FCC Addresses Remaining Requests for Changes to Landmark Satellite Licensing Order
The FCC addressed some remaining petitions for reconsideration to its first space station licensing reform order, approved by the agency 13 years ago (see 0304240027), which made major changes to satellite licensing procedures. The Satellite Industry Association (SIA) lost on several fronts in the order, approved in a unanimous vote of the commissioners and part of Wednesday's Daily Digest.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The 2003 order eliminated the “anti-trafficking rule,” which prohibited satellite licensees from selling “bare” satellite licenses for profit. But the FCC also said it should examine in such deals whether the seller got the license “in good faith or for the primary purpose of selling it for profit, whether the licensee made serious efforts to develop a satellite or constellation, and/or whether the licensee faces changed circumstances.”
SIA said that by asking those kinds of questions, the FCC effectively undercut its own decision to eliminate the anti-trafficking rule and asked the agency to change its policies. “We acknowledge SIA’s concerns, but conclude that those concerns do not warrant reconsideration,” the new order said. “We continue to believe that allowing parties with no intention of building a satellite system to take advantage of the Commission’s regulatory process would be contrary to the public interest,” the FCC said. “Maintaining this limited exception does not undermine our elimination of the anti-trafficking rule.”
SIA also protested an FCC prohibition against operators selling their place in the satellite application processing queue. “SIA argues that it is inconsistent to prohibit an applicant from selling its place in the queue, while allowing an applicant that transfers control over itself to a new controlling party to retain its place in the queue,” the FCC said.
But the agency also disagreed with SIA on this point: “The Commission’s purpose in prohibiting sales of places in the satellite application processing queue was to discourage entities who had no intention of building a system from filing applications merely to make a profit from a sale to an unrelated entity. It was not to discourage companies from merging with other companies in legitimate business transactions, especially when those transactions involve other assets and the new company is better positioned to compete in the marketplace.” The SIA didn't comment.
Among other policy calls the FCC makes is revising rules to eliminate the “three-licensee presumption” that applies to the non-geostationary satellite orbit-like processing round procedure. ICO had sought a change. “The ‘three-licensee presumption’ is overly restrictive for its intended purpose,” the FCC said. “We are persuaded by ICO’s arguments that a specific frequency band does not necessarily equate to a market, and thus having fewer than three licensees in a band does not necessarily indicate a harmful lack of competition in some market that we should attempt to remedy.”
The agency also clarified procedures for redistributing spectrum among remaining NGSO-like systems after an authorization for a NGSO-like system has been canceled or otherwise becomes available. The FCC said it will issue a public notice and propose to modify remaining grants. “The returned spectrum will generally be redistributed equally among the remaining operators that requested the spectrum, although no operator will receive more spectrum on redistribution than it requested in its application,” the agency clarified. “If an operator has not requested use of a particular spectrum band, it will not receive spectrum in that band.”