WPC 2?BJZECourier3|a #f\  PC&P#HP LaserJet 4M (PCL) (Add) RM 834HL4MPCAD.PRSx  @\$eX@ S'#f\  PC&P#2,qKXCourierTimes New Roman"i~'^5>I\\>>>\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\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\<?xxx,Px6X@`7X@2a=5,&a\  P6G;&P2^<n K3|a Times New RomanTimes New Roman BoldTimes New Roman Italic"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN/>/>/>/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+SS8-8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNI\\>>>\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\\pBnnBmgg>Q\7"yyyy\njc\gnn\22K)K+KA.K0"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\\pBnnBsgg>\\7"yyyy\nlc\gnn\"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$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd"i~'^:DpddȨDDDdp4D48ddddddddddDDpppd|Ld|pȐD8DtdDdpXpXDdp8Dp8pdppXLDpdddXP,PhD4htDDD4DDDDDDdDp8dddddȐXXXXXJ8J8J8J8pddddppppddpddddzpdddXXhXXXXXdddhdptL8LpLDLpphhp8ZDP8pppddƐXXXpLpLpLphfDtppppppȐhXXXpDppLDd4ddC6CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxHjdDdddddd%7777777777>>>0eOIIOD>OO%*ODaOO>OI>DOOgOOD%%37%07070%777V7777%*77O77055;%;3%%%%%%%%%%%7O0O0O0O0O0aHI0D0D0D0D0%%%%O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O7O0O7O6O7O7O7>7O0O0O0I0I0I;I0OED0D0D0D0O7O7O7O;O7O;O7%%7%%%7M>;;O7DD,D%D%DO7AO7O7O7O7aOI%I%I%>*>*>*>;D.DD3O7O7O7O7O7O7gOO;D0D0D0O7D%O7>*D%O7E77%%WMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN(BB(37%07777j7#TT7!#TT7T!%%007n&&Bn77lCTn(nBB(A\\>>n%07\n!"IIIITTenn7TnB@;7>lBBn726K 3vT5p5k:6"i~'^"(22TN"""28"2222222222888,\HBBH>8HH"&H>XHH8HB8>HH^HH>"".2",2,2,"222N2222"&22H22,006"6."""""""""""2H,H,H,H,H,XAB,>,>,>,>,""""H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H2H,H2H1H2H2H282H,H,H,B,B,B6B,H?>,>,>,>,H2H2H2H6H2H6H2""2"""2F866H2>>(>">">H2;H2H2H2H2XHB"B"B"8&8&8&86>*>>.H2H2H2H2H2H2^HH6>,>,>,H2>"H28&>"H2?22!!WFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxN$<<$.2",2222`2 LL2 LL2L"",,2d""; z<!9=">a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersUj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!h` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers"pfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 23B#?$?%@&Aa8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers#yW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style$. 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) . 2D'eB(B)C*ADa6TechnicalTechnical Document Style')D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style(<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style)9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style*8bv{ 2  a.   2H+E,E-aF.3Fa1TechnicalTechnical Document Style+F!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style,(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style-(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Style.z   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)Documentg2M/LH0ePL1L25MPleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading Paper/E!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:pTDocument[6]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g;  Document[5]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g<  Document[2]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g=*    Document[7]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O g>  ` ` ` 2W?*U@UAWVBVRight Par[1]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g?8 @  Right Par[2]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O g@A@` ` `  ` ` ` Document[3]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gA0     Right Par[3]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gBJ` ` ` @  ` ` ` 2ZCWDoXE%YFYRight Par[4]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gCS` ` `  @  Right Par[5]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gD\` ` `  @hhh hhh Right Par[6]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gEe` ` `  hhh@ hhh Right Par[7]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gFn` ` `  hhh@  2s]GZH[Ii\J\Right Par[8]Eg%Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersO g% W4I O gGw` ` `  hhh@ppp ppp Document[1]'Eg%Document Style W4A O g% W4I O gHF    ׃  Technical[5]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gI&!"  . Technical[6]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gJ&#$  . 