Skip Navigation

Federal Communications Commission

English Display Options

Commission Document

ESV Second Order on Reconsideration

Download Options

Released: July 19, 2012

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
)
)

Procedures to Govern the Use of Satellite Earth
)
IB Docket No. 02-10
Stations on Board Vessels in the 5925-6425 MHz/ )
3700-4200 MHz Bands and 14.0-14.5 GHz/
)
11.7-12.2 GHz Bands
)

SECOND ORDER ON RECONSIDERATION

Adopted: July 17, 2012

Released: July 19, 2012
By the Commission:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Heading
Paragraph #
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 1
II. BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 2
III. DISCUSSION......................................................................................................................................... 8
A. Off-Axis EIRP-Density Limits and Aggregate Power..................................................................... 9
B. Antenna Pointing Error Requirement ............................................................................................ 26
C. Procedural Rule Revisions............................................................................................................. 39
IV. PROCEDURAL MATTERS................................................................................................................ 40
A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification ..................................................................................... 40
B. Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis ........................................................................ 44
V. ORDERING CLAUSES....................................................................................................................... 45
APPENDIX A - List of Parties
APPENDIX B - Rule Revisions

I.

INTRODUCTION

1.
In this Second Order on Reconsideration for Earth Stations on Board Vessels (ESV Second
Reconsideration Order), we adopt changes to the ESV rules in order to promote the deployment of
broadband service, to ensure the flexible use of spectrum, and to protect incumbent operators from
harmful interference. In particular, we revise our ESV rules by adding technical requirements for
variable power ESV systems that use co-frequency transmitters operating simultaneously at varying data
rates. ESVs are mobile transmitters that facilitate communications services, including broadband service,
to cruise ships, merchant ships, yachts, U.S. Navy vessels, and other maritime vessels that are capable of
carrying a stabilized satellite antenna. Our actions in this Order stem from two petitions filed by The
Boeing Company (Boeing) and ViaSat, Inc. (ViaSat)1 requesting changes to our existing ESV rules.2 The

1 See Petition for Reconsideration of The Boeing Company, filed October 15, 2009 (Boeing Petition); Petition for
Clarification or Reconsideration of ViaSat, Inc., filed October 15, 2009 (ViaSat Petition). Appendix A contains the
complete list of filings.
2 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.221, 25.222 (ESV rules for operating in the C- and Ku-bands, respectively).

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

requirements we adopt provide variable power ESV systems with operational flexibility and ensure that
incumbent fixed-satellite service (FSS) operators are protected from harmful interference in the C-band3
and Ku-band.4

II.

BACKGROUND

2.
In 2005, the Commission established licensing and service rules for ESVs to operate in the
C-band and Ku-band frequencies.5 The ESV rules include technical requirements for preventing ESVs
from causing harmful interference to other radio services in these bands, including the FSS and Fixed
Service (FS). To protect the FSS operators, the Commission adopted off-axis effective isotropically
radiated power (EIRP)-density limits6 that restrict the power emitted from the ESV antenna towards the
satellites adjacent to the target satellite. The Commission also adopted an antenna pointing error
requirement that allows ESV antennas to mispoint only within 0.2 degrees when communicating with the
target satellite.7
3.
To protect the FS operators in the C-band, the Commission required ESV operators to
coordinate with affected FS operations; placed limits on the amount of spectrum that ESV operators are
permitted to coordinate; limited the EIRP towards the radio horizon and the EIRP-density towards the
radio horizon; and limited the installation of ESVs to vessels weighing 300 gross tons or more.8 The
Commission also established rules for licensing ESV systems, including licensing of ESV hub stations
and/or blanket licensing for ESV earth stations.9 Finally, to protect U.S. satellite and terrestrial licensees
from harmful interference, the Commission established requirements for U.S.-registered vessels
operating ESVs within and outside of U.S. waters and created a regulatory framework for foreign-
registered vessels operating ESVs in U.S. waters.10
4.
In the 2009 Order on Reconsideration (ESV Reconsideration Order), the Commission
revised certain ESV rules to provide ESV operators with greater flexibility in operating their systems in
order to meet the needs of their customers and to be competitive in the global marketplace11 and to

3 The C-band uplink and downlink are allocated to the terrestrial fixed service (FS) and the fixed-satellite service
(FSS) on a co-primary basis. The 5925-6425 MHz band also is known as the conventional C-band uplink or 6 GHz
band; the 3700-4200 MHz band also is known as the conventional C-band downlink or 4 GHz band. The 5925-6425
MHz band is densely used by the fixed point-to-point microwave service.
4 The Ku-band uplink and downlink are allocated to the FSS on a primary basis. The 14.0-14.5 GHz band also is
known as the conventional Ku-band uplink or 14 GHz band; the 11.7-12.2 GHz band also is known as the
conventional Ku-band downlink or 12 GHz band. ESVs may also operate in a portion of the extended Ku-band
(10.95-11.2 GHz and 11.45-11.7 GHz).
5 Procedures to Govern the Use of Satellite Earth Stations on Board Vessels in the 5925-6425 MHz/3700-4200 MHz
Bands and 14.0-14.5 GHz/11.7-12.2 GHz Bands
, IB Docket No. 02-10, Report and Order, FCC 04-286, 20 FCC
Rcd 674 (2005) (ESV Order). The other services located in the Ku-band include radio astronomy service and space
research service. See ESV Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 712-713, 715, ¶¶ 89-90, 96.
6 The phrase “off-axis EIRP-density” is used synonymously with “off-axis power-density.”
7 ESV Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 698-699, 716-717, 718-719, ¶¶ 55-58, 98-101, 103-106.
8 Id. at 691-695, 700, ¶¶ 39-45, 61-62.
9 Id. at 722-723, ¶¶ 114-117.
10 Id. at 724-727, ¶¶ 120-128.
11 Procedures to Govern the Use of Satellite Earth Stations on Board Vessels in the 5925-6425 MHz/3700-4200
MHz Bands and 14.0-14.5 GHz/11.7-12.2 GHz Bands
, IB Docket No. 02-10, Order on Reconsideration, FCC 09-63,
24 FCC Rcd 10369 (2009) (ESV Reconsideration Order).

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

protect the FSS and FS operators in the C- and Ku-bands. The Commission modified the ESV rules for
protecting FSS operators by: (1) allowing ESVs to operate at higher off-axis EIRP-density levels as long
as they comply with the certification and cessation of emission requirements specified in that Order;12 (2)
allowing certain ESV systems13 to declare their own maximum antenna pointing error and to cease
transmissions within 100 milliseconds if they exceed the declared antenna pointing error;14 and (3)
increasing the starting angle of the off-axis EIRP-density envelope to 1.5 degrees.15 The Commission
reasoned that these changes should promote greater operational flexibility for ESVs while continuing to
ensure that the FSS will be protected from harmful interference.16
5.
In addition, the Commission clarified the requirements for ESVs to: (1) protect offshore FS
operators; and (2) cease transmissions when an FS operator objects to continuation of the ESV operating,
in response to a public notice that announces the completed frequency coordination between the ESV
operator and FS operators.17 Further, the Commission revised its decision from the ESV Order for ESVs
on foreign-registered vessels communicating with foreign-based hubs in the Ku-band. In the ESV Order,
the Commission allowed those ESVs to operate within 300 kilometers from the U.S. coastline only if: (1)
there was a bilateral agreement between the United States and the administration of the foreign-based
hub; or (2) the vessels’ registering administration had approved the operation of the ESV on the foreign
vessel pursuant to ITU18 Radio Regulation Article 4.4 (ITU RR Art. 4.4).19 In the ESV Reconsideration
Order
, the Commission reduced the distance in which those conditions apply from 300 kilometers to 150
kilometers from the U.S. coastline.20 Finally, the Commission adopted various procedural changes to

