[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4908-4917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-1991]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 25, 74, and 78

[ET Docket No. 03-254; FCC 03-318]


Coordination Between the Non-Geostationary and Geostationary 
Satellite Orbit

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes to modify our frequency coordination 
rules to promote sharing between non-geostationary satellite orbit 
(NGSO) and geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) fixed-satellite service 
(FSS) operations and various terrestrial services operating in several 
frequency bands. We undertake this proceeding to facilitate the 
introduction of new satellite and terrestrial services while promoting 
interference protection among the various users in these bands.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before March 3, 2004, and reply 
comments must be filed on or before March 18, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ted Ryder, Office of Engineering and 
Technology, (202) 418-2803, e-mail: [email protected], or James Miller, 
(202) 418-7351 TTY (202) 418-2989, e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, ET Docket No. 03-254, FCC 03-318, adopted 
December 15, 2003 and released December 23, 2003. The full text of this 
document is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this document also may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International, 
445 12th Street SW., Room, CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full text 
may also be downloaded at: http://www.fcc.gov. Alternate formats are 
available to persons with disabilities by contacting Brian Millin at 
(202) 418-7426 or TTY (202) 418-7365.
    Pursuant to Sec.Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 
CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before 
March 3, 2004, and reply comments on or before March 18, 2004. Comments 
may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System 
(ECFS) or by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of Documents in 
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. Comments filed 
through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to 
http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally, only one copy of an 
electronic submission must be filed. If multiple docket or rulemaking 
numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, however, commenters 
must transmit one electronic copy of the comments to each docket or 
rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing the 
transmittal screen, commenters should include their full name, U.S. 
Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking 
number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-
mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should 
send an e-mail to [email protected], and should include the following words 
in the body of the message, ``get form .'' A sample form and directions will be sent in 
reply. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and 
four copies of each filing.

[[Page 4909]]

If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of 
this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each 
additional docket or rulemaking number.
    All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office 
of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Filings can be 
sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or 
by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we 
continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). 
The Commission's contractor, Natek, Inc., will receive hand-delivered 
or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 
236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The 
filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries 
must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes 
must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial overnight 
mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) 
must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. 
U.S. Postal Service first-class mail, Express mail, and Priority Mail 
should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20554.

Summary of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    1. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to modify the 
Commission's frequency coordination rules to promote sharing between 
non-geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) and geostationary satellite 
orbit (GSO) fixed-satellite service (FSS) operations and various 
terrestrial services operating in several frequency bands. 
Specifically, we consider a joint proposal by SkyBridge L.L.C. and the 
Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition (Skybridge/FWCC Growth Zone 
Proposal) to supplement our existing coordination procedures to promote 
sharing between new NGSO FSS space-to-Earth (downlink) operations and 
existing Fixed Service (FS) operations in the 10.7-11.7 GHz (10 GHz) 
band. We also set forth proposals for amending our frequency 
coordination rules to address situations where NGSO FSS and GSO FSS 
operations share spectrum with terrestrial operations in the FS, 
Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) and Cable Television Relay Service 
(CARS) in various bands. Specifically, we:
     Propose to apply the principles of the 
Skybridge/FWCC Growth Zone Proposal to our coordination rules for NGSO 
FSS downlink operations sharing with FS operations in the 10 GHz band;
     Propose to apply the existing parts 25 and 101 
coordination rules for coordination of new FSS (both NGSO and GSO) 
earth stations with mobile BAS/CARS operations in the 6875-7075 MHz (7 
GHz) and 12750-13250 MHz (13 GHz) bands, and consider whether any 
additions or modifications to the rules are needed to address the 
operating characteristics of mobile services;
     Propose to allow either the parts 74 and 78 
informal ad hoc coordination rules or the part 101 coordination rules 
to be used for the coordination of mobile BAS/CARS operations with FSS 
(both NGSO and GSO) earth stations, in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands, and 
consider whether any additions or modifications of these rules are 
needed; and,
 Propose to apply the existing parts 25 and 101 
coordination rules for sharing between new NGSO FSS earth stations and 
fixed BAS/CARS operations in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands.

We undertake this proceeding to facilitate the introduction of new 
satellite and terrestrial services while promoting interference 
protection among the various users in these bands.

A. Coordination Between NGSO FSS and FS Operations at 10 GHz

    2. Proposal. We tentatively conclude that our frequency 
coordination procedures should be modified to include the terms as we 
propose to modify them, below, of the Skybridge/FWCC Growth Zone 
Proposal for NGSO FSS gateway earth stations coordinating with the FS 
in the 10 GHz band. We believe that modifying our coordination 
requirements in this way will ensure that the use of the 10 GHz band by 
FS is not significantly hindered by the introduction of NGSO FSS 
gateway operations and that NGSO FSS operators will have more 
flexibility in deciding where to locate gateway earth stations. We note 
that the 10 GHz band has been targeted as an important alternative 
spectrum for FS operations being relocated from other bands. FS use in 
this band has seen continued growth. We do not think that the proposed 
coordination approach will significantly hinder NGSO FSS operations. 
The areas qualifying for Growth Zone treatment would be limited and, by 
their design and purpose, the number of NGSO FSS gateway earth stations 
should be small and have sufficient deployment flexibility. Finally, we 
believe that the coordination obligations put forth by Skybridge/FWCC 
are reasonable, and note that they would only apply if an NGSO FSS 
gateway earth station licensee determines that deployment within a 
Growth Zone is necessary. We request comment on our tentative 
conclusions regarding the effectiveness and benefits of the Skybridge/
FWCC Growth Zone Proposal and whether FS expansion can be accommodated 
under this approach.
    3. We note that the Skybridge/FWCC Growth Zone Proposal reflects a 
compromise reached by two significant parties in this proceeding, but 
it is prudent to address all of the various interests in the band. 
Therefore, we intend to explore alternatives to some of the procedures 
in the SkyBridge/FWCC Growth Zone Proposal and seek comment on them. 
First, we propose to adopt the qualification criteria in the SkyBridge/
FWCC Growth Zone definition of any county in which at least 30 FS 
frequencies are licensed to transmit in the 10.7-11.7 GHz band. We 
acknowledge the advantages of using counties as Growth Zone boundaries 
in that they are well defined. The use of counties would also be 
administratively convenient, since this information is readily 
available in our license and other coordination databases. Further, a 
minimum fixed number of FS operations (30 FS transmit frequencies per 
county) would provide an easy and definitive method of determining when 
a county would qualify as a Growth Zone. Nevertheless, this approach 
does not account for varying county size and the fact that 30 licensed 
FS transmit frequencies could be on a single FS path or 30 different FS 
paths. This could be a problem in that large counties with low FS path 
densities would qualify as Growth Zones and smaller counties with 
higher FS path densities, but not 30 frequencies, would not qualify as 
Growth Zones. Therefore, we seek comment on this proposal and on any 
alternatives that might normalize the qualification factors for Growth 
Zones or otherwise account for varying county sizes and deployment 
scenarios.
    4. Rather than propose the Skybridge/FWCC suggestion that the 
Commission publish a public notice every 6 months with a list of 
counties that qualify as Growth Zones, we propose to make the 
determination of whether an area qualifies as a Growth Zone a case-by-
case function of the frequency coordination process. We find that 
making and publishing Growth Zone determinations every six months is 
unnecessary because this information can easily be handled as part of 
the coordination process for a new NGSO FSS gateway earth station. This 
approach would also provide ``near real-time'' currency to the process. 
We seek comment on this proposal and any alternatives.

