WPC 2MBERKZ3|j yO"#X\  P6G;H;P#"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDdDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddxHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4MP (PCL)lpt1HPLA4MP0.PRSXj\  P6G;\e"8mXP2gEKX yO"#X\  P6G;H;P#"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+999999S9S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNa݅@  I.   X(# SubheadingSubheading#0\ E A.  2*$^'%d'&b('w)FOOTNOTEFootnote - Appearance$PHIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldedd%+. DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Date& X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟDRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style off'@@    2,.(XA*)1**1++1,HEADERHeader A - Appearance(LETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5) 3'3'Standard'3'3StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11 ;   LEGAL LANDLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.5*f 3'3'Standard'A'AStandardZ K e6VE L"nu;   LETTER PORTLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11+L 3'3'Standard3'3'StandardZ K e6VE L"nU9   20,1^.-n/.X//U0LEGAL PORTLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14, 3'3'StandardA'A'StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119   TITLETitle of a Document-K\ * ăFOOTERFooter A - Appearanced.BLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indented/N X 2^40i11dq12j13?2HEADING 33rd Heading Level0| XHIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold Large1B*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscored2 V -qLETTERHEADLetterhead - date/margins3u H XX  3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"nE9    * 3'3'LetterheadZ K e VE L"n3' II"n"Tv3'StandarddZ K e VE L"nU9 Ѓ   2r94E45-568778:8INVOICE FEETFee Amount for Math Invoice4 ,, $0$0  MEMORANDUMMemo Page Format5D.   ! M E M O R A N D U M ă r  y<N dddy   INVOICE EXPSEExpense Subtotals for Math Invoice6:A ,p, $0$00INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math Macro7z 4p, $0$002S<899XE;:[;;[;INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math Invoice8+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX NORMALReturn to Normal Typestyle9SMALLSmall Typestyle:FINEFine Typestyle;2?<[<=[<>[;=?=LARGELarge Typestyle<EXTRA LARGEExtra Large Typestyle=VERY LARGEVery Large Typestyle>ENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with Header?+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   2A@K?A?Bx@CAa11I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')@8ij@   a21I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')AAkl@` `  ` ` ` a31I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')BJmn` ` @  ` `  a41I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')CSop` `  @  2 EDAEBFpCG8Da51I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')D\qr` `  @hh# hhh a61I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')Eest` `  hh#@( hh# a71I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')Fnuv` `  hh#(@- ( a81I.E+')*'0Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers')8?I u*')Gwwx` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp 2(GH;EIqEJcaFKdFChapter?I@6HChapter Heading=(')8?I *')'0 ?I.EH9y z ` CHAPTER 3  Report Body@6HMain Text of Report8?I *')'0 ?I.EI{|  1, 2, 3,teNumbersotation"H('0\F H rW?I J 1.A, B,3,teUppercase LettersH('0\F H rW?I K .2ILZGMmHNnHO9ITitleNotesTitle Page NotesH('0\F H rW?I L''#Z*f9 x$X# #Z*f9 x%X#NotesTrianglee NotesH('0\F H rW?I MWorks CitedWorks Cited PageH('0\F H rW?I N99         Page TitlePage Title PageH('0\F H rW?I O#  `  2KP|IQpyJRqJSeZKfootnote tex P$ d\  PC Document[8]'Eg%Document StyleE O  O g% W4I O gQ` ` ` Document[4]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gR  . Document[6]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gS  2MTeKUVLVpLWYMDocument[5]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gT  Document[2]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gU*    Document[7]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gV  ` ` ` Right Par[1]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gW8 @  2PXNYNZMO[ORight Par[2]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gXA@` ` `  ` ` ` Document[3]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gY0     Right Par[3]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gZJ` ` ` @  ` ` ` Right Par[4]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g[S` ` `  @  2S\P]Q^ER_ SRight Par[5]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g\\` ` `  @hhh hhh Right Par[6]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g]e` ` `  hhh@ hhh Right Par[7]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g^n` ` `  hhh@  Right Par[8]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g_w` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp 2pV`TaTbOUcUDocument[1]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g`F    ׃  Technical[5]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O ga&!"  . Technical[6]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gb&#$  . Technical[2]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gc*%&    2YdVe7WfWg{XTechnical[3]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gd''(   Technical[4]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O ge&)*   Technical[1]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gf4+$,     Technical[7]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gg&-.  . 2>hh2Yiv Yj-fk~fTechnical[8]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gh&/0  . MACNormali;     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<    #:}D4P XP#T I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)T,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<    #:}D4P XP#,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#referencej;#FxX  Pg9CXP#itemizeX1k&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#2 lliphm injoekheader2lI ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# CitatorFormat Secretary's Citator Output FilemW r5-#d6X@`7Ͽ@# XX  X B r5-S  BFormat DownloadFormat Downloaded Documentniޛ r5- XX    \ #d6X@`7Ͽ@#footnote reference#o 2opl>lqllrmsmDefault Paragraph FoDefault Paragraph Fontp _Equation Caption_Equation Captionq endnote referenceendnote referencer44#Xx6X@DQX@##Xv6X@CX@#toc 1toc 1s` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#2xt&puDrvbtwvtoc 2toc 2t` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toc 3toc 3u` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4v` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#toc 5toc 5w` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#2xxyvzzd{{}toc 6toc 6x` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 7toc 7y toc 8toc 8z` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 9toc 9{` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#2|}~v,index 1index 1|` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#index 2index 2}` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toatoa~` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#captioncaption 2lԆ@҇m_Equation Caption1_Equation Caption1 a12:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*O8mn@   a22:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*OAop@` `  ` ` ` a32:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*OJqr` ` @  ` `  2-Cea42:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*OSst` `  @  a52:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*O\uv` `  @hh# hhh a62:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*Oewx` `  hh#@( hh# a72:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*Onyz` `  hh#(@- ( 2_b0la82:.E+O**Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers=(O*Ow{|` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp  ӎSMALL s†NSMALL s†NORMAL¤ Technical 4¸žC ӆNORMAL¤ TNORMAL¤ Technical 4¸žC:\mw3022.tmpЋ` hp x (#X` P hp x (#X` P hp x (#` hp x (#2ܘ(N$v$bly remains several bly remains several years \softline \softlheight276 awa` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (# Technical 4¸ Technical 4¸žC:\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmp` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 4Technical 4` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#T 2 Ҷ TechnicaT 2 Ҷ Technical 7Ҳ Right Par 7z INV` hp x (#X` hp x (#X` hp x (#` hp x (#2nljzlPC:\mw3022.tmpC:\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOC~C:\DOCS\C :\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmpރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOC~C:\DOCS\COMP` hp x (#` hp x (## P7P# ރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOCރC:\mw3022.tmpԸOC~C:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\: ~C:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\~C:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\: , ` hp x (# p x (# p x (#` hp x (#2ܡ:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\:\DOCS\COMPWHEN\: , ` hp x (# p x (# p x (#` hp x (#: , : , ,0` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#е ,  , ,0` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#:\mw3024.tmpt :\mw3024.tmpt C:\WINDOWS\MSAPPS\TEXTCONV\RTF_W` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#2JlhԨwwwwwbbbbbwwbwwbwwwwwbbbbbwwbwwbbbwwwwbwwwwbwwwwbwbwwwbwbb` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#,,0kjH endnote textendnote text;1#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#toa headingtoa headingX` hp x (#(#(#X` hp x (#2KK3K~)ɲ"i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDddddddI\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\33gggQyyrg>Frgygrr>3>T\>Q\Q\Q>\\33\3\\\\>F3\\\\QX%Xc>0cT>>>0>>>>>>\>\3QQQQQwyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3\\\\\\\\\\Q\Z\\\g\QQQyQyQycyQtrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\gcc\r3rIr>r>r3\l\\\\y>y>y>gFgFgFgcrMr3rT\\\\\\crQrQrQ\r>\gFr>\t0\\=!=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBT\>Q\\\\\3;\7;\7>>QQ\??n\\nBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\"i~'^5>g\\>>>\g0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>ggg\yyrF\yrgyy>3>j\>\gQgQ>\g3>g3g\ggQF>g\\\QI(I_>0_j>>>0>>>>>>\>g3\\\\\QyQyQyQyQD3D3D3D3g\\\\gggg\\g\\\\pg\\\QQ_QyQyQyQyQ\\\_\gjF3FgF>Fgg__gy3ySy>yIy3ggg\\QQQgFgFgFg_y^y>yjgggggg_yQyQyQgy>ggFy>\0\\=2=WxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNBnnBa\>\\\\\\7>\7>\7>>\\\??n\\nBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\"'^9D]gdCDDgq3q39gggggggggg99qqq[~~vCN~sk~CCDddCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddJN8ddddYc)cN_xdxdCYdgdddddFCChhd44ddxdddvooChdF"dȇdpqqq9"qDDqqq||CRodq8f3UYd||֐Z||fqqqHoxoY~Yvkdqrqzdd~YYxoxxx~xxCCdd2PK$KoKK"i~'^09FSS999Sq+9+/SSSSSSSSSS99qqqSggnxggxx9In]nxgxgS]xgg]]?/?FS9SSISI/SS//I/xSSSS??/SInII?C/CZ9+ZF999+999999S9S/gSgSgSgSgSnnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/nSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxS]IgSxSxSxS]IxSgSgSgSgSnInInZnIxdgIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999SSZZnI]/]<]9]5]/nSanSnSxSxSng?g?g?S?S?S?ZZ]<]/]FxSxSxSxSxSxSn]Z]?]?]?xS]9nSS?]9]Sd+SS8%8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddN >  X,3 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER >K  X3X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:  XZ3oI. INTRODUCTION Đ>K " X,3 m"p1.` ` By this order we grant EchoStar Satellite Corporation (ESC), Directsat Corporation  W %(DST) and EchoStar DBS Corporation (ESC DBS) authority to make minor modifications to their  W Direct Broadcast Satellite Service (DBS) satellites; ESC to launch a DBS satellite, EchoStar 4,  X!3 W into the 119.2$ W.L. orbital position;{!f X<$3 p9ԍXpThis order combines ESC, DST, and ESC DBS's application for authority to make minor  p~modifications and DST, DBSC, ESC DBS and ESC's application to change milestones.  pUnless distinction is necessary, we will refer to ESC, DST, ESC DBS and DBSC collectively as "EchoStar."(#{ and EchoStar to move its satellite, EchoStar 1, from  X"3 W {119$ W.L. and operate it at the 148$ W.L. orbital position. We also grant EchoStar conditional  X}#3 W authority to test its DBS satellite at the 127$ W.L. orbital location for eight weeks. We deny"}#4,))<<("  X3 W TEMPO Satellite Inc. (TEMPO) and Telquest Ventures, Inc.'s (Telquest) petitions to deny._ Xy3 p'ԍXpTEMPO filed a petition to deny the application for authority to make minor modifications.  pTelquest filed a petition to deny the request to change milestone dates. R/L DBS  p]Company L.L.C. (R/L DBS) filed comments supporting the applications to change  p*milestone dates and the State of Hawaii (Hawaii) filed comments supporting, with  pmconditions, both applications. Subsequently, Tempo filed a request to supplement its  p9petition to deny. The supplement alleges that EchoStar is operating two of its satellites,  X3EchoStar 1 and 2, at the nominal 119$ W.L. position in violation of its authorizations.(# Finally, we dismiss without prejudice EchoStar's request to change milestones.  X3>  X3II. BACKGROUND Đ>K  XQ3 mp2.` ` EchoStar and its affiliates provide direct broadcast satellite service to U.S.  X.3 W consumers.. X3 pԍXpAccording to the International Telecommunication Union's (ITU) Broadcasting Satellite  pService and Feeder Link Plans for North and South America, a DBS channel has a bandwidth of 24 MHz.(# Specifically, ESC is licensed to operate a DBS satellite, EchoStar 1, on 11 channels  X 3 W at 119.2$ W.L.z r  X.3 pԍXpEchoStar Satellite Corporation 7 FCC Rcd. 1765 (1992). In Continental Satellite  X3 pCorporation, 4 FCC Rcd. 6296 (1989), the Commission divided the eight U.S. DBS  porbital locations into four eastern and four western orbital locations. The eastern locations  X3 pare: 61.5$ W.L., 101$ W.L., 110$ W.L. and 119$ W.L. The four western locations are:  X3 p175$ W.L., 166$ W.L., 157$ W.L. and 148$ W.L. These are nominal locations, actual satellite position assignment may vary slightly.(#ƴ DST is licensed to operate a DBS satellite, EchoStar 2, on 10 channels at 118.8$  X3 W W.L. and is assigned 11 channels at 175$ W.L. XM3 pԍXpESC's satellite, EchoStar 1, operates on channels 121 odd and DST's satellite, EchoStar 2, operates on channels 220 even.(# ESC DBS is authorized to operate a DBS  X3 W Ysatellite on 24 channels at 148$ W.L. DBSC is licensed to operate a DBS satellite, EchoStar 3,  X3 W on 11 channels at 61.5$ W.L and assigned 11 channels at 175$ W.L.N X3 pԍXpSee Direct Broadcasting Satellite Corporation, 8 FCC Rcd. 7959 (1993); Direct Broadcast  X3 pFacility License, DA 98161 (authorizing service over channel 222 even at 61.5$ W.L.)  Xu 3 pand Direct Broadcasting Satellite Corporation, DA 972075 (rel. Sept. 29, 1997) (authorizing temporary operation over nonassigned channels).