2`K]LA^M^Nj_Technical[2]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gK*%&    Technical[3]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gL''(   Technical[4]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gM&)*   Technical[1]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gN4+$,     2;nOL`P`Qv VaRomTechnical[7]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gO&-.  . Technical[8]Eg%Technical Document Style O g% W4I O gP&/0  . MACNormalQ;     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<    #:}D4P XP#T I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)T,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#     X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<    #:}D4P XP#,0*ÍÍ,*Í ., US!!!! ! #:}D4P XP#FootnoteRÍč2frSmnTinUUpV~pfootnote tex#S'p #FxX  Pg9CXP#headerTAx 4 <D  #FxX  Pg9CXP# referenceU;#FxX  Pg9CXP#itemizeX1V&V 8F ` hp xr#FxX  Pg9CXP#2wWirX^tYO_uZ vheader2WI ` hp x`    #FxX  Pg9CXP# heading 3XF` hp x #FxX  Pg9CXP# footer!Y!!#d\  PCP#CitatorFormat Secretary's Citator Output FileZW r5-#d6X@`7Ͽ@# XX  X B r5-S  B2$z[w\rx] y^ryFormat DownloadFormat Downloaded Document[iޛ r5- XX    \ #d6X@`7Ͽ@#a2Agenda\a1AgendaAgenda Items]7D yP ) I. a3Agenda^2|_Vz` {a{bd>|HeadingChapter Heading_J d  ) I. ׃  Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers`>a݅@  I.   X(# SubheadingSubheadinga0\ E A.  HIGHLIGHT 1Italics and Boldldeddb+. 2c|d}e1~f1DRAFT ONHeader A Text = DRAFT and Datec X =8` (#FDRAFTă r  ` (#=D3 1, 43 12pt (Z)(PC-8))T2Dă  ӟDRAFT OFFTurn Draft Style offd@@    LETTER LANDLetter Landscape - 11 x 8.5e 3'3'Standard'3'3StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11 ;   LEGAL LANDLegal Landscape - 14 x 8.5ff 3'3'Standard'A'AStandardZ K e6VE L"nu;   2fg1h1FinwjLETTER PORTLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 11gL 3'3'Standard3'3'StandardZ K e6VE L"nU9   LEGAL PORTLegal Portrait - 8.5 x 14h 3'3'StandardA'A'StandardLetter Portrait - 8.5 x 119   TITLETitle of a DocumentiK\ * ăBLOCK QUOTESmall, single-spaced, indentedjN X 2ʈkdljmfnEHIGHLIGHT 2Large and Bold LargekB*d. HIGHLIGHT 3Large, Italicized and Underscoredl V -qLETTERHEADLetterhead - date/marginsmu 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   INVOICE FEETFee Amount for Math Invoicen ,, $0$0  2:o-p8)q8arMEMORANDUMMemo Page FormatoD.   ! M E M O R A N D U M ă r  y<N dddy   INVOICE EXPSEExpense Subtotals for Math Invoicep:A ,p, $0$00INVOICE TOTTotals Invoice for Math Macroqz 4p, $0$00INVOICE HEADRHeading Portion of Math Invoicer+C`*   4X 99L$0 **(  ӧ XX 2ՏsXlt[Ďu[v[zNORMALReturn to Normal TypestylesSMALLSmall TypestyletFINEFine TypestyleuLARGELarge Typestylev2w[x[byzX@EXTRA LARGEExtra Large TypestylewVERY LARGEVery Large TypestylexENVELOPEStandard Business Envelope with Headery+w ,,EnvelopeZ K e VE L"n,,EnvelopeLarge, Italicized and Under;    ,, 88+  `   1zdf2U{ʒ|j} ~lStyle 14Swiss 8 Pt Without Margins{$$D Co> PfQ  )a [ PfQO Style 12Dutch Italics 11.5|$$F )^ `> XifQ  )a [ PfQO Style 11Initial Codes for Advanced II}J )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 ! )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   x )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect II Learning Guide   j-n )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  jBX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 3oDutch Roman 11.5 with Margins/Tabs~ )a [ PfQO  ddn  # c0*b, oT9 !2˜#|+Style 4 PSwiss 8 Point with MarginsDq Co> PfQ  dddd  #  Style 1.5Dutch Roman 11.5 Font4h )a [ PfQO  dddn Style 2Dutch Italic 11.5$ )^ `> XifQ Style 5Dutch Bold 18 Point$RH$L T~> pfQ_  )a [ PfQO 2K=DStyle 7Swiss 11.5$$V )ao> PfQ ]  )a [ PfQO Style 6Dutch Roman 14 Point$$N w [ PfQ   )a [ PfQO Style 10oInitial Codes for Advanced U )a [ PfQK  dddn  ##  [[ b, oT9 !b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Advanced Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  QN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 Style 8PfInitial Codes for Beginninggi )a [ PfQK  dddn  # X` hp x (#%'b, oT9  [ &e )^ `> XifQ ` Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   d )^ `> XifQ Beginning Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   jH )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`6 >Page  j )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 2}&Style 9Initial Codes for Intermediate )a [ PfQK  dddn  # X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 Њ [ e )^ `> XifQ ` Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   3 )^ `> XifQ Intermediate Legal WordPerfect Learning Guide   jf )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc.`+ >Page  jX )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 UpdateInitial Codes for Update Module )a [ PfQK  dddn  #  [ X` hp x (#%'b, oT9 !n )^ `> XifQ ` Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   f )^ `> XifQ Legal WordPerfect 5.0 Update Class Learning Guide   Q" )^ `> XifQ    Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988`7 CPage  jN~ )^ `> XifQ    Page ` Copyright  Portola Systems, Inc. 1987, 1988 a1IndentedLeft-indented text6n ? I.Xa2IndentedLeft-indented text?C ? A.` ` 28a3IndentedLeft-indented textHP ? ` ` 1. a4IndentedLeft-indented textQp- ? ` `  a.` 'a5IndentedLeft-indented text[ܽ ? ` `  '(1) hh-a6IndentedLeft-indented textdK ? ` `  'hh-(a)42Zٶsj}ݸa7IndentedLeft-indented textl݇ ? ` `  'hh-4i)h:a8IndentedLeft-indented textu-b ? ` `  'hh-4:a)ppAa1InterrogatoresStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentUZZI.a1OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4$ 2Ea2OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4/ a3OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4: a4OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4E a5OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4P   2 Լ]a6OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4[   a7OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4f  a8OutlineE+O4*ÿUI. A. 1. a. (1) (a) i) a)4 =(O4WGl *O4q Leventhal6@6wwLeventhal, Senter & Lerman Doc Style*O4ÿUVGl.EQ    #XN\  PXP#2B8rҿDqa1DAKBt*3  S'1.` ` a3DAKa1for ordersenter, tab, parnum, two spaces5Q0 6"]J  1. a2InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<KL28qtqqVqa3InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<MNa4InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<OPa5InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<QRa6InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<ST2\qjqrLa7InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<UVa8InterrogatoroDStarts with A. at margin, 1 at first indentk*<WXa4DAKa2for ordersenter, tab, parnum, two spacesF\L0  S'X` ` A. 2K\ K55Z"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%8WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNM\\>>>\}0>03\\\\\\\\\\>>}}}\rryrr>Qygyrr\grrggF3FM\>\\Q\Q3\\33Q3\\\\FF3\QyQQFI3Ic>0cM>>>0>>>>>>\>\3r\r\r\r\r\yyQrQrQrQrQ>3>3>3>3y\\\\\\\\\gQr\\\\gQ\r\r\r\r\yQyQycyQnrQrQrQrQ\\\c\c\>3>\>>>\\ccyQg3gBg>g;g3y\jy\y\\\yrFrFrF\F\F\FccgBg3gM\\\\\\ygcgFgFgF\g>y\\Fg>g\n0\\=(=WddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddNBnnB_\F\\\\\\3;\7;\7>>gg\??n\\pBnnBb\\>g\7"yyyy\njc\}nn\2 S'   S' #&a\  P6G;&P# Federal Communications Commission DA 981538 #X\  P6G;P# #&a\  P6G;&P# PbBefore the Federal Communications Commission  S'0Washington, D.C. 20554 ă  S8'In the Matter of hhCq) ` `  hhCq)  S'Stratos Mobile Networks (USA) LLC,hhCq)ppITC98287TC  S'IDB Mobile Communications, Inc., Stratosq)  S'Global Corporation, and NewTel Enterprisesq)  Sp'Limited` `  hhCq)pp  * ` `  hhCq)  S 'MarineSat Communications Network, Inc.,q)ppITC98288TC  S 'Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc.,q)  S 'ICG Satellite Services, Inc., Stratos Holdings,q)  S 'Inc., and Stratos Acquisition Corporationq) ` `  hhCq)  SX'Applications pursuant to Section 214 of the q)  S0'Communications Act of 1934, as amended, toq)  S'transfer control of Section 214 Authorizationsq) ` `  hhCq)  S'Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc.q)pp9713587  S'and Stratos Acquisition Corporation,hhCq) ` `  hhCq)  S@'Application for consent to assignment ofq)  S'pointtopoint microwave radio station licenseq) ` `  hhCq)  S'Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc.q)pp807DSEAL98  S'and Stratos Acquisition CorporationhhCq) ` `  hhCq)  SP'Application to assign earth station authorizations)  S' ORDER AND AUTHORIZATION \  S' Adopted: July 28, 1998 hhCq ppReleased: August 5, 1998 By the Chief, Telecommunications Division:  S 'P I. Introduction ă  S!'1.` ` In this Order, we authorize Stratos Mobile Networks (USA) LLC ("Stratos USA"), IDB Mobile Communications, Inc. ("IDB Mobile"), and Stratos Global Corporation ("Stratos") to transfer control of Section 214 authorizations to NewTel Enterprises Limited ("NewTel"). We also authorize MarineSat Communications Network, Inc. ("MCN") and Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc. ("MTN"), and ICG Satellite Services ("ICG") to transfer Section 214 authorizations to Stratos Holdings, Inc. ("Stratos Holdings") and Stratos Acquisition Corporation ("Stratos Acquisition"). Furthermore, we grant MTN's applications regarding assignment of pointtopoint microwave radio station licenses and earth station authorizations to Stratos Acquisition. We also impose dominant"'0*((PP~&" carrier regulation on these authorizations for service on the U.S.Canada route. We find that a grant of these applications will serve the public interest under Sections 214 and 310(b)(4) of the  S'Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act).Tc yO'ԍ47 U.S.C.  214, 310(b)(4).T We also find that, with the exception of the U.S.Canada route, nondominant carrier regulation should apply to the routes serviced by the applicants.   