[[Page 4910]]

    5. We also propose to adopt the conditions (see (a) through (e) in 
paragraph 9 in the NPRM, on NGSO FSS deployment set forth in the 
SkyBridge/FWCC Growth Zone Proposal. These conditions would ensure: (1) 
That the coordination process protects the potential for FS growth 
throughout the allocated band, even though FS licensees would continue 
to be authorized for specific frequencies on an as needed basis; (2) 
that NGSO FSS licensees accepting a certain level of interference along 
a given azimuth from incumbent FS licensees will accept the same level 
of impact from future FS applicants; and (3) that coordination only 
considers the particular technical characteristics of the NGSO FSS 
gateway earth station being deployed without considering ``look 
angles'' to the satellites that will not be used. We seek comment on 
whether these conditions should apply only to NGSO FSS gateway earth 
stations located within a Growth Zone, or whether they should also 
apply to those in proximity to, or within a certain distance of, a 
Growth Zone, and, if so, what the proximity criteria or distance should 
be. We also seek comment on whether these conditions should apply only 
to the protection of FS stations located within the Growth Zone in 
which the NGSO FSS earth station is located, or whether they should 
also apply to the protection of other FS stations located outside that 
Growth Zone but within the coordination contour of the earth station. 
Further, we seek comment on whether the level of impact from future FS 
applicants, expressed in the proposal as an aggregate level of 
interference from any FS stations (see (c) in paragraph 9 of the NPRM, 
should apply case-by-case to individual transmit frequencies, to the 
aggregate of transmit frequencies operating on a single transmit path 
from a station, or to all frequencies on all transmit paths from a 
station. We seek comment on whether these conditions are appropriate to 
ensure equitable sharing. We also seek comment on whether other 
conditions or changes to our coordination procedures would be 
appropriate to address sharing between these services.

B. Coordination Between FSS and BAS/CARS Operations at 7 GHz and 13 GHz

    6. Proposal. We acknowledge that frequency coordination and 
spectrum sharing between FSS and BAS/CARS fixed and mobile operations 
will be challenging. Nevertheless, we believe that spectrum sharing 
between FSS earth stations (both GSO and NGSO) and BAS/CARS fixed and 
mobile operations is feasible because the number of new FSS earth 
stations should be relatively small. We find that there are several 
factors that affect how fixed, mobile, and fixed-satellite services 
will share the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands. For example, mobile BAS/CARS 
operations, which may include aeronautical operations, require a great 
deal of deployment flexibility to cover news or events when and where 
they happen, whereas fixed BAS/CARS and FSS operations are stationary 
and often have high requirements for reliability. Further, the 
interference protection expectations of mobile BAS/CARS operations, 
which may rely upon informal ad hoc coordination, would likely be 
different than those of fixed BAS/CARS and FSS operations, which 
coordinate their use prior to authorization to ensure reliable 
communications. Therefore, we address separately mobile and fixed BAS 
and CARS coordination with FSS for the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands.
    7. Coordination of FSS with Mobile BAS and CARS operations. We 
propose to maintain the existing coordination requirements for both FSS 
and mobile BAS and CARS operations in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands, 
rather than propose to require that all operations in the bands follow 
the same coordination procedures. Thus, NGSO and GSO FSS operators 
seeking to deploy new earth stations in these bands would continue to 
initiate coordination with mobile BAS and CARS operations using the 
coordination procedures in Sec.Sec. 25.203, 25.251 and 101.103(d). 
Similarly, new mobile BAS and CARS operations initiating coordination 
in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands would continue to have the flexibility to 
use either the informal ad hoc local coordination procedures in 
Sec.Sec. 74.638 and 78.36 or the coordination procedures in Sec. 
101.103(d) to coordinate with FSS earth stations.
    8. We first address the coordination procedures that an FSS entity 
would use when it initiates coordination for a new earth station. At 
the outset, pursuant to Sec.Sec. 25.203(b) and 25.251, the FSS entity 
needs to identify the coordination distance contour for the earth 
station based on the technical criteria contained in ITU Appendix 7 and 
certain ITU Recommendations. These technical criteria address 
protection of mobile as well as terrestrial fixed facilities, and thus, 
we believe, contain sufficient technical rigor to enable identification 
and protection of mobile TVPU stations. In this context, however, we 
note that the maximum coordination distances and coordination contours 
calculated using ITU Appendix 7 are conservatively large, particularly 
for sharing between an NGSO FSS earth station and aeronautical TVPU 
stations. Considering the relative brevity of TVPU operations, 
particularly for worst-case pointing by either an earth station or a 
mobile antenna, we seek comment on whether these distances should be 
changed with a view toward reducing the overall coordination burden 
where the potential for interference is minimal. Parties favoring 
reducing the coordination distances should support alternative 
distances with appropriate engineering analysis.
    9. Regarding the administrative aspects of coordination for FSS 
earth stations, our parts 25 and 101 rules require notification to all 
potentially affected licensees and applicants within the ITU Appendix 7 
coordination distance contour for the earth station. We note that the 
rules give applicants the flexibility to determine how best to identify 
facilities that may affect or be affected by the proposed facilities, 
and licensees who must be notified. Thus, in addition to thoroughly 
checking relevant Commission and any other licensing databases to 
assess both local and nationwide licensees that may have operations in 
the affected area, the FSS earth station applicant should also find it 
useful to contact local broadcast frequency coordinators, where they 
exist, to help identify the licensees with operations within the 
coordination contour of the FSS earth station, that need to be 
notified. Once notification is initiated, any responses from affected 
parties indicating potential interference must specify the technical 
details in writing, and all parties must make every reasonable effort 
to eliminate all technical problems and conflicts. Further, if no 
response is received within the 30 day period, the applicant will be 
deemed to have made reasonable efforts to coordinate and may file its 
application. We believe that this process will meet the needs of both 
the new FSS applicants and the BAS/CARS incumbents, who can identify 
and provide full technical details of the facilities that may interfere 
with the proposed earth station; facilities requiring protection, 
including fixed receiver sites; aeronautical TVPU operations; and 
mobile patterns of use. Because BAS/CARS stations and FSS earth 
stations have co-primary allocations in these bands, new FSS entrants 
must protect all incumbent BAS/CARS operations. Therefore, new FSS 
entrants in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands must consider typical 
deployments of TVPU operations within their authorized area to ensure 
that existing TVPU uses and operations are not adversely affected.