12 Id. at 10373-10376, ¶¶ 10-16.
13 Only ESVs with fixed power systems using low power techniques or ESV systems with the ability to control
power dynamically may deviate from the 0.2 degree antenna pointing error requirement. See id. at 10379-10380, ¶¶
23-27.
14 Id. at 10379-10380, ¶¶ 23-27.
15 Id. at 10381-10382, ¶¶ 30-31.
16 Id. at 10370, ¶ 1.
17 Id. at 10384-10386, ¶¶ 37-38, 42. In the C-band, ESV operators must coordinate with FS operators. Once the
parties complete the coordination, the ESV operator must submit a notification to the Commission that identifies
certain details of the completed coordination. Following the receipt of this notification, the Commission releases the
public notice announcing the details of the completed coordination, which provides the FS operators 30 days to
object on the grounds that they have been excluded from the completed coordination. If an FS operator objects, then
the ESV operator must cease transmitting on those frequencies used by that FS operator. See id. at ¶¶ 39, 42. See
also International Bureau Provides Guidance Concerning the Notice Requirement for C-Band Coordination by
Earth Stations on Vessel
, Public Notice, DA 05-1671 (2005) (outlining the details of the coordination that must be
submitted as part of the notification). An ESV system may not commence operation until after the release of the
public notice announcing the completed coordination. ESV Reconsideration Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 10385, ¶ 39.
18 ITU stands for International Telecommunication Union. The ITU is a United Nations agency that “allocate[s]
global radio spectrum and satellite orbits, develop[s] the technical standards that ensure networks and technologies
seamlessly interconnect, and strive[s] to improve access to [information and communication technologies] to
underserved communities worldwide.” See http://www.itu.int/en/about/Pages/default.aspx (last visited July 17,
2012).
19 ESV Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 726-727, ¶ 128. ITU RR Art. 4.4 allows administrations of Member States to assign
frequencies to services that do not conform to the Radio Regulations as long as those services do not cause
interference to, or claim protection from interference by, other services licensed in compliance with the Radio
Regulations.
20 ESV Reconsideration Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 10395, ¶ 63.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

Sections 25.132, 25.221, 25.222 and 25.271 of its rules in order to clarify and facilitate the operation of
ESVs as well as the ESV license application process.21
6.
On October 15, 2009, Boeing filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the ESV
Reconsideration Order in which it asked the Commission to allow ESVs with multiple co-frequency
earth stations transmitting simultaneously using variable power control to operate on an ALSAT22 basis
and, in the aggregate, at the same power levels as other FSS operators.23 On the same day, ViaSat filed a
Petition for Clarification or Reconsideration to modify and/or clarify the antenna pointing error
requirements.24 The Commission published the public notice of these Petitions in the Federal Register on
April 15, 2010.25 On April 29, 2010, Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc. (MTN) filed a
consolidated response to the Petitions filed by Boeing and ViaSat.26
7.
Subsequently, in a Public Notice released on January 26, 2011, the International Bureau
(Bureau) modified the ESV coordination notification filing procedures by requiring all coordination
notifications to be filed electronically via the International Bureau Filing System (IBFS)
(http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/).27 The Bureau stated that notifications must be filed in the form of a
statement referencing the relevant call signs and file numbers.

III.

DISCUSSION

8.
In this ESV Second Reconsideration Order, we grant in part and deny in part the Petition
filed by Boeing and deny the Petition filed by ViaSat. In particular, we adopt an aggregate power-density
rule that will allow ESVs with variable power, co-frequency systems to operate their individual
transmitters simultaneously while using varying off-axis EIRP-density levels instead of requiring each
transmitter within the system to use the same EIRP-density. We also require variable power ESV
systems to operate 1 dB below the off-axis EIRP-density limits28 in order to protect FSS from harmful
interference. In addition, we require ESV applicants seeking a waiver of the 1 dB requirement to file a
report regarding their system operations. Further, we require variable power ESV systems to cease
transmissions if those ESVs exceed the applicable power-density limits. We decline to clarify the
antenna pointing error provisions for ESVs because we find that the current rule provisions effectively
explain the requirements for operating an ESV antenna. Finally, we adopt useful, but non-substantive
rule changes such as renumbering the rules to incorporate the variable power ESV provisions (in order to

21 Id. at 10395-10397, ¶ 65.
22 ALSAT authority allows an earth station providing FSS in the Ku-band to access any U.S. satellite or foreign
satellite on the Permitted Space Station List as long as its communications are in accordance with the technical
parameters and conditions set forth in the earth station’s license. See Amendment of the Commission’s Regulatory
Policies to Allow Non-U.S.-Licensed Space Stations to Provide Domestic and International Satellite Service in the
United States
, IB Docket No. 96-111, First Reconsideration Order, FCC 99-325, 15 FCC Rcd 7207, 7210-11, ¶ 6,
7215-16, ¶ 19 (1999).
23 See generally Boeing Petition.
24 See generally ViaSat Petition.
25 See Petition for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding, Federal Register, 75 FR 19401 (2010).
26 Consolidated Response of Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc., filed April 29, 2010 (MTN Reply).
27 See The International Bureau Announces a Change in the Procedure for Filing Coordination Notifications for
Earth Stations on Vessels Operating in the C-band
, Public Notice, DA 11-132, 26 FCC Rcd 564 (2011). See also
Section 25.221(a)(12) in Appendix B.
28 Specifically, 1 dB below the off-axis EIRP-density limits. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.221(a)(1)(i), 25.222(a)(1(i).

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

be consistent with the rules for Vehicle-Mounted Earth Stations (VMES)) and incorporating the new
requirement to file coordination notifications electronically on IBFS. The revisions we adopt today for
variable power ESVs will provide greater operational flexibility for those ESVs while continuing to
ensure that the FSS operators are protected from harmful interference in the C- and Ku-bands.

A.

Off-Axis EIRP-Density Limits and Aggregate Power

9.
Background. In the ESV Order, the Commission adopted off-axis EIRP-density limits to
protect the FSS satellite or space station operations from harmful interference in the C- and Ku-bands.29
The off-axis EIRP-density is the power emitted from the ESV antenna in directions other than towards
the target satellite. ESV operators may exceed the off-axis EIRP-density limits if they comply with
certification and cessation of emission requirements.30
10.
The ESV off-axis EIRP-density limits restrict the power-density that is emitted from ESV
systems using: (1) a single earth station terminal in a single channel (i.e., single channel per carrier or
SCPC system); or (2) a modulation technique such as code division multiple access (CDMA), in which
multiple co-frequency earth station terminals transmit simultaneously in the same satellite beam (i.e.,
aggregate power system). To determine if the off-axis EIRP-density limits are exceeded, the power-
density from an SCPC system is measured from the individual terminal, whereas the power-density from
an aggregate power system is measured from all of the simultaneously operating co-frequency terminals.
The off-axis EIRP-density limits adopted in the ESV Order were based on the power-density emitted
from an individual terminal in an SCPC ESV system, and did not account for aggregate power systems.
Therefore, the Commission, in the Part 25 Streamlining Sixth Report and Order (Part 25 Streamlining
6th R&O)
incorporated the 10*log(N) term into the off-axis EIRP-density limits to measure the power-
density from individual terminals in aggregate power systems. Specifically, the power-density of each
individual co-frequency transmitter is reduced by a factor of 10*log(N), with “N” representing the
maximum number of co-frequency ESV transmitters expected to operate simultaneously in the same
satellite receiving beam.31 However, the 10*log(N) term, with “N” defined as set forth above, assumes
that aggregate power systems will operate their terminals so that each terminal emits the same level of
power-density (i.e., fixed power systems) and does not take into account another type of aggregate power
system – a system with terminals that may operate at different levels of power (i.e., variable power or
dynamic power systems).
11.
In the VMES Order, released after the Part 25 Streamlining 6th R&O, the Commission
adopted licensing and service rules, largely based on the ESV rules, for VMES networks, a land-based
mobile application with characteristics similar to ESVs that operates in the FSS-based Ku-band.32
However, in the VMES Order, the Commission went a step further than the ESV rules by adopting an

29 See ESV Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 698, 716, ¶¶ 55, 99. The off-axis EIRP-density is the power emitted from the ESV
antenna in directions other than towards the target satellite. The off-axis EIRP-density limits define the level of
power-density that can be emitted from an ESV antenna.
30 See ESV Reconsideration Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 10373-10376, ¶¶ 10-16.
31 See 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review – Streamlining and Other Revisions of Part 25 of the Commission’s Rules
Governing the Licensing of, and Spectrum Usage by, Satellite Network Earth Stations and Space Stations
, IB
Docket No. 00-248, Sixth Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 05-62, 20 FCC
Rcd 5593 (2005) (Part 25 Streamlining 6th R&O). See also ESV Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 698, 716 nn. 154, 256.
32 See Amendment of Parts 2 and 25 of the Commission’s Rules to Allocate Spectrum and Adopt Service Rules and
Procedures to Govern the Use of Vehicle-Mounted Earth Stations in Certain Frequency Bands Allocated to the
Fixed-Satellite Service
, IB Docket No. 07-101, Report and Order, FCC 09-64, 24 FCC Rcd 10414 (2009) (VMES
Order
).

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

aggregate power-density rule for VMES that use variable power systems.33 In particular, the Commission
required VMES applicants using variable power systems to demonstrate that their systems could operate
1 dB below the off-axis EIRP-density limits.34 The Commission also required VMES licensees to file a
report one year following the license issuance demonstrating that the system had complied with the
power-density requirements.35 However, in the VMES Order, the Commission did not provide variable
power VMES systems with ALSAT authority and did not define the value of “N” in the 10*log(N) term
for these systems.36
12.
In adopting the aggregate power-density rule for VMES systems, the Commission reasoned
that individual co-frequency transmitters in variable power networks are capable of operating at different
EIRP-density levels in the same satellite receiving beam under control of a central control and monitoring
station. The Commission explained that, in a variable power system, the central control and monitoring
station dynamically allocates a different EIRP-density to individual transmitters based on the amount of
data that needs to be transmitted from a particular transmitter37 with the control paths passing through
GSO satellites. Thus, operating variable power VMES systems involves greater operational complexity
than systems with fixed power.
13.
Boeing Petition. In its petition, Boeing requests that the Commission allow CDMA-based
ESVs to operate on an ALSAT basis using variable power control and without the 1 dB reduction in
power-density required for variable power VMES operators. Boeing claims that the restrictions imposed
on variable power ESV systems (requiring that all co-frequency terminals use the same power-density
levels) and VMES systems (prohibiting ALSAT licensing and requiring coordination or a 1 dB power-
density reduction) “unnecessarily limit the commercial flexibility and broadband throughput of such
networks and inhibit their ability to provide broadband services to consumers on ships, trains, trucks and
aircraft in the most efficient manner possible.”38
14.
In addition, if the Commission declines Boeing’s request, Boeing proposes as an
alternative that the Commission modify Section 25.222(a) of the ESV rules to be consistent with Section
25.226(a)(3), which sets forth the requirements for variable power VMES systems.39 Boeing also notes
that neither the ESV nor VMES rules define N for CDMA variable power systems.40 Thus, Boeing
recommends that Section 26.226(a)(3)(i) and the corresponding ESV rule state that “the effective
aggregate EIRP-density from all terminals should be at least 1 dB below the off-axis EIRP-density limits
defined in (a)(1)(i)(A)-(C), assuming N equals one.”41
15.
ViaSat supports Boeing’s proposal to revise the ESV rules to address variable power
systems, including certain CDMA systems.42 ViaSat indicates that these constraints – the lack of ALSAT

33 See VMES Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 10447, ¶ 102.
34 Id. at 10447, 10450, ¶¶ 102, 115-117.
35 Id. at 10451, ¶ 117.
36 Id.
37 Id. at 10448, ¶ 110-111.
38 Boeing Petition at 3-4.
39 Id. at 8-11.
40 Id. at 10.
41 Id.
42 Reply of ViaSat, Inc., filed May 12, 2010 (ViaSat Reply), at 3.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

authority and 1 dB power-density reduction – are inconsistent with the National Broadband Plan which
recommended the elimination of unnecessary technical restrictions on the use of spectrum.43 ViaSat
argues that eliminating the unnecessary restrictions highlighted by Boeing would serve the public interest
because: (1) there is no record evidence that variable power systems pose a risk of harmful interference
or that such systems are unable to comply with the same power-density levels as other types of earth
stations; (2) variable power systems are less likely to cause harmful interference than fixed power
systems; (3) the Commission could require such applicants to demonstrate compliance with the
applicable power-density limit instead of having a hard, inflexible rule for such systems; and (4) the
Commission acknowledges that the restrictions adversely affect the capacity and robustness of these
systems.44
16.
MTN would not object if the Commission modified Section 25.222 to clarify that the value
of N is one for variable-power CDMA systems.45 However, MTN opposes Boeing’s proposal to remove
the 1 dB restriction because, in MTN’s opinion, the risk of harmful interference should be assessed on a
case by case basis and, if the requirements for exceeding the off-axis EIRP-density limits in Section
25.226(a)(3)(ii) is applied to ESVs, then ESVs would be able to exceed the off-axis EIRP-density levels
in Section 25.226(a)(3)(i).46
17.
Discussion. We grant, in part, Boeing’s alternative request to adopt an aggregate power-
density rule for variable power ESV systems, similar to what we did for VMES in Section
25.226(a)(3)(i). However, as explained below, we decline to grant Boeing’s proposal to adopt the
requirements for exceeding the off-axis EIRP-density limits and the reporting requirements set forth in
Sections 25.226(a)(3)(ii) and 25.226(a)(3)(iii), respectively, of the VMES rules. As part of the aggregate
power-density rule, we require variable power ESVs to operate at least 1 dB below the off-axis EIRP-
density limits. A reduction in power of 1 dB means that the maximum power-density permitted would be
equivalent to 80 percent of the power emitted by other ESV systems. We also grant Boeing’s request to
give variable power ESV systems ALSAT authority and, as Boeing proposes,47 we define, for 10*log(N),
N equal to one for aggregate variable power-density, co-frequency systems. We decline Boeing’s
proposal to remove the requirement for variable power ESV systems to operate terminals at least 1 dB
below the off-axis EIRP-density limits on an aggregate basis. As explained below, ESV applicants have
the option to pursue a waiver of the 1 dB requirement. We will require ESV applicants intending to seek
a waiver of the 1 dB requirement to file a report detailing the operations of the system along with their
request. Finally, we adopt a cessation of emission rule for variable power systems. The changes we
implement today should provide greater operational flexibility for variable power ESV systems while
ensuring that the FSS satellite or space station operations are protected from harmful interference. These
changes also provide variable power ESV systems regulatory parity with variable power VMES systems.
18.
The aggregate power-density rule allows variable power ESV systems to operate with
greater flexibility. We recognize that the current off-axis EIRP density limits allow the operation of ESV
systems that utilize multiple, co-frequency transmitters operating simultaneously, which are some of the
characteristics of variable power systems. However, the current limits require each of those transmitters
to operate at the same level of power-density, pursuant to 10*log(N), and do not take into account the
dynamic component of the variable power system. The variable power system’s dynamic component

43 Id.
44 Id. at 4-5.
45 MTN Reply at 2-3.
46 Id. at 3.
47 Boeing Petition at 10.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

allocates different levels of power-density to different terminals, depending on the data needs in the areas
covered by each of those terminals. The aggregate power-density rule that we adopt today recognizes
and promotes the dynamic component of the variable power ESV system, thereby creating greater
operational flexibility for those systems.
19.
As noted above, we decline to grant Boeing’s proposal to eliminate the 1 dB restriction, a
requirement for variable power VMES operators. Although operating 1 dB below the EIRP-density
envelope will result in a reduction of capacity, we disagree with Boeing and ViaSat that the 1 dB power-
density reduction is unnecessary for this type of system. As we explained in the VMES Order, a dynamic
or variable power system is complex – the system’s network control and monitoring center must manage
a large number of factors and, as a result of operating commands through FSS satellites, there are
inherent time delays in relaying commands and monitoring the co-frequency terminals.48 This
complexity, combined with the fact that these are mobile applications operating in a fixed satellite
frequency band, necessitates adoption of more cautionary measures, such as requiring the ESV system to
reduce power-density by 1 dB. Moreover, because variable power ESV systems have technology that is
similar to VMES variable power systems, we are not compelled to eliminate the 1 dB requirement for
ESV systems.
20.
However, we agree with Boeing and ViaSat that certain variable power ESV systems may
be capable of operating without the 1 dB requirement while preventing interference and, therefore, these
systems may regain the 20 percent system capacity that is lost due to the 1 dB reduction. As Boeing
states, variable power networks have operated in the United States on an experimental basis for several
years without complaints of harmful interference.49 Further, MTN asserts that the potential for harmful
interference from these systems should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and we agree.50 We
conclude, therefore, that the waiver process described in detail below is an appropriate approach to
permit qualified variable power ESV systems to operate without the 1 dB requirement.51
21.
Pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission’s rules, the ESV operator may file a request to
waive the 1 dB requirement. We require the waiver request to be accompanied by a report52 that
demonstrates that the system has operated without providing unacceptable interference to adjacent
satellites.53 In order to help ensure that the report includes sufficient technical information, we
encourage the ESV applicant to refrain from filing a waiver request until its system is operating at or

48 See VMES Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 10450, ¶ 115.
49 Boeing Petition at 4.
50 MTN Reply at 3.
51 We highlight the waiver as an option here in order to emphasize that ESV operators do not need to request a
change to the aggregate power rule in order to operate without the 1 dB restriction.
52 At a minimum, the report should evaluate, through the use of operational statistics, actual measurements or a
combination thereof, the aggregate power-density at the geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) from all simultaneously
active co-frequency transmitters. The report should include information on the average and maximum number of
simultaneous co-frequency transmitters, an analysis of the EIRP-spectral density at the GSO, and a discussion of the
factors taken into account at the network control center required to manage the aggregate power-density of the
system.
53 We note that, in the VMES Order, the Commission required variable power systems to file a report one year
following approval for the VMES license detailing that the system has met the power-density requirements. See
VMES Order
, 24 FCC Rcd at 10451, ¶ 117. We do not adopt that requirement here. Instead, we require a report
only for those applicants seeking a waiver of the 1 dB requirement.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

above 50 percent of its capacity.54 This report will provide us with the data we need to make a
determination on the waiver request. We will place the waiver request and report on public notice
seeking comment from the FSS satellite operators and other interested parties. As a result, variable
power ESVs may demonstrate through the waiver process, as explained above, that they are capable of
operating at the same power-density level as other ESV systems without causing harmful interference to
the FSS.
22.
We also adopt a cessation of emission requirement for variable power ESV systems that
differs depending upon whether one of two scenarios occurs. Under the first scenario, if the power-
density from an individual transmitter exceeds the applicable55 power-density limit, then that transmitter
must cease or reduce emissions automatically within 100 milliseconds of detecting this violation. Under
this scenario, the individual transmitter must be self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off. Under
the second scenario, if the power-density of one or more transmitters causes the aggregate off-axis EIRP-
densities to exceed the applicable power-density limit, then the transmitter or transmitters must cease or
reduce emissions within 100 milliseconds of receiving the appropriate command from the system’s
central control and monitoring station. As part of the application, the ESV operator should describe how
the system will respond when the power-density in excess of the applicable off-axis EIRP-density limits
is detected. Finally, this cessation of emission requirement also applies to variable power ESV systems
operating at higher power levels under Sections 25.221(a)(2) and 25.222(a)(2), except that that variable
power system must cease emissions when it exceeds the power levels provided to the target satellite
operator.56
23.
Boeing observes that the Commission did not explain in either the ESV Reconsideration
Order or the VMES Order why it adopted operating requirements for variable power systems in the
VMES rules but not in the ESV rules.57 We did not discuss variable power ESV systems in the above-
referenced Orders because Boeing, which had raised that issue, withdrew it from the record of the ESV
docket prior to the release of these orders.58 However, Boeing has raised the issue in its current Petition,
so we address it here. We agree with Boeing that ESV systems are technically identical to VMES
systems in relevant respects, and that there is no reason to treat ESV variable power systems any

54 We note that the 1 dB reduction in EIRP-density is equivalent in a capacity reduction of about 20% over
operations at the maximum permitted EIRP-density. If the system is designed to operate at the maximum EIRP-
density, then notifying the Commission when it has reached 50% of peak capacity allows for a further 30% growth
during the year following notification without exceeding the minus 1 dB limit. Further, we note that to show that the
system will not cause harmful interference while operating at full power, the report should demonstrate a
correspondence between the current capacity and the current aggregate EIRP-density at the GSO.
55 By “applicable,” we mean that, for variable power ESV systems that do not request, or request, but do not obtain a
waiver of the 1 dB requirement, the applicable power-density limits would be the off-axis EIRP-density limits minus
1 dB. For variable power ESV systems that obtain Commission approval to waive the 1 dB requirement, the
applicable power-density limit would be the off-axis EIRP-density limit set forth in Sections 25.221(a)(1)(i),
25.222(a)(1)(i).
56 See Sections 25.221(a)(2)(iii), 25.221(b)(2)(iv), 25.222(a)(2)(iii) and 25.222(b)(2)(iv) in Appendix B.
57 Boeing Petition at 9.
58 We note that Boeing raised this issue in the context of its petition for reconsideration of the ESV Order but later
submitted a letter withdrawing its petition in part. Because the Commission at that time considered the partial
withdrawal to cover operational requirements for variable power ESV systems, it did not address this matter. See
ESV Reconsideration Order
, 24 FCC Rcd at 10370 n.4, citing Letter from Carlos M. Nalda, Counsel for Boeing, to
Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated Mar. 23, 2007). As Boeing did not intend to withdraw its petition in this
regard, we agree that the matter should be considered pending, and, consequently, we resolve it here.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

differently than variable power VMES systems. Accordingly, we adopt rules that permit the variable
power ESV systems to operate as described above.
24.
We disagree, however, with Boeing’s claim that, in the ESV Reconsideration Order, the
Commission changed the off-axis EIRP-density limits by specifically removing a reference to variable
power CDMA networks.59 The Commission modified the definition of the term “N” in three ways, none
of which had the effect of changing the off-axis EIRP density limits: (1) the term “CDMA” was dropped
to make the rule clearer for those systems that may employ alternative ways of operating simultaneous
co-frequency transmitters than by “code-division multiple access;” (2) the term “maximum” was replaced
by “expected maximum” to better describe what was expected in the application; and (3) the phrase “that
have the same EIRP” was added to better describe the mathematical expression “10*log(N)” in the rule.
25.
Finally, as noted above, we decline Boeing’s proposal that we adopt the requirements for
exceeding the off-axis EIRP-density limits and the reporting requirement set forth in Section
25.226(a)(3)(ii) and 25.226(a)(3)(iii), respectively, of the VMES rules.60 We find that incorporating the
requirements exceeding the off-axis EIRP-density limits into Sections 25.221(a)(3) and 25.222(a)(3) is
redundant with those same requirements set forth in Sections 25.221(a)(2) and 25.222(a)(2) of the ESV
rules. We also find that the reporting requirement, which requires variable power VMES systems to file
a report one year following license issuance that details the aggregate EIRP-density levels as a result of
operations, is unnecessary, especially since variable power systems must operate 1 dB below the off-axis
EIRP-density limits. As explained above in the discussion of the waiver process, we find that filing a
report regarding system operations should only be required for variable power ESV operators requesting
a waiver of the 1 dB requirement.61

B.

Antenna Pointing Error Requirement

26.
Background. In the ESV Order, the Commission adopted an antenna pointing error
requirement in order to protect adjacent satellites from harmful interference.62 Specifically, the
Commission required each ESV operator to maintain an antenna pointing error within 0.2 degrees
between the target satellite and the axis of the ESV antenna’s main lobe.63 The Commission also
required the ESV system to cease emissions automatically within 100 milliseconds if the antenna
pointing error exceeded 0.5 degrees.64
27.
In the ESV Reconsideration Order, however, the Commission relaxed the antenna pointing
error requirement in order to allow more operational flexibility for certain ESV systems described
below.65 The Commission recognized that certain ESV operators may be capable of maintaining a
pointing error that is greater than 0.2 degrees without exceeding the off-axis EIRP-density limits that
protect FSS satellites adjacent to the target satellite.66 Thus, ESVs that operate with a constant level of
power could lower the earth station EIRP-density and could deviate from the antenna pointing error

59 Boeing Petition at 5.
60 See id. at 9-10.
61 See supra, ¶ 21.
62 ESV Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 699, ¶ 58.
63 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.221(a)(1)(ii)(A), 25.222(a)(1)(ii)(A).
64 Id. §§ 25.221(a)(1)(iii)(A), 25.222(a)(1)(iii)(A).
65 ESV Reconsideration Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 10379-10380, ¶¶ 23-27.
66 Id. at 10379, ¶ 24.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

requirement if they declare a maximum antenna pointing error that exceeded 0.2 degrees.67 In addition,
ESV operators capable of controlling power dynamically68 may exceed the antenna pointing error
requirement if those operators simultaneously reduce their power by a proportionate amount.69
28.
ViaSat Petition. ViaSat requests that the Commission modify and/or clarify four areas of
the antenna pointing error rules in order to provide the certainty needed to ensure further development of
ESV services and technologies.70 First, ViaSat proposes that the Commission add the term “peak” to the
0.2 antenna pointing error requirement in Section 25.222(a)(1)(ii)(A).71 ViaSat argues that the
Commission intended for the 0.2 degree pointing error to be a “peak” level and not a “maximum” limit.
In particular, according to ViaSat, the Commission expressed its intent to be consistent with ITU
Resolution 902’s (Res. 902) technical parameters, “which requires operators to maintain a pointing
accuracy within 0.2 degrees peak.”72 According to ViaSat, the term “peak” in this context is generally
understood to be the value three standard deviations above the mean value in a normal distribution.73
ViaSat further asserts that, unlike the antenna pointing error, the higher 0.5 degree shut-down limit could
be described as a maximum limit.74 ViaSat also argues that the new language in Section
25.222(a)(1)(ii)(B) allowing ESV operators to declare a “maximum” antenna pointing error implies that
the 0.2 degree antenna pointing error is a maximum limit instead of a peak level. ViaSat therefore
requests that the Commission modify that rule to remove such an implication.75
29.
Second, ViaSat argues, for the reasons discussed above, that applicants declaring their own
antenna pointing error should provide both a “peak” pointing tolerance and the “maximum” mispointing
levels. Specifically, ViaSat requests that the Commission modify Section 25.222(a)(1)(ii)(B) so that
applicants declare a “peak,” instead of a “maximum” antenna pointing error that may be greater than 0.2
degrees.76 ViaSat also requests that the Commission: (1) modify Section 25.222(a)(1)(iii)(B) to allow
applicants to specify a “maximum” mispointing limit in excess of 0.5 degrees as long as they comply
with the applicable off-axis EIRP-density limits; and (2) require the applicants to shut down when they
exceed that “maximum” mispointing limit.77
30.
Third, ViaSat requests that the Commission clarify that the antenna pointing error includes
both non-deliberate and deliberate mispointing. ViaSat argues that, in the ESV Reconsideration Order,

67 Id. at 10379-10380, ¶¶ 23-25.
68 Controlling power dynamically means that the ESV system may automatically increase or decrease power
depending on the pointing of the antenna.
69 ESV Reconsideration Order, 24 FCC Rcd at 10380, ¶ 27.
70 ViaSat Petition at 2.
71 See ViaSat Petition, Exh. A, Proposed Revisions to New Rules.
72 See ViaSat Petition at 2-3. Res. 902, entitled “Provisions relating to earth stations located on board vessels which
operate in fixed-satellite service networks in the uplink bands 5925-6425 MHz and 14-14.5 GHz,” was adopted at
the 2003 World Radio Conference (WRC-03) and contains the international technical provisions related to ESV
operations.
73 ViaSat Petition at 3.
74 Id.
75 Id. at 3-4.
76 Id. at 5.
77 Id.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

the Commission only identified non-deliberate causes of antenna mispointing, thereby creating an
uncertainty as to whether deliberate antenna mispointing would be allowed. ViaSat claims that many
ESV terminals use closed-loop tracking systems that deliberately mispoint the antenna in order to
determine whether the signal strength from the target satellite can be enhanced.78 ViaSat reasons that
making this clarification would provide the Commission, the satellite industry and the public with more
comprehensive information when evaluating ESV applications.79
31.
Finally, ViaSat requests that the Commission clarify that ESV operators may
simultaneously deviate from the antenna pointing error requirement (which, according to ViaSat, should
be 0.2 degrees peak and 0.5 degrees maximum) and the off-axis EIRP-density limits provided that those
technical parameters have been coordinated with satellites adjacent to the target satellite.80 According to
ViaSat, Section 25.222(a)(2) of the ESV rules allows ESV operators to exceed the off-axis EIRP-density
limits, but Sections 25.222(a)(1)(ii)(B) and 25.222(a)(1)(iii)(B) require ESV operators to stay within the
mask if the ESVs declare their own pointing error.81 ViaSat argues that making this clarification would
be consistent with the intent of the ESV Reconsideration Order, which is to maximize operator flexibility
to the extent that such flexibility does not cause harmful interference to adjacent satellite operators.82
32.
Boeing supports ViaSat’s proposals, but without explanation.83 MTN does not oppose
ViaSat’s proposals, but is not convinced that the changes proposed by ViaSat are needed.84 MTN also
expresses concern that adoption of ViaSat’s proposals, without careful implementation, could lead to
confusion, an outcome that MTN does not support.85 Boeing also “agrees with MTN that the
Commission should carefully implement the proposals so that no further confusion is caused.”86
33.
Discussion. First, we decline to specify that the 0.2 degree antenna pointing error is a
“peak” limit in the 0.2 antenna pointing error rule, as requested by ViaSat. We disagree with ViaSat that
the term “peak”87 in this context is understood to be the value three standard deviations above the mean
value in a normal distribution.88 The term “peak” also has other meanings such as “[t]he highest value
attained by a varying quantity” and “the most extreme possible amount or value.”89 Further, the ITU did
not associate any particular definition with the term “peak” as it was used in Res. 902.90 By not using the
term “peak” and by specifying a shut-off angle in the ESV rules, the Commission provided ESV

78 Id.
79 Id. at 6.
80 Id. at 6-8; ViaSat Reply at 1-2.
81 ViaSat Petition at 7.
82 Id. at 8.
83 Id.
84 MTN Reply at 4.
85 Id.
86 Reply of The Boeing Company, filed May 12, 2010 (Boeing Reply), at 8-9.
87 We note that ViaSat does not provide a source for its “common” definition of the term “peak.”
88 Thus, ViaSat contends, the Commission did not intend the 0.2 degree level to be a maximum, but rather
understood that this level would be exceeded only on rare occasions. ViaSat Petition at 3.
89 See http://www.thefreedictionary.com/peak (last visited July 17, 2012).
90 See ITU Resolution 902 Annex 2.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

manufacturers with greater operational flexibility, thereby promoting competition in the maritime
broadband marketplace while continuing to ensure that FSS systems would receive no harmful
interference. Further, we decline to define the 0.5 degree shutoff angle as a maximum limit. The rule
clearly sets forth 0.5 degrees as a shutoff angle for ESV antennas, thereby providing sufficient guidance
for when ESV antennas need to cease transmitting.
34.
We also decline to modify Section 25.222(a)(1)(ii)(B) (self-declared maximum antenna
pointing error rule) in response to ViaSat’s assertion that the rule implies that the 0.2 degree antenna
pointing error is a maximum limit. The self-declared maximum antenna pointing error rule provides that
ESV operators “shall declare a maximum antenna pointing error that may be greater than 0.2 degrees.”91
The Commission referenced the 0.2-degree antenna pointing error in the rule in order to emphasize that
declaring a maximum pointing error is an alternative way to comply with ESV antenna pointing
requirements. In addition, the Commission did not intend for the self-declared maximum antenna
pointing error rule to replicate the 0.2-degree antenna pointing error rule. In the self-declared maximum
antenna pointing error rule, the Commission sought to ensure that applicants identified the maximum
pointing angle that could be achieved without causing harmful interference and were capable of ceasing
emissions if that antenna pointing error were exceeded. The rule, as written, provides ESV operators the
flexibility to innovate and develop new approaches to provide services and to protect incumbents,
thereby advancing market-driven deployment of broadband services while continuing to ensure that ESV
operators protect FSS providers from harmful interference.
35.
Second, we decline to require ESV applicants operating under the self-declared maximum
antenna pointing error rule to specify both “peak” and “maximum” mispointing levels. As noted above,
specifying a “peak” mispointing angle makes it necessary to define the term “peak.” By not specifying
“peak” mispointing levels, we permit the system designer maximum flexibility. In addition, the
Commission intended for the self-declared maximum mispointing angle and the cessation of emission (or
shut-off angle) to be the same because it allows an ESV operator to determine its own peak, be it three
standard deviations from the mean of a normal distribution as ViaSat contends, or some other definition.
More importantly, having these angles be the same ensures that the ESV system ceases transmissions
when the system’s power levels exceed the off-axis EIRP-density envelope and that we know at what
angle this occurs so that we can verify the designer’s calculations. Thus, specifying a peak angle would
be an unnecessary requirement and could restrict the ESV operator’s design of its system.
36.
Moreover, we agree with MTN that the changes, as proposed by ViaSat, are unnecessary.92
These rules have been in effect since 2005 and a number of ESV licenses have been granted. There is no
evidence that ESV operators have experienced any difficulty interpreting and applying the antenna
pointing error provisions in the ESV rules. We also find that applying new definitions such as “peak”
and “maximum” to these angular limits, as proposed by ViaSat, could have the inadvertent effect of
creating confusion, a result that could undermine the flexibility intended in the rules and hamper the
implementation of ESV systems.
37.
Third, we do agree, however, with ViaSat’s assertion that the antenna pointing error rule
includes both intentional and unintentional antenna mispointing. But contrary to ViaSat’s contention, we
do not agree that a clarification is necessary. There is nothing in the ESV Reconsideration Order to
indicate that the list of mispointing examples, which are examples of unintentional mispointing, is all-
inclusive. As MTN correctly states, the antenna pointing error rule is understood to include both

91 47 C.F.R. § 25.222(a)(1)(ii)(B).
92 See MTN Reply at 3-4.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

deliberate and non-deliberate pointing.93
38.
Finally, we acknowledge that ESV operators may deviate from both the antenna pointing
error and off-axis EIRP-density limits, as provided in Section 25.222(a)(2), once those parameters have
been coordinated with the adjacent satellites. However, once again, we disagree with ViaSat that a
clarification is necessary. Section 25.222(a) states, in part, that “ESV licensees must comply with the
requirements in either paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this section.”94 Section 25.222(a)(2) makes no
mention of any constraints on antenna mispointing angles. So, if ESVs operate pursuant to the off-axis
EIRP-density limits under paragraph (a)(1), then those operators must remain within those limits when
deviating from the antenna pointing error requirement. If ESVs operate at higher off-axis EIRP-density
levels, as allowed under paragraph (a)(2), then it follows that those operators may deviate from the
antenna pointing error requirement as long as they remain within the agreed-upon higher power levels.
Thus, we conclude that it is clear that ESV operations under Section 25.222(a)(2) have no specific
limitations on antenna mispointing angles provided that the ESV system technical parameters have been
coordinated with satellites adjacent to the target satellite.

