WPC0 2BJ Z Courier3|xBoldTimes New Roman Bold`7X@HP LaserJet 4M (PCL) (Additional)HL4MPCAD.PRSx  @\ vX@26F X3|j CourierCourier BoldLPT2HPLA4MPC.PRSx  @\RX@<?xxx,ix6X@`7X@?xxx,x `7X7nC:,|Xn4  pG;X7jC:,*9Xj\  P6G;XPpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDddddddvt0a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# 2 p   f a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# 2} M    a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p 2Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . a6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . 2|ma2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   243a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentgPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:/>/>/>/x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxIxIxWxIx{nInInInISSSWS]a?/?]?9?]]WW]n/nKn9nCn/x]xx]x]SSxxIxIxI]?]?]?]WnUn9nax]x]x]x]x]x]xxWnInInIx]n9x]]?n9xSz+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""t X-ԍ 47 C.F.R. 2.106.> It argues that the requested waiver would not undermine the policy of the rule and would promote the public interest, thus meeting the  X-standard for waivers set forth in WAIT Radio.b t X !-ԍ WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1969).b L/Q stresses that the desirability of allowing use of 50915250 MHz and 68757075 MHz for nongeostationary MSS feeder links has been explicitly recognized by the pertinent WRC95 allocation and, further, that the WRC adopted that allocation at the urging of the U.S. government. Grant of the waiver request would foster rapid development of a system that would bring new, global mobile communications services"7w 0*%%hh" to subscribers in the United States, according to L/Q, which reports that it hopes to begin launching Globalstar satellites in the second half of 1997. L/Q maintains that, aside from advancing the licensing process in the U.S., the requested waiver would facilitate obtaining "landing rights" for Globalstar providers in foreign countries and that because the frequencies in question have been allocated for MSS feeder links in all three ITU regions, assignment of them as requested would make it possible for the Globalstar system to provide worldwide coverage, consistently with the manifest intention of Subsect. 25.143 (b)(2)(ii) of the FCC's  X_-rules. L/Q asserts, moreover, that the Report of the Conference Preparatory Meeting, _t X-ԍ CPM Report on technical, operational, and regulatory/procedural matters to be  X -considered by the 1995 World Radiocommunication Conference (April 1995). on which the Commission largely relied in formulating the U.S. proposals for WRC95, confirmed that the requested 5 and 7 GHz frequencies could be used for nongeostationary MSS feeder links compatibly with existing uses, and L/Q contends that if the waiver is granted, compliance with ITU and FCC coordination requirements would suffice to protect the interests of existing licensees. x7. Constellation, which says that it plans to use the same 5 and 7 GHz frequency bands for its own feeder links, asserts that L/Q's proposed feederlink transmissions could adversely affect operation of Constellation's proposed system unless coordination is undertaken between L/Q and Constellation. Constellation says that it has no objection to the application or the waiver request, provided that any grant to L/Q does not preclude favorable disposition of Constellation's pending application and is conditioned on coordination with all affected systems, including Constellation's.  X-x8. Discussion. We will waive Section 2.102 to permit L/Q to launch and operate space stations using transmitting frequencies in the 68757055 MHz range for feeder links and telemetry from Globalstar satellites to fixed earth stations, as requested, and configured for reception of feederlink transmissions in the 50915250 MHz range. This authorization is subject, however, to any applicable restrictions that may be promulgated in a rulemaking to amend the domestic Table of Allocations to include FSS allocations in these bands for MSS  X|-feeder links. |bt X-ԍ See Preparation for International Telecommunications Union World  Xx-Radiocommunication Conferences, 10 FCC Rcd 12783 55 (1995). This authorization should not be construed as a license for earthtospace transmission in the 50915250 MHz frequency range. Such authority must be requested in the context of an earthstation application filed pursuant to 47 C.F.R. 25.130. Any authorization granted for MSS earthtospace feeder link transmission in that frequency range may be subject to sharing with unlicensed transmitters, as indicated in the Notice of Proposed"  0*%%hh\"  X-Rulemaking in ET Docket No. 96102, t Xy-ԍ Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Provide for Unlicensed NII/SUPERNet  Xb-operations in the 5 GHz Frequency Range, 11 FCC Rcd 7205 (1996). where the Commission is considering providing spectrum in the 5.155.35 GHz and 5.7255.875 GHz bands for broadband unlicensed devices.  X-Consistent with the policy laid down in the Big LEO Report and Order for intersystem  X-coordination between applicants sharing L Band spectrum for service links,D bt X-ԍ 9 FCC Rcd at 5962, 61.D L/Q must coordinate with any other Big LEO licensee(s) authorized to use the same spectrum for feeder links. L/Q must also coordinate with respect to licensed governmental and nongovernmental terrestrial systems, as necessary, in accordance with 47 C.F.R. 25.272.  