[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 84 (Friday, May 2, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18789-18800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-07643]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 26
[ET Docket No. 13-115; DA 25-270; FRS 289920]
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Announces Licensing and
Coordination Procedures for the Space Launch Service
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final action.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB
or Bureau) announces licensing and frequency coordination procedures
and data requirements for Space Launch Service licensees seeking
Commission authorization to perform non-Federal space launch operations
in the 2,025-2,110 MHz, 2,200-2,290 MHz, and 2,360-2,395 MHz bands.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 45 L St. NE, Washington,
DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark DeSantis, Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, Mobility Division, (202) 418-0678 or
mark.desantis@fcc.gov. For information regarding the PRA information
collection requirements, contact Cathy Williams, Office of Managing
Director, at 202-418-2918 or Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the WTB document, ET
Docket No. 13-115; DA 25-270, released on March 25, 2025. The released,
formatted version of this document is available at https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-270A1.pdf. Text and Microsoft
Word formats are also available (replace ``.pdf'' in the link with
``.txt'' or ``.docx'', respectively. Alternative formats are available
for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), by
[[Page 18790]]
sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission's Consumer
and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-
0432 (TTY).
Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), requires
that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice and
comment rulemakings, unless the agency certifies that the rule will
not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.'' If an agency files a
certification with a rulemaking, the certification must contain a
statement that provides a factual basis for its conclusion that there
will not be significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Accordingly, the Commission has prepared a Final
Regulatory Flexibility Certification (FRFC) certifying that the rule
and policy changes contained in this document will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
This document may contain new or modified information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13. All such requirements will be submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 3507(d)
of the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other federal agencies will be
invited to comment on any new or modified information collection
requirements contained in this proceeding. In addition, pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Bureau previously sought specific comment on how
the Commission might further reduce the information collection burden
for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Synopsis
By this document, as directed by the Commission in the Third Report
and Order (90 FR 11480-01, March 7, 2025) in this proceeding, the
Bureau announces licensing and coordination procedures for the
commercial Space Launch Service. On December 6, 2024, the Bureau issued
a Public Notice proposing and seeking comment on procedures for
licensees in the Space Launch Service to electronically register--under
a non-exclusive, nationwide license--launch sites; individual fixed,
base, itinerant, and mobile stations; and technical parameters of
launches that have been successfully coordinated with federal and non-
federal users. The Bureau also proposed and sought comment on
procedures for space launch licensees to complete federal and non-
federal coordination via a third-party frequency coordinator to be
selected at a later date.
After reviewing the record, we adopt the substantial majority of
our proposals, with certain modifications described below. This
approach is necessitated by the near-term timelines established by the
Launch Communications Act. Moreover, we recognize that key data
elements that we proposed be included in ULS registrations and provided
to the space launch frequency coordinator were requested by, and
coordinated with, the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) and associated federal government agency
stakeholders, in a collaborative effort to ensure that secondary
commercial space launch operations do not cause harmful interference to
incumbent federal users. Where appropriate and consistent with the
Second Report and Order (89 FR 63296-301, August 5, 2024) and Third
Report and Order in this proceeding, we adopt certain modified
proposals to further facilitate coordination of commercial space launch
operations with non-federal incumbent uses. We note that certain
procedures clarified through delegated authority in today's action may
be revised by future Bureau public notice if necessitated by specific
details associated with the future implementation of NTIA's automated
mechanism and if consistent with the Commission's Second Report and
Order and Third Report and Order, the authority delegated to the Bureau
thereunder, and any subsequent Commission action in this proceeding.
I. Background
In the Second Report and Order in this proceeding, the Commission
adopted a secondary allocation in the 2,025-2,110 MHz band for non-
federal Space Operation and, with respect to the 2,200-2,290 MHz band,
lifted a prior restriction limiting such operations to four sub-bands,
thus making the entire band available on a secondary basis for non-
federal Space Operation. These allocations are subject to various
conditions, including being limited to pre-launch testing and space
launch operations. The Commission also adopted a licensing framework
for these two bands under a new part 26 Space Launch Service. Through
that framework, eligible space launch operators seeking authorization
in the Space Launch Service will: (1) apply for and obtain a non-
exclusive nationwide license via the Commission's Universal Licensing
System (ULS); (2) register in ULS each launch site and each
corresponding station (fixed, base, itinerant, or mobile) that will be
used in their space launch operations; (3) complete a frequency
coordination process using a third-party frequency coordinator; and (4)
following successful coordination, register in ULS the technical and
operating parameters associated with each specific coordinated launch
prior to commencing launch operations. A space launch operator must
register the final coordinated technical parameters in ULS to be
authorized to commence launch operations.
The Launch Communications Act. Following the Commission's adoption
of the Second Report and Order, Congress enacted the Launch
Communications Act (LCA) on September 26, 2024. The LCA requires
Commission action with respect to three frequency bands: the 2,025-
2,110 MHz and 2,200-2,290 MHz bands that were the subject of the Second
Report and Order and the 2,360-2,395 MHz band, upon which the
Commission sought comment in the Second Further Notice and that was
addressed in the Third Report and Order. The LCA first requires the
Commission, within 90 days of the LCA's enactment, to allocate each of
these bands on a secondary basis for commercial space launches and
reentries and to complete any proceeding in effect related to the
adoption of service rules for these three bands. The Commission also
must issue, within 180 days of the LCA's enactment, new regulations to
streamline the process for granting authorizations for access to these
three bands. These regulations must provide for, among other things:
(1) authorizations that include multiple uses of the frequencies for
multiple launches and reentries from one or more private and federal
launch and reentry sites; (2) electronic filing and processing of
applications for access to such frequencies for commercial space
launches and reentries; and (3) improved coordination with NTIA to
increase the speed of review of applications for authorizations to
access frequencies for space launch and reentry through increased
automation similar to an approach currently used for the 70/80/90 GHz
bands.
Delegations of Authority. In the Second Report and Order, the
Commission delegated authority to the Bureau to issue a public notice
[[Page 18791]]
proposing and seeking comment on issues related to the licensing
framework for the Space Launch Service to refine the application
process and accommodate frequency coordination, including required
information for license registrations and frequency coordination
requests. The Commission also delegated authority to the Bureau to
issue a public notice seeking further comment on the circumstances
attending the designation of a single third-party space launch
coordinator, including a mechanism for selecting the frequency
coordinator.
The Bureau issued each of these public notices on December 6, 2024.
In the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN (89 FR 104502-01, December
23, 2024), the Bureau proposed licensing and frequency coordination
procedures and corresponding data requirements for the Space Launch
Service and sought comment on those proposals. The Bureau acknowledged
that its delegation of authority from the Second Report and Order
applied only to two of the three frequency bands identified in the LCA,
the 2,025-2,110 MHz and 2,200-2,290 MHz bands, as the Space Launch
Service at that time consisted solely of those two bands. However, the
Bureau anticipated that the Commission would benefit from the
development of a record with respect to the third band identified in
the LCA, the 2,360-2,395 MHz band, which had not yet been incorporated
into the Space Launch Service. Accordingly, the Bureau clarified that
its proposals, and any subsequent final action taken, would apply not
only to the 2,025-2,110 MHz and 2,200-2,290 MHz bands, but also to the
2,360-2,395 MHz band in the event the Commission took future action in
that band pursuant to the LCA and delegated additional authority to the
Bureau to clarify and establish procedures therein.
Third Report and Order. On December 23, 2024, the Commission
adopted a Third Report and Order in this proceeding that reallocated
the third band, 2,360-2,395 MHz, on a secondary basis for non-federal
Space Operation and incorporated the band into its part 26 Space Launch
Service. The Commission satisfied the 90-day LCA requirement to
complete any proceeding in effect through a combination of: (1)
previously adopting the Second Report and Order, thereby creating the
part 26 licensing framework for authorizing commercial space launches
and commercial space reentries and allocating the 2,025-2,110 MHz and
2,200-2,290 MHz bands for non-federal Space Operation on a secondary
basis and (2) adopting the Third Report and Order, which allocated the
2,360-2,395 MHz band on a secondary basis for non-federal Space
Operation, and extended the part 26 licensing framework to that band.
The Commission in the Third Report and Order also affirmed the Bureau's
proposals in the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN and delegated it
additional authority to specify, among other things, application,
licensing, registration, and frequency coordination procedures--
including the data requirements that must be included in frequency
coordination requests for space launch registrations--for all three
bands identified in the LCA.
In this document, we adopt final licensing and coordination
procedures for all three bands identified in the LCA: the 2,025-2,110
MHz, 2,200-2,290 MHz, and 2,360-2,395 MHz bands. As part of these final
procedures, we adopt, as required in the Commission's Second Report and
Order and Third Report and Order, data requirements for launch site,
individual station, and post-coordination launch registrations in ULS,
as well as information that licensees must submit to the space launch
frequency coordinator to facilitate coordination requests. In Section
II, we discuss the record and our decisions regarding required data
points and related issues in implementing the part 26 licensing
framework. In Section III, we set forth the specific data points
required for initial registration of launch sites and stations for a
particular launch, frequency coordination, and the registration of
coordinated technical parameters necessary to obtain authority to
conduct space launch operations under part 26 of the Commission's
rules.
II. Discussion
We received eight comments and seven ex parte letters in response
to the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN. We generally note in the
context of discussing particular issues whether any commenter addressed
those issues. We clarify from the outset, however, that commenters
raise a substantial number of issues regarding the Bureau's December
2024 proposals and appear to seek, through the Bureau's issuance of a
document on delegated authority, a fundamental paradigm shift of the
allocations and the licensing and coordination framework the Commission
established in the Second Report and Order and Third Report and Order.
We find that these requested revisions fall outside of the Bureau's
delegated authority established through two Commission actions in the
Space Launch Service proceeding. We note that, as of the release of
this document, the period for seeking reconsideration of the
Commission's Third Report and Order has not yet lapsed, and that the
Commission received no petitions for reconsideration of the
Commission's Second Report and Order. We also find that Commission
compliance with the near-term timeframes mandated by the LCA precludes
wholesale revisions to our proposed approach with respect to data
requirements. We therefore adopt, as discussed in detail below, the
substantial majority of our proposed data requirements, with certain
modifications based on record input.
A. Launch Site and Station Registrations
Launch Site Registrations. The Second Report and Order established
that a Space Launch Service licensee must register the launch site to
be used in a particular launch in ULS under its non-exclusive,
nationwide license. In the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, the
Bureau proposed the following data requirements for launch site
registrations in ULS:
1. Launch site name and launch designation (if applicable);
2. Geographic coordinates referenced to NAD83 (i.e., lat/long);
3. Address; and
4. Whether the site is an FAA-licensed commercial site or federal
site.
We received no comments on the data requirements for registering
launch sites in ULS and adopt these requirements, while adding
potential categories for private, exclusive use sites and for those
that are both commercial and federal sites.
Fixed, Base, Itinerant, and Mobile Station Registrations. As
established in the Second Report and Order, a Space Launch Service
licensee must register the fixed, base, itinerant, and mobile stations
needed to support a launch in ULS under its nationwide, nonexclusive
license. Through delegated authority, the Bureau sought to provide
clarity for applicants and, after coordinating with NTIA, proposed one
set of data requirements for itinerant and mobile station
registrations, and a separate set for fixed and base station
registrations.
Commenters are divided regarding our data proposals for station
registration. Aerospace and Flight Test Radio Coordinating Council,
Inc. (AFTRCC) generally supports our proposal and states that all of
the information required could be useful in analyzing interference
potential. It requests that we require maximum antenna height above
ground level (AGL) for itinerant and mobile station
[[Page 18792]]
registration. The Society of Broadcast Engineers (SBE) requests that we
require the height AGL to the radiation center when the antenna is
pointed along the horizon for fixed and base stations, and the tracking
arc path for each transmit station. Conversely, United Launch Alliance
(ULA) requests that we significantly reduce the required data for
initial station registration in ULS, arguing that only the frequency
band, center frequency, emission bandwidth, output power, and antenna
gain are needed for analyzing interference potential. For receive-only
stations, ULA argues that only the antenna's latitude and longitude are
needed, and that the receivers' antenna gain-to-noise temperature ratio
should be optional. ULA also requests that the Bureau eliminate any
requirement for duplicative and extraneous submissions for station
registration.
We agree with launch operators that eliminating certain data we
proposed for initial station registration in ULS would reduce
administrative burdens and serve the public interest. To promote
streamlining, we find that the specific antenna details we proposed to
require for initial station registration should not be required to be
submitted at that point. This data is more appropriate for direct
submission to the space launch frequency coordinator, as its essential
purpose is to enable frequency coordinators to assess a proposed space
launch operation and its potential to cause harmful interference to the
federal and non-federal users sharing the bands. AFTRCC, the incumbent
coordinator in the 2,360-2,395 MHz band, states that all of the data we
proposed to require in the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN could
assist the space launch frequency coordinator and the incumbent
coordinators in assessing the potential for harmful interference. SBE,
the incumbent coordinator in the 2,025-2,110 MHz band, also supports
the proposed level of detail. We therefore require licensees to provide
antenna details in frequency coordination requests for submission to
the space launch frequency coordinator, as discussed below, but we
decline to adopt our proposal that would require that data also to be
submitted for initial station registrations in ULS. We reflect this
change in the final data requirements set forth in Section III below.
Regarding more specific antenna details, SBE requests that we require
the height AGL to the radiation center when the antenna is pointed
along the horizon for initial ULS station registration, so that the
data becomes available in frequency coordination requests. AFTRCC
requests that we require maximum antenna height AGL for itinerant and
mobile station registration because that data will be a factor in
dictating the zone of potential interference to an incumbent station.
We find the data requested by each party is not necessary at the
initial station registration stage, but would assist in assessing the
potential for harmful interference, and is thus more appropriate for
frequency coordination purposes.