S8'Ol II. Background \  S'2.` ` Stratos USA, a Delaware corporation, is authorized to provide international maritime satellite services, international aeronautical satellite services, international land mobile satellite services, and international basic switched and private line services to various international points on both  Sp'facilities and resale bases.#pXc {Oh 'ԍ XSee Stratos Mobile Networks (USA), Inc., IDB Mobile Communications, Inc., Stratos Global Corporation, and NewTel Enterprises Limited, Application Pursuant to Section 214 of the  {O 'Communications Act of 1934, as Amended, to Transfer Control of Title II Authorizations, File No. ITC {O'98287TC, at 3 (filed Apr. 10, 1998) (Stratos Application). See also id. app. A1 for a detailed listing of Stratos USA's Title II authorizations.(## IDB Mobile, also a Delaware corporation, is authorized to provide various  SH 'international mobile satellite services.H c {O'ԍSee id. at 3; see also id. app. A2 for a detailed listing of IDB Mobile's Title II authorizations. MTN, a Colorado corporation, is a U.S. provider of satellite services with global facilitiesbased and resale authority as well as specific authority to provide services over the INMARSAT, ANIK E1, ANIK E2, Solidaridad I, Solidaridad II, Statsionar 1 and  S 'Statsionar 4 satellites.QH c {O'ԍXSee MarineSat Communications Network, Inc., Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc., ICG Satellite Services, Inc., Stratos Holdings, Inc., and Stratos Acquisition Corporation, Application Pursuant to Sections 214 and 310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended, to Transfer  {Oj'Control of and Assignment of Title II Authorizations, File No. ITC98288TC, at 2 (filed Apr. 10,  {O4'1998) (MCN/MTN Application). See also Maritime Telecommunications Network, Inc. and Stratos Acquisition Corporation, Application for Consent to Assignment of Pointtopoint Microwave Radio  {O'Station License, File No. 9713587 ex. B (filed May 5, 1998) (MTN Radio Application), for a listing of MTN's radio station licenses.(#Q MCN, a Delaware corporation, is a Floridabased provider of satellite communications for commercial ships, private vessels, offshore platforms, and landbased mobile units. MCN has authorization to operate as a facilitiesbased and resale carrier between the United  SX'States and various international points.Xc {O'ԍXSee MCN/MTN Application at 23. See also id. app. 1B for a more detailed listing of MCN's authorizations.(#ư In addition, MCN has pending an application to provide  S0'Inmarsat services.E0 c {O"'ԍ See id. at 6.E ICG, a Delaware corporation, currently controls MTN and MCN.  S'3.` ` NewTel, the incumbent supplier of telecommunications services in Newfoundland and Labrador, seeks to control Stratos USA and IDB Mobile through the acquisition of an approximately"0*''PPk" 52.86% interest in Stratos, the current holding/parent company for both Stratos USA and IDB Mobile. Stratos Acquisition and MTN will merge, with Stratos Acquisition as the surviving corporation, and Stratos Holdings, the holding company for Stratos Acquisition, will also acquire 100% of MCN. Because Stratos also serves as the parent company of Stratos Holdings, NewTel will indirectly control MCN and Stratos Acquisition/MTN through its interest in Stratos. As NewTel is controlled by BCE, Inc., a Canadian holding company, the transferors also will become affiliated with other incumbent  S'carriers in Canada upon authorization of the transfers of control.3c yOx'ԍXBCE controls (i.e., has more than 50% ownership stake in) the following incumbent carriers in Canada: NewTel, Bell Canada, Maritime Tel & Tel Limited, The Island Telephone, and T)l)bec It)e. BCE also has controlling interests in the following Canadian carriers that may or may not be dominant:  {O 'Northern Telephone Limited, Northwestel Inc., and NBTel. See Stratos Application app. C (listing NewTel foreign carrier affiliates in which BCE has a 25% or more interest).(#3  S'4.` ` Teleglobe Canada was affiliated with IDB Mobile and Stratos USA through its 29.17% interest in Stratos Wireless at the time the applications were filed. Teleglobe has since divested its  Sp'interest in Stratos Wireless and, so, is no longer affiliated with any of the applicants.pzc yO'ԍXLetter to Magalie Roman Salas, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, from Alfred Mamlet,  {OR'Counsel to Stratos at 1 (July 8, 1998) (Stratos Ex Parte Letter).(# Teleglobe is presently the Canada's Signatory to Inmarsat, but recently sold this service to Stratos Wireless, subject  S 'to Canadian Government approval.L c {O'ԍ See id. at 2. L  S '5.` ` The present applications were removed from streamlined processing because COMSAT Corporation, through its COMSAT Mobile Communications unit ("COMSAT"), filed comments on  S 'May 20, 1998 in which it opposed the transfer of control applications. f c {O'ԍ See Comments of COMSAT Mobile Communications at 4, n. 3 (May 20, 1998) (COMSAT Comments). Ğ In response, Stratos Global, Stratos Holdings and Stratos Acquisition (the "Stratos Companies"), NewTel, and ICG, MTN, and  S0'MCN filed replies on June 3, 1998. &0 c {O'ԍ XSee Joint Reply of Stratos Companies (filed June 3, 1998) (Stratos Reply); NewTel Reply to Comments  {O'of COMSAT Mobile Communications (filed June 3, 1998) (NewTel Reply); Joint Reply Comments of ICG Satellite Services, Inc., MarineSat Communications Network, Inc., and Maritime  {O$'Telecommunications Network, Inc. (filed June 3, 1998) (MCN/MTN Reply). (# COMSAT filed a response to these comments. 0c {O'ԍXResponse of COMSAT Mobile Communications (COMSAT Response) on June 11, 1998.(#Ƒ No other party opposed the pending applications.  S'P III. Discussion ă  Sh'6.` ` The applicants maintain that a grant of the instant applications is in the public interest because it will provide them with the financial resources necessary to innovate and to remain strong competitors in the market for mobile satellite services, thereby enabling them to offer U.S. consumers"x 0*''PP"  S'both reduced prices and increased choices.U c {Oh'ԍ See Stratos Application at 2.U COMSAT contends that the applications "[r]ather than promoting competition and the public interest . . . involve the consolidation of market power by  S'foreign carriers, with substantial risks of abuse of their foreign monopoly affiliations.PZc {O'ԍSee COMSAT Comments at 3.P In addition, COMSAT argues that Stratos Global and its affiliates warrant close scrutiny because the companies  S`'have engaged in unlawful conductL`c {O'ԍSee id. at 56.L and requests that the Commission deny the applications, or in the alternative, condition any transfer of control.  S'A.` ` Standard of Review   S'7.` ` We review these applications under the standards set forth in the Foreign Participation  Sr'Order.r~c {O'ԍXMatter of Rules and Policies on Foreign Participation in the U.S. Telecommunications Market, Market  {OZ'Entry and Regulation of Foreign Affiliated Entities, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 12  {O$'FCC Rcd 23891 (1997) (Foreign Participation Order), recon. pending. The effective date was  {O'established in a separate order, Rules and Policies on Foreign Participation in the U.S.  {O'Telecommunications Market, et. al., Order, FCC9810 (rel. Jan. 29, 1998). (# In that order, the Commission adopted an open entry standard for applications from service suppliers of World Trade Organization (WTO) Members, such as Canada. The Commission adopted a strong presumption that a carrier's affiliation with a carrier in a WTO Member country does not pose  S 'competitive concerns.p 8 c {O'ԍXSee Foreign Participation Order at  69.(#p The Commission also adopted a strong presumption that indirect ownership of  S 'a common carrier radio licensee by an entity from a WTO Member country serves the public interest.Y c {O>'ԍXSee id. at  111.(#Y Thus, the Commission stated that it would grant such authorizations expeditiously in all but the exceptional case in which an application presents a very high risk to competition that cannot be  S\'addressed by imposing additional conditions on the authorization.$\\ c {OX'ԍXSee id. at  69, 111. The Commission also said that it would act expeditiously absent serious concerns raised by the Executive Branch regarding national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, or trade  {O'issues. See id. at  6166. No such concerns have been raised with regard to the applications at issue here.(#Ư  S ' B. ` ` Competitive Analysis  S'8.` ` COMSAT argues that the instant applications create a very high risk to competition on the U.S.Canada route. COMSAT asserts that NewTel and Teleglobe are monopoly providers and argues that the applicants plan to utilize subsidized facilities and services from these foreign monopoly"lH0*''PP "  S'affiliates, thereby enabling them to engage in predatory pricing.Uc {Oh'ԍSee COMSAT Comments at 4, n. 3U Since Teleglobe is no longer affiliated with the Stratos Companies, COMSAT's concerns with anticompetitive conduct based on that affiliation are no longer relevant and we need not address them. We conclude that, even if NewTel were the provider of monopoly telecommunications services in Newfoundland and Labrador, the status of NewTel as a monopoly in these markets, by itself, does not pose a high risk to competition. We do not believe that, given its size, NewTel would give the applicants the ability to raise prices in the U.S. market unilaterally or to otherwise possess the ability to present a high risk to competition in the U.S.  S'market for international telecommunications services.&Zc {O 'ԍXSee Foreign Participation Order at  52. While we do not think it would make a difference in this case, NewTel argues that it is no longer a monopoly in its home markets, stating that it now faces  {Ot 'competition. NewTel Reply Comments at 2. We also note that Teleglobe is no longer a shareholder in  {O> 'Stratos Wireless. See Stratos Ex Parte Letter.(#  S'9.` ` COMSAT attempts to prove that applicants are likely to engage in anticompetitive behavior by arguing that the price that the applicants charge for some Inmarsat services ($2.50/min.) is below the cost of providing such service and made possible only through subsidies from Canadian  S 'affiliates.N Hc {O'ԍCOMSAT Comments at 67.N Thus, COMSAT is arguing that the applicants could price certain services too low, rather than too high. We find that COMSAT fails to demonstrate that the combined companies could engage in predatory pricing or even that they would have the incentive or ability to engage in such a pricing strategy. As the Stratos Companies point out, COMSAT charges some of its customers the same price as the applicants propose to charge. In addition, the Stratos Companies state that their charges include a healthy margin over the Space Segment Utilization Charge that Signatories pay to Inmarsat for space segment, thus allowing Stratos USA to cover not only its average variable costs, but its fixed costs as  S'well. Nq {O9'ԍSee Stratos Reply at 8.N Finally, the Stratos Companies note that, as a condition of becoming Canada's signatory to  S'Inmarsat, Stratos Wireless has agreed to the removal of all restrictions on routing Inmarsat traffic.[l c {O'ԍStratos Ex Parte Letter at 2. [ Thus, COMSAT, as well as any other provider of Inmarsat services, will be able to route traffic through Canada, including from landearth stations located in the United States, if there is a cost advantage to be gained from such routing. Given these facts we conclude that there is no evidence that applicants could engage in predatory pricing based on the transfer of control. Thus, we cannot find a very high risk to competition on this basis.  S' 10.` ` COMSAT also alleges that the transfers of control could pose a very high risk to competition because Stratos and IDB have not abided by Commission rulings or their own Section 214 authorizations. Specifically, COMSAT states that Stratos and IDB are operating in violation of the  SP'Inmarsat ActP c yO%'ԍInternational Maritime Satellite Telecommunications Act, 47 U.S.C. Sections 751, et seq. and IDB Mobile is violating FCC authorizations by refusing to pay COMSAT, the U.S."P 0*''PP" Signatory, for the use of Inmarsat space segment by IDB's U.S. landearth stations, instead purporting  S'to purchase that space segment from a foreign signatory.Hc {O@'ԍ Comments at 56.H We take very seriously any allegations that our rules are being violated, but allegations of impropriety do not by themselves necessarily create a very high risk to competition. The Stratos companies are currently disputing COMSAT's claim to be the exclusive provider of Inmarsat space segment for U.S.originated shoretoship traffic in an  S8'independent proceeding.