Page 1 October 30, Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC Re:
IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20190830-Call Signs S2983 & S
Dear Ms. Dortch:
Hughes Network Systems, LLC (with its affiliates, “Hughes”), Intelsat License LLC
(“Intelsat”), AT&T Services, Inc. and Inmarsat, Inc. (collectively, the “GSO Satellite
Operators”) submit this response in support of objections filed against the above-referenced
modification application (“Further Modification Application”) of Space Exploration Holdings,
LLC’s (with its affiliates, “SpaceX”), seeking further modification of its Ku/Ka-band nongeostationary orbit (“NGSO”) fixed-satellite service (“FSS”) system to adjust the orbital spacing
of its satellites.1 Specifically, the GSO Satellite Operators support SES Americom, Inc. and O3b
Limited’s (collectively, “SES”) Petition to Defer (“Petition”) consideration of the Further
Modification Application until additional information is provided to allow an independent
assessment of compliance with applicable equivalent power flux density (“EPFD”) limits.2 The
GSO Satellite Operators continue to urge the Commission to, at a minimum, impose appropriate
license conditions to ensure SpaceX’s EPFD compliance.
See SpaceX, Further Modification Application, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087 (Aug. 30,
2019); see also Satellite Policy Branch Information: Space Station Applications Accepted for Filing,
Public Notice, Report No. SAT-01412 (Sept. 13, 2019); Satellite Policy Branch Information: Actions
Taken, Public Notice, Report No. SAT-01421 (Oct. 11, 2019) (designating the Further Modification
Application as permit-but-disclose).
See SES, Petition, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087 (Oct. 15, 2019); see also Letter from
Brian D. Weimer, Counsel to WorldVu Satellites Limited, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, IBFS
File Nos. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087 et al. (Oct. 17, 2019).
See, e.g., Letter from Jennifer A. Manner, Hughes, et al. to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, IBFS
File Nos. SAT-STA-20190924-00098, at 1-2 (Oct. 9, 2019); Letter from Jennifer A. Manner, Hughes, et
al. to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, SES-LIC-20190211-00151 et al., at 1-2 (Oct. 9, 2019); GSO
Satellite Operators, Comments and Petition to Condition, IBFS File Nos. SES-LIC-20190211-00151 et al.
(July 12, 2019) (“GSO Satellite Operators Petition”); Hughes and Intelsat, Petition to Condition, IBFS
File Nos. SES-LIC-20190402-00425 et seq. & SES-AMD-20190410-00520 et seq., at 2-3 (May 31,
2019); Letter from Jennifer A. Manner, Hughes, and Susan H. Crandall, Intelsat, to Marlene H. Dortch,Page 2 As an initial matter, to ensure interference protection of geostationary satellite (“GSO”)
systems, SpaceX is required under Section 25.146 of the Commission’s rules to: (i) certify
compliance with applicable EPFD limits; and (ii) obtain a favorable or qualified favorable
International Telecommunication Union (“ITU”) finding that confirms EPFD compliance prior
to initiation of service.4 Although SpaceX obtained a partial waiver of Section 25.146(c) to
allow service commencement on its currently authorized system prior to obtaining a favorable or
qualified favorable ITU finding,5 the Further Modification Application does not request or offer
any justification for extending the partial waiver to SpaceX’s proposed modified system.Accordingly, consistent with Section 25.146’s requirements to ensure GSO interference
protection, any grant of the Further Modification Application should be subject to standard
license conditions imposed on other NGSO FSS licensees regarding compliance with applicable
EPFD limits.Regardless of whether the partial waiver of Section 25.146(c) may be extended to its
proposed modified system, SpaceX is obligated to obtain a favorable or qualified favorable ITU
finding, and until then, its NGSO operations will be at its own risk.8 As the GSO Satellite
Operators have noted, however, the Commission’s partial waiver creates both opportunity and
incentive for SpaceX to commence operations and delay the ITU process indefinitely, with no
assurance (other than a self-certification of EPFD compliance) of interference protection of GSO
systems.9 Indeed, as SES notes, SpaceX’s multiple modifications require ITU review to begin
anew each time, and SpaceX’s numerous ITU filings — including 20 ITU filings in October
2019 — reflect an apparent strategy to game and delay the ITU validation process in its favor.
The submission of 20 ITU filings “…suggests that SpaceX is attempting to evade the singleentry EPFD limits for its satellite network by dividing the network into multiple parts and asking
the ITU to evaluate them separately.” 10 Such efforts, along with concomitant delays in securing
a favorable or qualified favorable ITU finding, inevitably increase interference risks to
incumbent GSO systems.
Consequently, to address these unanticipated consequences and deter any potential
gaming of the ITU process, the Commission should defer consideration of the Further
Modification Application until SpaceX submits additional information to allow other parties to
Secretary, FCC, IBFS File Nos. SAT-MOD-20181108-00083 et al., at 1-3 (Apr. 25, 2019); Reply of
Hughes & Intelsat, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20181108-00083 (Mar. 5, 2019).
See 47 C.F.R. § 25.146(a), (c).
See Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Order and Authorization, 34 FCC Rcd 2526, ¶¶ 28, 37 (IB 2019)
(“SpaceX Order”).
See SpaceX, Further Modification Application, Waiver Requests.
See, e.g., LeoSat MA, Inc., Order and Declaratory Ruling, 33 FCC Rcd 11486, ¶ 22(m)-(n) (2018)
(“LeoSat”); Kepler Communications Inc., Order and Declaratory Ruling, 33 FCC Rcd 11453, ¶¶ 26, (2018) (“Kepler”).
See SpaceX Order ¶ 28.
See GSO Satellite Operators Petition at 2-3.
See SES, Petition at 4-5. Page 3 assess and verify EPFD compliance, as SES has proposed.11 Alternatively, the Commission
should impose a license condition requiring submission of such information prior to or upon
commencement of SpaceX’s proposed modified operations, as the GSO Satellite Operators also
have previously proposed.12 Requiring submission of such additional information will provide
an important safeguard to ensure interference protection of GSO systems, as there currently is no
verifiable evidence to substantiate SpaceX’s self-certification of EPFD compliance.
Please direct any questions regarding this matter to the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
GSO SATELLITE OPERATORS
/s/ Jennifer A. Manner
Jennifer A. Manner
Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Kimberly M. Baum
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Hughes Network Systems, LLC
/s/ Susan H. Crandall
Susan H. Crandall
Associate General Counsel
Cynthia J. Grady
Senior Counsel
Intelsat US LLC
/s/ Donna Bethea-Murphy
Donna Bethea-Murphy
Senior Vice President, Global Regulatory
Inmarsat, Inc.
/s/ Jessica B. Lyons
Jessica B. Lyons
Counsel to AT&T Services, Inc.
See id. at 6-7.
See GSO Petition at 4. Such license condition is entirely consistent with Commission precedent
imposing similar conditions on other NGSO FSS licensees. See, e.g., LeoSat ¶ 22(m) (licensee “must …
submit the files containing the data used as input to the ITU validation software, unless they have been
submitted before and do not need any update.”); Kepler ¶ 26 (same). The Commission has found that
“such a requirement satisfies the concerns of GSO FSS operators who request verification, either by the
Commission or third parties, of the complete set of input information used for the EPFD showing to the
ITU.” LeoSat ¶ 8; Kepler ¶ 9. Page 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Theresa Rollins, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Response was
served on October 30, 2019, by depositing a true copy thereof with the United States Postal
Service, first class postage pre-paid, addressed to:
Patricia Cooper
Vice President, Satellite Government
Affairs
William M. Wiltshire
Paul Caritj
Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP
1919 M Street, N.W.
Suite Washington, DC Counsel for SpaceX
David Goldman
Director of Satellite Policy
Space Exploration Technologies Corp.
1155 F Street, NW, Suite Washington, DC Petra A. Vorwig
Senior Legal and Regulatory Counsel
SES Americom, Inc.
1129 20th Street NW, Suite Washington, D.C.
Suzanne H. Malloy
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
O3b Limited
1129 20th Street NW, Suite Washington, D.C.
Karis A. Hastings
SatCom Law LLC
1317 F Street, NW, Suite Washington, D.C.
Brian D. Weimer
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite Washington, D.C. 20006-Counsel for WorldVu Satellites Limited
Nickolas G. Spina
Director, Launch and Regulatory Affairs
Kepler Communications Inc.