AFTRCC recommends that we add to our list of required parameters
the expected range of launch trajectories from the launch site,
indicating that such information could assist incumbent users in the
band in identifying the areas in which potential interference will be
received. SBE requests that we require the tracking arc path for the
registration of each transmit station in ULS. Space launch operators,
however, argue that launch trajectory information is confidential and
proprietary and therefore inappropriate for the public ULS database. In
order to further streamline, we find it unnecessary to require launch
trajectory data for initial ULS registrations, as this information is
most beneficial at the frequency coordination stage for assessing the
potential for harmful interference. By requiring trajectory information
in the frequency coordination process, rather than as a data field in
initial ULS registration, we maintain consistency with the current part
5 licensing process, where such information is provided to federal
agency stakeholders and not included as a data field in FCC Form 442
for an experimental license or in an application for experimental
special temporary authority (STA). We therefore need not reach the
issue of prospective confidentiality of this information in ULS. We
note, however, that in today's companion document regarding criteria
and a selection mechanism for the space launch frequency coordinator,
we take steps to ensure that information provided by space launch
operators to the frequency coordinator will be secured and only shared
with appropriate stakeholders, unless otherwise required by applicable
law.
Launch Vehicle Registrations. In the Licensing and Coordination
Comment PN, we proposed that launch vehicles be registered as mobile
stations, but with additional technical details beyond those required
for terrestrial mobile stations. We proposed data requirements for
launch vehicle registrations consisting of the launch vehicle name,
geographic coordinates of the launch site, location of transmitter on
launch vehicle, and antenna details.
SpaceX opposes our proposal to treat launch vehicles as mobile
stations, arguing that installing a mobile station on a launch vehicle
does not convert the vehicle itself into a mobile station and seeking
clarification that the launch vehicle itself is not a mobile station.
SpaceX states that the Communications Act, the Commission's rules, and
the ITU Radio Regulations treaty clearly distinguish between a ``mobile
station''--i.e., the radio equipment--and the platform on which that
station is installed, whether a land vehicle, maritime vessel,
aircraft, spacecraft, or building. SpaceX further argues that
``maintaining this delineation between the radio equipment and the
underlying launch vehicle will help ensure that the Commission's Part
26 licensing regime remains squarely within the Commission's statutory
jurisdiction without duplicating or conflicting with the
responsibilities of other agencies, including the Federal Aviation
Administration.''
We agree with SpaceX that clarification is warranted and confirm
that, consistent with Commission authority, licensees will be required
to register as a mobile station each radio attached to the launch
vehicle used in the specific launch, and provide the details as
specified in Section III below, but not independently register the
actual launch vehicle. We find this approach consistent with the Second
Report and Order, in which the Commission discussed registering mobile
stations associated with the launch vehicle, as opposed to the actual
vehicle, and we therefore condense the data required for mobile
stations into a single section.
Requests for Bandwidth in Excess of 5 Megahertz. Licensees in the
Space Launch Service are permitted to choose their own bandwidth, up to
and including 5 megahertz. However, licensees may request a bandwidth
exceeding 5 megahertz for a particular station where they can
demonstrate, on a case-by-case basis, why a larger bandwidth is
necessary ``to accomplish the specific telemetry, tracking, or command
operation(s),'' including an ``explanation of why the operator's
requirements cannot be satisfied using a bandwidth of 5 megahertz or
less.'' As required in the Second Report and Order, a licensee seeking
to operate in excess of 5 megahertz bandwidth must submit its
justification as part of the registration process for a launch. Given
the need to review the submission, the Bureau necessarily proposed that
such a
[[Page 18793]]
justification be included in the initial ULS registration.
In both the Second Report and Order and Third Report and Order, the
Commission cautioned that the applicant's justification for exceeding 5
megahertz would be carefully assessed and would not be routinely
granted. The Commission also noted in both Orders that a launch
operator's ability to operate in excess of 5 megahertz would be
dependent on its ability to coordinate such a bandwidth, which could be
difficult given the congested nature of all three bands. In the
Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, we proposed that the space
launch frequency coordinator would not be required to coordinate
requests for bandwidth in excess of 5 megahertz unless the Commission
first indicated to the space launch frequency coordinator that a
licensee's justification provided with a registration for a specific
launch is complete and provides the fulsome explanation required
pursuant to Sec. 26.301 of the Commission's rules. We sought comment
on this proposal.
AFTRCC agrees that the space launch frequency coordinator should
not be required to process such requests until the Commission first
indicates that the justification complies with Sec. 26.301 of the
Commission's rules. ULA states the licensee should not have to repeat
the approval process for future launches if the justification and
associated equipment remains the same. Virgin requests that the Bureau
clarify that the space launch frequency coordinator is permitted to
grant requests for greater than 5 megahertz, as the coordinator will
have a ``day-to-day understanding of spectrum use'' and will know,
during deconfliction on a mission-by-mission basis, whether more
bandwidth can be granted.
As proposed, we will not require the space launch frequency
coordinator to coordinate requests for bandwidth in excess of 5
megahertz unless and until it has been notified by the Commission that
the licensee's justification, as provided in its initial station
registration for a specific launch, is complete and complies with Sec.
26.301 of the Commission's rules. Although Virgin seeks to afford the
space launch frequency coordinator increased authority, the Second
Report and Order and Third Report and Order foreclose the Bureau from
designating the coordinator the sole arbiter of whether a justification
for increased bandwidth complies with Commission rules. Moreover, we
caution that a Commission finding that the accompanying justification
meets the Commission's rules does not guarantee that the space launch
frequency coordinator can accommodate each request, which, as the
Commission clearly highlighted, may be precluded in certain
circumstances due to interference concerns raised in the frequency
coordination process. We find our proposed approach to be consistent
with the Second Report and Order, in which the Commission stated that
requests for greater bandwidth would be carefully assessed on a case-
by-case basis and not routinely granted. Although ULA disagrees with
this approach, citing the need for greater flexibility, we find that
adopting our proposal increases efficiency by avoiding a scenario where
the space launch frequency coordinator expends significant resources
coordinating a space launch request with an assumed parameter, only for
the request to be later deemed noncompliant with the Commission's
rules.
ULA's proposal for submitting one justification covering multiple
launches is also foreclosed by the Second Report and Order's case-by-
case approach, which specified that the Commission was ``allowing
licensees to exceed the 5 megahertz bandwidth to the extent they can
demonstrate such additional bandwidth is necessary for a given
launch.'' We find merit, however, in streamlining submissions where
possible, as ULA suggests. With respect to emission bandwidth, we
therefore will require a space launch operator to only specify the
emission bandwidth in the relevant required fields set forth in Section
III below, rather than submit an excess bandwidth justification in each
of the multiple fields requiring emission bandwidth. In the initial
station registration in ULS, we will instead require that a
justification for greater than five megahertz be submitted as a single
attachment, which must identify each station for which increased
bandwidth is sought. AFTRCC requests that the justification for greater
than five megahertz bandwidth detail the specific throughputs and other
communications requirements for the launch. Although space launch
operators are free to provide this information in support of a request
for excess bandwidth, we do not mandate that such information be
included, as it does not directly relate to analysis of interference
potential. Rather, we require a licensee's justification for larger
bandwidths to include the details required in Sec. 26.301 of the
Commission's rules.
