[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 174 (Thursday, September 9, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54581-54589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-20362]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 5, 25 and 97

[IB Docket 02-54; FCC 04-130]
RIN 3060-A106


Mitigation of Orbital Debris

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) 
adopts a Second Report and Order that amends the Commission's rules to 
minimize the amount of orbital debris created by satellite systems and 
to mitigate the effects of orbital debris on operational spacecraft. 
Orbital debris consists of man-made objects that are not functioning 
spacecraft. Although orbital debris currently poses little short-term 
risk to operational spacecraft, an increase in orbital debris could 
have a significant impact in the long term on space activities, 
including important satellite communications. Adoption of these rules 
will help preserve the United States' continued affordable access to 
space, the continued provision of reliable U.S. space-based services--
including communications and remote sensing satellite services for U.S. 
commercial, government, and homeland security purposes--as well as the 
continued safety of persons and property in space and on the surface of 
the Earth. Adoption of these rules will also further the domestic 
policy objective of the United States to minimize the creation of 
orbital debris and is consistent with international policies and 
initiatives to achieve this goal.

DATES: Effective October 12, 2004, except for Sec. Sec.  5.63(e), 
25.114(d)(14), and 97.207(g) which contain information collection 
requirements that are not effective until approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget. The FCC will publish a document in the Federal 
Register announcing the effective date for those sections. Written 
comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed

[[Page 54582]]

information collection requirements must be submitted by the public, 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on 
or before November 8, 2004.

ADDRESSES: In addition to filing comments with the Office of the 
Secretary, a copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act 
information collection requirements contained herein should be 
submitted to Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 
1-C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet 
to [email protected], and to Kristy L. LaLonde, OMB Desk Office, 
Room 10234 NEOB, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, via the 
Internet to [email protected], or via fax at 202-395-5167.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Duall, Attorney Advisor, 
Satellite Division, International Bureau, telephone (202) 418-1103, or 
via the Internet at [email protected]. For additional information 
concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act information collection 
requirements contained in this document, contact Judith B. Herman at 
202-418-0214, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second 
Report and Order in IB Docket No. 02-54, FCC 04-130, adopted June 9, 
2004 and released June 21, 2004. The complete text of this Second 
Report and Order is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 
12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may 
also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best 
Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-
B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (202) 488-5300, facsimile (202) 
488-5563 or via e-mail at [email protected]. It is also available on the 
Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.
    Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis: This document contains proposed 
information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its 
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general 
public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the 
information collection requirements contained in this document, as 
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. 
Public and agency comments are due November 8, 2004. Comments should 
address: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the 
Commission, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; (c) ways 
to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information 
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information on the respondents, including the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. In 
addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 
Pub. L. 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on 
how we might ``further reduce the information collection burden for 
small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.'' This 
publication and comment period supersedes the publication and comment 
period that was published in the Federal Register on July 21, 2004, 69 
FR 45714.
    OMB Control Number: 3060-1013.
    Title: Mitigation of Orbital Debris.
    Form No.: N/A.
    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Number of Respondents: 50.
    Estimated Time per Response: 5 hours.
    Frequency of Response: One time reporting requirement and third 
party requirement.
    Total Annual Burden: 135 hours.
    Total Annual Cost: $36,000.
    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A.
    Needs and Uses: The Commission is revising this information 
collection to reflect the new and/or modified information collection 
requirements that resulted from the Second Report and Order, ``In the 
Matter of Mitigation of Orbital Debris.'' This Second Report and Order 
was released by the Commission on June 21, 2004. The Commission amended 
parts 5, 25, and 97 of the Commission's rules by adopting new rules 
concerning mitigation of orbital debris. Orbital debris consists of 
artificial objects orbiting the earth that are not functional 
spacecraft. Adoption of these rules will help preserve the United 
States' continued affordable access to space, the continued provision 
of reliable U.S. space-based services--including communications and 
remote sensing satellite services for U.S. commercial, government, and 
homeland security purposes--as well as the continued safety of persons 
and property in space and on the surface of the earth. Under the rules 
as amended today, a satellite system operator requesting FCC space 
station authorization, or an entity requesting a Commission ruling for 
access to a non-U.S.-licensed space station under the FCC's satellite 
market access procedures, must submit an orbital debris mitigation plan 
to the Commission regarding spacecraft design and operation in 
connection with its request. This Second Report and Order provides 
guidance for the preparation of such plans. The Commission also adopted 
requirements concerning the post-mission disposal of Commission-
licensed space stations operating in or near the two most heavily used 
orbital regimes, low-earth orbit (LEO), and geostationary-earth orbit 
(GEO). Adoption of these rules will further the domestic policy 
objective of the United States to minimize the creation of orbital 
debris and is consistent with international policies and initiatives to 
achieve this goal.
    The information collection requirements accounted for in this 
collection are necessary to mitigate the potential harmful effects of 
orbital debris accumulation. Without such information collection 
requirements, the growth in the orbital debris may limit the usefulness 
of space for communications and other uses in the future by raising the 
costs and lowering the reliability of space-based systems.
    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis: As required by the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),\1\ an Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated in the Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking in the Matter of Mitigation of Orbital Debris (Orbital 
Debris Notice).\2\ The Commission sought written public comment on the 
proposals in the Orbital Debris Notice, including comment on the IRFA. 
The comments received are discussed below. This present Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA), Public Law 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).
    \2\ See Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, IB Docket No. 02-54, FCC 02-80, 17 FCC Rcd 5586, 5613 
(2002).
    \3\ See 5 U.S.C. 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules: Orbital debris 
consists of artificial objects orbiting the Earth that are not 
functional spacecraft. Since human activity in space began, there has 
been a steady growth in the number and total mass of orbital debris. 
The risks presented by orbital debris consist primarily of the risk of 
collisions between orbital debris and functional spacecraft, and the 
risk of damage to persons and property on the surface of the Earth in 
cases where a debris object