[[Page 4911]]

    10. In addition, we note that Sec. 25.203(c)(3) requires 
coordination procedures to be completed within 30 days, but allows FSS 
applicants to extend the maximum coordination period to 45 days by 
mutual consent of the parties. To accommodate the notification and 
response process for incumbent TVPU operations, which may involve 
additional consideration of fixed receiver sites, aeronautical 
operations, and mobile patterns of use identified by notified parties 
as described above, we seek comment on whether the maximum coordination 
period should be increased beyond 45 days and, if so, for how long. We 
also seek comment on whether any modifications to the coordination 
process proposed above should be made to account for the technical and 
operational differences between NGSO FSS and GSO FSS earth stations.
    11. We also believe the existing coordination procedures provide 
sufficient flexibility for the parties to agree to reduce the 
likelihood of interference by shielding the earth station, particularly 
in satellite downlink bands, or constraining operations by various 
means. We note that these coordination procedures have been used 
successfully in coordinating the three FSS downlink earth stations 
grandfathered by the MSS Feeder Link R&O with mobile BAS/CARS TVPU 
stations in the 7025-7075 MHz band. They have also been successfully 
used to coordinate FSS uplink earth stations with mobile BAS/CARS TVPU 
stations in the 13 GHz band. While we believe existing parts 25 and 101 
coordination procedures are adequate to ensure that new FSS earth 
stations are deployed without interference with mobile BAS and CARS 
operations, we seek comment on the conclusions and proposals, and 
whether any additional steps or rule modifications are necessary to 
address the sharing scenarios in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands as the 
number of earth stations and BAS/CARS deployments increase.
    12. We propose to allow BAS and CARS entities flexibility to use 
either the informal ad hoc coordination process in Sec.Sec. 74.638 and 
78.36 or the coordination procedures in Sec. 101.103(d) when they 
initiate coordination for a new mobile BAS/CARS station with FSS earth 
stations in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands. These coordination procedures 
have been adequate to address sharing with BAS/CARS fixed operations 
and should offer sufficient protection between BAS/CARS mobile and FSS 
operations without unnecessary burdens and regulatory oversight. Since 
the number of earth stations in these bands should be few and readily 
identifiable through the Commission's files, BAS and CARS entities 
should have little difficulty in notifying the appropriate FSS entity 
for coordination purposes. We observe that our rules give BAS and CARS 
applicants the flexibility to determine how best to contact the parties 
they identify for coordination and thus we believe that these rules do 
not need to be modified in this regard. Because FSS has a co-primary 
allocation in these bands, new BAS and CARS entrants must protect all 
authorized FSS operations.
    13. We recognize the ad hoc coordination process relies on mutual 
interest, cooperation, and informal negotiations among licensees. It is 
less burdensome to the parties and affords mobile services maximum 
flexibility with regard to deployment. We believe this an important 
factor for TVPU operations where it is not possible to predict where 
breaking news may happen. On the other hand, we also recognize that the 
more formal frequency coordination procedures in parts 25 and 101 would 
likely provide FSS operations with additional certainty of protection 
from TVPU operations. We seek comment on our proposal to allow BAS and 
CARS entities the flexibility to use either the ad hoc coordination 
process in Sec.Sec. 74.638 and 78.36 or the coordination procedures in 
Sec. 101.103(d). Commenters should address whether this approach is the 
best means to maintain flexibility for mobile TVPU operations and to 
provide adequate protection to NGSO FSS earth stations. We also seek 
comment on any other alternatives to our existing coordination rules 
for FSS and BAS/CARS mobile operations. Finally, we seek comment from 
small businesses or other small entities concerning the alternatives 
proposed.
    14. In the BAS/CARS R&O, the Commission recently declined to expand 
the BAS short-term frequency coordination procedure to include a two-
way notification/response coordination requirement for short-term use 
with respect to FSS earth stations operations. The Commission stated 
that all short-term operation is secondary, and that the existing 
Section 74.24(g) requirement to notify the local coordinating committee 
or co-channel licensees is sufficient to ensure short-term deployments 
have a minimal chance of causing harmful interference while providing 
broadcasters the ability to cover newsworthy events without delay. We 
thus propose to maintain the secondary, non-interference status of BAS 
short-term itinerant TVPU operations vis-a-vis primary FSS operations 
in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands. In this connection, we remind BAS short-
term operants that they are responsible for ensuring notification to 
any co-channel FSS earth station within whose coordination contour a 
prospective short-term deployment is contemplated, whether notification 
is effected through a local frequency coordinator or directly with the 
FSS earth station. We also propose to require CARS short-term operators 
to notify either the local frequency coordinator or co-channel 
licensees, including licensees of FSS earth stations, and provide the 
name and telephone number of a person who may be contacted in the event 
of interference, except where it is impractical, similar to the BAS 
notification requirements. We believe this action will provide more 
certainty to licensed fixed, mobile, and particularly earth station 
operations without burdening CARS short-term itinerant operations. In 
this connection, we seek comment on whether the status of CARS short-
term operations should be on a secondary, non-interference basis, 
similar to BAS short-term operations. Because short-term itinerant TVPU 
operations would be susceptible to interference if they deploy near FSS 
uplink earth stations, they would benefit by coordinating their use to 
avoid such deployment. Moreover, we encourage all parties to a 
coordination to cooperate in resolving any potential interference 
concerns regarding a prospective short-term operation. We believe that 
the short-term operation procedures, could be used by the short-term 
TVPU operants to address potential interference scenarios. Under these 
procedures, the short-term itinerant TVPU operants will likely contact 
either the local frequency coordinators or co-channel BAS/CARS 
licensees, who likely have been involved in FSS earth station 
coordinations and are aware of any existing FSS earth station in an 
area. Further, we do not believe there will be large areas where short-
term itinerant operations would be precluded by FSS earth stations 
because the number of these earth stations should be limited. We seek 
comment on these proposals and whether other coordination steps would 
be necessary to address FSS sharing with short-term itinerant 
operations. For example, should FSS licensees maintain a point of 
contact to facilitate frequency engineering for short-term itinerant 
deployments to cover unplanned events? This point of contact could 
afford an avenue for rapid information exchange and thereby facilitate 
both the continued viability of