X1- Power Reduction ă x9. L/Q indicates in its application that the Globalstar satellites would operate with  X -lower average payload power than it had previously specified. t X-ԍ The previouslyspecified value was 660 watts. L/Q indicates in the current application, as supplemented by a letter dated April 24, 1996, that the satellites would operate with 550 watts of average payload power. TRW asserts that the reduction in average power would result in a substantial reduction in the signal strength of the  X -satellites' SBand" t X-ԍ The range of frequencies between 2000 and 4000 MHz is commonly referredto as "the S Band." As previously noted, L/Q' s license authorizes use of the 2483.52500 MHz sub X-band for spacetoEarth servicelink transmissions." transmissions to endusers' mobile transceivers, thus making the Globalstar System more susceptible to interference. Although it does not oppose the modification application, TRW stresses that this design change is entirely volitional and contends that it would be inequitable to require TRW's proposed "Odyssey" system to adhere to an SBand power flux density (p.f.d.) limit more stringent than the relevant ITU coordination limit merely to ameliorate inherent servicequality problems in the Globalstar system due to the reduction in available power for SBand transmission. x10. L/Q replies that TRW's supposition that the reduction in the satellites' average power level would reduce the power available for SBand transmission is incorrect. L/Q explains that the planned reduction in average power was made possible by an improvement" 0*%%hh"  X-in the efficiency of the satellites' CBand~t Xy-ԍ The term "C Band" has been commonly used to denote the spectrum between 4 and 7 GHz.~ amplifier and redesign of the LBandxbt X-ԍ In common industry parlance, "the L Band" is the spectrum between 1 and 2 GHz.x filter to reduce the power drawn by the CBand amplifier when not in use. The combination of these improvements resulted in a downward projection for average payload power, according to L/Q, without any concomitant diminution of net output power for the SBand amplifier, RF output, or peak power generation. The overall effect, L/Q asserts, is a more efficient satellite constellation with the same projected capacity. Furthermore, L/Q says that since there would be no change in the power available for SBand transmission, it has no intention of seeking "extra protection" for its system in intersystem coordination.  X1-x11. Discussion. TRW has not raised any concern that militates against acceptance of the proposed revision of the average payload power specification for the Globalstar satellites. As regards p.f.d. limits, we note that L/Q represents in its application that the planned p.f.d. levels for the Globalstar system are well within the limits adopted at WRC95 for international coordination. Whether Big LEO licensees should adhere to morestringent SBand p.f.d. limits for purposes of intersystem coordination is an issue for the parties to resolve through negotiation, in the first instance.  XK-  Other Design Changes ă x12. L/Q proposes several other modifications to the specifications for the Globalstar satellites. It has submitted revised mass and power budgets. It also proposes revised parameters for the SBand and LBand antennas, asserting that the modification would improve spectral efficiency. The application specifies the antenna contours that would result from operation with the revised parameters and provides representative forward and return path link budgets prepared using nominal feeder and service link channel frequencies.  X|-x13. Discussion. These proposed changes are consistent with the Commission's rules and would not tend to increase interference. Hence we will grant the request for modification  XN-of L/Q's license to permit them to be implemented.   "70*%%hh]"  X- Construction Milestones ă  X-x14. The Commission stated in the Big LEO Report and Order that each Big LEO spacestation licensee would be required to adhere to a timetable for implementation of its proposal. More specifically, it said that unless an applicant demonstrated a special need for additional time it would be required to begin construction of its first two satellites within one year after receiving an unconditional authorization, to begin construction of the remaining authorized satellites within three years of the same date, to complete construction of the first  XH-two within four years, and to put the entire system into operation within six years.JHt X -ԍ 9 FCC Rcd at 6008 189.J The  X1-requirements are to be imposed by specifying the timetables as license conditions.31yt X[ -ԍ Id.3 To ensure compliance, the Commission adopted rule provisions requiring Big LEO licensees to file annual progress reports and to certify within ten days after each milestone date that the  X -milestone requirement was met or else report that it was missed.F ,t X-ԍ See 47 C.F.R. 25.143(e).F We will incorporate the  X -milestone timetable detailed in the Big LEO Report and Order in the terms of L/Q's license.  X- Ordering Clauses ă x15. Accordingly, pursuant to authority delegated by Sections 0.241 and 0.261 of the FCC's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.241 and 0.261, IT IS ORDERED, that the Application for Modification to Order and Authorization for GLOBALSTAR and the Request for Waiver of 47 C.F.R. 2.106 ARE GRANTED to the extent indicated herein, in accordance with the technical specifications set forth in the application, including the referenced limit on SBand p.f.d. levels, and consistently with the FCC's rules except insofar as expressly waived. x16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless extended by the Commission for good cause shown, this authorization will become null and void in the event that the licensee fails to meet the following progress schedule:  Xe-x` `  Construction@hConstruction  Fully  XN-x` `  Commenced@hCompleted  Operational 0  X -First two system satellitesNovember 1997hNovember 2000  X -Remaining system satellitesNovember 1999hpp  November 2002 "0*%%hh<" x17. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this license shall not not vest in the licensee any right to operate space stations or use the assigned frequencies beyond the term thereof or in any manner other than authorized herein; that neither the license nor the rights granted thereunder shall be assigned or otherwise transferred in violation of the Communications Act; and that the rights granted herein are subject to the rights of use or control conferred by 47 U.S.C. 706. x` `  hh@h@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@Donald H. Gips x` `  hh@Chief, International Bureau x` `  hh@Richard M. Smith x` `  hh@Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology