SPD-2 DOC Report Word to PDF

Driving Space Commerce

Through Effective Spectrum Policy

Recommendations for Improving the Global

Competitiveness of the United States Space Sector through

Radio Frequency Spectrum Policies, Regulation, and United

States Activities at the International Telecommunication

Union and Other Multilateral Forums

U.S. Department of Commerce

Wilbur L. Ross, SECRETARY

David J. Redl, ASSISTANT SECRETARY

FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION

Office of Science and Technology Policy

The White House

ii!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ······················································································ IV

Introduction ································································································· 1

Analysis ······································································································· 4

I. The Space Economy ······································································· 4

II. Planned Space Commerce Activities ···················································· 7

III. Trends in the Use of Space-related Spectrum ·········································· 8

IV. Stakeholder Feedback ····································································· 9

Recommendations ························································································· 11

I. Spectrum Policies ············································································· 11

1. Allocate and assign radio frequencies domestically in a manner that recognizes

satellite operations as essential for space commerce innovation and economic

growth ······················································································ 11

2. Spectrum policy must balance in future allocations rising demand for service with

the availability of new technologies that significantly enhance spectral efficiency

······························································································· 12

3. Support global harmonization of the radio frequency spectrum for space related

activities ···················································································· 13

4. Improve radio frequency access for commercial space launches in the United

States ························································································ 14

5. Protect space operations from harmful interference ·································· 15

6. Examine the impact of quantum satellite communication technologies on the U.S.

radio frequency ecosystem ······························································· 16

7. Develop short-term and long-term spectrum policies that ensure deep space

communications and navigation capabilities will meet demand ···················· 17

8. Support appropriate policies that can help speed the delivery of satellite

broadband solutions to market ·························································· 19

II. Radio frequency Licensing Policies ························································ 19

9. Advance a streamlined U.S. radio frequency licensing process for satellites of all

sizes ························································································· 19

10. Streamline the U.S. process for authorizing use of radio frequencies for

international satellite Positioning, Navigation and Timing systems ··············· 20

III. International Spectrum Policies Impacting Space Operations ··························· 21

11. Improve the space-related activities and processes of the International

Telecommunications Union and other multilateral organizations ·················· 21

iii!

IV. Stakeholder Input ·············································································· 21

12. Develop a robust, periodic process for stakeholder input ··························· 21

13. Assessment of space operation spectrum demand and reporting on efforts to meet

it ····························································································· 21

Annex A ························································································ 22

Annex B ························································································ 23

Annex C ························································································ 27

iv!

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On May 24, 2018, President Donald J. Trump issued Space Policy Directive – 2 (SPD-2),

Streamlining Regulations on Commercial Use of Space.

The section on radio frequency spectrum

requires the Secretary of Commerce and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology

Policy (OSTP) to provide a report to the President “on improving the global competitiveness of

the United States space sector through radio frequency spectrum policies, regulation, and United

States activities at the International Telecommunication Union and other multilateral forums.”

This report responds with a set of recommendations to support the radio frequency needs of the

United States space sector.

The Trump Administration recognizes that a healthy satellite industry, equipped with

sufficient access to radio frequency spectrum, is essential to the global competitiveness of the

United States space sector. This report also considers the need to protect national security assets

and balance other economic interests, consistent with the Administration’s holistic approach to

spectrum management and policy reflected in the recently issued Presidential Memorandum on

Developing a Sustainable Spectrum Strategy for America’s Future.

In this report, we make thirteen specific recommendations: the first eight relate to spectrum

and communications policies; two relate to streamlining the radio frequency licensing process; one

relates to improving the United States position in international forums; and the final two procedural

recommendations involve strengthening stakeholder input mechanisms and regularly assessing

spectrum needs for space operations.

The report’s specific recommendations, detailed below, are:

1. Allocate and assign radio frequencies domestically in a manner that recognizes

satellite operations are essential for space commerce innovation, competitiveness, and

economic growth.

2. Spectrum policy must balance in future allocations the rising demand for service with

the availability of new technologies that significantly enhance spectral efficiency.

3. Support global harmonization of the radio frequency spectrum for space activities.

4. Improve radio frequency access for commercial space launches in the United States.

5. Protect space operations from harmful radio frequency interference.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See Space Policy Directive-2, Streamlining Regulations on Commercial Use of Space, 83 Fed. Reg. 24901 (May

30, 2018), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/05/30/2018-11769/streamlining-

regulations-on-commercial-use-of-space (“Space Policy Directive-2” or “SPD-2”). The report is to be prepared in

consultation with the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and in coordination with the members

of the National Space Council. Id.

See id.

Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Developing a Sustainable Spectrum Strategy

for America’s Future, 83 Fed. Reg. 54513 (Oct. 30, 2018), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-

23839 (“Spectrum PM”).

As the U.S. develops these spectrum-based recommendations, it is important to complement them with both trade

advocacy that advances U.S. space commerce issues internationally and multilateral work to alter policies in other

nations that discourage U.S. opportunities in the space commerce sector.

6. Examine the impact of quantum satellite communication technologies on the U.S.

radio frequency ecosystem.

7. Develop short-term and long-term spectrum policies that ensure deep space

communications and navigation capabilities can meet exponentially increasing

demand.

8. Support appropriate policies that can help speed the delivery of satellite broadband

solutions to global markets in both served and underserved areas.

9. Advance a streamlined U.S. radio frequency licensing process for all satellites.

10. Streamline the U.S. process for authorizing domestic reception of foreign Global

Navigation Satellite System signals when found to be in the national interest.

11. Work with like-minded countries to improve the space-related activities and

processes of the International Telecommunication Union and other multilateral

organizations.

12. Develop a robust process for periodic stakeholder input.

13. Assess spectrum demand for space operation and report on efforts to meet it.

The three annexes provide further background material in connection with the recommendations.

INTRODUCTION

The Trump Administration is committed to advancing commercial space activity and

ensuring that the United States remains the flag of choice for space commerce.

On June 30, 2017, President Trump revived the National Space Council, chaired by Vice

President Pence, following a twenty-five-year dormancy. Subsequently, the President signed three

space policy directives that make evident the Administration’s revitalized emphasis on human

exploration and discovery.

In signing Space Policy Directive – 1 (SPD-1), President Trump reaffirmed that Americans

would lead in space once again on all fronts, and that America would “establish a foundation for

an eventual mission to Mars, and perhaps someday, to many worlds beyond.”

Space Policy

Directives 2 and 3 direct the Department of Commerce (Department) to eliminate regulatory

burdens on commercial space activity that will unshackle industry and unleash “private enterprise

to support the economic success of the United States.”

To that end, the Department is working

with other federal agencies and independent authorities, including the Federal Communications

Commission (FCC), to encourage alignment between current and proposed regulations and the

President’s regulatory priorities to advance space commerce.

The Executive Branch is prioritizing policies that will enable continued United States

leadership in space commerce innovation and investment. These include actions that will ensure

both present and future commercial and government actors in space have sufficient access to

communications networks necessary to execute their missions.

On February 21, 2018, the National Space Council recommended to the President specific

action in this regard:

[National Telecommunications and Information Administration] shall coordinate

with the Federal Communications Commission to ensure the protection and

stewardship of radio frequency spectrum necessary for commercial space activities,

without adversely affecting national security or public safety. The Department of

Commerce shall take an active role in working with U.S. industry and members of

the National Space Council to develop and advocate, and to the extent possible,

implement spectrum management policies that make U.S. space-related industries

more competitive globally.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Space Policy Directive-1, Reinvigorating America's Human Space Exploration Program, 82 Fed. Reg. 59501 (Dec.

11, 2017), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/14/2017-27160/reinvigorating-americas-

human-space-exploration-program.

See Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump is Reforming and Modernizing American Commercial Space Policy,

WHITEHOUSE.GOV (May 24, 2018), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-

reforming-modernizing-american-commercial-space-policy/.

Record of Decision, National Space Council, NSpC ROD-2018-01 at 5 (Feb. 21, 2018).

On May 24, 2018, President Donald J. Trump issued SPD-2, Streamlining Regulations on

Commercial Use of Space.

Section 1 of the Directive establishes that:

It is the policy of the executive branch to be prudent and responsible when spending

taxpayer funds, and to recognize how government actions, including Federal

regulations, affect private resources. It is therefore important that regulations

adopted and enforced by the executive branch promote economic growth; minimize

uncertainty for taxpayers, investors, and private industry; protect national security,

public-safety, and foreign policy interests; and encourage American leadership in

space commerce.

In Section 5 of SPD-2, which focuses on radio frequency spectrum, the Department of

Commerce, in coordination with OSTP, is directed to work with the FCC to ensure that Federal

Government activities related to radio frequency spectrum are, to the extent permitted by law,

consistent with that policy.

Section 5 of SPD-2 also directs the Secretary and the Director of

OSTP to prepare this report “on improving the global competitiveness of the United States space

sector through radio frequency spectrum policies, regulation, and United States activities at the

International Telecommunication Union and other multilateral forums.”

The Trump Administration also recognizes the importance of balanced spectrum

management and policy in the context of space traffic management and space situational

awareness. The President’s recent Space Policy Directive – 3 (SPD-3), the first ever

comprehensive National Space Traffic Management Policy, states that the United States should

focus on preventing unintentional radio frequency interference and “continue to improve policies,

processes, and technologies for spectrum use … to address these challenges and ensure appropriate

spectrum use for current and future operations.”

In preparing this report, the Department and NTIA took immediate actions to assess the

economic environment for American space enterprise; industry needs, capabilities, and plans; and

present challenges facing government policy-makers. Accordingly, Secretary Ross and staff

engaged in the following:

• Multiple Secretary-led listening sessions and roundtables with the satellite and space

commerce sectors;

• NTIA-FCC coordination meetings regarding spectrum management and allocation;

• Assessment of the space commerce economy trends and growth potential;

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See SPD-2, supra note 1, at 24901.