[[Page 4912]]

short-term itinerant deployments and the protection of FSS operations. 
Alternatively, absent any coordination, FSS entities could take 
precautions to protect downlink earth stations from interference from 
short-term itinerant TVPU operations.
    15. In connection with the use of parts 25 and 101 coordination 
procedures for the coordination of FSS earth stations with mobile 
stations in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands, we note that the interference 
protection criteria in Sec. 101.105(a), (b), and (c) for FS, and 
referenced by Sec. 74.638 and 78.36, respectively, for BAS and CARS, 
specifically address the protection of fixed stations, but not mobile 
stations. We seek comment on whether those rules should be amended to 
apply specifically to mobile as well as fixed stations, whether they 
should be supplemented to include criteria unique to the protection on 
mobile and fixed receivers used in conjunction with mobile stations, 
and what the additional criteria should be. Commenters recommending 
additional criteria, such as the baseline interference and threshold 
degradation figures in Sec.Sec. 101.105(a) and (b) or the conservative 
default criteria in Sec. 101.105(c)(2), should support their proposals 
with engineering showings.
    16. We believe that the approaches described for coordinating FSS 
(both NGSO and GSO) and BAS/CARS mobile operations achieve a viable 
balance between the needs of FSS licensees for certainty and 
reliability and the needs of BAS/CARS for flexibility. We seek comment 
on these findings and proposals, as well as any modifications to the 
above procedures that would enhance the good faith and speed of 
participants or otherwise improve or streamline the process without 
compromising our goals.
    17. Coordination of FSS and Fixed BAS and CARS Operations: In both 
ET Docket No. 98-142 and ET Docket No. 98-206, the Commission stated 
its belief that parts 25 and 101 coordination procedures could protect 
both NGSO FSS earth stations and fixed BAS/CARS stations, but deferred 
adoption of those procedures to this proceeding. We propose to maintain 
the coordination procedures in Sec.Sec. 25.203 and 25.251 for 
coordination of new FSS earth stations with fixed BAS/CARS stations in 
the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands, and to adopt the coordination procedures 
set forth in Sec.Sec. 101.21(f) and 101.103(d) for coordination of new 
fixed BAS and CARS stations with FSS earth stations, whether NGSO or 
GSO. These procedures and the ITU Appendix 7 technical criteria 
referenced by them have proven successful in coordinating FS facilities 
governed by part 101 with FSS earth stations. Fixed BAS and CARS 
facilities under part 74 and part 78 are similar, if not identical, to 
the part 101 FS facilities in frequency, technical characteristics, 
limitations, and use, and thus should be able to follow the same 
technical criteria for coordination purposes. We believe that the same 
coordination procedures should be used for coordinating fixed BAS and 
CARS with FSS in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands, as currently used for 
coordinating fixed FS with FSS in the nearby 6525-6875 MHz and 10 GHz 
bands. We favor using uniform coordination procedures for similar 
services to simplify our rules and the frequency coordination process. 
Therefore, we propose to amend Sec.Sec. 74.638 and 78.36 to reference 
Sec.Sec. 101.21(f) and 101.103(d) procedures for coordinating fixed 
BAS/CARS facilities with FSS earth stations where the prospective fixed 
facilities are within the coordination contour of the FSS earth 
station, as defined in the ITU Appendix 7. We seek comment on this 
proposal. We also seek comment on whether any additional measures are 
needed, or any additional information should be exchanged, to ensure 
the efficacy of these coordination procedures for fixed BAS and CARS 
facilities.
    18. We also propose that the FS interference protection criteria in 
Sec. 101.105(a), (b), and (c) apply to the protection of fixed BAS and 
CARS receivers and that new FSS earth stations use this criteria when 
coordinating with incumbent fixed BAS and CARS operations. We believe 
use of these criteria will be as successful for protecting fixed BAS 
and CARS receivers as they have proven to be for FS receivers. We seek 
comment on these conclusions and proposals.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    19. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''),\1\ the 
Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(``IRFA'') of the possible significant economic impact on small 
entities by the policies and rules proposed in this NPRM of Proposed 
Rulemaking (``NPRM''). Written public comments are requested on this 
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be 
filed by the deadlines for comments on the NPRM. The Commission will 
send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C. 603(a). In 
addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in 
the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996, Pub. 
L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the CWAAA is 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(SBREFA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    20. By this action (NPRM), we propose to modify our frequency 
coordination rules to promote sharing between non-geostationary 
satellite orbit (NGSO) and geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) fixed-
satellite service (FSS) operations and various terrestrial services 
operating in several frequency bands. Specifically, we consider a joint 
proposal by SkyBridge L.L.C. and the Fixed Wireless Communications 
Coalition (Skybridge/FWCC Growth Zone Proposal) to supplement our 
existing coordination procedures to promote sharing between new NGSO 
FSS space-to-Earth (downlink) operations and existing Fixed Service 
(FS) operations in the 10.7-11.7 GHz (10 GHz) band.\2\ We also set 
forth proposals for amending our frequency coordination rules to 
address situations where NGSO FSS and GSO FSS operations share spectrum 
with terrestrial operations in the FS, Broadcast Auxiliary Service 
(BAS) and Cable Television Relay Service (CARS) in various bands. 
Specifically, we:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See SkyBridge/FWCC Ex Parte Comments in ET Docket No. 98-
206, filed December 8, 1999, at 3. These ex parte comments are 
included in the docket file for this proceeding. SkyBridge filed one 
of the petitions for rulemaking (RM-9147) to which ET Docket No. 98-
206 responds and is one of four applicants for NGSO FSS satellite 
systems in the 10 GHz band. The FWCC is a coalition of microwave 
equipment manufacturers, licensees, and their associations, and 
communications service providers and their associations, interested 
in terrestrial fixed microwave communications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Propose to apply the principles of the 
Skybridge/FWCC Growth Zone Proposal to our coordination rules for NGSO 
FSS downlink operations sharing with FS operations in the 10 GHz band;
     Propose to apply the existing parts 25 and 101 
coordination rules for coordination of new FSS (both NGSO and GSO) 
earth stations with mobile BAS/CARS operations in the 6875-7075 MHz (7 
GHz) and 12750-13250 MHz (13 GHz) bands, and consider whether any 
additions or modifications to the rules are needed to address the 
operating characteristics of mobile services;
     Propose to allow either the parts 74 and 78 
informal ad hoc coordination rules or the part 101 coordination rules 
to be used for the coordination of mobile BAS/CARS operations with FSS

[[Page 4913]]

(both NGSO and GSO) earth stations, in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands, and 
consider whether any additions or modifications of these rules are 
needed; and,
     Propose to apply the existing parts 25 and 101 
coordination rules for sharing between new NGSO FSS earth stations and 
fixed BAS/CARS operations in the 7 GHz and 13 GHz bands.
We undertake this proceeding to facilitate the introduction of new 
satellite and terrestrial services while promoting interference 
protection among the various users in these bands.

Legal Basis

    21. The proposed action is authorized under sections 4(i), 7(a), 
303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 157(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 
303(r).

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the 
Proposed Rules May Apply

    22. The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having 
the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small 
organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' \3\ In 
addition, the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term 
``small business concern'' under the Small Business Act.\4\ 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 Small Business Administration 
(``SBA'').\5\ A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit 
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.'' \6\ Nationwide, as of 1992, there were 
approximately 275,801 small organizations.\7\ The term ``small 
governmental jurisdiction'' is defined as ``governments of cities, 
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, 
with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' \8\ As of 1997, there 
were about 87,453 governmental jurisdictions in the United States.\9\ 
This number includes 39,044 county governments, municipalities, and 
townships, of which 37,546 (approximately 96.2%) have populations of 
fewer than 50,000, and of which 1,498 have populations of 50,000 or 
more. Thus we estimate the number of small governmental jurisdictions 
overall to be 84,098 or fewer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
    \4\ See Id. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of 
``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to the RFA, 
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.'' Id.
    \5\ See Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632.
    \6\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \7\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 Economic Census, Table 6 (special 
tabulation of data under contract to the Office of Advocacy of the 
U.S. Small Business Administration).
    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \9\ U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United 
States: 2000, Section 9, pages 299-300, Tables 490 and 492.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    23. Regarding incumbent cable television operations in the affected 
bands, the SBA has developed a small business size standard for Cable 
and Other Program Distribution, which consists of all such firms having 
$12.5 million or less in annual receipts.\10\ This category includes 
cable systems operators, closed circuit television services, direct 
broadcast satellite services, multipoint distribution systems, 
satellite master antenna systems, and subscription television services. 
According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were a total of 1,311 
firms in this category, total, that had operated for the entire 
year.\11\ Of this total, 1,180 firms had annual receipts of under $10 
million and an additional 52 firms had receipts of $10 million or more 
but less than $25 million. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of providers in this service category are small businesses 
that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517510 (changed from 513220 in 
October 2002).
    \11\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of 
Organization)'', Table 4, NAICS code 513220 (issued October 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    24. In addition, the Commission has developed its own small 
business size standard for cable system operators, for purposes of rate 
regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is 
one serving fewer than 400,000 subscribers nationwide.\12\ Estimates 
indicate that there were 1,439 cable operators who qualified as small 
cable system operators at the end of 1995.\13\ Since then, some of 
those companies may have grown to serve over 400,000 subscribers, and 
others may have been involved in transactions that caused them to be 
combined with other cable operators. Consequently, the Commission 
estimates that there are now fewer than 1,439 small entity cable system 
operators that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted in the 
NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 47 CFR 76.901(e). The Commission developed this definition 
based on its determination that a small cable system operator is one 
with annual revenues of $100 million or less. Implementation of 
Sections of the 1992 Cable Act: Rate Regulation, Sixth Report and 
Order and Eleventh Order on Reconsideration, 10 FCC Rcd 7393 (1995), 
60 FR 10534 (February 27, 1995).
    \13\ Paul Kagan Associates, Inc., Cable TV Investor, February 
29, 1996 (based on figures for December 30, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25. Further, the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, also 
contains a size standard for small cable system operators, which is ``a 
cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the 
aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States 
and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose gross annual 
revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.'' \14\ The Commission 
has determined that there are 67,700,000 subscribers in the United 
States.\15\ Therefore, an operator serving fewer than 677,000 
subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its annual revenues, 
when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do 
not exceed $250 million in the aggregate.\16\ Based on available data, 
the Commission estimates that the number of cable operators serving 
677,000 subscribers or fewer, totals 1,450.\17\ The Commission neither 
requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are 
affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 
million,\18\ and therefore are unable, at this time, to estimate more 
accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify as 
small cable operators under the size standard contained in the 
Communications Act of 1934.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 47 U.S.C. 543(m)(2).
    \15\ See FCC Announces New Subscriber Count for the Definition 
of Small Cable Operator, Public Notice DA 01-158 (January 24, 2001).
    \16\ 47 CFR 76.901(f).
    \17\ See FCC Announces New Subscriber Count for the Definition 
of Small Cable Operators, Public Notice, DA-01-0158 (released 
January 24, 2001).
    \18\ The Commission does receive such information on a case-by-
case basis if a cable operator appeals a local franchise authority's 
finding that the operator does not qualify as a small cable operator 
pursuant to 76.901(f) of the Commission's rules. See 47 CFR 
76.909(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. Regarding incumbent GSO FSS satellite use and the proposed NGSO 
FSS use in these requested bands, the Commission has not developed a 
definition of small entities specifically directed toward geostationary 
or non-geostationary orbit fixed-satellite service applicants or 
licensees. The SBA has developed a size standard for a small business 
within the category of Satellite Telecommunications. Under that SBA 
size standard, such a business is small if it has $12.5 million or less 
in average

