If the proposals in the NPRM are eventually adopted, the FCC envisions that qualifying smallsat systems will be able to save significant time and money. In particular, qualifying smallsat systems would not have to go through the often time-consuming and paperwork-intensive processing rounds normally associated with the licensing or market entry approval of non-geostationary orbit (“NGSO”) satellite systems. Furthermore, qualifying smallsat systems would only have to pay the proposed satellite application fee of $30,000 (as opposed to the $454,705 satellite application fee under the standard Part 25 approval process). Last but not least, qualifying smallsat systems that deploy at least half of their satellites within one year and thirty days of FCC approval would be able to forego filing surety bonds with the Commission. That’s not a small alteration, as these bonds can cost anywhere from one to five million dollars per system.

Per the NPRM, to qualify for streamlined approval, smallsat systems are those that have:

• A maximum mass of 180 kg per satellite
  • NASA previously identified 180 kg as the maximum mass for small satellites. The FCC believes this upper mass limit is sufficient to include typical small satellite designs, while allowing for flexibility to accommodate evolving satellite designs. But the Commission solicits views that another maximum mass limit, such as 500 kg, may be appropriate or that some other criterion, rather than mass, such as a zero reentry casualty risk criterion, may be more appropriate. Parties that are considering larger smallsats can be expected to weigh in on this tentative upper limit. (There is a proposed lower size limit of 10 cm in each dimension.)

• Ten or fewer satellites per authorization
  • The FCC anticipates that many smallsat applicants only intend to launch one or a few total satellites. The NPRM states that the streamlined process is intended for a limited group of applicants whose operations are small enough in scope that it would not serve the public interest to apply standard Part 25 procedures. Accordingly, the FCC seeks comment on whether it should limit the number of smallsats under a single license and also whether to limit the total number of smallsat applications that can be filed by an individual operator under the streamlined process.

• Total on-orbit lifetime of five years or less
  • As is stated in the NPRM, the ITU has previously found that the typical operational lifetime of nanosatellites is anywhere between one and three years. The FCC requests comment on a longer lifespan of five years to qualify smallsats in recognition of the fact that (1) some satellites might be launched at different times under a license in order to factor in time for the satellites to deorbit, and (2) satellites should be left ample time to deorbit.

• Either orbital altitudes below 400 km or propulsion systems
  • Naturally, the FCC wants to prevent in-orbit collisions, an issue that increases as the number of satellite proliferates. Indeed, recently, the Commission has asked some NGSO-applicants with large constellations to coordinate with others on collision avoidance. The International Space Station (“ISS”) currently operates at an altitude of approximately 400 km. Hence, the Commission proposes either a certification that the satellites will operate in a sub-400 km orbit, or, where that is not the case, that the satellites have built-in collision avoidance capabilities such as propulsion systems. The NPRM seeks comment on these issues and any other factors parties believe the FCC should consider in specifying criteria related to smallsat orbits.

• A relatively low risk profile regarding orbital debris
  • Along similar lines, the Commission tentatively concludes that it will limit the streamlined process to satellites that release no operational debris in a planned manner during their mission lifetime. Per the NPRM proposal, applicants will have to certify that each satellite has a risk of collision with large objects that is less than 0.001 probability over its lifetime, which is consistent with technical guidance developed by NASA for its space missions.

• Zero risk of human casualties
  • The NPRM proposes that any smallsat applicant seeking streamlined approval must certify that it has conducted a casualty risk assessment using the NASA Debris Assessment Software (“DAS”) or another higher fidelity model, and that the assessment resulted in a human casualty risk of zero. The Commission plans to require zero risk (but seeks comment on this tentative conclusion) because any casualty risk could result in a future claim being presented to the U.S. for liability for damage caused by space objects pursuant to the UN’s Outer Space Treaty.

• Ability to cease transmissions on command
  • Both international radio regulations and FCC rules require that space stations be equipped with devices that are capable of immediately ceasing radio emissions. The NPRM tentatively concludes that applicants for smallsats must certify that each satellite has the ability to receive command signals and cease transmissions as a result of a command. As part of this approach, the FCC seeks comment on whether it should require that satellites employ a “passively safe” system (i.e., the satellite cannot transmit unless it is actively commanded to transmit via a command, and will cease transmission unless within view of a ground station).

• A unique telemetry marker
  • The FCC proposes to have applicants certify that the smallsats will include a unique telemetry marker allowing it to be readily distinguished from other satellites or space objects. The Commission believes such certifications would help ensure that satellite operators can assist entities that track space objects to identify and distinguish between the smallsats and other space objects. It seeks comment on any alternative methods to achieve the same purpose.

