MTN CONCERNED NEW FCC REGULATIONS WILL HURT MARITIME BUSINESS

MTN and others have invested significant amount of money in C-band operations and change in Commission licensing procedures or operating rules could affect business adversely, MTN said: “If the FCC decides to prohibit or restrict ESV access to C-band, it will vitiate business and render millions of dollars in capital investment obsolete, with concomitant loss of service to cruise lines and passengers.” Satellite Industry Assn., Boeing, Hughes Network Systems (HNS), Intelsat, Inmarsat filed comments supporting MTN.

Despite possibility of interference in fixed service, there haven’t been any documented instances of that problem, MTN argued. FCC should allow ESVs to operate in FSS networks in C-band at 5925-6425 MHz and Ku-band at 14.0-14.5 GHz. C- band provides full oceanic coverage, available spectrum and already is in use on many ESV-equipped vessels. Moreover, C- band FSS spectrum has “effectively and efficiently” accommodated ESVs without causing interference, MTN said. FSS Ku-band uplink at 14.0-14.5 GHz should be available to ESVs where commercially and technically appropriate because in certain instances where there are no terrestrial services, Ku-band can alleviate coordination difficulties that may arise with use of shared C-band.

Dual-band operations shouldn’t be imposed under any circumstances, MTN said. C-band is used on high seas and Ku- band is link in port. MTN believes MSS bands are unworkable choice for ESVs. There isn’t enough bandwidth or global satellite capacity in sufficient quantity at price point economical enough to make MSS viable option for ESVs, MTN said. ESVs shouldn’t be relegated to MSS bands that can’t accommodate them simply on pretext ships at sea are mobile, it said.

MTN offered 2 proposals for licensing: (1) Dockside out model would license specific dock areas. License applications would be submitted to 17 U.S. seaports licensed for ESVs. ESV operators rather than ESV-equipped ships would be licensed and required to provide service to ships docked at licensed seaports or in shipping channels leading to and from ports. (2) VSAT model would be patterned after licensing procedures for networks of very small aperture terminals. Necessary modifications would be made to provide frequency coordination in C-band. For ESV operations in Ku- band, licenses would be issued to hub stations in VSAT network. Gateway earth stations would have capability of monitoring ESV transmissions and of operating ESVs.

Service could move forward without licensing procedure, MTN said. Without license, ESVs could continue to operate on noninterference basis. If FCC established basis for licensing ESVs, MTN said restrictions or conditions shouldn’t be imposed such as requirement to make written complaints of interference or allowing Commission to take punitive action against interfering FSS gateway facilities. Commission also should avoid limiting licensed ESV operations to U.S. seaports and reject restriction that ESVs be licensed to receive only, MTN said.

MTN said it supported imposition of reasonable restrictions such as minimum antenna elevation angle, minimum antenna diameter, maximum half-power antenna bandwidth and antenna tracking accuracy of ESVs along with maximum necessary bandwidth in single operating area of 36 MHz at C- band. MTN opposes ESV license term shorter than full 15 years for other licensed earth stations as well as requirement ESVs be coordinated only to specific satellites.

Most of comments seemed to support MTN position. SIA said licensing ESVs would enable FSS operators make more efficient use of spectrum. Satellites are best way to provide maritime communications because of broad footprint and distance-insensitive technology, SIA said. Regulatory regime currently in place discourages maritime industry use of FSS satellites. Proponents of ESV services on cargo, passenger, recreational and military vessels must seek special temporary authority on ad hoc basis. Authority typically subject to waivers and conditions and is limited to 6-month period, which adds uncertainty to long-term regulatory status of service. Limitations have hindered full development of service, SIA said.

Development of service will facilitate and speed interchange of data and other communication services “vital and valuable” to maritime industry “which can’t be met” in Mobile Service bands, HNS said. Time is ripe for regularized licensing of ESV services and Commission already has in place appropriate rules to license Ku-band FSS ESVs. There’s no need to impose unusual restrictions on use of Ku-band ESVs, it said.

Intelsat said licensing of ESVs would provide stable environment for ship operators and service providers with establishment of standard technical requirements and procedures. It said coordination at 14 GHz could alleviate coordination difficulties close to shore and dual-band operations could be used as option for ESV wanting to operate close to shore where 6 GHz is heavily used by terrestrial stations. Maritime Communications Services (MCS) believes it would be premature for Commission to adopt rules and regulations for ESVs, filing said, but it’s willing to accept reasonable regulation. Commission should defer holding additional proceedings concerning ESV regulation because there aren’t any interference issues that need to be addressed, and various committees of World Radio Conference are working on ESV technical issues.

Boeing said current framework didn’t provide normalized licensing process. It said it might not be significant issue for U.S. companies, but licensing structure should be established that would allow long-term licenses for systems intended for regular use that would provide framework to facilitate operations in foreign waters and frequency coordination with other administrations. Inmarsat said ESVs should be able to operate on co-primary basis with terrestrial FS services, but not to mandate dual-band ESV capabilities. Company said changes must be made to accommodate growing role of ESVs.