196 Spadina Avenue, Suite Toronto, ON Canada
M5T 2C/s/ Theresa Rollins
Theresa Rollins
PDF Page 1
PlainSite Cover Page
PDF Page 2
October 30, 2019
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC 20554
Re:
IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087
Call Signs S2983 & S3018
Dear Ms. Dortch:
Hughes Network Systems, LLC (with its affiliates, “Hughes”), Intelsat License LLC
(“Intelsat”), AT&T Services, Inc. and Inmarsat, Inc. (collectively, the “GSO Satellite
Operators”) submit this response in support of objections filed against the above-referenced
modification application (“Further Modification Application”) of Space Exploration Holdings,
LLC’s (with its affiliates, “SpaceX”), seeking further modification of its Ku/Ka-band nongeostationary orbit (“NGSO”) fixed-satellite service (“FSS”) system to adjust the orbital spacing
of its satellites.1 Specifically, the GSO Satellite Operators support SES Americom, Inc. and O3b
Limited’s (collectively, “SES”) Petition to Defer (“Petition”) consideration of the Further
Modification Application until additional information is provided to allow an independent
assessment of compliance with applicable equivalent power flux density (“EPFD”) limits.2 The
GSO Satellite Operators continue to urge the Commission to, at a minimum, impose appropriate
license conditions to ensure SpaceX’s EPFD compliance.3
1
See SpaceX, Further Modification Application, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087 (Aug. 30,
2019); see also Satellite Policy Branch Information: Space Station Applications Accepted for Filing,
Public Notice, Report No. SAT-01412 (Sept. 13, 2019); Satellite Policy Branch Information: Actions
Taken, Public Notice, Report No. SAT-01421 (Oct. 11, 2019) (designating the Further Modification
Application as permit-but-disclose).
2
See SES, Petition, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087 (Oct. 15, 2019); see also Letter from
Brian D. Weimer, Counsel to WorldVu Satellites Limited, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, IBFS
File Nos. SAT-MOD-20190830-00087 et al. (Oct. 17, 2019).
3
See, e.g., Letter from Jennifer A. Manner, Hughes, et al. to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, IBFS
File Nos. SAT-STA-20190924-00098, at 1-2 (Oct. 9, 2019); Letter from Jennifer A. Manner, Hughes, et
al. to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, SES-LIC-20190211-00151 et al., at 1-2 (Oct. 9, 2019); GSO
Satellite Operators, Comments and Petition to Condition, IBFS File Nos. SES-LIC-20190211-00151 et al.
(July 12, 2019) (“GSO Satellite Operators Petition”); Hughes and Intelsat, Petition to Condition, IBFS
File Nos. SES-LIC-20190402-00425 et seq. & SES-AMD-20190410-00520 et seq., at 2-3 (May 31,
2019); Letter from Jennifer A. Manner, Hughes, and Susan H. Crandall, Intelsat, to Marlene H. Dortch,
PDF Page 3
As an initial matter, to ensure interference protection of geostationary satellite (“GSO”)
systems, SpaceX is required under Section 25.146 of the Commission’s rules to: (i) certify
compliance with applicable EPFD limits; and (ii) obtain a favorable or qualified favorable
International Telecommunication Union (“ITU”) finding that confirms EPFD compliance prior
to initiation of service.4 Although SpaceX obtained a partial waiver of Section 25.146(c) to
allow service commencement on its currently authorized system prior to obtaining a favorable or
qualified favorable ITU finding,5 the Further Modification Application does not request or offer
any justification for extending the partial waiver to SpaceX’s proposed modified system.6
Accordingly, consistent with Section 25.146’s requirements to ensure GSO interference
protection, any grant of the Further Modification Application should be subject to standard
license conditions imposed on other NGSO FSS licensees regarding compliance with applicable
EPFD limits.7
Regardless of whether the partial waiver of Section 25.146(c) may be extended to its
proposed modified system, SpaceX is obligated to obtain a favorable or qualified favorable ITU
finding, and until then, its NGSO operations will be at its own risk.8 As the GSO Satellite
Operators have noted, however, the Commission’s partial waiver creates both opportunity and
incentive for SpaceX to commence operations and delay the ITU process indefinitely, with no
assurance (other than a self-certification of EPFD compliance) of interference protection of GSO
systems.9 Indeed, as SES notes, SpaceX’s multiple modifications require ITU review to begin
anew each time, and SpaceX’s numerous ITU filings — including 20 ITU filings in October
2019 — reflect an apparent strategy to game and delay the ITU validation process in its favor.
The submission of 20 ITU filings “…suggests that SpaceX is attempting to evade the singleentry EPFD limits for its satellite network by dividing the network into multiple parts and asking
the ITU to evaluate them separately.” 10 Such efforts, along with concomitant delays in securing
a favorable or qualified favorable ITU finding, inevitably increase interference risks to
incumbent GSO systems.
Consequently, to address these unanticipated consequences and deter any potential
gaming of the ITU process, the Commission should defer consideration of the Further
Modification Application until SpaceX submits additional information to allow other parties to
Secretary, FCC, IBFS File Nos. SAT-MOD-20181108-00083 et al., at 1-3 (Apr. 25, 2019); Reply of
Hughes & Intelsat, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20181108-00083 (Mar. 5, 2019).
4
See 47 C.F.R. § 25.146(a), (c).
5
See Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Order and Authorization, 34 FCC Rcd 2526, ¶¶ 28, 37 (IB 2019)
(“SpaceX Order”).
6
See SpaceX, Further Modification Application, Waiver Requests.
7
See, e.g., LeoSat MA, Inc., Order and Declaratory Ruling, 33 FCC Rcd 11486, ¶ 22(m)-(n) (2018)
(“LeoSat”); Kepler Communications Inc., Order and Declaratory Ruling, 33 FCC Rcd 11453, ¶¶ 26, 30
(2018) (“Kepler”).
8
See SpaceX Order ¶ 28.
9
See GSO Satellite Operators Petition at 2-3.
10
See SES, Petition at 4-5.
2
PDF Page 4
assess and verify EPFD compliance, as SES has proposed.11 Alternatively, the Commission
should impose a license condition requiring submission of such information prior to or upon
commencement of SpaceX’s proposed modified operations, as the GSO Satellite Operators also
have previously proposed.12 Requiring submission of such additional information will provide
an important safeguard to ensure interference protection of GSO systems, as there currently is no
verifiable evidence to substantiate SpaceX’s self-certification of EPFD compliance.
Please direct any questions regarding this matter to the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
GSO SATELLITE OPERATORS
/s/ Jennifer A. Manner
Jennifer A. Manner
Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Kimberly M. Baum
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Hughes Network Systems, LLC
/s/ Susan H. Crandall
Susan H. Crandall
Associate General Counsel
Cynthia J. Grady
Senior Counsel
Intelsat US LLC
/s/ Donna Bethea-Murphy
Donna Bethea-Murphy
Senior Vice President, Global Regulatory
Inmarsat, Inc.
/s/ Jessica B. Lyons
Jessica B. Lyons
Counsel to AT&T Services, Inc.
11
See id. at 6-7.
12
See GSO Petition at 4. Such license condition is entirely consistent with Commission precedent
imposing similar conditions on other NGSO FSS licensees. See, e.g., LeoSat ¶ 22(m) (licensee “must …
submit the files containing the data used as input to the ITU validation software, unless they have been
submitted before and do not need any update.”); Kepler ¶ 26 (same). The Commission has found that
“such a requirement satisfies the concerns of GSO FSS operators who request verification, either by the
Commission or third parties, of the complete set of input information used for the EPFD showing to the
ITU.” LeoSat ¶ 8; Kepler ¶ 9.
3
PDF Page 5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Theresa Rollins, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Response was
served on October 30, 2019, by depositing a true copy thereof with the United States Postal
Service, first class postage pre-paid, addressed to:
Patricia Cooper
Vice President, Satellite Government
Affairs
William M. Wiltshire
Paul Caritj
Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP
1919 M Street, N.W.
Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036
Counsel for SpaceX
David Goldman
Director of Satellite Policy
Space Exploration Technologies Corp.
1155 F Street, NW, Suite 475
Washington, DC 20004
Petra A. Vorwig
Senior Legal and Regulatory Counsel
SES Americom, Inc.
1129 20th Street NW, Suite 1000
Washington, D.C. 20036
Suzanne H. Malloy
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
O3b Limited
1129 20th Street NW, Suite 1000
Washington, D.C. 20036
Karis A. Hastings
SatCom Law LLC
1317 F Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20004
Brian D. Weimer
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington, D.C. 20006-6801
Counsel for WorldVu Satellites Limited
Nickolas G. Spina
Director, Launch and Regulatory Affairs
Kepler Communications Inc.
196 Spadina Avenue, Suite 400
Toronto, ON Canada
M5T 2C2
/s/ Theresa Rollins
Theresa Rollins
4
Back to 