^8Zc {O2'ԍXIn the Matter of Competitive Access to the International Mobile Satellite System, File No. ISP98003  {O'(Competitive Access Proceeding). The applicants have also certified that they will comply with the  {O 'outcome of the Competitive Access Proceeding. See Stratos Reply at 3.(#Ɖ We will address COMSAT's concerns in that proceeding. We find no evidence in the record to support COMSAT's allegations that Stratos and IDB are acting inconsistently  S'with certifications made to the Commission.c {O 'ԍXSee COMSAT Comments at 89; see also Stratos Reply at 1112.(#Ƈ  S' 11.` ` Finally, COMSAT argues that the applications pose a very high risk to competition because applicants can route traffic through affiliated carriers and we will not have sufficient ability to detect any anticompetitive behavior. COMSAT alleges that, because the Canadian carriers are beyond the Commission's jurisdiction, the Commission will not be able to monitor or police many of the potential abuses the applicants will be able to engage in by taking advantage of their affiliations with monopoly providers. We disagree with COMSAT. Stratos and IDB have agreed to be regulated as dominant carriers on the U.S.Canada route. Since both Stratos and IDB have 214 certificates, if we detect anticompetitive behavior on that route to the benefit of the applicants, we can take appropriate action. Therefore, we conclude that the applications do not pose a very high risk to competition and,  S0'as required by the Foreign Participation Order, we will grant them.  S'C.` ` COMSAT's Request to Impose Conditions on the Applicants  S' 12.` ` If the Commission allows the license transfers, COMSAT proposes a number of  Sj'conditions be imposed on applicants and their transferees.Xjc {O'ԍXCOMSAT Comments at 1011.(#X These are: 1) apply dominant carrier regulation to each carrier for all routes in which the carrier utilizes affiliate facilities, as well as all services on the U.S.Canada route; 2) require that applicants and transferees disclose within thirty days, on a continuing basis, any agreements among affiliates, including Teleglobe Canada, for any equipment and services; 3) require that applicants and transferees certify that they will purchase any equipment and services from affiliates only at competitive rates; 4) require that applicants and transferees certify that they will not discriminate in favor of their affiliates in the provision of any service; 5) require that applicants certify that they will route all U.S.originated traffic to U.S. landearth stations; and 6) require that the applicants certify that they will route all U.S. landearth station traffic through U.S. Signatory space segment. "0*''PP"Ԍ S'  13.` ` We decline to impose the suggested conditions. Some of the suggested conditions are covered by our "no special concessions" rule, which prohibits U.S.licensed carriers from agreeing to accept special concessions granted by foreign carriers that possess market power in a relevant market  S'on the foreign end of a U.S. international route.kc {O'ԍXSee Foreign Participation Order at  157.(#k Thus NewTel, for example, is not allowed to discriminate in favor of any of the applicants on the U.S.Canada route for any services. This means that service has to be provided in a nondiscriminatory manner. On routes other than the U.S.Canada, we do not believe that there is a significant potential for anticompetitive behavior as none of the applicants or their affiliates have market power other than in Canada. It would be difficult to act anticompetitively in the absence of market power.  Sp' 14.` ` As noted above, Stratos and IDB, as well as MCN and MTN, agree that they will be regulated as dominant on the U.S.Canada route. This means that they will have to file advance notice of tariffs; maintain a limited form of structural separation; submit quarterly traffic and revenue reports; report quarterly on provisioning and maintenance services provided by a foreign affiliates; and provide  S 'a quarterly circuit status report. Zc {O'ԍSee Foreign Participation Order at  222; see also 47 C.F.R.  63.10. In addition, the existing licenses already require the companies to 1) file with the FCC any written or oral agreements entered into with Teleglobe relating to routing of U.S. traffic through Teleglobe's facilities, and 2) purchase or obtain Teleglobe's services at published  SX'rates.E ZXc {O'ԍXSee WorldCom/Stratos Wireless, 12 FCC Rcd. 8340 (1997). We note that Teleglobe is no longer a shareholder in Stratos Wireless and therefore these conditions may no longer be necessary. Stratos Wireless is able to seek review of these conditions if it chooses. (#E These conditions will remain in place notwithstanding the transfer of control. We believe these conditions are sufficient to prevent anticompetitive behavior or to actually reveal that anticompetitive behavior is occurring, at which point we can take further action.  