[[Page 4914]]

annual receipts.\19\ According to Census Bureau data for 1997, in this 
category there was a total of 324 firms that operated for the entire 
year.\20\ Of this total, 273 firms had annual receipts of under $10 
million, and an additional twenty-four firms had receipts of $10 
million to $24,999,999.\21\ Thus, under this size standard, the 
majority of firms can be considered small. Generally, these NGSO and 
GSO FSS systems cost several millions of dollars to construct and 
operate. Therefore the NGSO and GSO FSS companies, or their parent 
companies, rarely qualify under this definition as a small entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517410 (changed from 513340 in 
October 2002).
    \20\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Establishment and Firm Size (Including Legal Form of 
Organization),'' Table 4, NAICS code 513340 (issued October 2000).
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. Auxiliary, Special Broadcast and other program distribution 
services involve a variety of transmitters, generally used to relay 
broadcast programming to the public (through translator and booster 
stations) or within the program distribution chain (from a remote news-
gathering unit back to the station). The Commission has not developed a 
definition of small entities specific to broadcast auxiliary licensees. 
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has developed small 
business size standards, as follows: (1) For TV BAS, we will use the 
size standard for Television Broadcasting, infra; \22\ (2) For Aural 
BAS, we will use the size standard for Radio Stations, infra; \23\ (3) 
For Remote Pickup BAS we will use the small business size standard for 
Television Broadcasting when used by a TV station and that for Radio 
Stations when used by such a station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 515120 (changed from 513120 in 
October 2002).
    \23\ Id. at NAICS code 515112 (changed from 513112 in October 
2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    28. The SBA has developed a small business sized standard for 
television broadcasting, which consists of all such firms having $12 
million or less in annual receipts.\24\ Business concerns included in 
this industry are those ``primarily engaged in broadcasting images 
together with sound.'' \25\ According to Commission staff review of BIA 
Publications, Inc. Master Access Television Analyzer Database as of May 
16, 2003, about 814 of the 1,220 commercial television stations in the 
United States had revenues of $12 million or less. We note, however, 
that, in assessing whether a business concern qualifies as small under 
the above definition, business (control) affiliations \26\ must be 
included.\27\ Our estimate, therefore, likely overstates the number of 
small entities that might be affected by our action, because the 
revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate 
revenues from affiliated companies. There are also 2,127 low power 
television stations (LPTV).\28\ Given the nature of this service, we 
will presume that all LPTV licensees qualify as small entities under 
the SBA size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Id. at NAICS code 515120 (changed from 513120 in October 
2002).
    \25\ OMB, North American Industry Classification System: United 
States, 1997, at 509 (1997). This category description continues, 
``These establishments operate television broadcasting studios and 
facilities for the programming and transmission of programs to the 
public. These establishments also produce or transmit visual 
programming to affiliated broadcast television stations, which in 
turn broadcast the programs to the public on a predetermined 
schedule. Programming may originate in their own studios, from an 
affiliated network, or from external sources.'' Separate census 
categories pertain to businesses primarily engaged in producing 
programming. See id. at 502-05, NAICS code 512120, Motion Picture 
and Video Production; code 512120, Motion Picture and Video 
Distribution; code 512191, Teleproduction and Other Post-Production 
Services; and code 512199, Other Motion Picture and Video 
Industries.
    \26\ ``Concerns are affiliates of each other when one concern 
controls or has the power to control the other or a third party or 
parties controls or has to power to control both.'' 13 CFR 
121.103(a)(1).
    \27\ ``SBA counts the receipts or employees of the concern whose 
size is at issue and those of all its domestic concern's size.'' 13 
CFR 121.103(a)(4).
    \28\ FCC News Release, ``Broadcast Station Totals as of 
September 30, 2002'' (Nov. 6, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    29. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Radio 
Stations, which consists of all such firms having $6 million or less in 
annual receipts.\29\ Business concerns included in this industry are 
those ``primarily engaged in broadcasting aural programs by radio to 
the public.'' \30\ According to Commission staff review of BIA 
Publications, Inc., Master Access Radio Analyzer Database, as of May 
16, 2003, about 10,427 of the 10,945 commercial radio stations in the 
United States had revenue of $6 million or less. We note, however, that 
many radio stations are affiliated with much larger corporations with 
much higher revenue, and, that in assessing whether a business concern 
qualifies as small under the above definition, such business (control) 
affiliations \31\ are included.\32\ Our estimate, therefore, likely 
overstates the number of small businesses that might be affected by our 
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 515112 (changed from 513112 in 
October 2002).
    \30\ Id.
    \31\ ``Concerns are affiliates of each other when one concern 
controls or has the power to control the other, or a third party or 
parties controls or has the power to control both.'' 3 CFR 
121.103(a)(1).
    \32\ ``SBA counts the receipts or employees of the concern whose 
size is at issue and those of all its domestic and foreign 
affiliates, regardless of whether the affiliates are organized for 
profit, in determining the concern's size.'' 13 CFR 121.103(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    30. We believe, however, that most, if not all, of the auxiliary 
facilities could be classified as small businesses by themselves. We 
also recognize that most translators and boosters are owned by a parent 
station which, in some cases, would be covered by the revenue 
definition of small business entity discussed above.
    31. Incumbent microwave services in the 7 GHz, 10 GHz, and 13 GHz 
bands include common carrier, private operational fixed, and BAS 
services. Presently there may be up to 22,015 common carrier fixed 
licensees and 61,670 private operational-fixed licensees and broadcast 
auxiliary radio licensees in the microwave services. The SBA has 
developed a small business size standard for Cellular and other 
Wireless Telecommunications, which consists of all such companies 
having 1,500 or fewer employees.\33\ According to Census Bureau data 
for 1997, there were 977 firms in this category, total, that operated 
for the entire year.\34\ Of this total, 965 firms had employment of 999 
or fewer employees, and an additional 12 had employment of 1,000 
employees or more.\35\ Thus, under this standard, the majority of firms 
can be considered small. We estimate, for this purpose, that all of the 
Fixed Microwave licensees (excluding broadcast auxiliary licensees) 
would qualify as small entities under the SBA definition for 
radiotelephone companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 513322.
    \34\ U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Economic Census, Subject Series: 
Information, ``Employment Size of Firms Subject to Federal Income 
Tax: 1997,'' Table 5, NAICS code 513310 (issued Oct. 2000).
    \35\ Id. The census data do not provide a more precise estimate 
of the number of firms that have employment of 1,500 or fewer 
employees; the largest category provided is ``Firms with 1,000 
employees or more.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    32. We propose changes to the part 74, 78, and 101 rules governing 
coordination between NGSO FSS and other terrestrial services. 
Specifically, certain obligations will be imposed on NGSO FSS licensees 
in order to protect potential growth opportunities for terrestrial 
services in the 10 GHz band, and proposed coordination rules will 
govern the use of shared frequencies between FSS and BAS/CARS 
terrestrial