B. Frequency Coordination
Federal coordination is required in all three bands in the Space
Launch Service. Specifically, the frequency coordinator is required to
initiate coordination with NTIA by providing the licensee's launch site
and station registrations with their corresponding technical and
operational parameters to initiate the coordination process for each
proposed launch. As noted in the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN,
the LCA requires the Commission to improve coordination with NTIA
within 180 days of enactment, including coordination to increase
automation similar to the automation described in the Commission's
service rules for the 70/80/90 GHz service.
In the 2,025-2,110 MHz and 2,360-2,395 MHz bands, non-federal
coordination is also required. In the 2,025-2,110 MHz band, the
frequency coordinator is required to initiate site-specific frequency
coordination with the local Broadcast Auxiliary Service (BAS) frequency
coordinator, including the provision of all necessary technical and
operational parameters for each space launch licensee, to protect BAS,
Cable Television Relay Service (CARS), and Local Television
Transmission Service (LTTS) operations, as well as federal entities
that have completed coordination with the BAS frequency coordinator. In
the 2,360-2,395 MHz band, the frequency coordinator must initiate a
post-grant coordination request for site-specific coordination with the
part 87 frequency coordinating committee as well as federal entities
that have completed coordination with that committee.
Data Requirements for Coordination Requests. Following coordination
with NTIA and federal agency partners, we proposed in the Licensing and
Coordination Comment PN a list of data requirements for frequency
coordination requests that would apply to the frequency coordination
process in all three bands. We noted that the Commission anticipated
that a licensee would identify the following for coordination requests:
(1) the specific coordinates of fixed, base, and itinerant stations
(e.g., latitude and longitude); (2) frequency channels; (3) launch
trajectories; (4) launch window or planned launch date; and (5) any
other technical and operational information (e.g., antenna
characteristics, power levels, emission designators) needed by a third-
party frequency coordinator to submit the frequency coordination
request to the relevant non-federal and federal entities.
In proposing data requirements, we anticipated that the Commission
would, consistent with the LCA, reallocate the 2,360-2,395 MHz band on
a secondary basis for Space Operation, incorporate it into the part 26
Space Launch Service,
[[Page 18794]]
and require Space Launch Service licensees to coordinate their
operations with part 87 non-federal flight test users. In the event the
Commission did reallocate the 2,360-2,395 MHz band as anticipated and
require coordination with non-federal flight test users, we proposed
incorporating the data that the part 87 frequency advisory committee
currently requires into the part 26 frequency coordination data
requirements. Accordingly, we proposed data requirements for
coordination requests in all three bands that include data currently
required in the part 87 frequency advisory committee flight test
coordination process, the data required in the STA process currently
used to authorize space launch communications under part 5 of the
Commission's rules, and the aforementioned data points the Commission
anticipated would be required. We sought comment on whether any
additional data should be required, and whether the proposal provided a
third-party space launch frequency coordinator with sufficient
information to coordinate launches with federal and non-federal users
in all three LCA bands.
In response to our proposals, several commenters suggest
modifications and clarifications. As noted above in the context of
initial registration, SBE requests that we require for each transmit
station the height AGL to the antenna radiation center when the antenna
is pointed along the horizon, and for each fixed and base station the
projected space launch tracking arc path. Blue Origin and Virgin
request that we clarify that some data elements required for
coordination requests will not be applicable to suborbital launch
providers. ULA requests that we reduce the required data for
coordination requests to eight elements, which it claims would be
sufficient for the use of simplified propagation models for analyzing
interference potential. ULA asserts that the information required under
our proposal can be obtained from other federal agencies. ULA also
submits that equipment suppliers should be responsible for providing
emission details for each designator of each transmitter, not the
launch providers.
After review of the record, we find it in the public interest to
take the following approach. First, we require as a data point for each
transmit station the height AGL to the antenna radiation center when
the antenna is pointed along the horizon, and for each fixed and base
station the projected space launch tracking arc path. We agree with SBE
that this data would be useful in analyzing interference potential in
three congested bands. Second, we agree with Blue Origin and Virgin
that certain required data would be inapplicable to suborbital launch
providers. Accordingly, we clarify that launch operators proposing
suborbital launches need not provide the following data tailored for
orbital launch operations: (1) list of objects to achieve orbit during
launch operation, (2) orbital location (orbit insertion), and (3)
duration of transmission(s), to include on/off time (nominal and
maximum durations) for each transmitter and receiving station(s)
corresponding to the on/off times.
With respect to comments requesting revisions that would
substantially eliminate data requirements, in particular ULA's
conclusion that just eight specific datapoints are sufficient for
simplified propagation models, we reiterate that the proposed data
elements were requested by NTIA following federal agency stakeholder
input, with a focus on preventing interference to incumbent federal
operations from secondary space launch operations in these congested
bands. Further, two additional incumbent frequency coordinators concur
with our proposal to require this level of detail in coordination
requests. We therefore do not find it appropriate to adopt commenter
suggestions to significantly reduce the data required for coordination
requests, as requiring this level of information can also facilitate
expedited, successful coordination where feasible. ULA also submits
that certain data needed for site and station registration and
frequency coordination should be manually retrieved by the frequency
coordinator from equipment suppliers and federal agencies, e.g., the
FAA. We find such an approach administratively inefficient and
inconsistent with the Commission's part 26 rules, which require the
submission of data by the space launch operator licensee.
Next, Virgin Galactic requests that we enable licensees with high
flight cadences of similar, if not nearly identical profiles, an option
to submit ``blanket mission requests'' that cover several missions over
a longer period of time. We find that the submission of a single
``blanket mission request'' seeking authorization of ``several
missions'' with ``nearly identical flight profiles'' over a period of
time is impermissible under the part 26 rules, which require frequency
coordination on a per-launch basis. We clarify that licensees may
submit, with their initial ULS registration, information regarding
multiple launch sites and related station information associated with
multiple launches for which actual authority to launch is sought. In
conjunction, space launch licensees are free to submit multiple
frequency coordination requests to the space launch frequency
coordinator covering these multiple launches, provided each request
seeks authorization and provides technical details for a single planned
launch. Licensee are cautioned against registering and seeking
frequency coordination for speculative launches.
Finally, similar to the argument raised in the context of initial
registration of data in ULS, space launch providers emphasize the
confidential and proprietary nature of the data required for frequency
coordination requests, especially the required launch trajectory data.
ULA asks that we address how the space launch frequency coordinator
should handle, preserve, and safeguard launch service provider data.
Currently, various technical parameters associated with a typical space
launch are available for public review in the Commission's Experimental
Licensing System (ELS), either through a filed application or through
the grant instrument authorizing launch. We find it in the public
interest, as noted in the Frequency Coordinator Selection Public
Notice, to require applicants seeking to be the space launch frequency
coordinator to demonstrate in their applications how they will secure
the data provided by space launch operators.
Coordination Request Filing Destinations. In the Licensing and
Coordination Comment PN, we proposed different filing destinations for
coordination requests based on the band(s) for which the licensee seeks
authorization. To complete non-federal coordination in the 2,025-2,110
MHz band, we proposed that the space launch frequency coordinator
submit the coordination request to the local SBE frequency coordinator.