[[Page 54583]]

survives reentry into the Earth's atmosphere. While these risks are 
small and are likely to remain so for the near term, continued and 
unmitigated growth in the orbital debris population may limit the 
usefulness of space--particularly high-value orbits such as low-Earth 
orbit (LEO)\4\ and geostationary-Earth orbit (GEO)\5\--for 
communications and other uses in the future, by raising the costs and 
lowering the reliability of space-based systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For purposes of the Second Report and Order, the term LEO is 
used to refer to the orbits at altitudes below 2,000 kilometers.
    \5\ GEO is a circular orbit along the plane of the Earth's 
equator at an altitude of approximately 35,786 kilometers. A 
spacecraft in geostationary-Earth orbit can be maintained at a 
constant longitudinal position relative to the Earth, thus allowing 
the satellite to be ``seen'' continuously from, and at a fixed 
orientation to, any given point on the Earth's surface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This Second Report and Order adopts rules to minimize the creation 
of orbital debris. Minimizing the creation of orbital debris will help 
to ensure continued affordable access to space by the United States, 
the continued provision of U.S. space-based communications, and the 
continued safety of persons and property in space and on the surface of 
the Earth. In addition, the adoption of orbital debris mitigation rules 
by the FCC furthers the long-standing policy of the United States to 
minimize the creation of orbital debris, and is consistent with 
international policies and initiatives to mitigate orbital debris.
    Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response 
to the IRFA: Two parties submitted comments that specifically responded 
to the IRFA. The Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation (AMSAT)\6\ 
contends that it and its constituent members qualify as ``small 
entities'' that must be considered in the Commission's formulation of 
any new rules that may be applicable to the amateur-satellite service. 
In addition, the University of Mississippi National Remote Sensing and 
Space Law Center (UM Space Law Center)\7\ proposes that, although 
threshold requirements for orbital debris mitigation should be set by 
the FCC, the orbital debris mitigation plans of small entities should 
be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and that small entities should be 
able to seek exemptions from orbital debris mitigation reporting or 
compliance requirements if specific reasons for the exemption can be 
shown.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Comments of the Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation 
Regarding Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, IB Docket No. 02-
54 (filed July 17, 2002).
    \7\ Response of the University of Mississippi National Remote 
Sensing and Space Law Center to Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, IB Docket No. 02-54 (filed July 16, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There is no significant economic impact on AMSAT or its constituent 
members under the RFA. AMSAT is a non-profit scientific and educational 
organization that represents individuals who hold amateur radio 
licenses under 47 CFR 97 of the Commission's rules, and who operate or 
communicate with amateur space stations. Because only individuals may 
hold amateur licenses and amateur licensees are precluded from 
operating for commercial purposes, neither AMSAT nor individual amateur 
licensees fit the definition of small entity, as defined by the SBA.\8\ 
Nonetheless, the Second Report and Order has addressed the proposal of 
AMSAT and other commenters to exempt categorically amateur space 
stations from orbital debris mitigation requirements and found such 
proposals to be inconsistent with the purpose and object of such 
requirements.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(6) (``small entity'' has same meaning as 
``small business'' under RFA).
    \9\ See Second Report and Order at paras. 89-92.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the rules adopted in the Second Report and Order are 
consistent with the proposals of the UM Space Law Center. Under the new 
rules, the elements of the orbital debris mitigation plans of all 
parties--not just small entities--are reviewed on a case-by-case basis 
in the majority of instances. Where the rules adopt rules in lieu of 
case-by-case review, such as for the post-mission disposal of GEO 
satellites, parties are permitted under existing FCC rules to seek 
waivers of such requirements for specific good cause shown.\10\ In 
addition, the Second Report and Order exempts, or ``grandfathers,'' in-
orbit GEO satellites that were launched prior to the release of the 
Orbital Debris Notice on March 18, 2002 from the minimum post-mission 
disposal altitude requirements that are adopted by the Commission.\11\ 
Comments indicated that the financial impact of the post-mission 
disposal rules for GEO spacecraft could be significant for this class 
of satellites in the absence of grandfathering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 47 CFR 1.3.
    \11\ See Second Report and Order at Section III.D.4.i.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Proposed Rules May Apply: The RFA directs agencies to provide a 
description of, and, where feasible, an estimate of, the number of 
small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if 
adopted.\12\ The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as 
having the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small 
organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' \13\ In 
addition, the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term 
``small business concern'' under the Small Business Act.\14\ 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).\15\ A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit 
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.''\16\ Nationwide, as of 1992, there were 
approximately 275,801 small organizations.\17\ ``Small governmental 
jurisdiction'' generally means ``governments of cities, counties, 
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, 
with a population of less than 50,000.''\18\ As of 1992, there were 
approximately 85,006 such jurisdictions in the United States.\19\ This 
number includes 38,978 counties, cities, and towns; of these, 37,566, 
or 96 percent, have populations of fewer than 50,000.\20\ The Census 
Bureau estimates that this ratio is approximately accurate for all 
governmental entities. Thus, of the 85,006 governmental entities, we 
estimate that 81,600 (91 percent) are small entities. Below, we further 
describe and estimate the number of small entity licensees that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
    \13\ Id. 601(6).
    \14\ 5 U.S.C. 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.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(3).
    \15\ Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632 (1996).
    \16\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \17\ 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 6 
(special tabulation of data under contract to Office of Advocacy of 
the U.S. Small Business Administration).
    \18\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \19\ U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, ``1992 Census 
of Governments.''
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rules proposed in this Second Report and Order would affect 
satellite operators, if adopted. The Commission has not developed a 
definition of small entities applicable to satellite operators. 
Therefore, the applicable definition of small entity is generally the 
definition under the SBA rules applicable to