C.

Procedural Rule Revisions

39.
Finally, we adopt procedural rule changes set forth in Appendix B of this Order.95 First,
we place the variable power provisions adopted today in paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(3) of Sections 25.221
and 25.222 in order to be consistent with the VMES rules, which also have variable power provisions in
paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(3) of Section 25.226.96 As a result, the subsequent paragraphs are renumbered.
For example, the point of contact requirement set forth in paragraph (a)(3) of Section 25.221 can now be
found in paragraph (a)(4) and so on. We also modify the newly renumbered Section 25.221(a)(12),97
which sets forth the coordination requirements, by incorporating the requirement to file coordination
notifications electronically via IBFS.98

IV.

PROCEDURAL MATTERS

A.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification

40.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),99 requires that a regulatory
flexibility analysis be prepared for notice-and-comment rule making proceedings, unless the agency
certifies that “the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.”100 The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same
meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.”101

93 See id. at 4 n.9.
94 47 C.F.R. § 25.222(a) (emphasis added).
95 These rule changes are not subject to the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act
See 5 U.S.C. § 553(b)(3)(A) (2007). All rule changes described in this section are “interpretative rules, general
statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.” Id.
96 See 47 C.F.R. §§ 25.226(a)(3), 25.226(b)(3).
97 Prior to this change, the coordination requirements could be found in Section 25.221(a)(11).
98 See infra, ¶ 7.
99 The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. §§ 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
100 5 U.S.C. § 605(b).
101 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under
the Small Business Act.102 A “small business concern” is one which: (1) is independently owned and
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established
by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).103
41.
In light of the rules adopted in the ESV Order, we find that there are only two categories of
licensees that would be affected by the new rules. These categories of licensees are Satellite
Telecommunications and Fixed-Satellite Transmit/Receive Earth Stations. The SBA has determined that
the small business size standard for Satellite Telecommunications is a business that has $15 million or
less in average annual receipts.104 Currently there are approximately 3,390 operational fixed-satellite
transmit/received earth stations authorized for use in the C- and Ku-bands. The Commission does not
request or collect annual revenue information, and thus is unable to estimate the number of earth stations
that would constitute a small business under the SBA definition. Of the two classifications of licensees,
we estimate that only 15 entities will provide ESV service. For the reasons described below, we certify
that the policies and rules adopted in this Second Reconsideration Order will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
42.
In the ESV Order, the Commission established licensing and service rules for ESVs
operating in the 5925-6425 MHz/3700-4200 MHz (C-band) and 14.0-14.5 GHz/11.7-12.2 GHz (Ku-
band) frequencies. These rules allow ESV operations in the C- and Ku-bands, while ensuring that ESVs
protect the fixed service (FS) and fixed-satellite service (FSS) operators, and a limited number of
Government operations in these bands from harmful interference. In the Order on Reconsideration, the
Commission clarified and modified certain ESV rules designed to protect the FSS and the FS in the C-
and Ku-bands in order to allow greater operational flexibility for ESVs. For example, ESVs may operate
at higher off-axis power-density levels as long as the ESV remains within the parameters of the
coordination agreements between the target satellite and adjacent satellites. In this Second
Reconsideration Order
, we further promote operational flexibility while ensuring that the FSS operators
are protected from harmful interference by adopting an aggregate power-density rule and a cessation of
emission rule for variable power ESV systems.
43.
The Commission does not expect a substantial number of small entities to be directly
impacted by the rule changes adopted in this Second Reconsideration Order. Specifically, we expect that
fewer than ten entities will be affected by the variable power rule provisions adopted in this Order. In
addition, we believe these new rule provisions will not impose a significant economic impact on small
entities and, in fact, will benefit both large and small entities utilizing variable power systems by
allowing greater operational flexibility in providing ESV service. Therefore, we certify that the
requirements adopted in this Second Reconsideration Order will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.

B.

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

44.
This document does not contain new information collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain

102 5 U.S.C. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small-business concern” in the Small Business
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an
agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity
for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the
agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register.”
103 15 U.S.C. § 632.
104 13 C.F.R. § 121.201, NAICS codes 517410.

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

any new or modified information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

V.

ORDERING CLAUSES

45.
IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 7, 302, 303(c), 303(e), 303(f) and 303(r)
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 157, 302, 303(c), 303(e),
303(f) and 303(r), this Second Order on Reconsideration IS ADOPTED. Part 25 of the Commission’s
Rules IS AMENDED, as specified in Appendix B, effective 30 days after publication in the Federal
Register.
46.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration filed by The Boeing
Company IS GRANTED in part to the extent described above and IS DENIED in all other respects.
47.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration filed by ViaSat, Inc. IS
DENIED.
48.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, as
required by Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, IS ADOPTED.
49.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Second Order on Reconsideration
including the Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

APPENDIX A

List of Parties

List of Petitioners

The Boeing Company (Boeing)
ViaSat, Inc. (ViaSat)

List of Replies

Boeing
Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc. (MTN)
ViaSat

Ex Parte Filings

Boeing

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

APPENDIX B

Rule Revisions

For the reasons discussed above, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 C.F.R. part 25 as
follows:

PART 25 – SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

1. The authority citation for Part 25 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 701-744. Interprets or applies Sections 4, 301, 302,303, 307, 309 and 332 of the
Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 332, unless
otherwise noted.
2. Amend Section 25.221 as follows:
a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text;
b. Revise the first sentence of paragraph (a)(1)(ii) and paragraph (a)(1)(iii);
c. Revise paragraph (a)(2);
d. Revise paragraph (a)(2)(iii);
e. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(12) as paragraphs (a)(4) through (a)(13);
f. Add new paragraph (a)(3);
g. Revise paragraph (b) introductory text;
h. Revise paragraph (b)(2);
i. Revise paragraph (b)(2)(iv);
j. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(5) as paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(6);
k. Add new paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(7).
§ 25.221 Blanket Licensing provisions for Earth Stations on Vessels (ESVs) receiving in the 3700–
4200 MHz (space-to-Earth) frequency band and transmitting in the 5925–6425 MHz (Earth-to-
space) frequency band, operating with Geostationary Satellite Orbit (GSO) Satellites in the Fixed-
Satellite Service.

(a) The following ongoing requirements govern all ESV licensees and operations in the 3700-4200 MHz
(space-to-Earth) and 5925–6425 MHz (Earth-to-space) bands transmitting to GSO satellites in the fixed-
satellite service. ESV licensees must comply with the requirements in paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2) or (a)(3)
of this section and all of the requirements set forth in paragraphs (a)(4)-(a)(13) of this section. Paragraph
(b) of this section identifies items that must be included in the application for ESV operations to
demonstrate that these ongoing requirements will be met.
(1) * * *
(ii) Except for ESV systems operating under paragraph (a)(3), each ESV transmitter must
meet one of the following antenna pointing error requirements:
(A) * * *
(B) * * *
(iii) Except for ESV systems operating under paragraph (a)(3), each ESV transmitter

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

must meet of one the following cessation of emission requirements:
(A) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) The following requirements shall apply to an ESV that uses off-axis EIRP spectral-densities
in excess of the levels in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (a)(3)(i) of this Section. An ESV or ESV system
operating under this subsection shall file certifications and provide a detailed demonstration(s) as
described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(i) * * *
(ii) * * *
(iii) The ESV shall operate in accordance with the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities that
the ESV supplied to the target satellite operator in order to obtain the certifications listed
in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Except for ESVs with variable power systems, the
ESV shall automatically cease emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter
exceeds the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities supplied to the target satellite operator. For
ESVs using variable power systems, the individual ESV transmitter shall automatically
cease or reduce emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter exceeds the
off-axis EIRP-density limits supplied to the target satellite operator; the individual
transmitter must be self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off; and if one or more
ESV transmitters causes the aggregate off-axis EIRP-densities to exceed the off-axis
EIRP-density limits supplied to the target satellite operator, then the transmitter or
transmitters shall cease or reduce emissions within 100 milliseconds of receiving a
command from the system's central control and monitoring station.
(3) The following requirements shall apply to an ESV system that uses variable power-density
control of individual simultaneously transmitting co-frequency ESV earth stations in the same
satellite receiving beam unless that ESV system operates pursuant to paragraph (a)(2). An ESV
system operating under this subsection shall provide a detailed demonstration as described in
paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(i) The effective aggregate EIRP-density from all terminals shall be at least 1 dB below
the off-axis EIRP-density limits defined in paragraph (a)(1)(i), with the value of N=1. In
this context the term “effective” means that the resultant co-polarized and cross-
polarized EIRP-density experienced by any GSO or non-GSO satellite shall not exceed
that produced by a single transmitter operating 1 dB below the off-axis EIRP-density
limits defined in paragraph (a)(1)(i). An ESV system operating under this subsection
shall provide a detailed demonstration as described in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(ii) The individual ESV transmitter shall automatically cease or reduce emissions within
100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter exceeds the off-axis EIRP-density limits
specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i). The individual transmitter must be self-monitoring and
capable of shutting itself off. If one or more ESV transmitters causes the aggregate off-
axis EIRP-densities to exceed the off-axis EIRP-density limits specified in paragraph
(a)(3)(i), then the transmitter or transmitters shall cease or reduce emissions within 100
milliseconds of receiving a command from the system's central control and monitoring
station.
(4) There shall be a point of contact in the United States, with phone number and address,
available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with authority and ability to cease all emissions

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

from the ESVs, either directly or through the facilities of a U.S. Hub or a Hub located in another
country with which the United States has a bilateral agreement that enables such cessation of
emissions.
(5) For each ESV transmitter, a record of the ship location (i.e., latitude/longitude), transmit
frequency, channel bandwidth and satellite used shall be time annotated and maintained for a
period of not less than 1 year. Records will be recorded at time intervals no greater than every 20
minutes while the ESV is transmitting. The ESV operator will make this data available upon
request to a coordinator, fixed system operator, fixed-satellite system operator, or the
Commission within 24 hours of the request.
(6) ESV operators communicating with vessels of foreign registry must maintain detailed
information on each vessel's country of registry and a point of contact for the relevant
administration responsible for licensing ESVs.
(7) ESV operators shall control all ESVs by a hub earth station located in the United States,
except that an ESV on U.S.-registered vessels may operate under control of a hub earth station
location outside the United States provided the ESV operator maintains a point of contact within
the United States that will have the capability and authority to cause an ESV on a U.S.-registered
vessel to cease transmitting if necessary.
(8) ESV operators transmitting in the 5925-6425 MHz (Earth-to-space) frequency bands to GSO
satellites in the fixed-satellite service (FSS) shall not seek to coordinate, in any geographic
location, more than 36 megahertz of uplink bandwidth on each of no more than two GSO FSS
satellites.
(9) ESVs shall not operate in the 5925-6425 MHz (Earth-to-space) and 3700-4200 MHz (space-
to-Earth) frequency bands on vessels smaller than 300 gross tons.
(10) ESVs, operating while docked, that complete coordination with terrestrial stations in the
3700-4200 MHz band in accordance with §25.251, shall receive protection from such terrestrial
stations in accordance with the coordination agreements, for 180 days, renewable for 180 days.
(11) ESVs in motion shall not claim protection from harmful interference from any authorized
terrestrial stations or lawfully operating satellites to which frequencies are either already
assigned, or may be assigned in the future in the 3700-4200 MHz (space-to-Earth) frequency
band.
(12) ESVs operating within 200 km from the baseline of the United States, or within 200 km
from a U.S.-licensed fixed service offshore installation, shall complete coordination with
potentially affected U.S.-licensed fixed service operators prior to operation. The coordination
method and the interference criteria objective shall be determined by the frequency coordinator.
The details of the coordination shall be maintained and available at the frequency coordinator,
and shall be filed with the Commission electronically via the International Bureau Filing System
(http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/) to be placed on public notice. The coordination notifications
must be filed in the form of a statement referencing the relevant call signs and file numbers.
Operation of each individual ESV may commence immediately after the public notice is released
that identifies the notification sent to the Commission. Continuance of operation of that ESV for
the duration of the coordination term shall be dependent upon successful completion of the
normal public notice process. If, prior to the end of the 30-day comment period of the public

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

notice, any objections are received from U.S.-licensed fixed service operators that have been
excluded from coordination, the ESV licensee shall immediately cease operation of that
particular station on frequencies used by the affected U.S.-licensed fixed service station until the
coordination dispute is resolved and the ESV licensee informs the Commission of the resolution.
(13) ESV operators must automatically cease transmission if the ESV operates in violation of the
terms of its coordination agreement, including, but not limited to, conditions related to speed of
the vessel or if the ESV travels outside the coordinated area, if within 200 km from the baseline
of the United States, or within 200 km from a U.S.-licensed fixed service offshore installation.
Transmissions may be controlled by the ESV network. The frequency coordinator may decide
whether ESV operators should automatically cease transmissions if the vessel falls below a
prescribed speed within a prescribed geographic area.
(b) Applications for ESV operation in the 5925-6425 MHz (Earth-to-space) band to GSO satellites in the
fixed-satellite service must include, in addition to the particulars of operation identified on Form 312,
and associated Schedule B, the applicable technical demonstrations in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) or (b)(3)
and the documentation identified in paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(7) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) An ESV applicant proposing to implement a transmitter under paragraph (a)(2) of this section
and using off-axis EIRP spectral-densities in excess of the levels in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or
paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section shall provide the following certifications and demonstration(s)
as exhibits to its earth station application:
(i) * * *
(ii) * * *
(iii) * * *
(iv) Except for variable power ESVs applicants, a demonstration from the ESV operator
that the ESV system is capable of detecting and automatically ceasing emissions within
100 milliseconds when the transmitter exceeds the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities
supplied to the target satellite operator. Variable power ESV applicants shall provide a
detailed showing that an individual ESV terminal is capable of automatically ceasing or
reducing emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter exceeds the off-axis
EIRP spectral-densities supplied to the target satellite operator; that the individual
transmitter is self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off; and that one or more
transmitters are capable of automatically ceasing or reducing emissions within 100
milliseconds of receiving the appropriate command from the system's central control and
monitoring station if the aggregate off-axis EIRP spectral-densities of the transmitter or
transmitters exceed the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities supplied to the target satellite
operator.
(3) An ESV applicant proposing to implement an ESV system under paragraph (a)(3) of this
section and using variable power-density control of individual simultaneously transmitting co-
frequency ESV earth stations in the same satellite receiving beam shall provide the information
in paragraphs (b)(3)i) and (b)(3)(ii) as exhibits to its earth station application. The International
Bureau will place these showings on Public Notice along with the application.
(i) The ESV applicant shall provide a detailed showing of the measures it intends to
employ to maintain the effective aggregate EIRP-density from all simultaneously

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

transmitting co-frequency terminals operating with the same satellite transponder at least
1 dB below the EIRP-density limits defined in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. In this
context the term “effective” means that the resultant co-polarized and cross-polarized
EIRP-density experienced by any GSO or non-GSO satellite shall not exceed that
produced by a single ESV transmitter operating at 1 dB below the limits defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.
(ii) The ESV applicant shall provide a detailed showing that an individual ESV terminal
is capable of automatically ceasing or reducing emissions within 100 milliseconds if the
ESV transmitter exceeds the off-axis EIRP-density limit specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i)
and that the individual transmitter is self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off.
The ESV applicant shall also provide a detailed showing that one or more transmitters
are capable of automatically ceasing or reducing emissions within 100 milliseconds of
receiving the appropriate command from the system's central control and monitoring
station if the aggregate off-axis EIRP spectral-densities of the transmitter or transmitters
exceed the off-axis EIRP-density limits specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i).
(4) There shall be an exhibit included with the application describing the geographic area(s) in
which the ESVs will operate.
(5) The point of contact information referred to in paragraph (a)(4) of this section and, if
applicable, paragraph (a)(7) of this section, must be included in the application.
(6) ESVs that exceed the radiation guidelines of §1.1310 of this chapter must provide, with their
environmental assessment, a plan for mitigation of radiation exposure to the extent required to
meet those guidelines.
(7) Except for ESV systems operating pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, ESV systems
authorized pursuant to this section shall be eligible for a license that lists ALSAT as an
authorized point of communication.
3. Amend Section 25.222 as follows:
a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text;
b. Revise the first sentence of paragraph (a)(1)(ii) and paragraph (a)(1)(iii);
c. Revise paragraph (a)(2);
d. Revise paragraph (a)(2)(iii);
e. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(7) as paragraphs (a)(4) through (a)(8);
f. Add new paragraph (a)(3);
g. Revise paragraph (b) introductory text;
h. Revise paragraph (b)(2);
i. Revise paragraph (b)(2)(iv);
j. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(5) as paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(6); and
k. Add new paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(7).
§ 25.222 Blanket Licensing provisions for Earth Stations on Vessels (ESVs) receiving in the 10.95–
11.2 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.45–11.7 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.7–12.2 GHz (space-to-Earth)


Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

frequency bands and transmitting in the 14.0–14.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency band,
operating with Geostationary Orbit (GSO) Satellites in the Fixed-Satellite Service.

(a) The following ongoing requirements govern all ESV licensees and operations in the 10.95-11.2 GHz
(space-to-Earth), 11.45-11.7 GHz (space-to-Earth), 11.7-12.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency bands and
14.0-14.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) bands transmitting to GSO satellites in the fixed-satellite service. ESV
licensees must comply with the requirements in either paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section
and all of the requirements set forth in paragraphs (a)(4) through (a)(8) of this section. Paragraph (b) of
this section identifies items that must be included in the application for ESV operations to demonstrate
that these ongoing requirements will be met.
(1) * * *
(ii) Except for ESV systems operating under paragraph (a)(3), each ESV transmitter must
meet one of the following antenna pointing error requirements:
(A) * * *
(B) * * *
(iii) Except for ESV systems operating under paragraph (a)(3), each ESV transmitter
must meet of one the following cessation of emission requirements:
(A) * * *
(B) * * *
(2) The following requirements shall apply to an ESV that uses off-axis EIRP spectral-densities
in excess of the levels in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (a)(3)(i) of this Section. An ESV or ESV system
operating under this subsection shall file certifications and provide a detailed demonstration(s) as
described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(i) * * *
(ii) * * *
(iii) The ESV shall operate in accordance with the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities that
the ESV supplied to the target satellite operator in order to obtain the certifications listed
in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Except for ESVs with variable power systems, the
ESV shall automatically cease emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter
exceeds the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities supplied to the target satellite operator. For
ESVs using variable power systems, the individual ESV transmitter shall automatically
cease or reduce emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter exceeds the
off-axis EIRP-density limits supplied to the target satellite operator; the individual
transmitter must be self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off; and if one or more
ESV transmitters causes the aggregate off-axis EIRP-densities to exceed the off-axis
EIRP-density limits supplied to the target satellite operator, then the transmitter or
transmitters shall cease or reduce emissions within 100 milliseconds of receiving a
command from the system's central control and monitoring station.
(3) The following requirements shall apply to an ESV system that uses variable power-density
control of individual simultaneously transmitting co-frequency ESV earth stations in the same
satellite receiving beam unless that ESV system operates pursuant to paragraph (a)(2). An ESV
system operating under this subsection shall provide a detailed demonstration as described in
paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(i) The effective aggregate EIRP-density from all terminals shall be at least 1 dB below

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

the off-axis EIRP-density limits defined in paragraph (a)(1)(i), with the value of N=1. In
this context the term “effective” means that the resultant co-polarized and cross-
polarized EIRP-density experienced by any GSO or non-GSO satellite shall not exceed
that produced by a single transmitter operating 1 dB below the limits defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(i). An ESV system operating under this subsection shall provide a
detailed demonstration as described in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(ii) The individual ESV transmitter shall automatically cease or reduce emissions within
100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter exceeds the off-axis EIRP-density limits
specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i). The individual transmitter must be self-monitoring and
capable of shutting itself off. If one or more ESV transmitters causes the aggregate off-
axis EIRP-densities to exceed the off-axis EIRP-density limits specified in paragraph
(a)(3)(i), then the transmitter or transmitters shall cease or reduce emissions within 100
milliseconds of receiving a command from the system’s central control and monitoring
station.
(4) There shall be a point of contact in the United States, with phone number and address,
available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with authority and ability to cease all emissions
from the ESVs, either directly or through the facilities of a U.S. hub or a hub located in another
country with which the United States has a bilateral agreement that enables such cessation of
emissions.
(5) For each ESV transmitter, a record of the ship location (i.e., latitude/longitude), transmit
frequency, channel bandwidth and satellite used shall be time annotated and maintained for a
period of not less than 1 year. Records will be recorded at time intervals no greater than every 20
minutes while the ESV is transmitting. The ESV operator will make this data available upon
request to a coordinator, fixed system operator, fixed-satellite system operator, NTIA, or the
Commission within 24 hours of the request.
(6) ESV operators communicating with vessels of foreign registry must maintain detailed
information on each vessel’s country of registry and a point of contact for the relevant
administration responsible for licensing ESVs.
(7) ESV operators shall control all ESVs by a hub earth station located in the United States,
except that an ESV on U.S.-registered vessels may operate under control of a hub earth station
location outside the United States provided the ESV operator maintains a point of contact within
the United States that will have the capability and authority to cause an ESV on a U.S.-registered
vessel to cease transmitting if necessary.
(8) In the 10.95-11.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 11.45-11.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) frequency bands
ESVs shall not claim protection from interference from any authorized terrestrial stations to
which frequencies are either already assigned, or may be assigned in the future.
(b) Applications for ESV operation in the 14.0-14.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) band to GSO satellites in the
fixed-satellite service must include, in addition to the particulars of operation identified on Form 312,
and associated Schedule B, the applicable technical demonstrations in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) or (b)(3)
and the documentation identified in paragraphs (b)(4) through (b)(7) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) An ESV applicant proposing to implement a transmitter under paragraph (a)(2) of this section
and using off-axis EIRP spectral-densities in excess of the levels in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section shall provide the following certifications and demonstration(s)
as exhibits to its earth station application:
(i) * * *
(ii) * * *
(iii) * * *
(iv) Except for variable power ESVs applicants, a demonstration from the ESV operator
that the ESV system is capable of detecting and automatically ceasing emissions within
100 milliseconds when the transmitter exceeds the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities
supplied to the target satellite operator. Variable power ESV applicants shall provide a
detailed showing that an individual ESV terminal is capable of automatically ceasing or
reducing emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV transmitter exceeds the off-axis
EIRP spectral-densities supplied to the target satellite operator; that the individual
transmitter is self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off; and that one or more
transmitters are capable of automatically ceasing or reducing emissions within 100
milliseconds of receiving the appropriate command from the system's central control and
monitoring station if the aggregate off-axis EIRP spectral-densities of the transmitter or
transmitters exceed the off-axis EIRP spectral-densities supplied to the target satellite
operator.
(3) An ESV applicant proposing to implement an ESV system under paragraph (a)(3) of this
section and using variable power-density control of individual simultaneously transmitting co-
frequency ESV earth stations in the same satellite receiving beam shall provide the information
in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (b)(3)(ii) as exhibits to its ESV application. The International Bureau
will place these showings on Public Notice along with the application.
(i) The ESV applicant shall provide a detailed showing of the measures it intends to
employ to maintain the effective aggregate EIRP-density from all simultaneously
transmitting co-frequency terminals operating with the same satellite transponder at least
1 dB below the EIRP-density limits defined in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. In this
context the term “effective” means that the resultant co-polarized and cross-polarized
EIRP-density experienced by any GSO or non-GSO satellite shall not exceed that
produced by a single ESV transmitter operating at 1 dB below the limits defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.
(ii) The ESV applicant shall provide a detailed showing that an individual ESV terminal
is capable of automatically ceasing emissions within 100 milliseconds if the ESV
transmitter exceeds the off-axis EIRP-density limit specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) and
that the individual transmitter is self-monitoring and capable of shutting itself off. The
ESV applicant shall also provide a detailed showing that one or more transmitters are
capable of automatically ceasing or reducing emissions within 100 milliseconds of
receiving the appropriate command from the system's central control and monitoring
station if the aggregate off-axis EIRP spectral-densities of the transmitter or transmitters
exceed the off-axis EIRP-density limits specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i).
(4) There shall be an exhibit included with the application describing the geographic area(s) in
which the ESVs will operate.
(5) The point of contact referred to in paragraph (a)(4) and, if applicable paragraph (a)(7) of this
section, must be included in the application.
(6) ESVs that exceed the radiation guidelines of §1.1310 of this chapter must provide, with their

Federal Communications Commission

FCC 12-79

environmental assessment, a plan for mitigation of radiation exposure to the extent required to
meet those guidelines.
(7) Except for ESV systems operating pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, ESV systems
authorized pursuant to this section shall be eligible for a license that lists ALSAT as an
authorized point of communication.
* * * * *

Note: We are currently transitioning our documents into web compatible formats for easier reading. We have done our best to supply this content to you in a presentable form, but there may be some formatting issues while we improve the technology. The original version of the document is available as a PDF, Word Document, or as plain text.

close
FCC

You are leaving the FCC website

You are about to leave the FCC website and visit a third-party, non-governmental website that the FCC does not maintain or control. The FCC does not endorse any product or service, and is not responsible for, nor can it guarantee the validity or timeliness of the content on the page you are about to visit. Additionally, the privacy policies of this third-party page may differ from those of the FCC.