S'15.` ` There are other generally applicable conditions that will prevent anticompetitive activities. As a nondominant carrier on all routes, other than Canada, the applicants will be subject to regulation under Title II of the Act. Specifically, Title II requires carriers to offer international services under rates, terms and conditions that are just, reasonable, and not unduly discriminatory (Sections 201 and 202), and Title II carriers are subject to the Commission's complaint process (Sections 206209). Title II carriers also are required to file tariffs pursuant to our streamlined tariffing procedures (Sections 203 and 205).  Sx'16.` ` Finally, with respect to the last two conditions suggested by COMSAT, we agree with  SP'the applicants that these go to the issues we will consider in the Competitive Access Proceeding. To impose such conditions now would be to prejudge the outcome of that proceeding.  S'17.` ` Since we are not adopting COMSAT's proposed conditions for the reasons described above, we need not get to the question of whether imposition of additional conditions would be" 0*''PP"  S'inconsistent with the U.S. commitments under the World Trade Organization.W!c {Oh'ԍXSee NewTel Reply at 45.(#W  S'{P IV. Conclusion ă  S`'18.` ` For the reasons described above, we authorize Stratos USA, IDB Mobile and Stratos Global to transfer control of Section 214 authorizations to NewTel. We also authorize MCN, MTN, and ICG to transfer Section 214 authorizations to Stratos Holdings and Stratos Acquisition. Furthermore, we find that it would serve the public interest, convenience and necessity pursuant to Sections 310(b)(4) and 310(d) to grant MTN's applications regarding assignment of pointtopoint microwave radio station licenses and earth station authorizations to Stratos Acquisition. We also impose dominant carrier regulation on these authorizations for service on the U.S.Canada route only.  S '= V. Ordering Clauses ă  S '19.` ` Upon consideration of the application and in view of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the present and future public convenience and necessity require the grant of the present applications.  S0'20.` ` Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that application File No. ITC98287TC IS GRANTED, and the transfer of control of Stratos USA's and IDB Mobile's Title II authorizations to NewTel is authorized.  S'21.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that application File No. ITC98288TC IS GRANTED, and the transfer of control of MTN's and MCN's Title II authorizations to Stratos Acquisition and Stratos Holdings is authorized.  S'22.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that application File No. 9713587 IS GRANTED, and the assignment of MTN's pointtopoint microwave radio license to Stratos Acquisition is authorized.  Sx'23.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that application File No. 807DSEAL98 IS GRANTED, and the assignment of MTN's earth station authorizations to Stratos Acquisition is authorized.  S'24.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the applicants will be subject to dominant carrier regulation under Section 63.10 of the rules on the U.S.Canada route, and that nondominant carrier regulation should apply to all other routes serviced by the applicants.  S8'25.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all terms and conditions of any Commission orders granting authority to Stratos USA, IDB Mobile, MTN, or MCN shall remain in effect. "!Z!0*''PP "  S'26.` ` This order is issued under Section 0.261 of the Commission's rules and is effective upon adoption. Petitions for reconsideration under Section 1.106 or applications for review under Section 1.115 of the Commission's rules may be filed within 30 days of the date of the public notice  S'of this order. (See Section 1.4(b)(2).)  ` `  hhCqFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` `  hhCqDiane J. Cornell ` `  hhCqChief, Telecommunications Division ` `  hhCqInternational Bureau