[[Page 54584]]

Satellite Telecommunications.\21\ The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for Satellite Telecommunications, which consists 
of all such firms having $12.5 million or less in annual receipts.\22\ 
According to Census Bureau data for 1997, in this category there was a 
total of 324 firms that operated for the entire year.\23\ 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.\24\ Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms 
can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ ``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged 
in providing point-to-point telecommunications services to other 
establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries 
by forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of 
satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.'' Small 
Business Administration, 1997 NAICS Definitions, NAICS 513340.
    \22\ 13 CFR 121.201, NAIC code 517410 (changed from 513340 in 
October 2002).
    \23\ 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).
    \24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Commission records reveal that there are approximately 
240 space station operators licensed by this Commission. We do not 
request or collect annual revenue information, and thus are unable to 
estimate the number of licensees that would constitute a small business 
under the SBA definition. Small businesses may not have the financial 
ability to become space station licensees because of the high 
implementation costs associated with satellite systems and services.
    Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements: Under the rules as amended by the Second 
Report and Order, a satellite system operator requesting FCC space 
station authorization, or an entity requesting a Commission ruling for 
access to a non-U.S.-licensed space station under the FCC's satellite 
market access procedures, must submit an orbital debris mitigation plan 
to the Commission regarding spacecraft design and operation in 
connection with its request. The Second Report and Order provides 
guidance for the preparation of such plans. The Second Report and Order 
also adopt requirements concerning the post-mission disposal of 
Commission-licensed space stations operating in or near the two most 
heavily used orbital regimes, low-Earth orbit and geostationary-Earth 
orbit.
    As discussed below, all parties requesting Commission authorization 
to operate a space station or a ruling for access to a non-U.S.-
licensed space station must already demonstrate under existing FCC 
rules that they have the technical and legal ability to conduct such 
operations as a prerequisite to grant of an FCC authorization.\25\ 
Because the preparation and disclosure of orbital debris mitigation 
plans utilizes engineering and legal resources similar to those 
currently used in the space station licensing process, it is expected 
that all parties--including small entities--will have available the 
resources to prepare and disclose orbital debris mitigation plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 47 CFR 25.140-146 (requiring applicants in various 
satellite services to demonstrate technical qualifications as a 
prerequisite to receiving Commission authorization for space station 
operations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered: The RFA requires an 
agency to describe any significant 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 or 
reporting requirements under the rule for 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 small entities.\26\ 
Each is discussed in turn below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)--(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Differing compliance or reporting requirements.The Second 
Report and Order requires all satellite operators to disclose plans to 
mitigate orbital debris as part of their requests for Commission 
authorization. The requirement for the disclosure of orbital debris 
mitigation plans is not a periodic reporting requirement, but is 
instead triggered by submission of a request for Commission licensing 
or authorization, the timing of which is subject to the control of the 
applicant. As a result, the timetable for the disclosure can be 
adjusted by any applicant--including small entities--without the need 
for specific exemptions in the Commission's rules. Because the 
preparation and disclosure of orbital debris mitigation plans utilizes 
engineering and legal resources similar to those currently used in the 
licensing process, it is expected that all parties--including small 
entities--will have available the resources to prepare and disclose 
orbital debris mitigation plans. Furthermore, authorizing space station 
operations by small entities, which pose the same public interest 
concerns as those posed by large entities, without any consideration of 
whether the proposed space station operations will contribute 
unreasonably to the creation of orbital debris would undermine the 
policy object of the Commission and the United States Government in 
mitigating orbital debris.
    (2) Clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance 
or reporting requirements. The Second Report and Order clarifies, 
consolidates, and/or simplifies several existing compliance or 
reporting requirements regarding the operation of FCC-licensed space 
stations that will benefit all authorized space station operators, 
including small entities.
    (3) Use of performance, rather than design, standards. The Second 
Report and Order establishes its debris mitigation requirements in 
terms of performance standards and does not adopt design standards for 
any class of entities, including small entities.
    (4) Exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
small entities. Authorizing space station operations by small entities, 
which pose the same public interest concerns as those posed by large 
entities, without any consideration of whether the proposed space 
station operations will contribute to the creation of orbital debris 
would undermine the policy object of the Commission and the United 
States Government in mitigating orbital debris. A categorical exemption 
from debris mitigation rules was considered in the context of amateur 
space station licenses--even though amateur space station licensees are 
not small entities as defined by the RFA--and was rejected as 
inconsistent with the underlying purpose of the rules.\27\ In addition, 
any operator--including a small entity--is permitted under existing FCC 
rules to seek waivers of debris mitigation requirements for specific 
good cause shown.\28\ In addition, the Second Report and Order exempts, 
or ``grandfathers,'' all in-orbit GEO satellites that were launched 
prior to the release of the Orbital Debris Notice on March 18, 2002 
from the minimum post-mission disposal altitude requirement that are 
adopted by the Commission.\29\ Comments indicated that the financial 
impact of the post-mission disposal rules for GEO spacecraft could be 
significant for this