Id. at 24901.

See id. at 24902. The Secretary shall assign to the Assistant Secretary and the NTIA responsibility for the

performance of the Secretary’s communications functions. 47 U.S.C. § 902(b)(1).

See id at 24902.

See Space Policy Directive-3 (SPD-3) Section 4(g), National Space Traffic Management Policy, 83 Fed. Reg.

28969, 28971 (Jun. 18, 2018), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/06/21/2018-

13521/national-space-traffic-management-policy.

• Multiple staff briefings and listening sessions with commercial space industry, including

companies focused on satellite remote sensing, telecommunications, on-orbit servicing,

tourism, space situational awareness, prospecting, and venture capital firms, among

others;

• Meetings with private equity, venture capital, and lending institutions to discuss

economic and investment trends in space;

• Discussions with Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs),

including MITRE Corp. and Aerospace Corp., working to evaluate technical aspects of

space-related spectrum use, protections, and challenges;

• Review of industry white papers and reports; and

• Engagement with other Executive Branch departments and agencies, including the

Department of Defense (DoD), Air Force, National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), regarding potential

radio frequency interference concerns and challenges facing current and planned mission-

critical space operations.

The research and analyses performed for this report make clear that U.S. commercial

industry, in addition to the federal government, envisions far-reaching missions in space that will

require vital communications to achieve success—both space-to-space communications and

communications between Earth and objects in space. These missions will also depend on spectrum

for other purposes, such as navigation and sensing. The United States needs strong and innovative

space industries. Government action and policy must ensure that spectrum is available for

important and rapidly advancing commercial—and Administration—envisioned space initiatives.

At the same time, radio frequency spectrum is limited and the ability to access

spectrum is critical to many important commercial, personal, government, and scientific

applications. As a relevant example, access to spectrum for space commerce at times competes

with access for terrestrial wireless services including emerging 5G communications, which is an

Administration priority that will provide tremendous benefits to U.S. consumers and the U.S.

economy. Further, the nature of space communications, often involving exceptionally long

distances, generate their own requirements in how radio frequency spectrum is allocated and

managed. Because of the significant implications of how we as a nation manage our spectrum

resources now, and especially for the future, President Trump has directed the Department,

working through NTIA, to lead development of a national spectrum strategy.

As we consider

the importance of satellite and space commerce to Americans, we must understand how these

services factor into our broader economic picture and the protection of national security and public

safety.

As President Trump has recognized, no country in the world is more reliant on space for

its security, economy, and international status. Key to continued U.S. global leadership is our

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See Spectrum PM, supra note 3.

ability to continue expanding America’s preeminence in space through civil, commercial, and

military activity.

For Americans today, many common household and business functions, means

of transportation, and fundamental services rely on satellite technology. The Department of

Commerce and NTIA recognize that “the world as we know it today literally would not exist

without [] satellites.”

In that vein, the world of tomorrow will likely depend on a stable spectrum

environment that appropriately protects vital satellite operations from harmful interference and

supports U.S. goals in the global spectrum policy arena.

ANALYSIS

In preparing the recommendations in this report, the Department first considered the state

of the space economy and the importance of space-related communications to U.S. business and

consumers. Second, staff reviewed industry feedback, planned activities, and related concerns.

Finally, the Department, through NTIA, evaluated potential government actions and

recommendations related to spectrum management that will help advance American space

commerce.

The Space Economy

Recent data make evident that the global space economy, though difficult to fully quantify,

is rapidly growing. By one account, it now totals more than $383.5 billion worldwide.

Last year,

seven countries spent more than $1 billion on space, orbital launches increased by over 7 percent,

and the total number of deployed spacecraft doubled.

Data show that, under the Trump

Administration, the United States continues to solidify its leadership role within the burgeoning

economy. The U.S. totals approximately 57 percent of global space spending, accounts for one-

third of all orbital launch activities, and the U.S. share of global spacecraft deployed is roughly 65

percent.

The U.S. satellite industry is a key component of the growing space economy. The Satellite

Industry Association (SIA) reports that the U.S. satellite industry generated over $110 billion in

revenues and supported over 210,000 American jobs in 2016.

Currently, there are over 800

operational American satellites in orbit, and by 2024, that number could exceed 15,000. In

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See generally, Michael Pence, Vice President, Remarks at 34th Space Symposium (Apr. 16, 2018),

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-34th-space-symposium-colorado-

springs-co.

See David J. Redl, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information, Remarks at Satellite

2018: Affirming Our Partnership for Growth and Innovation in Space, Washington DC (Mar. 14, 2018),

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/speechtestimony/2018/remarks-assistant-secretary-redl-satellite-2018.

See The Space Report 2018: The Authoritative Guide to Global Space Activity, SPACE FOUNDATION (Jul. 19,

2018).

Id.

See 2017 State of the Satellite Industry Report, SATELLITE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION 6 (June 2017),

https://www.sia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SIA-SSIR-2017.pdf.

addition, companies already are selling tickets for human flights into suborbit at $250,000 each.

Today’s satellites have capacities of up to 260 Gbps which will increase to 1000 Gbps by the end

of the decade.

The American investment community recognizes the economic opportunity of space. In

2015, more than 50 venture capital firms began investing in space. That year, more capital

ventured into the space market than in the prior 15 years combined.

The trend is likely to

continue as America enters a new space age, with $3 billion in equity investments in 2018 alone.

Recent estimates show that by 2040 global space revenue will grow to over $1.1 trillion as more

than 70 countries begin operating in space.

One does not have to look far to identify the significant benefits of our assets in space. The

Global Positioning System (GPS) continues to be crucial to the everyday lives of Americans. This

satellite technology enables systems and modern applications for precise geographic position,

navigation, and timing that are essential to modern business, public safety and more. The totality

of the GPS economy is difficult to capture, as modern applications and uses rapidly develop (e.g.,

cell phone mapping and location-based applications; smart watches; public safety announcements

and warnings) and overlap with other space functions like communications. A preliminary study

conservatively estimated the GPS economy at $55.8 billion in 2013, benefitting multiple sectors

and industries including precision agriculture, construction, surveying, rail and air transportation,

maritime, and consumer vehicles.

Undoubtedly, GPS technology and uses have rapidly

expanded in the last six years. This and other estimates likely do not fully take into consideration

the broad indirect applications of GPS value related to increased human productivity, improved

efficiency, and information data collection and analysis, to name a few.

GPS is driving innovative business technologies that are changing the modern world.

Farmers plant seeds through auto-steering machinery that relies on GPS guidance. Private

automobile ride service providers, valued at over a combined $1 trillion, use GPS to locate

customers, save people commuting time and expense, and create thousands of jobs. GPS

technology provides improved air transportation routes that enable fewer carbon emissions, fewer

flight delays, fuel savings and other implications that lead to an estimated $1.3 trillion in annual

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wilbur Ross, Opinion, That Moon Colony Will Be a Reality Sooner Than You Think, N. Y. TIMES (May 24, 2018).

See Realizing the Benefits of Rural Broadband: Challenges and Solutions: Hearing before the Subcomm. on

Communications & Technology of the H. Comm. Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications &

Technology (Jul. 17, 2018) (statement of Tom Stroup, President, Satellite Industry Association).

Lauren Thomas, In a new space age, Goldman suggests investors make it big in asteroids, CNBC (April 6, 2017),

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/06/goldman-sachs-tells-investors-to-consider-new-space-age.html.

See Space Investment Quarterly Q4 2018, SPACE ANGELS (Jan 2019),

https://spaceangels.docsend.com/view/imudzjd.

See Space: Investing in the Final Frontier, MORGAN STANLEY (Nov. 13, 2017),

https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/investing-in-space.

Irv Leveson, The Economic Benefits of GPS, GPS WORLD (Sep. 1, 2015) (“Leveson Report”), available at

https://www.gpsworld.com/the-economic-benefits-of-gps/.

economic activity generating more than 10 million jobs.

Meanwhile, the maritime industry will

see valuable benefits from new space technologies as ports and ships use satellite imaging and

GPS positioning services to more effectively navigate ships, avoid weather, and implement

automated steering and robotics into operations.

Satellite technology will also support many terrestrial communications advancements in

the coming years, including support for, and integration with, 5G communications platforms. For

example, satellites can help bring 5G and other next-generation services to rural and other areas

where it is not economically feasible for terrestrial companies to lay fiber-optic cables, benefiting

ranchers, farmers, pilots, sailors, and others.

Finally, environmental observation and data collection generate billions in economic value.

Weather analysis, prediction, and forecasting present are just a few examples. In 2014, the

Department found that the aggregate annual valuation of weather forecasts totals approximately

$31.5 billion.

The total of private and public spending on weather forecasting exceeds $5 billion,

and re-packaged government data is currently used to produce over 15 million weather products

relating to tornado and flood warnings, air quality alerts, tourism and farming applications, and

more.

Studies show that many people refer to weather forecasts an average of 3.8 times a day—

an estimated 301 billion forecasts consumed per year—to plan their daily lives. The economic

benefit of weather forecasts to businesses, consumers, and government is especially apparent

preceding and during extreme weather and natural disasters.

Accurate data and precise

forecasting enable prompt evacuations and preparations that have saved lives and led to trillions

of dollars in savings.

Space activities and their commercial applications are vital to the lives of Americans and

our economic growth, national security, public safety, innovation, and achievement. As

entrepreneurs and companies expand upon the business opportunities of space and embark upon

new applications relating to remote sensing, GPS, environmental observation, manufacturing,

tourism, pharmaceuticals, space situational awareness, and many other activities, addressing future

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guiding Profits, Eight Ways the Global Positioning System Drives Billions in Economic Activity, RAYTHEON

(Dec. 13, 2017), www.raytheon.com/news/feature/guiding-profits.

See When Shipping Meets Satellite Technology, PORT TECHNOLOGY (Mar. 1, 2016),

https://www.porttechnology.org/news/when_shipping_meets_satellite_technology; see also Joseph Bennington

Castro, Robot Ships Will Bring Big Benefits – and Put Captains on Shore, NBCNEWS (Nov. 8, 2017),

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/robot-ships-will-bring-big-benefits-put-captains-shore-ncna818941.

Caleb Henry, 5 Q’s for 5G, What the satellite industry needs to know about where it stands, SPACENEWS (Aug.

27, 2018), https://spacenews.com/what-the-satellite-industry-needs-to-know-about-where-5g-stands/.

Jane Callen, The Value of Government Weather and Climate Data, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (Sept. 2,

2014), https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2014/09/value-government-weather-and-climate-data.

Id.

space communications requirements including spectrum access must be a priority for the federal

government.

Planned Space Commerce Activities

The Trump Administration seeks to ensure that the United States remains the flag of choice

for commercial space activities as technology progresses and companies realize novel concepts in

space. Industry plans for new space businesses and deep space exploration are advancing quickly.

Commercial activities in space will escalate as the Administration and NASA envision a renewed

American presence on the Moon. NASA’s Deep Space Gateway program could provide an

anchor, like the International Space Station (ISS), for outward expansion.

Communication needs

will be of upmost importance to these endeavors. Numerous companies have briefed the

Department on the forward-thinking business plans they are beginning to execute, including:

• Spacecraft aiming to create a sustainable economy in low-Earth orbit for commercial crew

transportation and future expansion outward towards the Moon;

• Missions to send humans to the Moon as early as 2023;

• Advance cargo missions to Mars in 2022 to confirm water resources, identify hazards, and

support infrastructure;

• Formation of space habitations;

• Inflatable space stations to be used as space hotels;

• Establishment of a permanent operating presence on the Moon and sophisticated Moon

infrastructure to enable prospecting of precious resources that could bring enormous

benefits to Earth, including water, which could provide an accessible source for in-space

rocket fuel;

• Development of an all-optical, global satellite communications network;

• Development of a commercial architecture docking station for spacecraft transporting to

and from the moon.

• A next generation shift from ground-based air traffic control to a satellite-based system of

air traffic management.

• Mega-constellations of lower cost-satellites to provide low-latency, high-speed broadband

access across the globe.

These are representative examples of commercial and public-private partnership activities—many

conducted in support of government agencies—to pursue expanded operations in space. One thing

is clear: these difficult challenges will require increasingly data-heavy, reliable communications

with Earth and within space.

Complementing private industry efforts, President Trump has also made clear the

Administration’s intent to expand the American presence and infrastructure in space. Large-scale

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sarah Lewin, Humanity’s Expansion into Deep Space Is Inevitable, Industry Experts Say, SPACE.COM (Dec. 13,

2017), https://www.space.com/39076-humanity-heads-toward-deep-space-expansion.html.

Optical communications systems are in experimental phases; these systems could provide space communications

without the current need for spectrum access.

state-sponsored programs look toward the Moon and beyond. NASA’s next-generation missions

will depend on commercial support and lead to continued economic growth as they provide an

anchor for space development and technology:

• New U.S. commercial spacecraft and rockets are assisting with cargo deliveries to ISS and

are planning to launch NASA astronauts from U.S. soil in the near future;

• ISS is providing an ideal laboratory setting for wide-ranging scientific research including

advanced life support systems and human/robotic interfaces;

• New NASA-piloted aircraft designs could lead to supersonic flight over land;

• NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket will carry astronauts aboard its ORION

spacecraft back to the moon, where the astronauts will begin developing the systems

needed for subsequent missions into deep space;

• NASA will continue building up its deep space capabilities in preparation for human trips

to Mars;

• Two new NASA missions, ICESat-2 and GRACE Follow-On, will entail new satellite

Earth observation technologies critical to environmental planning and understanding of

changes to national resources; and

• Development of new technologies and techniques for solving problems in preparation for

longer-duration missions far from Earth.

Trends in the Use of Space-related Spectrum

It is critical that all stakeholders—regulators, service providers, users—understand and consider

the detailed technical characteristics of each use of radio spectrum in any regulatory decision.

Regulatory instability is bad for business and internationally harmonized regulations are critical

for satellites since their signals do not stop at borders and offer global and regional coverage.

Satellite regulation requires a global and regional approach—most importantly at the International

Telecommunications Union.

Prudent spectrum allocation and management, incorporating spectrum sharing when appropriate,

is critical due to congested radio spectrum. In light of the disparate radio spectrum uses, a “one

size fits all” approach to spectrum sharing is not possible or even necessarily desirable because,

for example, it could detract from optimizing spectrum use intensity through more advanced

sharing techniques.

Commercial terrestrial users are pushing into higher millimeter-wave frequency bands. These

higher frequencies appear attractive to those market entrants interested in launching high capacity,

high-speed, low-latency wireless networks. In 2016, the FCC adopted new rules for wireless

broadband operations in frequencies above 24 GHz, making the U.S. the first country in the world

to make this spectrum available for next-generation wireless services. The rules balance different

spectrum access approaches, including exclusive use licensing, shared access, and unlicensed

access in order to meet a variety of different needs and use cases. The FCC also adopted other

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What’s Next for NASA, NASA (April 24, 2018), https://www.nasa.gov/about/whats_next.html. For a current

description of NASA exploration plans, please refer to www.NASA.gov.

flexible service and technical rules to allow new technologies and innovations to evolve and

flourish without needlessly prescriptive regulations. Some of these bands are currently used by

the space community, and the impact of sharing on sensitive satellite receivers needs to be

considered.

The newer technology of software-defined radios presents even more policy issues. Some

satellites (today, mostly small lower Earth orbit (LEO) satellites) are designed with software-

defined radios, which can adapt frequency usage dynamically and which may open the door over

time to new regulatory approaches to spectrum sharing. However, many legacy satellites without

the ability to adapt to different areas of spectrum will be on orbit for decades to come. Transmitters

capable of operating across wide frequency bands are certainly attractive for their flexibility, but

these same transmitters could be sources of interference or jamming if allowed to operate across

spectrum used for space services. Carefully thought out regulatory implementation of these new

spectrum access technologies and techniques is imperative.

Stakeholder Feedback

The Department recognizes that access to spectrum is critical for the U.S. satellite

industry’s ability to innovate. Consumer-focused satellite communications services include direct

broadcast television, satellite radio, satellite broadband access, mobile satellite phones and

terminals, and navigation or location-based applications. In addition to growth in these areas, as

industry and government operations progress further into deep space missions satellite

communications and navigation will be essential to mission success.

In preparation of this report, Department staff conducted numerous meetings and

briefings with industry, nonprofit organizations, military and civil government officials and

engineers, and other interested stakeholders. Space stakeholders expressed concerns and

provided input pertaining to radio frequency spectrum including:

1. The Administration’s efforts to establish the U.S. as first in 5G must support its

concurrent efforts to ensure that foreign influence, including that of China, does not

leverage international spectrum policies to the detriment of the U.S. satellite industry

globally and prevent satellite services from competing with nationalized terrestrial

systems. Satellite systems need a stable and predictable spectrum environment given

their long-lasting, often mission-critical uses and their far-reaching scientific and

economic benefits.

2. Some services are inherently incompatible unless separated—sometimes widely

separated—in frequency. Space systems have unique spectrum needs that may be

incompatible with terrestrial systems, particularly those that are widely deployed and

operate at power levels that are orders of magnitude above that of received satellite

signals.

3. Once satellites are in orbit and operational, these systems need sufficient protection from

harmful interference. For example, GPS satellites and receivers require protection from

harmful interference, especially if future systems, such as the NextGen satellite-driven air

traffic management network, are to effectively enable safe transportation. Meanwhile,

10!

upfront capital is not likely to flow to new entrants in the satellite market in the presence

of excessive uncertainty or lack of predictability for fear that future operations will be

compromised.

4. Interference protection criteria should be based on widely accepted spectrum engineering

principles and practices (including additional protections for safety applications).

5. Industry seeks assured spectrum allocations in the U.S. and harmonized international

allocations in light of the international nature of satellite operations.

6. Future spectrum management and policies should consider that deep space missions are

quickly becoming a reality. They will require reliable spectrum access for mission

success and, in some cases, to protect lives.

7. Satellite systems in the L-band currently need a stable spectrum environment given their

long-lasting and mission-critical uses.

8. The composite effect of terrestrial systems, if not considered carefully, could negatively

affect the noise floor in space-based receiving systems, depending on the specific case.

This could in turn harm important science missions conducted by NASA and other space

agencies.

9. Protection of the existing S, X, Ku, and Ka DSN frequency band allocations from out-of-

band or disproportionately high-powered terrestrial uses in satellite bands must be a

priority if moon and mars missions are to be a reality. Certain emissions of sufficient

power level from operational systems in LEO, highly elliptical orbit (HEO), and

geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO) in immediately adjacent frequency bands will likely

cause harmful interference to deep space communications, as deep space signals are

usually received on the ground at much lower power levels than LEO, HEO, and GEO

satellite systems.

As noted above, in preparing this Report, the Department assessed the state of the satellite

industry, the impact of spectrum policy, and management decisions and actions. Our engagement

with stakeholders inside and outside of the government also provided us with significant inputs on

how spectrum policies could help advance U.S. space commerce. However, this report must be

viewed as an initial effort—a launching pad for further study, stakeholder input, and ultimately

decision-making. For example, as the space industry is rapidly expanding and innovating, we need

a much deeper understanding of the specific spectrum demands for the near- and longer-term

across a wide range of mission needs. At the same time, we need to understand whether industry

is investing in more spectrally efficient technologies that will support co-existence with other

space-based as well as terrestrial systems, or, in the case of some emerging technologies, perhaps

even alleviate the need for access to radio frequency spectrum.

Moreover, a strategy for

addressing the spectrum implications of an expanding U.S. space industry must not occur in a

vacuum. Therefore, although the federal government must continue to review the spectrum

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For example, to minimize launch-based spectrum demand, launch ranges transitioning to GPS metric tracking and

automatic flight termination systems can reduce, if not eliminate, the need for dedicated spectrum for flight

termination command and control.

11!

requirements and technology developments associated with space operations, NTIA must

incorporate this activity into the development of the President’s national spectrum strategy.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The President’s recent Spectrum PM calls for “a balanced, forward-looking, flexible, and

sustainable approach to spectrum management,” recognizing that valuable demand for future

spectrum is needed due to American industry technological advancements, including the

expansion of commercial space operations.

The President directs the Secretary to develop

recommendations for a long-term spectrum strategy that, among other things, would “improve the

global competitiveness of United States terrestrial and space-related industries and augment the

mission capabilities of Federal entities through spectrum policies, domestic regulations, and

leadership in international forums.”

To embrace the Administration’s priority of maintaining and expanding the U.S. position

in space exploration, innovation, and economic growth, the U.S. Government must ensure that

U.S. spectrum use and related regulatory and licensing policies balance all our national priorities,

including support for a robust satellite industry. This report outlines the need for rapidly advancing

such policies through stakeholder engagement, collaboration across the federal government, and

sound scientific study and analysis. It also makes clear that spectrum policy and planning in the

context of space must be part of the Administration’s broader spectrum management strategy. By

embracing the recommendations in this report, the Administration will take decisive steps to make

U.S. space commerce a dominant economic force for the benefit of all Americans.

I. Spectrum Policies.

1. Allocate and assign radio frequencies domestically in a manner that

recognizes satellite operations as essential for space commerce innovation

and economic growth. A healthy satellite industry is essential to enhance the

global competitiveness of the United States space sector. The Department,

through NTIA and in collaboration with the FCC, must ensure that U.S. spectrum

policies consider the needs of space-based technologies. To this end, the

government should assess current satellite technical characteristics, future space

technologies, and associated spectrum demand in order to inform national

forward-looking spectrum policies. The Spectrum PM requires the Director of the

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to submit a report to the

President on emerging technologies and their expected impact on non-Federal

spectrum demand. It also directs Federal departments and agencies to report to

NTIA on their anticipated future spectrum requirements. Both of these

examinations must take into full account space-based systems. Meanwhile, the

FCC is encouraged to continue considering innovative spectrum assignment

approaches, including those that account for geographical characteristics (e.g.,

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See Spectrum PM, supra note 3.

Id.

12!

urban areas versus rural areas) and that recognize the roles of both terrestrial and

space systems in serving the public interest and advancing U.S. priorities.

2. Spectrum policy must balance in future allocations the rising demand for

service with the availability of new technologies that significantly enhance

spectral efficiency. It is inevitable that, as wireless and satellite services expand

commercial and personal capabilities, demand will continue to grow. In a static

spectral efficiency environment, it would be appropriate for spectrum allocations

to track that demand and exclusively provide greater spectrum access for the

services that are experiencing the greatest demand. However, according to one

study, wireless network bandwidth capacity, and the capacity of other modalities,

increase approximately 100% every ten years.

Current and emerging

technologies hold significant promise in this regard for both terrestrial and

satellite services.

For example, quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) technology deployed in

many wireless operations is a method of combining two amplitude-modulated

signals into a single channel, thereby doubling the effective bandwidth.

Additionally, beamforming is significantly increasing the capacity of its allocated

spectrum and reducing the number of cell sites required for service.

Moreover,

5G technology is projected to provide 50% more spectral efficiency than LTE.

Similarly, satellite technology advancements are enhancing bandwidth capacity

and broadband service provision with enabling spectrum allocations. High

Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) is an emerging video compression standard that

can make ultra-high definition video via satellite cost effective.

High-

throughput satellite (HTS) have increased satellite spectral capacity by

approximately two orders of magnitude since 2011.

Taken together, and considering other developments such as the FCC’s currently

under consideration proposals with regard to C-Band reallocation,

it may be that

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See The Spectrum Handbook 2018, SUMMIT RIDGE GROUP (Oct. 2018, 31), https://ssrn.com/abstract=3259782.

See id.

See id. at 36.

See id. at 44.

See id. at 34.

See id. at 36.

“The FCC has unanimously voted to find ways to open up the C-band spectrum (3.7-4.2 Ghz) for terrestrial

wireless use, either all of the 500 Mhz or some portion of it, and through either an incentive or capacity auctions, a

market mechanism where incumbents voluntarily strike deals to reduce their footprint, or some other means.” John

Eggerton, FCC Votes to Open C-Band for Wireless Broadband, BROADCASTINGCABLE.COM (Jul. 12, 2018),

https://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/fcc-votes-to-open-c-band-for-wireless-broadband.

13!

the U.S. will be able to minimize the oft-repeated concerns of a looming

“Spectrum Crunch.” Accordingly, U.S. spectrum policy and spectrum allocation

decisions should take into serious consideration significant spectral efficiency

enhancement technologies that will help meet wireless and satellite service

demand. Moreover, spectrum policy should assess how advancements in

technology for satellite and other services will provide new methods to meet

consumer demand – provided these modalities have the spectrum they need to

provide service.

