terminals, the Global Positioning System, and the Global Orbiting Navigation Satellite System
X -
x can coexist in adjacent bands. See Memorandum of Understanding Between the FCC, NTIA and
FAA, Public Notice 50736, November 19, 1994.
X -
15. x Feeder Links. LQP requests feeder links at 50255225 MHz (Earthtospace) and 6875
x l 7075 MHz (spacetoEarth). Motorola argues that LQP's amended request for feeder link
X v -
x frequencies constitutes a major amendment under Section 25.116 of our rules. { v
X - # Xj \ P 6G ; XP# э x 47 C.F.R. 25.116.{ It claims that
X _ -
x . the amendment was not necessitated by the new policies and rules established in the Big LEO
X H -
x Order, and that it increases the potential for interference without resolving any frequency
x [ conflicts. Motorola also claims the amended request will decrease the likelihood that there will
x . be enough spectrum available for all the qualified applicants in their desired feeder link bands,
x = and that such requests will further delay unconditional licenses to Motorola and other system
x operators. In its Response, LQP states that the increase in bandwidth is directly necessitated by
X -
x ? the Big LEO Order, which required band sharing and reduced the amount of servicelink
x spectrum available for CDMA systems. The increase in the number of service beams needed to
x share spectrum with other CDMA systems translated into a direct need for increased feeder link
spectrum, LQP states.
X b -
16. x In the Big LEO Order, the Commission afforded applicants the opportunity to amend their
x L applications to bring them into conformance with newly adopted requirements and policies for
x satellite systems. It noted, for example, that a change from a geostationary system configuration
X -
x to a LEO configuration to meet our satellite system design requirement, or a change in coverage
x patterns to conform with our satellite visibility requirements, would not affect a particular
x x application's status in the processing group. It also indicated, however, that "a change that is not
X -
x necessary to bring the application into conformance with our rules and which would increase
X -
x frequency conflicts" would render the application newly filed under Section 25.116 of the rules. h h
X " - Ѝ x Big LEO Order at 59 (emphasis added).h
x As an example, it stated that a design change from a CDMA to a TDMA/FDMA system, which
x would not facilitate spectrum sharing, would be a major amendment. Such applications would
be considered in a future processing group, after January 1996.
X N -
17. x LQP redesigned its system to facilitate the spectrum sharing plan adopted in the Big LEO " N 0*(( "
X -
x Order by increasing the number of end users that can be served simultaneously. It appears that
x LQP's feeder link requests were a consequence of this redesign. Therefore, we do not believe the
x z changes in LQP's feeder link proposal should be considered major. Furthermore, even if the
x amendment were considered major within the meaning of Section 25.116 of the Rules, we would
x waive its requirements in this case because (a) the modified system serves the public interest by
x increasing system capacity and spectrumuseefficiency in the service links; (b) feeder link
x spectrum is for a use ancillary to the use of Big LEO spectrum; (c) the service is at a relatively
x early stage of development in which its spectrum requirements are still being addressed; and (d)
x any third parties who might be adversely affected by feeder link allocations will have a full
X 1 -
x 0 opportunity to address potential interference concerns in other pending proceedings. 1
X
-
A Ѝ x We note that the Commission has a number of issues related to the allocations of
x spectrum for Big LEO feeder links separately before it in several pending proceedings, including
x z the 28 GHz Proceeding, (Second Notice of Proposed Rule Making in CC Docket No. 92297),
x 9 F.C.C.Rcd. 1394 (1994), and Preparation for the World Radio Conference, (Notice of Inquiry
in IC Docket No. 9431), 9 F.C.C.Rcd. 2430 (1994).
Accordingly, we decline to treat LQP's application as newly filed.
X
-
18. x As stated in our Big LEO Order, we are not in a position to assign feeder link frequencies
X -
x unconditionally to any applicant. Q
X -
^ Ѝ x Big LEO Order at 166. Accordingly, we will not implement a construction milestone
x until authority to launch and operate a mobile satellite system using specific feeder link spectrum
X u - is granted. Id. at 189. Q Therefore, we will grant qualified applicants the authority to
x / construct, at their own risk, mobile satellite systems capable of operating on the feeder link
x frequencies they have requested. We believe this is the type of "conditional" license
X -
x . contemplated by the Big LEO Order. N
X - ԍ x Big LEO Order at 166.N We will defer acting on requests to launch and operate
x [ using specific feeder link frequencies until that spectrum is available to assignment to Big LEO
X b -
x z feeder links, and sufficient spectrum is available to satisfy the feeder link requirements of all
X K - licensed Big LEO systems, regardless of frequency band. KQ
X M -
Ѝ x Big LEO Order at 166. We will afford permittees and applicants an opportunity to
x revise their requested feeder link bands, if necessary. Consistent with our usual practice, we will
x place any revised requests on public notice and will provide the public an opportunity to
comment.