[[Page 54585]]

class of satellites in the absence of grandfathering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Second Report and Order at para. 91.
    \28\ See 47 CFR 1.3.
    \29\ See Second Report and Order at Section III.D.4.i.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules: Remote sensing satellite systems are licensed by both 
the FCC and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 
of the Department of Commerce. The Second Report and Order waives 
disclosure requirements concerning post-mission disposal of spacecraft 
for remote sensing satellites when those disposal plans have been 
reviewed and approved by NOAA as part of its licensing process.
    Report to Congress: The Commission will send a copy of the Second 
Report and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.\30\ In addition, the 
Commission will send a copy of the Second Report and Order, including 
this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the 
Second Report and Order and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be 
published in the Federal Register.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    \31\ See 5 U.S.C. 604(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of the Second Report and Order

    In this Second Report and Order, the Commission amends parts 5, 25, 
and 97 of its rules by adopting new rules concerning mitigation of 
orbital debris. The Second Report and Order concludes that the 
Commission has authority under the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 151 et 
seq., to adopt orbital debris mitigation rules.
    Under the Commission's rules, as amended by the Second Report and 
Order, a satellite system operator requesting FCC space station 
authorization, or an entity requesting a Commission ruling for access 
to a non-U.S.-licensed space station under the FCC's satellite market 
access procedures, must submit an orbital debris mitigation plan to the 
Commission regarding spacecraft design and operation in connection with 
its request. Entities that have requests for such Commission 
authorization currently pending have 30 days after the effective date 
of the orbital debris disclosure rules in which to amend their requests 
by filing a disclosure of debris mitigation plans in a manner 
consistent with this Second Report and Order. The Second Report and 
Order also amends Sec. Sec.  25.143(b), 25.145(c)(3), 25.146(i)(4), and 
25.217 to eliminate previously adopted, duplicative orbital debris 
disclosure requirements for specific satellite services. The Commission 
will announce the effective date of the elimination of these service 
specific disclosure requirements in a future Federal Register notice, 
which will also announce the effective date of the new orbital debris 
disclosure rules in Sec. Sec.  5.63(e), 25.114(d)(14), and 97.207(g).
    The Second Report and Order provides guidance for the preparation 
of debris mitigation plans. The Second Report and Order amends 
Sec. Sec.  5.63, 25.114, and 97.207 of the Commission's rules to 
specify the elements of the orbital debris mitigation plans that must 
be addressed as part of a request for Commission authorization. As a 
result, mitigation plans must address elements of spacecraft design and 
operations so as to minimize the affect of collisions with small 
debris, the minimization of debris generated by accidental explosions, 
the selection of safe flight profiles to minimize collisions with large 
objects, and disposal plans for spacecraft at end of life.
    The Second Report and Order amends the Commission's rules governing 
application filing, pre-operational maneuvers, on-orbit operations, and 
coordination of maneuvers. The Second Report and Order declines to 
adopt an orbital tolerance for NGSO spacecraft, but amends Sec.  25.114 
of the Commission's rules to require disclosure of the accuracy, if 
any, with which the orbital parameters of NGSO spacecraft will be 
maintained. It also adopts a new rule Sec.  25.282 which authorizes GEO 
spacecraft to transmit in connection with short-term transitory 
maneuvers directly related to post-launch, orbit-raising maneuvers, 
provided that certain conditions are met.
    The Second Report and Order also adopts a proposal to shorten and 
simplify the text of Sec.  25.210(j) of the Commission's rules, which 
requires GEO space stations to be maintained within 0.05[deg] of their assigned orbital longitude, and to provide an 
explicit exception for certain end-of-life operations. It defers the 
issue of whether to extend the longitudinal tolerance of 0.05[deg], applicable to space stations in the fixed-satellite 
service, to all space stations, including mobile-satellite service 
(MSS) and remote sensing space stations, to a further notice of 
proposed rulemaking to be initiated at a later date. In addition, the 
Second Report and Order amends Sec.  25.280 of the Commission's rule to 