(# EchoStar requests  X 3 W authorization to modify its licenses at the nominal orbital location of 119$ W.L. (119$ W.L.) in  X\ 3 W Horder to substitute its two 16transponder satellites, EchoStar 1, currently at 119$ W.L. with a"\ ,K(K(<< "  X3 W more powerful switchable 32/16transponder satellite, EchoStar 4. Xy3 pԍXpEchoStar application for minor modifications of DBS authorizations, launch and operational authority, filed December 30, 1997 at 2 (Modification Request). (# EchoStar 4 would provide  X3service from 119.2$ W.L. on all of ESC's 11 channels and five of DST's. p  X3 mnp3.` ` Granting the 148$ W.L. modification would allow EchoStar to move one of its two  Xt3 W 716transponder satellites, EchoStar 1, from 119$ W.L. to 148$ W.L. and operate this relocated  XQ3 W satellite on 16 of EchoStar's 24 authorized channels at 148$ W.L. Modification authorization  X.3 W is necessary because the EchoStar 4 satellite, which EchoStar proposes to use at 119$ W.L., was  X 3 W Ioriginally authorized for 148$ W.L. and the EchoStar 1 satellite is authorized for 119$ W.L.  X3 W |EchoStar asserts that granting the modifications will allow it to commence service from 148$  W W.L. several years ahead of its construction and operation milestones and will create extra in X3 W orbit satellite transponder capacity.b X 3 pԍXpModification Request at 4. While EchoStar is only authorized to broadcast on 21 channels  X3at 119$ W.L., it will have the capacity to transmit on 48 channels.(# EchoStar proposes using the 32/16transponder EchoStar 4  X 3 W jsatellite at 119$ W.L. in conjunction with the remaining 16transponder satellite, EchoStar 2, to  W }provide its "backbone" programming service of approximately 130 digital audio and video  X9 3 W &channels to the Continental United States (CONUS), Alaska and Hawaii.P 9  X3ԍXpId. at 13. (#P EchoStar intends to  X 3 W 7provide "niche" service to the western U.S. and Alaska from 148$ W.L. using the relocated 16 X 3 W transponder EchoStar 1 satellite.H  XS3ԍXpId. at 6.(#H EchoStar states the modifications are not substantial and will  X 3 W not significantly increase the potential for interference for any authorized user of the spectrum.H b  X3ԍXpId. at 7.(#H  X3Telemetry, Tracking & Control (TT&C) functions for EchoStar 1 at 148$ W.L. are in the Cband.  Xg3 m-p4.` ` EchoStar has also requested a waiver of the Commission's rules regarding  XD3 W &provision of DBS services to Alaska and Hawaii from 148$ W.L. The DBS geographic service  W rules state that those acquiring DBS authorizations after January 19, 1996 must provide DBS  W jservice to Alaska and Hawaii where such service is technically feasible from the acquired orbital  X3 W location.   X 3 pԍXp47 C.F.R.  100.53. We are currently seeking comment on whether we should adopt  X!3 psimilar measures for Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories and possessions. See Polices  Xu"3 pand Rules for the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, NPRM FCC9826 (rel. Feb. 26, 1998).(#ƒ On January 25, 1996, ESC DBS won at auction 24 channels at 148$ W.L.  X%3 pԍXpSee Echostar DBS Corporation, 11 FCC Rcd. 16291 (1996) (finding ESC DBS's  X%3authorization at 148$ W.L. ready for grant).(# Thus,"! ,K(K(<<"  W the rules require ESC DBS to provide service to Alaska and Hawaii when EchoStar places a  X3satellite into that orbital location.t XV3 pԍXpWe have previously noted that service to Alaska and Hawaii from 110$ W.L. and 119$  X?3 pW.L. and all four western locations is technically feasible. See Revision of Rules and  X*3Policies for the Direct Broadcast Service, 11 FCC Rcd. 9712 (1995).(#t  X3 mp5.` ` In a separate filing, EchoStar requests that the milestone requirements for DBSC  Xt3 W and DST to commence operation at 175$ W.L. be changed from November 1998 to December  W 2002 and from August 1999 to December 2002 respectively. In addition, EchoStar requests that  X.3 W the milestone requirements of ESC DBS's satellite at 148$ W.L. be changed from December 2002  X 3 W {to November 1998 for 16 channels. The remaining eight channels assigned to ESC DBS at 148$  X3W.L. would continue with the original milestone schedule.O X 3 p9ԍXpConsolidated Request to Change Milestones for Commencing Operation, filed December 30, 1997 at 6. (Milestone Request) (#ƻ  X3 >  X3III. DISCUSSION Đ>K  X\ 3A.pECHOSTAR MINOR MODIFICATION REQUEST: SERVICE TO HAWAII  X 3 mp6.` ` We first address whether EchoStar must provide service to Alaska and Hawaii  X 3 W from 148$ W.L. As noted above, it is technically feasible to serve Alaska and Hawaii from 148$  X 3 W W.L. EchoStar wishes to place its new, more powerful EchoStar 4 satellite into 119$ W.L. to  W provide its backbone programming service to CONUS, Alaska and Hawaii. EchoStar states that  W Yit is more economical for it to transmit its backbone programming to the entire CONUS, Alaska  Xg3 W and Hawaii from the 119$ W.L. orbital location using EchoStar 4 and provide niche programming  W 7to the western United States and Alaska from the relocated 16transponder EchoStar 1 satellite  X!3 W &at 148$ W.L.! X3 pԍXpCurrently, broad coverage of the CONUS is not possible from 148$ W.L. because only a portion of the CONUS can receive an adequate signal from that orbital location.(# EchoStar contends that if its modification request is not granted, it would only  X3 W be able to provide niche programming to Hawaii from 148$ W.L. and the backbone programming  X3 W provided from 119$ W.L. would continue to be unavailable to Hawaii.U  X3ԍXpModification Request at 10. (#U In order to optimize its  W deployment of satellites and better serve the public, EchoStar has requested that the Commission  X3 W waive the requirement to serve Hawaii from 148$ W.L. and allow it to fulfill its geographic  Xr3service requirements for the 148$ W.L. location by using EchoStar 4 at 119.2$ W.L.Tr4  XW#3ԍXpModification Request at 15.(#T "O ,K(K(<<"Ԍ X3 mp7.` ` The State of Hawaii generally supports EchoStar's applications but raises several  X3 W concerns regarding service provision from 148$ W.L. XV3 poԍXpSee Comments of the State of Hawaii, filed February 17, 1998 (supporting with conditions).(#ƥ Hawaii is concerned that if we grant a  X3 W waiver for 148$ W.L., EchoStar could stop service to Hawaii from 119$ W.L. sometime in the  X3 W Hfuture and would not be required to provide service to Hawaii from either the 119$ W.L. or the  Xt3 W 148$ W.L. orbital location. Hawaii suggests that, instead of waiving the rule, the Commission  XQ3 W hold it in abeyance in order to ensure that Hawaii is served by EchoStar.HQd Xf 3ԍXpId. at 6.(#H Further, Hawaii  W suggests that the authorization continue only as long as the EchoStar 1 satellite is operating at  X 3the 148$ W.L. orbital location.  X3 m<p8.` ` We share Hawaii's concerns and believe they can be addressed through a waiver  X3 W with conditions. Xj3 pԍXpSection 1.3 of our rules of procedure provides for waiver of our rules for good cause. 47 C.F.R. 1.3. (#Ư We have stressed on several occasions the importance of DBS licensees  X 3 W providing service to Alaska and Hawaii.O  X3 pԍXpSee Policies and Rules for the Direct Broadcast Service, FCC 9826,  3236 (rel. Feb.  X3 p:26, 1998); Revision of Rules and Policies for the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, 11 FCC Rcd. 9712,  125128 (1995).(#O In our recent notice of proposed rulemaking, for  W example, we emphasized that the provision of DBS service to Alaska and Hawaii will provide  X9 3 W important multichannel video programming distribution (MVPD) competition in those markets.9 8  X"3 p9ԍXpPolicies and Rules for Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, FCC 9826 (rel. Feb. 26, 1998) at 33.(#ư  W YIn order to provide service expeditiously to Alaska and Hawaii, we will waive, with conditions,  W EchoStar's requirements under 47 C.F.R.  100.53 to provide service to Alaska and Hawaii from  X 3 W 148$ W.L. This waiver will serve the public interest because it will enable subscribers in Hawaii  X3 W |to receive the same backbone programming as subscribers on the mainland.]  X23ԍXpSee Modification Request at 4.(#] In addition, the  X3 W 7state of Hawaii supports such a result,O X 3ԍXpHawaii comments at ii.(#O and we believe Hawaii's support provides evidence of  Xg3 W {the public interest in granting the waiver.Og8 XP#3 pԍXpSee Policies and Rules for the Direct Broadcast Service, FCC 9826,  3236 (rel. Feb.  X;$3 p:26, 1998); Revision of Rules and Policies for the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, 11 FCC Rcd. 9712,  125128 (1995).(#O We emphasize that this is a factspecific waiver and  W does not represent a change in policy regarding provision of DBS services to Alaska and Hawaii.  W To the contrary, to ensure that service to Hawaii is maintained, we impose the following three"!,K(K(<<"  W conditions on the waiver: 1) any satellite replacing EchoStar's relocated 16transponder, EchoStar  X3 W 1 satellite, at 148$ W.L. will immediately be subject to our geographic service rules;Q XV3ԍXp47 C.F.R. 100.53(b).(#Q 2) if  X3 W EchoStar 4 stops providing service to Hawaii from 119$ W.L., the EchoStar satellite at 148$  W W.L. will immediately incur  100.53 geographic service requirements; and 3) EchoStar's  W geographic service requirements remain intact for EchoStar and its affiliates on all other  XQ3 W satellites.Qy X{3 p}ԍXpIn its reply, EchoStar agreed to these conditions. See Consolidated Reply Comments and Opposition, filed March 4, 1998 (EchoStar Reply).(# Further, we note that ESC DBS's  100.53 requirements remain in force for its 8  X.3 W assigned channels remaining unused at 148$ W.L. Finally, we note that EchoStar 1 is a 16 W jtransponder satellite and that EchoStar has not specified which of the 24 channels assigned to it  X3 W Yat 148$ W.L. EchoStar intends on using. Consequently, EchoStar must notify the Commission  X3 W within 30 days of relocating a satellite to 148$ W.L. which channels it intends on using at that location.  X\ 3 mNp9.` ` In addition to the conditions above, Hawaii urges us to require that EchoStar  W charge Hawaiian subscribers prices for DBS programming and equipment no higher than those  X 3 W 7charged to subscribers on the mainland.R  X3ԍXpHawaii comments at 1011.(#R In response, EchoStar states that it does not and will  W not differentiate in its monthly subscription fees and that it expects hardware pricing to be  X 3 W similar.M  XG3ԍXpEchoStar reply at 7.(#M While EchoStar argues that it will not differentiate its prices by subscriber location,  W it also argues that the nondiscrimination conditions urged by Hawaii would deprive EchoStar of  W the possible flexibility that may be necessary to run its business in that such conditions would  W preclude it from offering localized discounts in an attempt to compete with particular cable  XD3 W Hoperators and to attract new customers switching from cable.BDw Xl3ԍXpId.(#B We first note that we have not,  W in the past, required any DBS operator to charge uniform prices to customers located throughout  W Ythe U.S. or imposed other pricing conditions on DBS licensees. We also note that in Hawaii, as  W elsewhere in the United States, cable is the dominant provider of multichannel video  W 7programming, and to the extent that cable prices in Hawaii are similar to cable prices within the  W continental U.S., we do not believe that EchoStar would have an incentive to charge higher prices  W in Hawaii than elsewhere, as long as it is attempting to win customers away from cable systems.  W At the same time, we do not believe it would necessarily be in the public interest for the FCC  W {to prevent a DBS operator from responding to local competitive conditions even if that resulted  W in prices that were not identical in all areas served by the DBS operator. Thus we see no reason to impose pricing conditions with respect to service in Hawaii on EchoStar at this time. "}* ,K(K(<< "Ԍ X3B. pREQUEST TO CHANGE MILESTONES p  X3p1.` ` Realignment of Milestones  X3 mp10.` ` EchoStar states that, after evaluating the needs of the market for DBS, it believes  W that the public interest would be served by a realignment of its existing milestone dates for its  XQ3 W 148$ W.L. and 175$ W.L. assignments.Y Q X3ԍXpEchoStar Milestone Request at 5.(#Y We find that this request is actually a request for an  X.3 W )extension of time to construct, launch and operate satellites for EchoStar's 175$ W.L.  X 3 W assignments. EchoStar's decision to place a satellite in the 148$ W.L. orbital location prior to  W ESC DBS's milestone date requirement is a business decision made by EchoStar that is unrelated  X3 W to 175$ W.L. Any milestone requirements for DBSC, DST and ESC at 175$ W.L., are separate  X3 W and distinct from those of ESC DBS at 148$ W.L.!_y X 3 pԍXpOur due diligence milestone rules as found in 47 C.F.R. 100.19 generally state that  plpersons granted DBS authorizations complete contracting for construction of the satellite  pKstations(s) within one year of the grant of the construction permit and be in operation  pwithin six years of the construction permit grant. In addition, persons who receive new  por additional DBS construction permits after January 19, 1996 shall complete construction  p(of the first satellite in their respective DBS systems within four years of the grant of the construction permit.(# The Commission's policy with regard to  W the assignment of DBS channels has traditionally been to impose milestone requirements at  W specific orbital locations rather than to establish stringent financial qualifications to ensure  X9 3 W development and use of valuable DBS resources.8"9  X3 pLԍXpSee Inquiry into the development of regulatory policy in regard to Direct Broadcast  pmSatellites for the period following the 1983 Regional Administrative Radio Conference.,  X^390 F.C.C. 2nd 676 (1982).(#8 We find that, as presented by EchoStar, its  W {request for "realignment" of the milestone dates is actually a request for an extension of time for  X 3 W &DBSC, DST and ESC to construct, launch and operate DBS satellites at 175$ W.L. and should  X 3 W be filed as such.#v %  X3 pԍXpEchoStar requests that the milestone requirements for DBSC and DST to commence  X3 pKoperation at 175$ W.L. be changed from November 1998 to December 2002 and from  pAugust 1999 to December 2002 respectively. EchoStar requests that the construction,  Xa3 p\launch and operation milestones of ESC DBS's satellite at 148$ W.L. be changed from  pDecember 2002 to November 1998 for 16 channels. The remaining eight channels  X3!3assigned to ESC DBS at 148$ W.L. would continue with the original milestone schedule.(#ƴ Consequently, we dismiss EchoStar's request to change its milestones dates  W without prejudice to EchoStar filing a request for extension of time to construct, launch and  X3operate before the expiration of its current authorizations at 175$ W.L.F$c X$3 pԍXpTelquest urges the Commission to deny DBSC and DST's request for "extensions of  X%3 ptime." See Telquest petition to deny at 78. Because we dismiss EchoStar's request we will not address Telquest's arguments at this time.(#F "g$,K(K(<<"Ԍ X3p2.` ` Western Satellite Condition  X3 m^p11.` ` Telquest notes that the Commission conditioned EchoStar's nominal 119$ W.L.  W assignment of channels upon EchoStar's demonstration of due diligence for the contracting and  X3 W construction of a satellite to be located at a western DBS orbital location.% X3 pԍXpTelquest petition to deny at 411 (citing EchoStar Satellite Corp., 7 FCC Rcd. 1765  p(1992) (imposing a condition that EchoStar's assignment of channels at an eastern  plocation be conditioned upon demonstration of due diligence for a satellite to be located at a western location.)) (#Ə Telquest argues that  W [EchoStar has failed to meet its due diligence requirements for its western satellite because  XQ3 W &EchoStar has asked for an extension of time.&Q6 X8 3 p~ԍXpThe Commission has not assigned channels at a western DBS location to EchoStar and EchoStar's request for such western channels remains pending.(# Telquest argues that EchoStar has consequently  W failed to meet its condition to demonstrate due diligence for its western satellite and therefore,  X 3 W the eleven channels assigned to EchoStar at 119$ W.L. should be canceled and reclaimed for  X3reassignment.B' Xi3ԍXpId.(#B  X3 mp12.` ` We do not agree. At the time of EchoStar's 119$ W.L. assignment, the  X 3 W 7Continental east/west pairing rule was in effect.s(  X3ԍXpContinental Satellite Corp., 4 FCC Rcd. 6292 (1989).(#s This rule provided that DBS channels would  W {be assigned in east/west pairs with eastern halfCONUS service permitted from the four eastern  W orbital locations and western halfCONUS service permitted from the four western orbital  W Glocations. This policy was instituted to facilitate the Commission's goals of ensuring fullCONUS  W jDBS service at a time when the Commission was unsure of a single satellite's ability to transmit  X 3 W &fullCONUS signals.$) 6  X3 p~ԍXpEchoStar Satellite Corporation, 7 FCC Rcd. 1765, 1772 (1992) (stating that due to the  p]uncertainty of fullCONUS DBS service, ESC's assignment is conditioned upon its western channel due diligence).(#$ Subsequently, the east/west pairing policy was eliminated because full X3 W CONUS coverage is technically possible from several of the eastern orbital locations.* X3 p)ԍXpRevision of Rules and Policies for the Direct Broadcast Satellite Service, 11 FCC Rcd. 1297, 1323 (1995) (determining east/west pairing policy unnecessary).(#  W Therefore, because EchoStar is authorized and able to transmit a fullCONUS DBS signal and  W because the east/west pairing policy is no longer in effect, we do not find it in the public interest  XF3to terminate EchoStar's license to operate at 119$ W.L. p p"W*,K(K(<<"Ԍ X3p $N  $N 5.` ` Technical Issues  X3 mp13.` ` TEMPO raises several technical issues associated with EchoStar's request for $N  $N   X3 W authority to modify satellites and to launch and operate EchoStar 4 at 119$ W.L.U+ X33ԍXpTEMPO petition to deny at 2.(#U Specifically,  W TEMPO is concerned about: (1) the lack of technical information on the proposed modifications;  W H(2) the insufficient crosspolarization isolation of EchoStar 4; (3) possible interference between  W 6TEMPO's and EchoStar's tracking, telemetry and control (TT&C) operations; (4) possible excess  W 'power fluxdensity from EchoStar 4 into eastern Siberia; and (5) allegations that EchoStar is  X 3operating its satellites at 119$ W.L. in unauthorized orbital locations.  X3p  X3pA. Lack of Technical Information  X3 mp14.` ` Tempo states that EchoStar has provided little technical information about its  W Yproposed modifications or analysis of its satellite's potential for causing harmful interference to  X\ 3 W other systems and other radio services sharing the frequency bands.],\ y X3ԍXpReply of TEMPO Satellite, Inc. at 2.(#] We disagree with  W 7TEMPO's allegations. Under Commission rules, applicants must provide a sufficient technical  W showing to allow the Commission to make a determination of the potential for harmful  X 3 W &interference to other systems.O- * X3ԍXp47 C.F.R.  100.21.(#O EchoStar has complied with this requirement. While its initial  W }modification application did not contain sufficient technical information, EchoStar filed a)  W additional technical information describing the basic technical parameters of its system, and b)  W analyses demonstrating compliance with the coordination triggers in Annex 1 to Appendices S30  Xg3 W }and S30A of the ITU Radio Regulations ("Appendices S30 and S30A").U.vg X3 pԍXpLetter from Pantelis Michalopoulos to Kimberly Baum, dated February 26, 1998  p(providing the basic characteristics of EchoStar 4 and EchoStar 1, as requested in Annex  p2 to Appendices S30 and S30A), and Letter from Pantelis Michalopoulos to Kimberly  pBaum, dated March 11, 1998 (providing analyses of EchoStar 4 and Echostar I with  prespect to the coordination triggers in Annex 1 of Appendices S30 and S30A to identify any affected administrations).(#U We believe the  W kcombination of this technical information and analyses, previously filed information, and the  W Technical Annex to EchoStar's consolidated reply comments and opposition provides sufficient  W 'information for the Commission to make an informed decision, and for other permittees and  X3licensees to determine the potential impact of the modification on their DBS systems. /  X!3 p~ԍXpSee Consolidated Reply Comments and Opposition filed by EchoStar, dated March 4, 1998.(#ơ  X3 mp15.` ` Additionally, Tempo expresses concern over the lack of information provided by  W EchoStar regarding how EchoStar intends to coordinate frequency use and physical location of"r /,K(K(<<"  X3 W EchoStar 4 at 119$ W.L.L0 Xy3ԍXpTEMPO's Reply at 2.(#L While the timing of the launch, the length of time all three of  X3 W EchoStar's satellites 1, 2 and 4 will remain at the 119$ W.L. nominal location, and how service  W will be transitioned to the new satellite are very important issues, we believe that the specific  W 8details of the transition are best determined through direct communication between the DBS  Xt3 W licensees assigned channels at 119$ W.L. Accordingly, we will condition this license upon  W EchoStar notifying TEMPO of its exact plans regarding the specific details of the timing of the  W 9launch of EchoStar 4, the transition of service to EchoStar 4, and the physical location of  X 3 W EchoStar 4 following launch and before the final positioning of the satellite at 119.2$ W.L.. In  W Yregard to the exact orbital position of EchoStar 4, EchoStar states that in the instant application  X3 W it seeks authority to launch its satellite to 119.2$ W.L.U1y X 3ԍXp Modification Request at 2. (#U As TEMPO's satellite is authorized at  X3 W 118.8$ W.L., positioning EchoStar 4 at 119.2$ W.L. will minimize the possibility of interference to TEMPO's satellite.  X9 3 pB.` ` CrossPolarization Isolation  X 3 m;p16.` ` TEMPO also objects to EchoStar 4's downlink satellite antenna crosspolarization  X 3 W isolation of 24 dB.L2 * X3ԍXpTEMPO's Reply at 4.(#L TEMPO argues that a 24 dB crosspolarization isolation deviates from the  X 3 W standard in Appendix S30.B3  X\3ԍXpId.(#B The Region 2 BSS Plan4  X3 pԍXpThe Region 2 BSS Plan and its associated feeder link Plan, contained in Appendices S30  pand S30A respectively, were adopted by a World Administration Radiocommunication  p;Conference (WARC) in 1985. In these Plans, each country in Region 2 is assigned certain DBS channels at certain orbital location(s).(#ƚ is based upon a satellite antenna cross W polarization isolation of 30 dB in order to maximize efficient use of the orbitspectrum resource.  W kEchoStar however, contends that under the ITU Radio Regulations, an Administration is not  Xg3 W precluded from using a different crosspolarization isolation.5g  X3 pnԍXpSection 3 of the Technical Annex to EchoStar's Consolidated Reply Comments and Opposition.(#Ɵ We concur that the United States  W lmay modify the Region 2 BSS Plan to reflect the actual technical parameters of U.S. DBS  X!3 W systems that are implemented through the modification procedure in Appendix S30.}6! Xf"3 pmԍXpSee Article 4 of Appendix S30 and Annex 5 to Appendix S30. Successful modification  pof the Plans is dependent on obtaining the agreement of any administration whose Plan  X:$3assignments or other services are identified as affected in accordance with Appendix S30. (#} For a  W 7system using different technical parameters than those specified for the Region 2 BSS Plan, the  W United States will file the information in Annex 2 to Appendix S30 with the ITU to initiate" 6,K(K(<<"  W Hmodification of the Plan. Once the modification process is completed, the technical parameters of the actual system will be included in the Region 2 Plan.  X3 mp17.` ` TEMPO argues that it should not be required to accept degradation of its service  Xt3 W as a result of EchoStar's poor crosspolarization isolation.L7t X3ԍXpTEMPO's Reply at 4.(#L While we expect our licensees to use  W kgood engineering practice in designing their satellites to promote the most efficient use of the  W Glimited orbitspectrum resource, our rules permit the implementation of systems that use different  W characteristics from those specified in Appendix S30, upon adequate showing that such action  W does not result in interference to other operational or planned systems in excess of that  X3 W determined in accordance with Appendix S30.8y X 3 pKԍXpSee 47 C.F.R. 100.21 of the Commission's rules. While this rule section refers to the  pJFinal Acts of the World BroadcastingSatellite Administrative Radio Conference in 1977,  plthese Final Acts have been codified into Appendix S30 of the ITU Radio Regulations and modified by subsequent World Radiocommunication Administration Conferences.(# Accordingly, our licensees may use cross W polarization isolation different from that specified for the Region 2 BSS Plan if they demonstrate  W that such a difference does not result in interference to other operational or planned systems,  W including U.S. licensed systems. While it appears that EchoStar's use of 24 dB crosspolarization  W Iisolation may not be consistent with our rules, it is not clear that the resulting degradation is  W Imaterial since the information submitted by TEMPO and EchoStar indicates that the overall  W interference caused to TEMPO may not be in excess of that allowed under Appendix S30. In  W addition, the frequency overlap between the services of TEMPO and EchoStar is less than 10  X3MHz, a fraction of the ten 24 MHz channels assigned to TEMPO.9 XE3 pJԍXpEchoStar's channel 21 partially overlaps TEMPO's channel 22. The overlapping portion  X.3is 9.42 MHz. See Appendix S30, Article 10, Table 4.(#  Xg3 mp18.` ` Considering this, we will require EchoStar to coordinate with TEMPO regarding  W Hits use of 24 dB satellite crosspolarization isolation. Until such coordination is completed, we  W &will require that EchoStar operate on a no harmful interference basis with respect to TEMPO's  W channel 22 (the only channel that could experience interference from EchoStar's Echostar 4 satellite).  X3p C. TT&C Functions  Xr3 mop19.` ` Tempo also states that EchoStar 4's proposed TT&C operations could interfere  XO3 W with TEMPO's TT&C operations.L:O  X"3ԍXpTEMPO's Reply at 5.(#L TEMPO argues that the TT&C signals used by EchoStar and  W TEMPO could actually overlap, in light of the frequency stability specifications employed by  X 3 W TEMPO and EchoStar. ; 4  X%3 pԍXpTEMPO's Reply at 5, and attached Engineering Statement at 3. Frequency stability is the  pLamount of error in the specification of a certain frequency. TEMPO states that its"&:,K(K(&"  pfrequency stability, and EchoStar's, will be +/ 10 parts per million, which would mean  pthat the actual frequency would be within +/ 10 parts per million of the specified frequency. (#  TEMPO uses signals with center frequencies 12,201 MHz, 12,202"  K;,K(K(<<"  X3 W MHz, 12,203 MHz and 12,204 MHz, with a 450 kHz bandwidth for TT&C.<K X3 pnԍXpSection 5 of the Technical Annex to EchoStar's Consolidated Reply Comments and Opposition. (#Ơ EchoStar proposes  W to use signals with center frequencies 12,200.5 MHz, 12,202.5 MHz, 12,698.5 MHz and 17, 308  X3 W GMHz, with a 300 kHz bandwidth for its TT&C operations.= XP 3ԍXpEchoStar's Appendix S4 information for EchoStar 4, filed February 26, 1998.(#Ƅ Use of these frequencies for TT&C  W operations is consistent with the Commission's policy that licensees perform TT&C in the bands  Xt3in which the applicant's satellites would normally operate to provide communications services.>t X 3 pԍXpSee 47 C.F.R.  25.202(g) of the Commission's rules. Specifically, these frequencies fall into the guardbands of the Appendices S30 and S30A Plans. (#  X.3 mp20.` ` We agree that, considering frequency stability, the TT&C signals of EchoStar and  W YTEMPO could overlap. As in other situations, we expect U.S. licensees to coordinate their use  W of TT&C frequencies and reach a mutually acceptable solution. In this particular case, TEMPO  X3 W has already launched a satellite to the nominal orbital location of 119$ W.L., and the frequencies  W it uses for TT&C functions are public information. Based on this information, EchoStar could  W Xhave chosen frequencies with sufficient guardbands to TEMPOs TT&C signals to avoid potential  W overlap. EchoStar however, indicates that it is not likely that either EchoStar or TEMPO will  X9 3 W %need to use all of their downlink telemetry frequencies simultaneously.?9 2  X3 pԍ XpSection 5 of the Technical Annex to EchoStars Consolidated Reply Comments and Opposition.(#ƣ Further, EchoStar states  W that it should be possible for EchoStar and TEMPO to avoid using adjacent TT&C signals  X 3 W simultaneously.@  Xp3 pԍXpSection 5 of the Technical Annex to EchoStars Consolidated Reply Comments and Opposition.(#Ƣ We believe that it should be possible for EchoStar and TEMPO to avoid  W potential harmful interference into each other's TT&C signals in light of the relatively large  W 7diameter TT&C antennas used and based on the orbital separation between their satellites. We  W will require EchoStar to coordinate with TEMPO and EchoStar to transmit on center frequencies  W 12,200.5 MHz and 12,202.5 MHz on a no harmful interference basis to TEMPO's TT&C operations until the parties have completed coordination of TT&C operations.  X3 m^p21.` ` We assume from EchoStar's application and subsequently filed information that  W |EchoStar will use the above frequencies for transfer orbit TT&C operations. We will require" f@,K(K(<<"  W EchoStar to coordinate its TT&C operations during the launch and transfer orbit phase with any  X3potentially affected inorbit, U.S. licensed systems and foreign licensed systems.*A XV3 p[ԍXpPotentially affected networks include those located within +/ 10 degrees in any direction  pof the geostationary orbital arc where EchoStar's satellite in transfer orbit passes by the geostationary orbital arc.(#*  X3p D.` ` Power Fluxdensity  Xt3 mp22.` ` TEMPO also states that the information submitted on EchoStar 4 fails to document  W compliance with powerflux density limits in Appendix S30 required to protect Region 1 fixed  X.3 W service systems.LB.K X* 3ԍXpTEMPO's Reply at 5.(#L Our rules effectively require that licensees meet the limits specified in Annex  X 3 W '1 to Appendix S30.PC  X 3ԍXpSupra at note 55.(#P If the limits in Annex 1 to Appendix S30 are exceeded by a proposed  W jsystem (i.e. proposed modification to the Plans) according to the ITUs analysis, the agreement  X3 W 7of all affected administrations must be obtained.]D X%3ԍXpSee Article 4 of Appendix S30.(#] Our analysis shows that EchoStar 4 exceeds  W the coordination trigger specified in Annex 1 to Appendix S30 to protect terrestrial services in  X 3 W Ieastern Siberia.kE b  X3ԍXpSee Section 5(c) of Annex 1 to Appendix S30.(#k Thus, EchoStar will have to coordinate with the affected administration to  W |obtain its agreement. EchoStar should have been aware of this problem early in the design of  W its satellite and should have initiated coordination with the affected administration as early as  W possible. Since agreement has not yet been obtained, we will condition the grant of EchoStar's  W application on operation on a no harmful interference basis with respect to affected administrations, until agreement can be reached.  X3 mp23.` ` EchoStar also proposes to move EchoStar 1 to 148$ W.L. EchoStars analysis of  Xg3 W Gthe potential interference to other services indicates that the operation of EchoStar 1 at 148$ W.L.  W will not exceed the coordination triggers in Annex 1 to Appendix S30. However, we are  W Yconcerned about the coordination of EchoStar 1s Cband TT&C frequencies at this new orbital  W location. EchoStar 1 is not performing TT&C functions within its service bands and there are  X3 W inorbit Cband satellite systems operating or proposing to operate in the vicinity of 148$ W.L.  X3 W 7As our trilateral agreement with Canada and Mexico does not extend to 148$ W.L., we have no  W specific international obligation other than normal international coordination with these countries  Xr3 W 8regarding our use of this part of the orbital arc.Fr  X8#3 pԍXpSee "Trilateral Agreement Regarding Use of The Geostationary Orbit Reached by Canada, Mexico and The United States," Public Notice dated September 2, 1988.(# We see no reason not to allow EchoStar to  XO3 W coordinate these frequencies at 148$ W.L. as required under the ITUs Radio Regulations. We  W again will require that these TT&C operations will not cause harmful interference to other  W 6services or satellite systems operating in accordance with the ITU Radio Regulations. In addition,"  F,K(K(<<"  W we remind EchoStar that no protection from interference caused by radio stations authorized by  W other administrations is guaranteed unless coordination procedures are timely completed or, with respect to individual administrations, by successfully completing coordination agreements.  Xt3 mp24.` ` In addition, during movement of EchoStar 1 from 119$ W.L. to 148$ W.L., we  W will require EchoStar to coordinate its Cband TT&C operations with all potentially affected satellite systems, including U.S.licensed systems and foreignlicensed systems.  X 3  X3pE.` ` Orbit Locations  X3 m;p25.` ` Finally, TEMPO alleges that EchoStar is operating its two existing satellites at the  X3 W nominal 119$ W.L. orbital position outside of EchoStar's authorized locations thus increasing the  X 3 W 8potential for interference and satellite collision.G  X 3ԍXpSee supplemental filing of TEMPO Satellite, Inc., filed on March 27, 1998 at 12. (#Ƒ TEMPO's allegations raise several serious  W concerns. We intend to investigate this matter carefully to determine if any Commission rules  W jhave been violated and what action should be taken. However, because this issue is sufficiently  W distinct from those involved in the instant application, we will address the matter of orbital locations in a separate proceeding. p  X3C. pLAUNCH AUTHORITY REQUEST p  Xg3 mp26.` ` EchoStar has requested authority to launch EchoStar 4 to the 119.2$ W.L. orbital  W klocation. Based upon the discussions above, we find that EchoStar has satisfied its technical  W Ksubmissions requirement and is ready to begin service using its new switchable 32/16  X3 W transponder satellite from 119.2$ W.L. provided EchoStar meets the conditions discussed above.  X3 W Therefore, we grant EchoStar authority to launch to 119.2$ W.L. and begin operations from that location on channels 121 inclusive assigned to ESC and DST.  Xr3D.pSPECIAL TEMPORARY AUTHORITY FOR TESTING p  X,3 m*p27.` ` On March 17, 1998, EchoStar filed an application for special temporary authority  X 3 W to test its EchoStar 4 DBS satellite at 128$ W.L., 127$ W.L. or 110$ W.L. for eight weeks.DH { X53 pԍXpRequest of EchoStar Satellite corporation for Special Temporary Authority to Test a  X3 pDirect Broadcast Satellite At the 128$ W.L., 127$ W.L. or 110$ W.L. Orbital Location, filed March 17, 1998 (EchoStar STA Request).(#D  X3 W %EchoStar states that its preferred location for temporary testing is at the 127$ W.L. or 128$ W.L.  X3 W jlocations._I Xr"3ԍXpEchoStar STA Request at 1, footnote 1.(#_ Channels at the 127$ W.L. location are assigned to Mexico under the Region 2 BSS  X3 W %Plan.cJ X%3ԍXpSee Appendix S30, Article 10 (1997).(#c EchoStar asserts that the Mexican administration has no plans to deploy a satellite to that"b J,K(K(<<"  X3 W Hlocation within the relevant time frame.SK Xy3ԍXpEchoStar STA Request at 3.(#S EchoStar States that the requested special temporary  W authority is essential for it to perform all tests required by its insurers on all 32 transponders and  X3that testing from this location will extend the satellite's useful life by three to four months.#Ly X3 p}ԍXpBy testing at the 127$ W.L. location instead of the 110$ W.L. location, EchoStar will not  phave to use as much fuel to maneuver the spacecraft from the testing location to the operational location.(##  Xt3 mp28.` ` Both the Commission and EchoStar have had discussions with the Mexican  W administration on this matter. We are currently having discussions with Mexico regarding  X.3 W XEchoStar's proposed testing, and expect that these discussions will be completed prior to launch.-M. X 3 pԍXpSee Letter from Richard B. Engelman Chief, Planning and Negotiations Division,  pLInternational Bureau to Sra. Salma Jalife Villalon, Coodinadora General de Asuntos Internacionales COFETEL dated April 2, 1998.(#-  X 3 W 9We will grant EchoStar's authority to test at 127$ W .L., subject to the outcome of these  X3 W }discussions with Mexico. We will require that EchoStar's testing at 127$ W .L. not cause  W harmful interference to or receive protection from systems operating in accordance with the ITU Radio Regulations.  X\ 3E.p OPERATIONAL AUTHORITY  X9 3 p  X 3 m^p29.` ` EchoStar has requested authority to relocate one of its 16transponder satellites  X 3 W from its current location at 119$ W.L to 148$ W.L. and begin operation on 16 of ESC DBS's 24  X 3 W assigned channels.^N  X3ԍXpEchoStar's Modification Request at 2.(#^ As discussed and conditioned above, we find it in the public interest to grant  X3 W YEchoStar authority to begin operations on 16 of its assigned 24 channels at the 148$ W.L. orbit  W location. We again note that all milestones for the remaining 8 channels not used by the relocated satellite must be met.  XD3  X!3IV.CONCLUSION Đ>Kp  X3  mMp30.` ` We find it in the public interest to grant, with conditions, EchoStar's request to  W make minor modifications to their DBS authorizations, grant authority to launch a EchoStar 4 to  X3 W Y119$ W.L., relocate EchoStar 1 to 148$ W.L., and to begin operations from 148$ W.L. because  W Zit will facilitate DBS service to Alaska and Hawaii. We also grant EchoStar authority to test  XO3 W EchoStar 4 at 127$ W.L. for a period of eight weeks after which it will be moved to 119.2$ W.L  W We dismiss EchoStar's request to change milestones without prejudice and deny TEMPO and Telquest's petitions to deny.  X3> >"2 N,K(K(<<"Ԍ X36V. ORDERING CLAUSES Đ>Kp  X3 mp31.` ` Accordingly, pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.261 of the Commission's  W Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.261, IT IS ORDERED that EchoStar's requests for authority to make minor  W modifications, launch and operate DBS satellites, Application File Nos. 70SATMP/ML98, 71 W iSATMP/ML98, 72SATMP/ML98 are GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS that:  W (1) until the Region 2 BSS Plan and its associated Feeder Link Plan are modified to include the  W |technical parameters of EchoStar 4 and modified EchoStar 1 and their associated feeder links,  W these satellite systems will not cause harmful interference to or receive protection from other BSS  W or feeder link assignments or other services or satellite systems operating in accordance with the ITU Radio Regulations, in particular with respect to Section 5(c) of Annex 1 to Appendix S30;  W (2) EchoStar will provide the Commission with any additional information and analyses, as  W required, to effect coordination of its frequency assignments with other Administrations; (3) until  W EchoStar completes coordination of its satellite crosspolarization isolation with the operation of  W TEMPO, it will not cause harmful interference to or receive protection from TEMPO's Channel 22; (4) EchoStar will coordinate as necessary with other U.S. licensees.  X3 mp32.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: (1) EchoStar shall coordinate all onstation  W %TT&C operations with all potentially affected inorbit U.S. licensees and foreignlicensed satellite  W |systems and; (2) until the completion of coordination with TEMPO regarding use of TT&C  W signals with center frequencies of 12,200.5 MHz and 12,202.5 MHz TT&C signals, operation on these frequencies will be on a nonharmful interference basis to TEMPO's TT&C operations;  W (3) until the advance publication, coordination and/or notification of TT&C frequencies in  W Yaccordance with the ITU Radio Regulations is complete, these TT&C operations will not cause  W harmful interference to or receive protection from other services or satellite systems operating in accordance with the ITU Radio Regulations.  XO3 mp33.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that EchoStar will coordinate all transferorbit TT&C  X,3 W %operations, including operations for movement of EchoStar 1 from 119$ W.L. to 148$ W.L., with all potentially affected inorbit U.S. licensees and foreignlicensed satellite systems.  X3 m;p34.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT EchoStar shall notify TEMPO regarding the  W specific details of the timing of the launch of EchoStar 4, the transition of service to EchoStar  W 4, and the physical location of EchoStar 4 following launch and before the final positioning of  XZ3the satellite at 119.2$ W.L.  X3 mop35.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT any satellite replacing EchoStar 1 at 148$  W 8W.L. will immediately be subject to 47 C.F.R. 100.53 (b) obligations; (2) if EchoStar stops  X 3 W Kproviding service to Hawaii from 119$ W.L., any EchoStar satellite at 148$ W.L. will  W immediately incur 47 C.F.R. 100.53(b) obligations; (3) for all other satellites subject to 100.53, EchoStar's requirements remain.  XB$3 mp36.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT EchoStar is GRANTED AUTHORITY to  X%3launch a direct broadcast satellite, EchoStar 4, to the 119.2$ W.L. orbital location. "%N,K(K(<<+"Ԍ X3 mp37.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT EchoStar is GRANTED AUTHORITY to  W operate a direct broadcast satellite on 16 of the 24 channels authorized to Echostar DBS at the  X3 W 148$ W.L. orbit location SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT (1) EchoStar's milestone  X3 W obligations for the provision of DBS service on the unused channels assigned to EchoStar at 148$  W ZW.L. remain unchanged as originally authorized; and (2) EchoStar inform the Commission of  XQ3 W kwhich channels it will operate at 148$ W.L. within 30 days of relocating EchoStar 1 to 148$ W.L.  X3  mOp38.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT EchoStar is GRANTED SPECIAL  X3 W iTEMPORARY AUTHORITY to test its EchoStar 4 DBS satellite at the 127$ W.L. orbit location  W for a period of eight weeks SUBJECT TO THE outcome of the discussions with the Mexican  W 'Administration and SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT testing of EchoStar 4 at this  W location not cause harmful interference to, nor will it receive protection from, systems operating in accordance with the ITU Radio Regulations.  X 3 mp39.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that EchoStar's Request to Change Milestones, File  W 7Nos. 66SATMP/ML98, 67SATMP/ML98, 68SATMP/ML98, 69SATMP/ML98 is dismissed without prejudice.  Xg3 mp40.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that TEMPO Satellite, Inc.'s Motion to File Supplement is GRANTED.  X3 mp41.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that TEMPO Satellite, Inc. and Telquest Ventures, Inc.'s petitions to deny ARE DENIED. p` `  hh+ p` `  hh+ p` `  hh+FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION   p` `  hh+Thomas S. Tycz p` `  hh+Chief, p` `  hh+Satellite and Radiocommunication Division  v p` `  hh+International Bureaus