[[Page 4915]]

services in the 7 and 13 GHz bands.\36\ As noted in the section 
entitled ``Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules'', supra, in 
the 7 and 13 GHz bands, we are applying existing parts 25 and 101 
coordination rules for coordination of new FSS earth stations with 
mobile BAS/CARS operations; allowing either existing part 74/78 ad hoc 
coordination rules or part 101 coordination rules for coordination of 
new BAS/CARS mobile operations with FSS earth stations; and applying 
existing parts 25 and 101 coordination rules for coordination of new 
FSS earth stations and new fixed BAS/CARS operations.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Notice ]] 11-14, supra. See list of obligations at NPRM 
] 9, supra.
    \37\ See Notice ]] 22, 34, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, 
and Significant Alternatives Considered

    33. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, 
specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in 
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four 
alternatives (among others): ``(1) The establishment of differing 
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into 
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and 
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the 
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small 
entities.''\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. We propose to adopt or seek comment on adequate spectrum 
sharing criteria to minimize the potential for interference of these 
new NGSO FSS operations on incumbent operations, many of which qualify 
as small entities. Further, to promote system growth for the fixed 
microwave service, we are proposing to establish obligations on NGSO 
FSS licensees to ensure flexible growth potential. This proposal should 
permit FS small entities some level of assurance that future 
terrestrial links can be established without hindrance from NGSO FSS 
earth stations. Further, our coordination rules will ensure that BAS, 
CARS, and NGSO FSS services can operate sharing these bands without 
impacting other services' operations. We also note that, in the 
Discussion Section of the Notice, we have requested comment from small 
businesses and other small entities concerning the alternatives 
proposed for our coordination rules.\39\ We request comment on our 
conclusions and any alternatives to our proposals that could minimize 
the impact of this action on small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See NPRM ]] 28, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules

    35. None.

Ordering Clauses

    36. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 4(j), 7(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 
and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 
154(i), 157(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 303(r), this Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is hereby adopted.
    37. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of the Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 25

    Communications common carriers, Communications equipment, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Satellites.

47 CFR Parts 74 and 78

    Communications equipment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amends 47 CFR parts 25, 74, and 
78 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 and 332, 
unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 25.201 is amended by adding the following definition in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec. 25.201  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Fixed service growth zone. A fixed service (FS) growth zone is any 
county in which at least 30 FS frequencies are licensed to transmit in 
the 10.7-11.7 GHz band. Growth zone determinations shall be made at the 
time of submission of a request for coordination of the NGSO FSS 
gateway earth station to a frequency coordinator and shall be a 
component of the coordination process required under this part.
* * * * *
    3. Section 25.203 is amended by adding paragraph (l) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 25.203  Choice of sites and frequencies.

* * * * *
    (l) NGSO FSS gateway earth stations operating in the 10.7-11.7 GHz 
band may be located in a fixed service (FS) growth zone, as defined by 
Sec. 25.201 and recognized during the gateway earth station's 
coordination process pursuant to its license application, subject to 
the following conditions:
    (1) The NGSO FSS gateway earth station located in the FS growth 
zone shall be in accordance with standard coordination procedures, 
except that coordination shall assume that all FS stations relevant to 
the coordination are operating on all FS transmit frequencies in the 
10.7-11.7 GHz band; and
    (2) If an FS applicant seeking to operate a new FS station in an FS 
growth zone would be precluded, under the standard coordination 
procedures, at a particular location in the band due to the existence 
of the gateway earth station, the gateway earth station licensee shall, 
at the FS applicant's request, be responsible for reducing the effect 
on the gateway earth station of the power radiated by the proposed FS 
station to the greatest extent practicable, consistent with sound 
engineering practices and in a manner that does not materially degrade 
the operational capabilities of the gateway earth station, up to a 
maximum of 20 dB below the interference level derived from the free-
space coordination calculation; and
    (3) In order to locate an NGSO FSS gateway earth station at a 
particular site within an FS growth zone that otherwise would not be 
acceptable under the standard coordination procedures, an NGSO FSS 
gateway earth station applicant may voluntarily agree to accept, from a 
specified azimuth, a certain level of interference from a particular FS 
station in excess of the level that would be consistent with the 
standard coordination procedures. To the extent that an NGSO FSS 
gateway earth station is sited pursuant to this subsection, the 
licensee shall in the future be obligated to continue to accept, from 
that specified azimuth, that

[[Page 4916]]

same aggregate level of interference from any FS stations; and
    (4) In coordinating a new FS station with an NGSO FSS gateway earth 
station located in an FS growth zone, the coordination shall not take 
into account NGSO FSS gateway earth station antenna elevation angles 
below the lowest geometric elevation angle that can be employed by the 
NGSO FSS gateway earth station for each direction of azimuth, taking 
into account the specific characteristics of the relevant satellite 
constellation; and
    (5) If, at the time of submission of a request for coordination of 
a particular NGSO FSS gateway earth station site to a frequency 
coordinator, that site is located outside of any FS growth zone, any 
NGSO FSS gateway earth station facility subsequently licensed to 
operate at that site shall not be subject to the provisions of 
paragraphs (l)(1) through (4) of this section, regardless of whether 
the county in which that site is located subsequently becomes an FS 
growth zone.

PART 74--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO, AUXILIARY, SPECIAL BROADCAST AND OTHER 
PROGRAM DISTRIBUTION SERVICES

    4. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307, 336(f), 336(h) and 554.