clarify the timing of the notice that must be provided to the 
Commission once a GEO spacecraft initiates inclined orbit operations.
    Furthermore, the Second Report and Order amends Sec.  25.114 to 
require a more detailed discussion of how certain satellite systems 
will avoid potential in-orbit collisions. These systems include those 
launched into a low-Earth orbit that is identical, or very similar, to 
an orbit used by another system, as well as a GEO system that is 
proposed to be co-located with other satellites at a single GEO orbital 
location.
    The Second Report and Order adopts rules concerning the post-
mission disposal of Commission-licensed spacecraft. The Commission will 
examine orbital debris mitigation plans of non-geostationary satellite 
orbit (NGSO) spacecraft, including LEO spacecraft, on a case-by-case 
basis in light of the U.S. Government Orbital Debris Mitigation 
Standard Practices (U.S. Government Standard Practices) and the orbital 
debris mitigation guidelines presented by the Inter-Agency Space Debris 
Coordination Committee (IADC Guidelines). Use of post-mission disposal 
methods for LEO spacecraft as set forth by the U.S. Government Standard 
Practices and IADC Guidelines suggest that the space station will 
operate consistent with the public interest. Disclosures indicating 
that a spacecraft will not use one of these disposal methods may 
necessitate the Commission to seek further information, or ultimately 
to condition or withhold approval. Furthermore, the Second Report and 
Order amends Sec. Sec.  5.63, 25.114, and 97.207 to require entities 
proposing to dispose of spacecraft by means of atmospheric re-entry to 
assess the risk of human casualty from such maneuvers.
    For GEO spacecraft, the Second Report and Order adopts the proposal 
of the Orbital Debris Notice to evaluate post-mission disposal plans 
according to the formula developed by the IADC Guidelines for 
determining the minimum perigee storage altitude for GEO spacecraft at 
end of life. For GEO spacecraft launched prior to the release of the 
Orbital Debris Notice on March 18, 2002, the Commission exempts, or 
``grandfathers,'' such spacecraft from the requirement to be relocated 
at end of life to a disposal orbit calculated by use of IADC formula. 
The Second Report and Order adopts the proposed rule that an GEO 
spacecraft that is disposed of at end of life according to the IADC 
formula may operate outside of its assigned orbital location for the 
purpose of such post-mission disposal, on the condition that the 
spacecraft's tracking, telemetry, and control transmissions are planned 
so as to avoid electrical interference to other satellites and are 
coordinated with any potentially affected satellite networks. 
Furthermore, the Second Report and Order requires all Commission-
licensed spacecraft to

[[Page 54586]]

ensure that all stored energy sources on board the satellite are 
discharged at the end of life, unless prevented by technical failures 
beyond their control. It also amends Sec. Sec.  5.63, 25.114, and 
97.207 to require disclosure of the quantity of fuel--if any--that will 
be reserved for post-mission disposal maneuvers of both GEO and NGSO 
spacecraft. New post-mission disposal requirements are codified in new 
Sec.  25.283 of the Commission's rules.
    The Second Report and Order clarifies that amateur, experimental, 
and non-U.S.-licensed spacecraft must submit the same orbital debris 
mitigation disclosure as U.S.-licensed spacecraft requesting 
authorization pursuant to part 25 of the Commission's rules. The Second 
Report and Order adopts the proposal not to address matters involving 
post-mission disposal of spacecraft that are co-licensed by the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) since such plans 
are already subject to effective regulatory review by NOAA. The Second 
Report and Order also states that the Commission does not intend to 
alter the current practice of not requiring information about the 
launch vehicle used to launch an FCC-licensed spacecraft into orbit, 
but the Commission retains discretion to consider orbital debris 
concerns involving a particular launch vehicle in the event they are 
raised as part of a request for a Commission authorization.
    Finally, the Second Report and Order addresses liability and 
insurance issues related to orbital debris. It declines to adopt a rule 
requiring space station operator to obtain insurance to protect the 
United States from exposure to liability claims arising from orbital 
debris, but states insurance and liability issues will continue to play 
a role in the determination of whether approval of a particular debris 
mitigation plan serves the public interest, particularly when the plan 
involves activities, such as atmospheric re-entry, which may involve 
more immediate and substantial risks to persons and property on the 
surface of the Earth.