In the NPRM, the FCC identifies the 137-138, 148-150.05, and 1610.6-1613.8 MHz bands for consideration as potential bands for smallsat systems, reflecting what the Commission expects to be low data rate links for at least some smallsats. The FCC also proposes to allow smallsats to operate inter-satellite links in the 1615-1617.75, 1618.725-1626.5, and 2483.5-2495 MHz bands.

The NPRM proposes to apply the existing Part 25 technical rules to smallsat systems qualifying for streamlined approval, but seeks comment on what other frequency band-specific adjustments should be made to accommodate smallsats.

Comments will be due 45 days and reply comments will be due 75 days after publication of the NPRM in the Federal Register. Publication has not yet occurred.

Background:

Use of spectrum above 95 GHz is largely uncharted territory. Apart from several minor authorizations for amateur radio and industrial, scientific, and medical (“ISM”) operations under Part 18, all non-Federal operations in these frequency ranges have only been permitted by the FCC via experimental licenses. Various parts of this extremely broad range of bands are used by radio astronomy and other passive services.

The Commission has used its Spectrum Frontiers proceeding to gauge interest in spectrum above 95 GHz. While several parties filed comments in that proceeding touting a range of both communications and non-communications applications services (including spectroscopy, imaging, and sensing), the Commission took no meaningful steps toward making the band more available. The Draft NPRM would seek comment on (I) possible licensed operations in various frequency ranges; (II) making particular frequency bands available for unlicensed use; and (III) creating a new framework for experimental licenses for spectrum above 95 GHz.

I. Licensed Allocations

The Draft NPRM would propose that rules in these bands may be based on the light-licensing fixed point-to-point rules that currently apply to the 70/80/90 GHz bands which provide for:

• Non-exclusive nationwide licenses in any portion of the bands in question with 10-year terms
• Registration of links through a system maintained by a database manager
• A twelve-month construction requirement (after registration)
• Interference protection based on registration priority

As written, the Draft NPRM requests feedback on whether to permit fixed point-to-multipoint systems in addition to fixed point-to-point links in these bands, and on whether there is any interest in deploying mobile services in spectrum above 95 GHz.

Noting that almost all of the bands in the 95-275 GHz range that would be under consideration are shared bands, the Draft NPRM devotes considerable space to raising issues regarding shared operation of licensed fixed links with other allocated uses, as applicable, including not only FSS and MSS, but radio astronomy, Earth Exploration Satellite Service (“EESS”), the Space Research Service (“SRS”), the Inter-Satellite Service (“ISS”), radiolocation, and radionavigation, as well as sharing between Federal and non-Federal users.

II. Unlicensed Operations

This anticipated proposal comes in the wake of the Commission declining in the November 2017 Spectrum Frontiers orders that, in general, turned a deaf ear to please by Microsoft and others to increase unlicensed opportunities in the range between 24 and 86 GHz. In contrast with that action, the Draft NPRM states that “[p]otential future [unlicensed] applications in these bands [might]include ultra-high definition video, and high-speed data transmission, such as temporary fiber optic line replacement, chip-to-chip communication within computer equipment, and replacement of computer data cables in data centers with wireless links.”

Further, given that these frequencies enable certain non-communications applications of potential interest to industry and research, such as emerging terahertz spectroscopy applications, the Draft NPRM includes queries whether unlicensed operations more properly fall within the Part 18 ISM rules, and what changes in that rule part may be appropriate to accommodate these uses.

III. Experimental Licenses

• Greater Marketing Flexibility by allowing direct sales of experimental equipment used in market trials to trial participants (whereas existing ERS rules only allow limited equipment sales to other ERS licensees during market trials).
• Broader Geographic Scope by giving experimental licensees “substantial flexibility to conduct ... experiments over a wide geographic area ... and adapt their program of experimentation as needed.”
• Longer License Terms namely ten-year term instead of the two- and five-year terms currently available for other ERS licenses.

The FCC is tentatively scheduled to vote on the draft item during the Open Commission Meeting scheduled for February 22. Assuming the item is approved, the Draft NPRM suggests that comments will be due 30 days (and reply comments 45 days) after the date of publication in the Federal Register. The mere issuance of the Draft NPRM is welcome news for a number of equipment and service developers who have been pushing for greater access to these frequency ranges and, if the Commission’s expectations reflected in the draft item are fulfilled, may give others reason to pursue plans that have not been fully ignited because of the lack of formal encouragement to develop a regulatory framework, and greater certainty, in these bands.