X -
! 19. x Waiver Request. LQP requests a waiver of Section 2.106 of the Commission's rules and
x j International Radio Regulation ("RR") 753P to operate its service downlink in the 2.4 GHz band
x using power flux density (PFD) levels that exceed the levels contained in RR 2566. It states that
x z Task Group 22, convened by the International Telecommunication Union to prepare for the
X -
x upcoming World Radio Conference (WRC95) to develop sharing criteria for radio services in
x the 13 GHz band, concluded that operation at higher PFD levels increases the capacity of MSS " 0*((R "
x ] systems, while providing full protection to analog radio relay networks and only a slight
X -
x operating loss to digital radio relay networks operating in the same band. v
X b -
Ѝx RR 2566 specifies the PFD limits at the earth's surface produced by space station
X K -
x { emissions at 152 dB(W/m2) from 0 to 5 degrees above the horizontal plane; 152 + 0.5(,
X 4 -
x 5)dB(W/m2) for angles of arrival , (in degrees) between 5 and 25 degrees; and 142 dB(W/m2)
x for angles between 25 and 90 degrees. Task Group 22's proposal would permit a higher PFD
X -
x with figures of 150, 150 + 0.65(, 5), and 137, respectively, for these angles. See Document
22/TEMPT/47(Rev.3)E. LQP says the we
should permit these higher PFD levels at all elevation angles.
X -
z 20. x In response, Constellation notes that it and the other CDMA applicants have indicated that
x > they would operate their systems at the PFD levels currently specified in RR 2566, but they
X v -
x j would not object to a waiver at elevation angles between 10o and 25o, provided that a waiver is
x y also granted for all LEO systems operating in that band. MCHI argues that waivers should not
X H -
x j apply to elevations above 25o because this would increase interference to the other applicants'
x < systems, provide an unfair competitive advantage to LQP or, alternatively, require a major system
redesign by MCHI.
X
-
? 21. x As a general matter, the Commission does not grant waivers except on a specific factual
x demonstration that a waiver would further the public interest and Commission objectives. While
x an increase in the PFD limit may ultimately serve the public interest, granting a waiver to only
x [ one applicant might create the potential for harmful interference stemming from differing signal
x j strengths and disparate noise levels. The rulemaking process, not the waiver procedure, is the
X y -
x more appropriate vehicle for changing a technical requirement that will affect all licensees. x y
X 0 - Ѝx See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1969). x We
x therefore will address the matter of revising the PFD limits in Section 2.106 in the pending
X K -
x reconsideration of the Big LEO Order. Accordingly, we deny LQP's request for a waiver of
Section 2.106 of the Rules.
X -
22. x Regulatory Treatment. Pursuant to our discretion under Section 332(c)(5) of the
X -
x Communications Act, we grant LQP's request that it be regulated as a noncommon carrier. W
X W - Ѝ x 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(5).W
X -
x / As we determined in the Big LEO Order, Big LEO space station licensees providing service
x > directly to end users must be regulated as common carriers if the service offering meets the
X -
x / definition of commercial mobile radio service ("CMRS"). X h
X # - Ѝx Big LEO Order at 174.X If a Big LEO licensee, however,
x [ offers space segment capacity to a reseller or other entity who then offers CMRS to end users,
X | -
x we have the discretion to determine whether to require the licensee to offer such service on a " | 0*((P "
X -
x common carriage basis or to permit the offering to be made on a private carriage basis. Z
X y - Ѝx Id. at 175.Z We
X -
x M concluded in the Big LEO Order that there does not appear to be a need to impose common
X -
x = carrier requirements on Big LEO licensees offering space segment capacity to resellers. T y
X - Ѝ x Id. at 179.T LQP
x - says that the Globalstar space segment will be offered on a contract basis to vendors who in turn
x = will provide MSS services to subscribers and/or resell capacity to other service vendors. LQP
X -
x does not intend to hold itself out to provide MSS service indifferently to the public. b ! *
X h
- Ѝx LQP Amendment (Nov. 15, 1994), at 9.b We
therefore will allow LQP to operate as a noncommon carrier.