Ordering Clauses

    Accordingly, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 301, 303, 308, 309, and 
310 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. sections 
151, 154(i), 301, 303, 308, 309, and 310, this Second Report and Order 
in IB Docket No. 02-54 is hereby adopted.
    Parts 5, 25, and 97 of the Commission's rules are amended as set 
forth below.
    The Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center, 
shall send a copy of this Second Report and Order, including the Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Parts 5, 25, and 97

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Satellites.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR parts 5, 25, and 97 as follows:

PART 5--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO SERVICE (OTHER THAN BROADCAST)

0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 4, 302, 303, 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 
47 U.S.C. 154, 302, 303. Interpret or apply sec. 301, 48 Stat. 1081, 
as amended; 47 U.S.C. 301.


0
2. Add paragraph (e) to Sec.  5.63 to read as follows:


Sec.  5.63  Supplementary statements required.

* * * * *
    (e) Except where the satellite system has already been authorized 
by the FCC, applicants for an experimental authorization involving a 
satellite system must submit a description of the design and 
operational strategies the satellite system will use to mitigate 
orbital debris, including the following information:
    (1) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the amount of debris released in a planned manner during normal 
operations, and has assessed and limited the probability of the space 
station becoming a source of debris by collisions with small debris or 
meteoroids that could cause loss of control and prevent post-mission 
disposal;
    (2) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of accidental explosions during and after 
completion of mission operations. This statement must include a 
demonstration that debris generation will not result from the 
conversion of energy sources on board the spacecraft into energy that 
fragments the spacecraft. Energy sources include chemical, pressure, 
and kinetic energy. This demonstration should address whether stored 
energy will be removed at the spacecraft's end of life, by depleting 
residual fuel and leaving all fuel line valves open, venting any 
pressurized system, leaving all batteries in a permanent discharge 
state, and removing any remaining source of stored energy, or through 
other equivalent procedures specifically disclosed in the application;
    (3) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of the space station becoming a source of 
debris by collisions with large debris or other operational space 
stations. Where a space station will be launched into a low-Earth orbit 
that is identical, or very similar, to an orbit used by other space 
stations, the statement must include an analysis of the potential risk 
of collision and a description of what measures the space station 
operator plans to take to avoid in-orbit collisions. If the space 
station operator is relying on coordination with another system, the 
statement must indicate what steps have been taken to contact, and 
ascertain the likelihood of successful coordination of physical 
operations with, the other system. The statement must disclose the 
accuracy--if any--with which orbital parameters of non-geostationary 
satellite orbit space stations will be maintained, including apogee, 
perigee, inclination, and the right ascension of the ascending node(s). 
In the event that a system is not able to maintain orbital tolerances, 
i.e., it lacks a propulsion system for orbital maintenance, that fact 
should be included in the debris mitigation disclosure. Such systems 
must also indicate the anticipated evolution over time of the orbit of 
the proposed satellite or satellites. Where a space station requests 
the assignment of a geostationary-Earth orbit location, it must assess 
whether there are any known satellites located at, or reasonably 
expected to be located at, the requested orbital location, or assigned 
in the vicinity of that location, such that the station keeping volumes 
of the respective satellites might overlap. If so, the statement must 
include a statement as to the identities of those parties and the 
measures that will be taken to prevent collisions;
    (4) A statement detailing the post-mission disposal plans for the 
space station at end of life, including the quantity of fuel--if any--
that will be reserved for post-mission disposal maneuvers. For 
geostationary-Earth orbit space stations, the statement must disclose 
the altitude selected for a post-mission disposal orbit and the 
calculations that are used in deriving the disposal altitude. The 
statement must also include a casualty risk assessment if planned post-
mission disposal involves atmospheric re-entry

[[Page 54587]]

of the space station. In general, an assessment should include an 
estimate as to whether portions of the spacecraft will survive re-entry 
and reach the surface of the Earth, as well as an estimate of the 
resulting probability of human casualty.

PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

0
3. 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.

0
4. Add paragraph (d)(14) to Sec.  25.114 to read as follows:


Sec.  25.114  Applications for space station authorizations.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (14) A description of the design and operational strategies that 
will be used to mitigate orbital debris, including the following 
information:
    (i) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the amount of debris released in a planned manner during normal 
operations, and has assessed and limited the probability of the space 
station becoming a source of debris by collisions with small debris or 
meteoroids that could cause loss of control and prevent post-mission 
disposal;
    (ii) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of accidental explosions during and after 
completion of mission operations. This statement must include a 
demonstration that debris generation will not result from the 
conversion of energy sources on board the spacecraft into energy that 
fragments the spacecraft. Energy sources include chemical, pressure, 
and kinetic energy. This demonstration should address whether stored 
energy will be removed at the spacecraft's end of life, by depleting 
residual fuel and leaving all fuel line valves open, venting any 
pressurized system, leaving all batteries in a permanent discharge 
state, and removing any remaining source of stored energy, or through 
other equivalent procedures specifically disclosed in the application;
    (iii) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of the space station becoming a source of 
debris by collisions with large debris or other operational space 
stations. Where a space station will be launched into a low-Earth orbit 
that is identical, or very similar, to an orbit used by other space 
stations, the statement must include an analysis of the potential risk 
of collision and a description of what measures the space station 
operator plans to take to avoid in-orbit collisions. If the space 
station operator is relying on coordination with another system, the 
statement must indicate what steps have been taken to contact, and 
ascertain the likelihood of successful coordination of physical 
operations with, the other system. The statement must disclose the 
accuracy--if any--with which orbital parameters of non-geostationary 
satellite orbit space stations will be maintained, including apogee, 
perigee, inclination, and the right ascension of the ascending node(s). 
In the event that a system is not able to maintain orbital tolerances, 
i.e., it lacks a propulsion system for orbital maintenance, that fact 
should be included in the debris mitigation disclosure. Such systems 
must also indicate the anticipated evolution over time of the orbit of 
the proposed satellite or satellites. Where a space station requests 
the assignment of a geostationary-Earth orbit location, it must assess 
whether there are any known satellites located at, or reasonably 
expected to be located at, the requested orbital location, or assigned 
in the vicinity of that location, such that the station keeping volumes 
of the respective satellites might overlap. If so, the statement must 
include a statement as to the identities of those parties and the 
measures that will be taken to prevent collisions;
    (iv) A statement detailing the post-mission disposal plans for the 
space station at end of life, including the quantity of fuel--if any--
that will be reserved for post-mission disposal maneuvers. For 
geostationary-Earth orbit space stations, the statement must disclose 
the altitude selected for a post-mission disposal orbit and the 
calculations that are used in deriving the disposal altitude. The 
statement must also include a casualty risk assessment if planned post-
mission disposal involves atmospheric re-entry of the space station. In 
general, an assessment should include an estimate as to whether 
portions of the spacecraft will survive re-entry and reach the surface 
of the Earth, as well as an estimate of the resulting probability of 
human casualty.
* * * * *

0
5. Revise Sec.  25.210(j) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.210  Technical requirements for space stations in the Fixed-
Satellite Service.

* * * * *
    (j) Space stations operated in the geostationary satellite orbit 
must be maintained within 0.05[deg] of their assigned orbital longitude 
in the east/west direction, unless specifically authorized by the 
Commission to operate with a different longitudinal tolerance, and 
except as provided in Section 25.283(b) (End-of-life Disposal).
* * * * *

0
6. Revise Sec.  25.280 to read as follows:


Sec.  25.280  Inclined orbit operations.

    (a) Satellite operators may commence operation in inclined orbit 
mode without obtaining prior Commission authorization provided that the 
Commission is notified by letter within 30 days after the last north-
south station keeping maneuver. The notification shall include:
    (1) The operator's name;
    (2) The date of commencement of inclined orbit operation;
    (3) The initial inclination;
    (4) The rate of change in inclination per year; and
    (5) The expected end-of-life of the satellite accounting for 
inclined orbit operation, and the maneuvers specified under Sec.  
25.283 of the Commission's rules.
    (b) Licensees operating in inclined-orbit are required to:
    (1) Periodically correct the satellite attitude to achieve a 
stationary spacecraft antenna pattern on the surface of the Earth and 
centered on the satellite's designated service area;
    (2) Control all electrical interference to adjacent satellites, as 
a result of operating in an inclined orbit, to levels not to exceed 
that which would be caused by the satellite operating without an 
inclined orbit;
    (3) Not claim protection in excess of the protection that would be 
received by the satellite network operating without an inclined orbit; 
and
    (4) Continue to maintain the space station at the authorized 
longitude orbital location in the geostationary satellite arc with the 
appropriate east-west station-keeping tolerance.

0
7. Add Sec.  25.282 to subpart D to read as follows:


Sec.  25.282  Orbit raising maneuvers.

    A space station authorized to operate in the geostationary 
satellite orbit under this part is also authorized to transmit in 
connection with short-term, transitory maneuvers directly related to 
post-launch, orbit-raising maneuvers, provided that the following 
conditions are met:
    (a) Authority is limited to those tracking, telemetry, and control

[[Page 54588]]

frequencies in which the space station is authorized to operate once it 
reaches its assigned geostationary orbital location;
    (b) In the event that any unacceptable interference does occur, the 
space station licensee shall cease operations until the issue is 
rectified;
    (c) The space station licensee is required to accept interference 
from any lawfully operating satellite network or radio communication 
system.

0
8. Add Sec.  25.283 to subpart D to read as follows:


Sec.  25.283  End-of-life disposal.

