<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: FCC acts on MSS spectrum &#8211; why now?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/06/21/fcc-acts-on-mss-spectrum-why-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/06/21/fcc-acts-on-mss-spectrum-why-now/</link>
	<description>Satellites, spectrum and other stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:36:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: PCSTEL</title>
		<link>https://tmfassociates.com/blog/2010/06/21/fcc-acts-on-mss-spectrum-why-now/comment-page-1/#comment-424</link>
		<dc:creator>PCSTEL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:48:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tmfassociates.com/blog/?p=262#comment-424</guid>
		<description>It appears the FCC is proceeding as planned in the NBP.  With flexibility granted to WCS  spectrum straight away void of any NPRM requisites. The next step in the plan was for the issuance of NPRM&#039;s for all 3 band plans in 2010 with the issuance of the 2Ghz Order delayed until sometime in 2011.  

The NBP appears to have selected &quot;winner and losers&quot; in the MSS marketplace.  While indicating their desire to repurpose all 40Mhz of the &quot;S Band&quot; MSS spectrum with a modification to the International Table of Allocations to &quot;Primary Mobile&quot;, along the notation that neither DBSD nor Terrestar had any commercial subscribers on the roles.  Whilst, over at thee L Band, and Big LEO Bands.  The FCC indicated that only a portion of those bands would be afforded &quot;flexibility&quot;, while promoting the need for &quot;public interest&quot; via operational and subscriber metrics.  

Of course, the Big LEO and much of the L Band MSS Spectrum is ITU sanctioned spectrum, while the 2 Ghz MSS Spectrum is FCC, Industry Canada harmonized spectrum.  So the FCC has fewer &quot;treaty&quot; obligations in the 2Ghz bands, versus the Big LEO bandplans.  Hence, the FCC&#039;s ability to easily  reconfigure the Table of Allocations with the 2Ghz licenses to &quot;Primary-Mobile&quot;.  

The FCC suggests in the NBP that only the 2Ghz MSS licensees would be subject to financial penalties in lieu of the &quot;step up in value&quot;.  I viewed this framework as an effort to mitigate potential legal battles with the CTIA in association with the FCC regulated 2Ghz MSS Band, versus potential issues with levying localized  financial rewards on ITU sanctioned Big LEO spectrum.  

The NBP, through it&#039;s recommendations appear to make it clear that the FCC considers that 4 MSS providers would present sufficient service and competition.  Therefore the FCC appears to have clearly set their sites on the internally regulated 2Ghz MSS Bands as a source for a large percentage of the targeted spectrum to be repurposed.

So personally, I see no large change in timing as the NBP indicated that the &quot;L Band&quot; and &quot;Big LEO Band&quot; Orders would be issued in 2010.  A September NPRM, with the clock ticking once officially published would yield little time for an order to be issued by the end of 2010, once the required comment and replay periods are taken into account.  I have always expected the NPRM in July/early August if the FCC were to stick to their timetable.  The consensus at the Globalstar ASM was that the NPRM was on track for a July issuance.  

In my opinion, the FCC could provide an incentive auction for the 2Ghz MSS spectrum with few issues, versus a  similar auction for Big LEO ITU sanctioned spectrum.  Which I believe would raise many more international legal issues than the possible financial rewards for the relief sought.  However, I believe the CTIA is going to be overseeing this process with a keen eye.  

PCSTEL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It appears the FCC is proceeding as planned in the NBP.  With flexibility granted to WCS  spectrum straight away void of any NPRM requisites. The next step in the plan was for the issuance of NPRM&#8217;s for all 3 band plans in 2010 with the issuance of the 2Ghz Order delayed until sometime in 2011.  </p>
<p>The NBP appears to have selected &#8220;winner and losers&#8221; in the MSS marketplace.  While indicating their desire to repurpose all 40Mhz of the &#8220;S Band&#8221; MSS spectrum with a modification to the International Table of Allocations to &#8220;Primary Mobile&#8221;, along the notation that neither DBSD nor Terrestar had any commercial subscribers on the roles.  Whilst, over at thee L Band, and Big LEO Bands.  The FCC indicated that only a portion of those bands would be afforded &#8220;flexibility&#8221;, while promoting the need for &#8220;public interest&#8221; via operational and subscriber metrics.  </p>
<p>Of course, the Big LEO and much of the L Band MSS Spectrum is ITU sanctioned spectrum, while the 2 Ghz MSS Spectrum is FCC, Industry Canada harmonized spectrum.  So the FCC has fewer &#8220;treaty&#8221; obligations in the 2Ghz bands, versus the Big LEO bandplans.  Hence, the FCC&#8217;s ability to easily  reconfigure the Table of Allocations with the 2Ghz licenses to &#8220;Primary-Mobile&#8221;.  </p>
<p>The FCC suggests in the NBP that only the 2Ghz MSS licensees would be subject to financial penalties in lieu of the &#8220;step up in value&#8221;.  I viewed this framework as an effort to mitigate potential legal battles with the CTIA in association with the FCC regulated 2Ghz MSS Band, versus potential issues with levying localized  financial rewards on ITU sanctioned Big LEO spectrum.  </p>
<p>The NBP, through it&#8217;s recommendations appear to make it clear that the FCC considers that 4 MSS providers would present sufficient service and competition.  Therefore the FCC appears to have clearly set their sites on the internally regulated 2Ghz MSS Bands as a source for a large percentage of the targeted spectrum to be repurposed.</p>
<p>So personally, I see no large change in timing as the NBP indicated that the &#8220;L Band&#8221; and &#8220;Big LEO Band&#8221; Orders would be issued in 2010.  A September NPRM, with the clock ticking once officially published would yield little time for an order to be issued by the end of 2010, once the required comment and replay periods are taken into account.  I have always expected the NPRM in July/early August if the FCC were to stick to their timetable.  The consensus at the Globalstar ASM was that the NPRM was on track for a July issuance.  </p>
<p>In my opinion, the FCC could provide an incentive auction for the 2Ghz MSS spectrum with few issues, versus a  similar auction for Big LEO ITU sanctioned spectrum.  Which I believe would raise many more international legal issues than the possible financial rewards for the relief sought.  However, I believe the CTIA is going to be overseeing this process with a keen eye.  </p>
<p>PCSTEL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