    5. Section 74.638 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), (c) 
introductory text, and paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec. 74.638  Frequency coordination.

    (a) Coordination of all frequency assignments for fixed stations in 
all bands above 2110 MHz, and for mobile (temporary fixed) stations in 
the bands 6425-6525 MHz and 17.7-19.7 GHz, will be in accordance with 
the procedure established in paragraph (b) of this section, except that 
the prior coordination process for mobile (temporary fixed) assignments 
may be completed orally and the period allowed for response to a 
coordination notification may be less than 30 days if the parties 
agree. Coordination of all frequency assignments for all mobile 
(temporary fixed) stations in all bands above 2110 MHz, except the 
bands 6425-6525 MHz and 17.7-19.7 GHz, will be conducted in accordance 
with the procedure established in paragraph (b) of this section or with 
the procedure in paragraph (d) of this section. Coordination of all 
frequency assignments for all fixed stations in the band 1990-2110 MHz 
will be in accordance with the procedure established in paragraph (c) 
of this section. Coordination of all frequency assignments for all 
mobile (temporary fixed) stations in the band 1990-2110 MHz will be 
conducted in accordance with the procedure in paragraph (d) of this 
section.
    (b) For each frequency coordinated under this paragraph, the 
interference protection criteria in Sec. 101.105(a), (b), and (c) of 
this chapter and the frequency usage coordination procedures in Sec. 
101.103(d) of this chapter will apply.
    (c) For each frequency coordinated under this paragraph, the 
following frequency usage coordination procedures will apply:
* * * * *
    (d) For each frequency coordinated under this paragraph, applicants 
are responsible for selecting the frequency assignments that are least 
likely to result in mutual interference with other licensees in the 
same area. Applicants may consult local frequency coordination 
committees, where they exist, for information on frequencies available 
in the area. In selecting frequencies, consideration should be given to 
the relative location of receive points, normal transmission paths, and 
the nature of the contemplated operation.

PART 78--CABLE TELEVISION RELAY SERVICE

    6. The authority for part 78 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 2, 3, 4, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 48 Stat., as 
amended, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085; 47 U.S.C. 
152, 153, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, and 309.

    7. Section 78.11 is amended by adding a sentence to the end of 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec. 78.11  Permissible service.

* * * * *
    (e) * * * And provided, further, that prior to such operation, the 
licensee shall, for the intended location or area-of-operation, notify 
the appropriate frequency coordination committee or any licensee(s) 
assigned the use of the proposed operating frequency, including 
licensees of fixed-satellite service earth stations, concerning the 
particulars of the intended operation, and shall provide the name and 
telephone number of a person who may be contacted in the event of 
interference, except that this notification provision shall not apply 
where an unanticipated need for immediate short-term mobile station 
operation would render this notification provision impractical.
* * * * *
    8. Section 78.36 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b) 
introductory text, (b)(1), (c) introductory text, and paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 78.36  Frequency coordination.

    (a) Coordination of all frequency assignments for fixed stations in 
all bands above 2110 MHz, and for mobile (temporary fixed) stations in 
the bands 6425-6525 MHz and 17.7-19.7 GHz, will be in accordance with 
the procedure established in paragraph (b) of this section, except that 
the prior coordination process for mobile (temporary fixed) assignments 
may be completed orally and the period allowed for response to a 
coordination notification may be less than 30 days if the parties 
agree. Coordination of all frequency assignments for all mobile 
(temporary fixed) stations in all bands above 2110 MHz, except the 
bands 6425-6525 MHz and 17.7-19.7 GHz, will be conducted in accordance 
with the procedure established in paragraph (b) of this section or with 
the procedure in paragraph (d) of this section. Coordination of all 
frequency assignments for all fixed stations in the band 1990-2110 MHz 
will be in accordance with the procedure established in paragraph (c) 
of this section. Coordination of all frequency assignments for all 
mobile (temporary fixed) stations in the band 1990-2110 MHz will be 
conducted in accordance with the procedure in paragraph (d) of this 
section.
    (b) For each frequency coordinated under this part, the 
interference protection criteria in Sec. 101.105(a), (b), and (c) of 
this chapter and the following frequency usage coordination procedures 
will apply:
    (1) General requirements. Proposed frequency usage must be prior 
coordinated with existing licensees, permittees, and applicants in the 
area, and other applicants with previously filed applications, whose 
facilities could affect or be affected by the new proposal in terms of 
frequency interference on active channels, applied-for channels, or 
channels coordinated for future growth. Coordination must be completed 
prior to filing an application for regular authorization, or a major 
amendment to a pending application, or any major modification to a 
license. In coordinating frequency usage with stations in the fixed 
satellite service, applicants must also comply with the requirements of 
Sec. 101.21(f). In engineering a system or modification thereto, the 
applicant must, by appropriate studies and analyses, select sites, 
transmitters, antennas and frequencies that will avoid interference

[[Page 4917]]

in excess of permissible levels to other users. All applicants and 
licensees must cooperate fully and make reasonable efforts to resolve 
technical problems and conflicts that may inhibit the most effective 
and efficient use of the radio spectrum; however, the party being 
coordinated with is not obligated to suggest changes or re-engineer a 
proposal in cases involving conflicts. Applicants should make every 
reasonable effort to avoid blocking the growth of systems as prior 
coordinated. The applicant must identify in the application all 
entities with which the technical proposal was coordinated. In the 
event that technical problems are not resolved, an explanation must be 
submitted with the application. Where technical problems are resolved 
by an agreement or operating arrangement between the parties that would 
require special procedures be taken to reduce the likelihood of 
interference in excess of permissible levels (such as the use of 
artificial site shielding) or would result in a reduction of quality or 
capacity of either system, the details thereof may be contained in the 
application.
* * * * *
    (c) For each frequency coordinated under this part, the following 
frequency usage coordination procedures will apply:
* * * * *
    (d) For each frequency coordinated under this part, applicants are 
responsible for selecting the frequency assignments that are least 
likely to result in mutual interference with other licensees in the 
same area. Applicants may consult local frequency coordination 
committees, where they exist, for information on frequencies available 
in the area. In selecting frequencies, consideration should be given to 
the relative location of receive points, normal transmission paths, and 
the nature of the contemplated operation.

[FR Doc. 04-1991 Filed 1-30-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P