    (a) Geostationary orbit space stations. Unless otherwise explicitly 
specified in an authorization, a space station authorized to operate in 
the geostationary satellite orbit under this part shall be relocated, 
at the end of its useful life, barring catastrophic failure of 
satellite components, to an orbit with a perigee with an altitude of no 
less than:

36,021 km + (1000[middot]CR[middot]A/m)


where CR is the solar pressure radiation coefficient of the 
spacecraft, and A/m is the Area to mass ratio, in square meters per 
kilogram, of the spacecraft.
    (b) A space station authorized to operate in the geostationary 
satellite orbit under this part may operate using its authorized 
tracking, telemetry and control frequencies, and outside of its 
assigned orbital location, for the purpose of removing the satellite 
from the geostationary satellite orbit at the end of its useful life, 
provided that the conditions of paragraph (a) of this section are met, 
and on the condition that the space station's tracking, telemetry and 
control transmissions are planned so as to avoid electrical 
interference to other space stations, and coordinated with any 
potentially affected satellite networks.
    (c) All space stations. Upon completion of any relocation 
authorized by paragraph (b) of this section, or any relocation at end-
of-life specified in an authorization, or upon a spacecraft otherwise 
completing its authorized mission, a space station licensee shall 
ensure, unless prevented by technical failures beyond its control, that 
all stored energy sources on board the satellite are discharged, by 
venting excess propellant, discharging batteries, relieving pressure 
vessels, and other appropriate measures.
    (d) The minimum perigee requirement of paragraph (a) of this 
section shall not apply to space stations launched prior to March 18, 
2002.

PART 97--AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE

0
9. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 48 Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 303. 
Interpret or apply 48 Stat. 1064-1068, 1081-1105, as amended; 47 
U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609, unless otherwise noted.

0
10. Revise Sec.  97.207(g) to read as follows:


Sec.  97.207  Space station.

* * * * *
    (g) The license grantee of each space station must make two written 
pre-space station notifications to the International Bureau, FCC, 
Washington DC 20554. Each notification must be in accord with the 
provisions of Articles S9 and S11 of the ITU Radio Regulations.
    (1) The first notification is required no less than 27 months prior 
to initiating space station transmissions and must specify the 
information required by Appendix S4 and Resolution No. 642 of the 
International Telecommunication Union Radio Regulations. The first 
notification shall also include a description of the design and 
operational strategies the space station will use to mitigate orbital 
debris, including the following information:
    (i) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the amount of debris released in a planned manner during normal 
operations, and has assessed and limited the probability of the space 
station becoming a source of debris by collisions with small debris or 
meteoroids that could cause loss of control and prevent post-mission 
disposal;
    (ii) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of accidental explosions during and after 
completion of mission operations. This statement must include a 
demonstration that debris generation will not result from the 
conversion of energy sources on board the spacecraft into energy that 
fragments the spacecraft. Energy sources include chemical, pressure, 
and kinetic energy. This demonstration should address whether stored 
energy will be removed at the spacecraft's end of life, by depleting 
residual fuel and leaving all fuel line valves open, venting any 
pressurized system, leaving all batteries in a permanent discharge 
state, and removing any remaining source of stored energy, or through 
other equivalent procedures specifically disclosed in the application;
    (iii) A statement that the space station operator has assessed and 
limited the probability of the space station becoming a source of 
debris by collisions with large debris or other operational space 
stations. Where a space station will be launched into a low-Earth orbit 
that is identical, or very similar, to an orbit used by other space 
stations, the statement must include an analysis of the potential risk 
of collision and a description of what measures the space station 
operator plans to take to avoid in-orbit collisions. If the space 
station operator is relying on coordination with another system, the 
statement must indicate what steps have been taken to contact, and 
ascertain the likelihood of successful coordination of physical 
operations with, the other system. The statement must disclose the 
accuracy--if any--with which orbital parameters of non-geostationary 
satellite orbit space stations will be maintained, including apogee, 
perigee, inclination, and the right ascension of the ascending node(s). 
In the event that a system is not able to maintain orbital tolerances, 
i.e., it lacks a propulsion system for orbital maintenance, that fact 
should be included in the debris mitigation disclosure. Such systems 
must also indicate the anticipated evolution over time of the orbit of 
the proposed satellite or satellites. Where a space station requests 
the assignment of a geostationary-Earth orbit location, it must assess 
whether there are any known satellites located at, or reasonably 
expected to be located at, the requested orbital location, or assigned 
in the vicinity of that location, such that the station keeping volumes 
of the respective satellites might overlap. If so, the statement must 
include a statement as to the identities of those parties and the 
measures that will be taken to prevent collisions;
    (iv) A statement detailing the post-mission disposal plans for the 
space station at end of life, including the quantity of fuel--if any--
that will be reserved for post-mission disposal maneuvers. For 
geostationary-Earth orbit space stations, the statement must disclose 
the altitude selected for a post-mission disposal orbit and the 
calculations that are used in deriving the disposal altitude. The 
statement must also include a casualty risk assessment if planned post-
mission disposal involves atmospheric re-entry of the space station. In 
general, an assessment should include an estimate as to whether 
portions of the spacecraft will survive re-entry and reach the surface 
of the Earth, as well as an estimate of the resulting probability of 
human casualty.
    (2) The second notification is required no less than 5 months prior 
to initiating space station transmissions and must specify the 
information required by

[[Page 54589]]

Appendix S4 and Resolution No. 642 of the Radio Regulations.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 04-20362 Filed 9-8-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P