NOTICE


    *********************************************************    

       

                         NOTICE


   *********************************************************


This document was originally prepared in Word Perfect.  

If the original document contained--

                    *  Footnotes
                    *  Boldface & Italics

--this information  is missing in this version

The document format (spacing, margins, tabs, etc.) is changed
too.

If you need the complete document, download the Word Perfect
version.

For information about downloading documents (FTP) see file
 how2ftp.

File  how2ftp (.txt & .wp) is in directory
/pub/Bureaus/Miscellaneous/Public_Notices/

*****************************************************************
********
              DA 96-541 
Before the
 Federal Commun             ications Commission
Washington, D.                  C. 20554




In the Matter of

Dominion Video Satellite, Inc.                        
                                                           
Application for Minor Modification of Construction
Permit for Direct Broadcast Satellite System 




                
 File No.  16-SAT-MP-96
                 



                                   ORDER
                                                               Adopted:  April 5, 1996             Released:  April 8, 1996

By the Chief, International Bureau:

1.  On November 20, 1995, Dominion Video Satellite, Inc. ("DVS") filed a request to modify
its construction permit in the Direct Broadcast Satellite ("DBS") service.  It proposes to
exchange two of its channel assignments at a western orbital location, 166o W.L., for two
channel assignments at an eastern orbital location, 61.5o W.L.  Direct Broadcasting Satellite
Corporation ("DBSC") opposes grant of the request.  For the reasons stated below, we deny
the request.

2.  DVS states that its request fully complies with the Commission's recent decision to
eliminate east-west pairing of channel assignments, and that grant of its request is a minor
modification requiring no additional orbit/spectrum resources.  DBSC argues that the
Commission's policy of awarding channel assignments on a first-come first-served basis, in
the order in which due diligence obligations are satisfied, requires that DBSC take precedence
over DVS should the Commission elect to award any unassigned channels.  DBSC notes that
it opposed an earlier request for these channels on the same grounds.  DVS responds that the DBS Auction Order fundamentally changed the channel assignment policy,
and that its request is consistent with that change.  DVS further notes that DBSC has not filed
a competing application for the unassigned channels, and contends that any such application
would now be untimely.

    3.     We recognize that the DBS Auction Order eliminated the requirement that DBS
channels remain in east-west pairs.  We do not, however, find it in the public interest to
modify channel assignments made prior to the recent changes in policy in the manner
requested by DVS.  DVS's citation to the Commission's change in policy is insufficient. 
Because some permittees clearly can provide full-CONUS service from 101o W.L., 110o W.L.,
or 119o W.L, we no longer require that permittees retain east-west paired assignments.  It
does not follow, however, that realignment of channel assignments at non-full-CONUS
locations, such as those held by DVS, is necessarily in the public interest.

    4.  Prior to the DBS Auction Order, the Commission had twice granted requests to
exchange channel assignments as minor modifications.  In each instance, the permittee
exchanged channels it held at one orbital location for other channels at the same orbital
location, and the requests were unopposed.  Here, by contrast, DVS seeks to exchange
channels at different orbital locations.  We believe this is more than a minor modification. 
Moreover, unlike prior requests, another permittee has not only opposed the request but also
seeks the same channels requested by DVS.  DVS can offer no reason why it should receive
these channels rather than DBSC.  More to the point, the same DBS Auction Order that
revised our east-west pairing policy also established the principle that auctions should be used
to assign scarce DBS resources desired by more than one party.  Under the circumstances,
we see no public interest in allowing DVS to acquire unassigned channels at a different
orbital location without opening the process to other interested parties and, if we receive
mutually exclusive applications, conducting an auction.  Accordingly, we find that grant of
DVS' application for minor modification is not in the public interest, and is hereby denied.

    5.     Under our revised DBS policies, we permit both existing permittees and new
entrants to apply for available DBS orbit/spectrum resources.  DBS Auction Order at  6-7. 
We intend to give interested parties an opportunity to apply for any available DBS
orbital/channel assignments, including those requested by DVS and DBSC.  We will issue a
public notice to announce a filing period for such applications in the near future; no
applications will be accepted prior to that time.

    6.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the application of Dominion Video Satellite,
Inc. for minor modification of its construction permit, File No. 16-SAT-MP-96, to exchange
two western orbital/channel assignments for two eastern orbital/channel assignments IS
DENIED.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




    Scott Blake Harris
    Chief, International Bureau