We also proposed filing destinations for requesting federal
coordination. For coordination requests that involve the 2,025-2,110
MHz and/or 2,200-2,290 MHz bands, we proposed requiring the frequency
coordinator to submit frequency coordination requests to the NTIA
Office of Spectrum Management's Frequency Assignment Branch. For
coordination requests in the 2,360-2,395 MHz band, we proposed that the
space launch frequency coordinator submit coordination requests to the
applicable Area Frequency Coordinator (AFC) listed in Annex D, Table 2
of NTIA's Manual of Regulations and Procedures for Federal Radio
Frequency Management. We also recognized that some coordination
requests might
[[Page 18795]]
combine 2,360-2,395 MHz with 2,025-2,110 MHz and/or 2,200-2,290 MHz,
which could require routing to different destinations. For that reason,
we sought comment on whether, in those instances, federal coordination
requests should be directly submitted to NTIA's Office of Spectrum
Management's Frequency Assignment Branch.
No commenters addressed the proposed filing destinations for
initiating frequency coordination. Following further coordination with
NTIA, and to reduce administrative burdens, we find it appropriate to
adopt a single filing destination for all federal frequency
coordination requests involving space launch frequencies. Specifically,
the space launch frequency coordinator shall submit requests for
federal coordination involving any of the three Space Launch Service
bands, or any combination thereof, to the NTIA Office of Spectrum
Management's Frequency Assignment Branch. For non-federal coordination
requests in the 2,025-2,110 MHz band, we adopt our proposal that the
space launch frequency coordinator submit coordination requests to the
local SBE frequency coordinator. As noted above, after the Bureau
issued the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, the Commission
adopted the Third Report and Order and established non-federal
frequency coordination requirements for the 2,360-2,395 MHz band.
Specifically, the Commission required licensees to complete non-
federal, site-specific coordination with the part 87 frequency
coordinating committee, which is currently AFTRCC. We clarify that, to
initiate non-federal coordination in the 2,360-2,395 MHz band,
licensees must follow AFTRCC's current practice and procedure
applicable to part 87 frequency coordination requests, which are
submitted to AFTRCC via its online coordination portal.
Timing for Submission of Coordination Requests to Space Launch
Frequency Coordinator and Format. With respect to the timing of the
filing of coordination requests, we sought comment in the Licensing and
Coordination Comment PN on a proposal in all three bands that would
require the space launch frequency coordinator to submit coordination
requests to incumbent coordinators 60 days in advance of a proposed
launch date or window.
Commenters hold varying views regarding the timeframe for the
submission of frequency coordination requests. AFTRCC requests that the
space launch frequency coordinator receive the coordination request 80
days in advance of launch to review prior to submitting to incumbent
coordinators, but otherwise supports our proposed timeframes for
submission to the incumbent coordinators. Given the anticipated
increased cadence of commercial space launches, space launch operators
caution that a mandatory timeframe could result in an increased need
for re-coordination requests as launch parameters and conditions
change. SpaceX disagrees with the imposition of any minimum timeframe
for filing coordination requests, arguing that most coordinations can
be completed ``within just a few days.'' SpaceX believes that the
Bureau should forgo a specific timeframe and instead establish an
expectation that parties will begin coordination as early as
practicable before launch to avoid the need for re-coordination,
coupled with a mutual requirement to coordinate in good faith and
conclude coordination expeditiously to meet anticipated launch dates.
More recently, however, SpaceX argued that ``setting an initial
coordination timeframe of five-to-ten days before launch'' would be
``an appropriate means to ensure high-fidelity coordination information
while reducing the extent to which parties must re-coordinate prior to
launch.'' ULA argues that ``the space launch industry does not
typically manifest 60 days from launch.'' Blue Origin indicates that
flexibility with launch dates and times is needed for a 60-day
requirement to be practicable. Virgin Galactic claims the 60-day notice
period is too long to support quick turnaround times and recommends a
15- or 30-day notice period instead.
We clarify that our focus is on the timeframe for space launch
operators to submit coordination requests to the space launch frequency
coordinator, not to the incumbent coordinators. Incumbent coordinators
include NTIA and related federal AFCs, SBE, and AFTRCC. After review of
the record, to provide increased flexibility, we do not herein mandate
timeframes for the submission of coordination requests to the incumbent
coordinators. We also do not mandate a specific timeframe for the
submission of coordination requests from the space launch frequency
coordinator to the incumbent coordinators. We note that part 26
licensees are required by Commission rule to initiate frequency
coordination by submitting coordination requests to the space launch
frequency coordinator, not the incumbent coordinators.
For these same reasons, we also decline to establish a fixed
timeframe within which a space launch operator must submit coordination
requests to the space launch frequency coordinator, such that the
failure to submit by that date would result in an automatic rejection
of the request as, in effect, late-filed. Rather, in seeking to
facilitate successful launches, we clarify that a space launch
frequency coordination request submitted to the space launch frequency
coordinator 60 days or more from the launch date or start of a primary
launch window would best facilitate effective coordination with
relevant incumbent coordinators to prevent harmful interference in
admittedly congested bands. We do anticipate, as space launch operators
request, that the space launch frequency coordinator will exercise good
faith and reasonable diligence to process a request expeditiously upon
receipt by promptly reviewing the data and submitting the request to
applicable incumbent coordinators for consideration. Although we
recognize space launch operator interest in limiting the need for re-
coordination requests based on, for example, changes to launch
parameters as a launch date approaches, we must balance that concern
with a compelling need for the space launch frequency coordinator to
coordinate with, in many circumstances, multiple stakeholders. We
therefore caution that a failure to submit a frequency coordination
request to the space launch frequency coordinator 60 days or more from
the anticipated launch date or start of a primary launch window may
leave insufficient time for the coordinator to fully engage all
relevant incumbent coordinators, whether federal or non-federal, and
receive critical input necessary to process the request prior to the
requested launch date.
With respect to the format and method for space launch operators to
submit the required data elements set forth in Section III below for
frequency coordination, we seek to provide flexibility for the space
launch frequency coordinator. We therefore will permit the coordinator,
once selected, to establish and communicate to space launch operators
the appropriate details for receipt of this information to commence the
frequency coordination process.
Timing of Response from Incumbent Frequency Coordinators. In the
Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, we sought comment on requiring a
response from incumbent SBE frequency coordinators to the space launch
frequency coordinator within 15 days following receipt of the
coordination request. We received no comment directly addressing this
proposed timeframe, though commenters generally seek flexibility
[[Page 18796]]
where possible in the coordination process. We find it appropriate to
afford incumbent coordinators such flexibility in evaluating space
launch requests and accompanying data, and to manage their frequency
coordination services. To further streamline our requirements, and as
we anticipate that incumbent coordinators will respond to the space
launch coordinator as expeditiously as possible, we do not find it
necessary at this time to mandate a specific timeframe for incumbent
coordinators to respond to the space launch frequency coordinator. If
we find, after gaining experience with the part 26 framework, that
there is a need to establish a mandatory timeframe for responding to
frequency coordination requests, we may revisit this timing issue.
Although we do not impose a timeframe for incumbent coordinators to
respond to frequency coordination requests, we reiterate that licensees
must obtain consent from relevant incumbent coordinators through the
space launch frequency coordinator, as discussed below, to be able to
register technical parameters and obtain authorization to commence
space launch operations. The space launch frequency coordinator has no
authority to independently authorize such operations.