X H -
@ 23. x Other Issues. Finally, LQP reaffirms its request, already tentatively denied in the Big
X 1 -
x LEO Allocation NPRM, 7 F.C.C. Rcd. at 6420, for a pioneer's preference. LQP submits that the
X -
x = Commission should grant this request at the same time as LQP's space station authorization. O "
X - Ѝ x Id. at n.2.O
x LQP's request for a pioneer's preference is being addressed in another proceeding. Our decision
x to issue LQP a license is both consistent with the Commission's desire to license Big LEO
x service expeditiously, and without prejudice to any action the Commission deems appropriate
with respect to LQP's pioneer preference request.
X -
23.x Effect of Decisions on Other Applications. In orders released today, the Bureau defers
x ! action on the applications of MCHI and Constellation until January 1996. Based on the
X b -
x intraservice sharing plan adopted in the Big LEO Order, it may not be possible to grant all
x k remaining applications for Big LEO licenses. Nonetheless, in granting LQP's application we
x z insulate LQP from any mutual exclusivity that may arise among the remaining applicants. In
x other words, while LQP's license is conditional in some respects, it will not be affected in any
x y way if the Commission determines that all three of the remaining applicants are qualified for the
X - two remaining licenses that can be awarded for the currently available spectrum.
X - C III. Ordering Clauses
T P
X -
O 24. x Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that application file Nos. 19DSSP91(48) and CSS91
X | -
x 014 IS GRANTED, and Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P., IS AUTHORIZED to construct a
x 0 mobile satellite service system capable of operating in the 16101626.5/2483.52500 MHz
x frequency bands, in accordance with the technical specifications set forth in its application and
consistent with our rules unless specifically waived herein.
X -
^ 25. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P., IS AUTHORIZED
x [ to launch and operate 48 lowEarth orbiting space stations and eight inorbit spares during the
x license term for the purpose of providing a mobile satellite service in the United States in the " " 0*((; "
x 16101621.35/2483.52500 MHz frequency bands in accordance with the technical specifications
x . set forth in its applications and consistent with our rules unless specifically waived herein. In
x [ the event the 16101612 MHz band is not available for mobile satellite service operations in the
X - United States, LQP IS AUTHORIZED to operate in the 16121622.60/2483.52500 MHz bands.
X -
^ 26. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P., IS AUTHORIZED
x to construct, at its own risk, a mobile satellite system capable of operating with feeder links in
X _ -
x the 50255225 MHz (Earthtospace) and 68757075 MHz (spacetoEarth) frequency bands in
x Z accordance with technical specifications set forth in its applications and consistent with our rules
unless specifically waived herein.
X
-
O 27. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that application file No. 21SATMISC95, a request for a
x waiver of Section 319(d) of the Communications Act to begin construction of feeder links, IS
DISMISSED as moot.
X
-
^ 28. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Loral/ Qualcomm Partnership, L.P. IS AUTHORIZED
to offer space segment capacity on its satellite system on a private carriage basis.
x ` `
X b -
m 29. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the license term for the space station constellation is
x ten years and will commence on the date the licensee certifies to the Commission that the first
x j satellite in the system has been successfully placed into orbit and that the first transmission to
X - or from that satellite in the authorized frequency bands has occurred.
X -
# 30. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this authorization is subject to the completion of
x consultations under Article XIV of the INTELSAT Agreement and Article 8 of the INMARSAT
x Convention. Upon completion of these consultations, and notification by the Department of State
x . that the United States has fulfilled its international obligations with respect to INTELSAT and
INMARSAT, no further action by this Commission will be required.
X e -
31. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that LQP will prepare any necessary submissions to the
x International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and will participate in any necessary decisions
x with other administrations as appropriate in order to coordinate these space stations in accordance
with the ITU Radio Regulations.
X -
32. x IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the temporary assignment of any orbital planes, or of
x any particular frequencies, to Loral/Qualcomm Partnership, L.P. is subject to change by summary
x order of the Commission on 30 days' notice and does not confer any permanent right to use the
x orbit and spectrum. Neither this authorization nor any right granted by this authorization, shall
x be transferred, assigned or disposed of in any manner, voluntarily or involuntarily, or by transfer " "
" 0*((f! "
x of control of any corporation holding this authorization, to any person except upon application
x to the Commission and upon a finding by the Commission that the public interest, convenience
and necessity will be served thereby.
x ` ` hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
x ` ` hhScott B. Harris
x ` ` hhChief, International Bureau