Space Launch Frequency Coordinator Response to Licensee. In the
Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, we proposed that the space
launch frequency coordinator respond in writing to the licensee with
the results of the coordination upon its completion, including any
conditions, restrictions, or other limitations. AFTRCC agrees that, for
denials of coordination requests, the space launch frequency
coordinator must provide an explanation to the licensee. Although some
commenters seek implementation of a revised paradigm that would alter
the interactions between the space launch frequency coordinator and
space launch licensees, no party opposes this proposal as specifically
applied to the part 26 licensing framework adopted in the Second Report
and Order. We therefore adopt our proposal, finding it an appropriate
measure to facilitate prompt frequency coordination with clearly
communicated approved parameters and related conditions, if any, of a
space launch.
Non-Federal Coordination in the 2,360-2,395 MHz Band. In the 2,360-
2,395 MHz band, the space launch frequency coordinator is required to
initiate a post-grant coordination request for site-specific
coordination with the part 87 frequency coordinating committee, as well
as federal entities that have completed coordination with that
committee. In the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, we anticipated
that the space launch frequency coordinator, in coordinating with the
part 87 frequency advisory committee, would consider all stations
within 320 kilometers (200 miles), which is the required procedure for
part 87 flight test coordination. However, we proposed that the space
launch frequency coordinator have the ability to expand that radius at
its discretion if necessary for analyzing interference potential. After
considering all such stations and coordinating with the part 87
frequency advisory committee, the space launch frequency coordinator
would then propose necessary changes in technical parameters to
minimize the risk of harmful interference to non-federal flight test
stations. We sought comment on this proposal.
AFTRCC supports our proposal to allow the space launch frequency
coordinator, in coordinating with the part 87 frequency advisory
committee, to consider flight test stations outside the 320-kilometer
(200-mile) radius. It states that the space launch and incumbent
frequency coordinators having the ability to consider additional
stations is essential to protecting primary flight test operations in
the band because the geographic zone of potential interference from the
space launch vehicle expands as the vehicle gains altitude. SpaceX
disagrees, arguing that requiring deconfliction over an area larger
than 200 miles could needlessly create uncertainty, delay, and
additional burdens on coordinating parties, particularly as the launch
rate increases.
Based on the record, we find it unnecessary at this time to revise
the part 87 requirement as applied to part 26 space launch operations,
as we have not received complaints of harmful interference to incumbent
stations resulting from space launch operator use, authorized through
parts 5 or 87 of the Commission's rules, of center frequencies 2,364.5
MHz, 2,370.5 MHz, and/or 2,382.5 MHz. These three frequencies are
currently available within the 2,360-2,395 MHz band for telemetry and
associated telecommand operations of expendable and re-usable launch
vehicles. We therefore maintain the requirement that the space launch
frequency coordinator consider relevant stations within a 320-kilometer
(200-mile) radius in its interference analysis. This approach is
subject to re-evaluation in the event complaints arise from impacted
primary incumbent facilities, potentially resulting from the
anticipated increased cadence of commercial space launch operations,
and given the part 26 framework that provides access to frequencies on
a secondary basis across the entire 2,360-2,395 MHz band.
Automated Federal Coordination Procedures. The LCA requires the
Commission to improve NTIA coordination to increase the speed of review
of space launch applications for authorization in all three bands,
including automation similar to that required in the service rules for
the 70/80/90 GHz service. In order to comply with the LCA, we proposed
to require the space launch frequency coordinator to complete federal
coordination in all three LCA bands using the automated coordination
mechanism to be developed by NTIA.
Commenters support this requirement, with no commenter opposing
this approach to complying with this particular LCA mandate. We adopt
our proposal to require the space launch frequency coordinator to use
the NTIA automated mechanism when available. We conclude that taking
this action, in addition to ensuring from the outset that the space
launch frequency coordinator has the ability to undertake automated
frequency coordination, fulfills the 180-day LCA obligation to increase
automation in NTIA coordination. The Bureau will subsequently announce
the availability of the NTIA automated mechanism and any necessary
adjusted data components and filing procedures resulting therefrom,
which may include action through rulemaking, with notice and comment to
the extent required or desired, and to the extent consistent with the
Commission's delegation to the Bureau.
Coordination Disputes. We received comments seeking clarification
on circumstances in which there is disagreement during frequency
coordination among the launch operators, incumbent coordinators, and/or
space launch frequency coordinator. Blue Origin states there should be
a clearly defined escalation path made available to promote swift
resolution in the event users are unable to reach a solution during the
coordination process. AFTRCC asks that we clarify that the space launch
frequency coordinator does not supplant the ultimate approval authority
of the incumbent coordinators. It also states that, where the space
launch frequency coordinator disagrees with the incumbent coordinator's
denial or imposition of mitigation measures as a condition to a
coordination request, the two should be required to meet expeditiously
to resolve differences. According to AFTRCC, the Commission
[[Page 18797]]
should be notified if a disagreement persists, but the incumbent
coordinator's position should take precedence.
In the Second Report and Order, the Commission established the role
of the space launch frequency coordinator in Sec. 26.202 of the
Commission's rules. Rather than indicate that the space launch
frequency coordinator would approve or deny frequency coordinator
requests following consultation with incumbent coordinators, the
Commission specified that the space launch frequency coordinator was to
serve as both a clearinghouse and an intermediary in negotiating
operational parameters with incumbent coordinators. The Commission
found that a single third-party coordinator, armed with knowledge of
the operational guidelines imposed by prior coordination, could cross-
reference that data with new requests for coordination in real time and
act as an intermediary with SBE and NTIA to speed up the review
process. We reiterate that part 26 licensees, working through the space
launch frequency coordinator, must obtain consent from the incumbent
coordinators, and that the space launch frequency coordinator has no
authority to independently authorize operations. Consistent with the
Second Report and Order, we clarify that the space launch frequency
coordinator's role is limited to acting as a facilitator and an
intermediary in negotiating with incumbent coordinators.
We recognize that certain circumstances may result in a lack of
consensus in the frequency coordination process, particularly as launch
cadences and congestion increase in the three bands available for space
launch operations on a secondary basis. The Commission anticipated
these circumstances and specified that, should a conflict arise, the
affected coordinators are ``jointly responsible for taking action to
resolve the conflict, up to and including notifying the Commission and
NTIA that a launch request must be denied.'' The Commission's language
makes clear that it anticipated that a launch coordination request may
in fact be denied where an incumbent coordinator(s) and the space
launch frequency coordinator are unable to resolve a dispute and agree
on operational and technical parameters, conditions, or limitations. We
find the Second Report and Order and Third Report and Order preclude
our adoption of a dispute resolution system in which licensees are
afforded a remedy for the denial of a coordination request.
Changes to Launch Parameters. Section 26.202 of the Commission's
rules states that any changes to the technical and operational
parameters for a launch that occur after completion of post-grant
frequency coordination also require coordination, and that these
changes must be provided to the space launch frequency coordinator to
initiate an updated coordination. In the Licensing and Coordination
Comment PN, we sought comment on procedures for licensees that seek to
change launch parameters close in time to a scheduled launch date.
Specifically, we sought comment on whether we should establish a cut-
off date for licensees to modify launch parameters that have previously
been coordinated, given that a cut-off date would need to afford
sufficient time for re-coordination of a launch. We also sought comment
on establishing a separate cut-off date for changes solely related to
the coordinated launch date/time, potentially to accommodate weather or
technical delays, that seek no changes to technical parameters.
Space launch operators unanimously advocate that the Commission not
establish a cut-off date for coordinating changes to launch parameters,
and no incumbent coordinator advocates for such a cut-off date. AFTRCC
submits that the space launch frequency coordinator should be under no
greater obligation than to exercise good faith and reasonable diligence
to process a request for revised coordination, noting that such
requests could be submitted only a few days prior to launch. SBE
acknowledges that non-substantive changes to launch parameters do not
require a new coordination request and asks that we require licensees
to provide the coordinator any updates to launch particulars and timing
information as soon as reasonably practicable once they are known.
Finally, commenters agree that changes solely to launch date and time
should not require re-coordination.
We agree with commenters that establishing a cut-off date for
coordinating changes to launch parameters would not provide the
flexibility needed to conduct commercial space launch operations,
particularly with an anticipated increase in cadence, and we decline to
adopt such a deadline. As suggested by AFTRCC, we instead will require
space launch operators to submit a revised coordination request to the
space launch frequency coordinator as soon as practicable, and the
space launch frequency coordinator must exercise good faith and
reasonable diligence to expeditiously process such a request upon
receipt.
We further clarify that, based on record support, a space launch
operator is not required to submit a new coordination request with all
associated data elements to the space launch frequency coordinator for
changes to a specific scheduled launch registered in ULS that do not
change the technical parameters of that launch. Rather, in
circumstances solely requiring a change to the date/time of a launch if
set for a particular date or a date change that falls outside a
coordinated and registered launch window, a space launch operator will
be permitted to notify the space launch frequency coordinator as soon
as practicable of the requested new date, using a format to be
determined by the space launch frequency coordinator following
selection. Under the current part 5 experimental STA process, STAs are
typically granted for a 6-month period, which provides flexibility in
the event a launch date must be changed. We understand that, in the
part 5 context, an update to a targeted launch date/time without
technical parameter changes is typically completed following 48 hours'
notice. As noted above, the space launch frequency coordinator has no
authority to independently approve or deny launch parameters. We afford
the space launch frequency coordinator the flexibility to coordinate
changes solely related to the previously coordinated launch date/time
with incumbent frequency coordinators on an expedited basis, without
the licensee submitting a new coordination request. In the event the
requested new date/time can be accommodated, the space launch frequency
coordinator must communicate the result to the space launch operator
which, to promote transparency and remain consistent with the Second
Report and Order, is then required to update the previously approved
registered coordination parameters in ULS, as discussed below, to
reflect the new launch date/window. After the updated registration is
accepted in ULS, the space launch operator is authorized to conduct the
space launch operation.
Finally, we separately sought comment on a proposal that space
launch licensees seeking to operate in the 2,360-2,395 MHz band,
following coordination and registration of technical parameters in ULS
and absent a change in technical parameters, be required to provide
pre-launch notification to both the space launch frequency coordinator
and the part 87 frequency advisory committee 96 hours in advance of the
commencement of the registered launch window. We asked whether the 96-
hour notification would provide sufficient notice for flight test
[[Page 18798]]
operators. AFTRCC and Virgin Galactic support such a requirement. SBE
notes that a launch notification is also typically provided for space
launch operations in the 2,025-2,110 MHz band. SBE explains that the
launch notification is typically provided several days prior to a
coordinated launch, outlining the particulars of the launch, such as
launch windows, orbital parameters, and event sequencing. Thus, the
launch notification is not currently relied upon as a substitute for
frequency coordination requests, but as a supplement. SBE supports
adoption of this format to the Space Launch Service.
Above, we clarified the applicable procedures for re-coordination
of changed launch technical parameters, as well as afforded the
flexibility to provide notice to the space launch frequency coordinator
for launch date and time changes without changes to coordinated
parameters. We find that these clarifications to the rules adopted in
the Second Report and Order and Third Report and Order are sufficient
to provide clarity to space launch stakeholders regarding the scope,
limitations, and responsibilities surrounding a space launch. To
facilitate a streamlined process, we find it unnecessary at this time
to further mandate a separate, supplemental launch notification
procedure specific to any of the three secondary space launch bands.
The record makes clear that certain procedures, not currently required
under Commission rules, have been developed to supplement interactions
between incumbent coordinators and space launch operators (e.g.,
providing 96-hour advanced launch notification; separate notifications
outlining launch parameters/windows). The record also confirms that
much of the data for these supplemental notifications overlaps with the
data we already require for frequency coordination. Stakeholders are of
course free to continue current best practices developed through mutual
agreement to foster an environment that can facilitate continuing
increased use of these three bands for secondary space launch
operations.
C. Post-Frequency Coordination Launch Registrations
Pursuant to the Second Report and Order, after a licensee has
successfully coordinated, through the space launch frequency
coordinator, its launch operations with NTIA and other relevant non-
federal users, it must register those technical and operating
parameters of the launch in ULS. In addition, a licensee is only
authorized for space launch operations after it has successfully
registered the coordinated technical and operational parameters in ULS,
subject to the condition that the licensee re-register, if necessary,
and re-coordinate the launch if technical or operational details
change.
Data Requirements for Post-Coordination Launch Registrations. In
the Licensing and Coordination Comment PN, we proposed the following
requirements for data for post-coordination launch registrations, to be
incorporated from the licensee's approved coordination request:
1. Purpose of operation;
2. Operation start date and time;
3. Operation end date and time;
4. Stations to be used;
5. Launch site to be used;
6. Transmission characteristics, including frequency, emission
designator, output power and effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP);
and
7. Response from the third-party frequency coordinator regarding
outcome of coordination, including conditions and limitations, and a
list of entities with which it coordinated.
We also proposed that the parameters in the post-coordination
launch registration would reflect the binding operational parameters
for a given launch, and that a licensee would be authorized to commence
launch operations thereunder, once that registration is accepted in
ULS. SpaceX argues generally that the ``binding operational
parameters'' of each launch are confidential and should not be publicly
registered in ULS.
We did not receive specific comments regarding the data
requirements we proposed for post-coordination launch registrations,
with the exception of those seeking fundamental changes deemed outside
the scope of the Bureau's delegated authority, as referenced. We adopt
the proposed data parameters for such post-coordination registration
purposes, as set forth in Section III below. We clarify in Section III
that the ``transmission characteristics'' required at this stage are
required for each station the licensee will use in its launch. We find
it in the public interest to also adopt our proposal that a licensee be
authorized to conduct launch operations under the parameters in the
post-coordination launch registration once that registration is
accepted in ULS. We find that such an approach fosters transparency and
data accuracy as it relates to reflecting coordinated parameters, and
provides operational certainty in three congested bands for space
launch stakeholders. With respect to SpaceX's general position that
binding launch parameters are confidential and should not be included
in public-facing ULS, we note that the Second Report and Order requires
registration through that vehicle, and it is outside the scope of our
delegated authority to change that decision. Further, as noted above,
we do not anticipate that such information will meet the standards for
obtaining confidentiality, particularly given the fact that many of the
technical parameters required under part 26 are consistent with those
currently made public through the part 5 experimental STA process. We
reiterate that confidentiality must be requested on a case-by-case
basis through existing Commission rules.
III. Required Data Elements for Space Launch Initial Site/Station
Registration, Frequency Coordination, and Registration of Coordinated
Launch Parameters
A. Initial Launch Site and Station Registration
To register a launch site that will be used in their space launch
operations under a nationwide license, as required by Sec. 26.108(b)
of the Commission's rules, Space Launch Licensees shall provide the
following data in ULS:
Launch Site Details
1. Launch site name and launch designation (if applicable);
2. Geographic coordinates referenced to NAD83 (i.e., lat/long);
3. Address; and
4. Whether the site is an FAA-licensed commercial site, FAA-
licensed federal site, FAA-licensed commercial and federal site, or
private exclusive use site.
To register the individual terrestrial fixed, base, itinerant, and
mobile stations that will be used in their space launch operations, as
required by Sec. 26.108(b) of the Commission's rules, Space Launch
Licensees shall provide the following data in ULS. For licensees that
specify a bandwidth in excess of 5 megahertz, a justification for
greater than five megahertz must be submitted in the initial station
registration in ULS as a single attachment, which must identify each
station for which increased bandwidth is sought.
Fixed and Base Station Details
1. Description of station, including its overall purpose within the
proposed launch operation and specific function (e.g., transmit/
receive, command/telemetry);
2. Antenna support structure type;
3. Height above ground level to the highest point of the supporting
structure only;
[[Page 18799]]
4. Overall height above ground to tip of antenna in meters;
5. Elevation of ground at antenna site above mean sea level in
meters;
6. Frequency band;
7. Emission bandwidth; and
8. Address.
Itinerant and Mobile Station Details
1. Description of station, including its overall purpose within the
proposed launch operation and specific function (e.g., transmit/
receive, command/telemetry);
2. Radius of operation and geographic coordinates of the transmit
location referenced to NAD83;
3. Frequency band;
4. Emission bandwidth;
5. For stations attached to the launch vehicle: name of launch
vehicle; and
6. For stations attached to the launch vehicle: location of
transmitter on launch vehicle or payload (e.g., first stage, second
stage).
B. Frequency Coordination Requests
To initiate frequency coordination prior to each specific launch,
as required by Sec. 26.202 of the Commission's rules, Space Launch
Service licensees shall provide the following data to the space launch
frequency coordinator in a frequency coordination request:
1. Licensee details:
a. Name of licensee;
b. Call sign; and
c. Primary and alternate point of contact for questions (name,
title, email, and business phone number);
2. Previously registered launch site where launch will take place
and corresponding site details;
3. Previously registered itinerant and mobile stations to be used
in the launch and corresponding station details;
4. Previously registered fixed and base stations to be used in the
launch and corresponding station details;
5. Transmitter characteristics for each transmit station (center
frequency):
a. Transmitter make/model;
b. Output power;
c. Antenna type (e.g., blade, parabolic);
d. Number of antennas deployed;
e. Antenna gain;
f. Width of beam in degrees at half-power point;
g. Frequency tolerance;
h. Orientation in horizontal/vertical planes (if the antenna is
tracking, state ``tracking'');
i. Antenna polarization;
j. Antenna azimuth (if the antenna is tracking, state
``tracking'');
k. Antenna elevation angle (if the antenna is tracking, state
``tracking'');
l. For fixed and base stations, projected space launch tracking arc
path;
m. For fixed and base stations, the height AGL to the radiation
center when the antenna is pointed along the horizon;
n. For mobile and itinerant stations, maximum antenna height AGL;
o. EIRP (per individual antenna);
p. Total EIRP (from all radiating sources using a specific
location); and
q. Emission designator;
6. Emission details for each designator of each transmitter:
a. Emission bandwidth;
b. Modulating signal:
c. Modulation type (e.g., BPSK, QPSK, APK, FSK, Analog);
d. If it is a digital signal, the final symbol rate in symbols/
second after all overhead encoding or the final bit rate in bits/second
after all overhead encoding;
e. If FSK, include the type of FSK and the peak-to-peak frequency
deviation as well as the final symbol rate or final bit rate;
f. Indicate whether the signal has subcarriers and, if so, which
ones are used;
g. RF fundamental emission data (two-sided) including a minimum of
-3 dB, -20 dB, and -60 dB bandwidth data points; and
h. Description of any signal filtering techniques employed;
7. Launch details:
a. Name of launch vehicle;
b. Launch mission name and/or designator number;
c. Launch and reentry date/time window (primary and backup),
including launch window open time, and the duration of each window;
d. List of objects to achieve orbit during launch operation, if
applicable;
e. Total elapsed time from launch to end of transmission;
f. Requested frequencies used for launch and reentry, including
required center frequency(ies);
g. Orbital location (orbit insertion), if applicable;
h. Mean launch azimuth (degrees, clockwise from the North);
i. Ground track from lift-off until end of transmission;
j. ECF Cartesian Vectors Format (position and velocity vs. time or
position, velocity, and acceleration vs. time) in one minute time steps
(at least) for each phase of launch through the end of transmission;
k. A plot image of the two-dimensional ground track of the launch
vehicle including demarcations for important mission events (e.g., main
engine cut-off (MECO), stage separation, payload jettison,
passivation);
l. Duration of transmission(s), to include on/off time (nominal and
maximum durations) for each transmitter and receiving station(s)
corresponding to the on/off times, if applicable;
m. Trajectory (azimuth, heading) of the launch (i.e., expected
launch vehicle flight profile);
n. Reentry landing zone, if applicable;
o. If applicable, expected reentry coordinates and the landing
trajectory (from the reentry point) of reusable launch vehicles and
boosters;
p. Maximum heights above ground level and above sea level for both
launch and reentry activity; and
q. Operational contact information, including name, email address,
and telephone number;
8. Additional station details:
a. Name and location of each relay satellite station supporting
launch operation;
b. Ground receiver sensitivity and selectivity; and
c. Antenna gain to noise temperature ratio (G/T) for each ground
station used for reception of launch vehicle telemetry.
C. Registration of Coordinated Launch Parameters
To complete the post-coordination launch registration in ULS, as
required by Sec. 26.108(b) of the Commission's rules, Space Launch
Service licensees shall provide the following data:
1. Purpose of operation;
2. Operation start date and time (Eastern Time Zone);
3. Operation end date and time (Eastern Time Zone);
4. Stations to be used;
5. Launch site to be used;
6. Transmission characteristics for each station--specifically,
frequency, emission designator, output power, and EIRP; and
7. Response from the third-party frequency coordinator regarding
outcome of coordination, including conditions and limitations, and a
list of entities with which it coordinated.
This document shall be effective 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register, except for new or modified information collections
contained herein, for which the Bureau will seek such review by the
Office of Management and Budget as provided below. Following completion
of OMB review, the Bureau will announce the effective date of any such
new or modified information collections.
[[Page 18800]]
Federal Communications Commission.
Amy Brett,
Acting Chief of Staff, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2025-07643 Filed 5-1-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P