3. Support global harmonization of the radio frequency spectrum for space-

related activities. U.S. space activities, which operate over much of the globe,

will benefit significantly from internationally harmonized spectrum. Operation of

a satellite system in different spectrum bands in different regions increases

operational challenges and costs while decreasing U.S. investment, threatening

the growth of U.S.-based space commerce. NTIA must continue to strive to

understand fully the specific harmonization needs, challenges to global

harmonization, and technically and economically feasible alternatives in specific

bands (if any). This policy positions the U.S. delegation to pursue globally

harmonized spectrum allocations where feasible at the upcoming 2019 World

Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-19).

The ITU has made clear through several recent actions that, amidst a search for

spectrum to advance terrestrial wireless broadband, or “IMT-2020” in ITU

parlance, reserving spectrum for satellite services is also of paramount

importance. The 2015 WRC identified over 33 GHz of millimeter wave spectrum

for study for possible identification for IMT-2020 at WRC-19. On the other hand,

the 28 GHz (Ka) band was not included in this list, with the resolution noting the

importance of the Ka band in providing mission critical satellite broadband

services in the U.S. and other nations.

Moreover, the ITU protected satellite use

in the of 3.6-4.2 GHz band (C Band) in Region 2, covering the Americas, but that

same band was identified as available for wireless service in other regions.

Additionally, the subsequent 2016 edition of the ITU Radio Regulations includes

several requirements designed to protect space communications from terrestrial

operations above 1 GHz. The ITU’s basis for these requirements was in the

premise that, “all stations, whatever their purpose, must be established and

operated in such a manner as not to cause harmful interference to the radio

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See, e.g., The World Radiocommunication Conf. Res. 238-1, (WRC-15) (2015).

See, The World Radiocommunication Conf. FINAL ACTS, (WRC-15) (2015) (identifying the lower 200MHz of

C-band downlink frequencies—3400-3600MHz—for mobile telecommunication use in ITU Regions 1 and 2,

covering most of the world except East Asia.) In Region 2 – EMEA and Russia – a footnote identified the 3600-

3700MHz band for mobile use in a few countries. Id.

14!

services or communications of other Members or of recognized operating

agencies, or of other duly authorized operating agencies which carry on a radio

service, and which operate in accordance with the provisions of these

Regulations.”

Specifically, ITU Radio Regulations Article 21 establishes

detailed technical parameters on power limits and separation angles for terrestrial,

earth, and space stations operating above 1 GHz to mitigate interference upon and

from space communications.

Further, the ITU recently stated that access to spectrum for satellite technology is

crucial for broadband services and applications. In its Plenipotentiary Conference

2018, the ITU stated, “In recognition of satellite’s unique capability to extend

broadband connectivity, the ITU’s 2018 Plenipotentiary Conference modified its

resolution on connectivity to broadband networks to specifically include satellite

technology.”

That resolution now invites Member States “to facilitate

connectivity to satellite and terrestrial broadband networks, including enabling

access to spectrum, as appropriate, as one important component of access to

broadband services and applications, including to remote, underserved and

unserved areas.”

To ensure continued investment in essential satellite services, it is critical that the

U.S. Government strive to align international activities, including in preparation

for WRC-19, with current and future U.S. spectrum regulations and decisions that

advance President Trump’s space and economic priorities.

4. Improve radio frequency access for commercial space launches in the United

States. In the past, spectrum needed to support the tracking and commanding of

space launches was largely within the domain of the federal government. This

was due to the way the U.S. manages spectrum, with access to all spectrum bands

supporting launch allocated exclusively for federal government use. Today, the

U.S. provides spectrum for commercial space launches through an ad hoc process

of special temporary authority grants or experimental licenses. In addition, our

policies have evolved, encouraging the federal government to use commercial

space-related systems to meet its satellite needs through commercial leasing,

which can include investment in federal earth stations. However, the U.S. does

not protect federal earth station investments through federal allocations when they

are built to connect to commercial satellites. The U.S. must protect such

infrastructure as it represents significant taxpayer investment. NTIA has

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ITU Radio Regulations, Preamble 0.4 (2016).

See id. at Art. 21.

See ITU Plenipotentiary, Res. 293 (Rev. Dubai 2018).

Id.

15!

collaborated with the FCC on these issues for many years and it is imperative we

act. This will be especially important as the opportunities for smaller commercial

launch vehicles, and expected growth in the number of launches, grow

substantially.

5. Protect space operations from harmful interference. SPD-3 directs federal

agencies to “coordinate to mitigate the risk of harmful interference and promptly

address any harmful interference that may occur.”

The U.S. must work to

protect the reception and transmission of space-related operations against harmful

interference through U.S. and international regulations. Satellite systems such as

GPS and others rely on reception of low power signals from space. Reception of

these signals can be difficult in the presence of signals from other communication

services (either terrestrial or space) operating in the same or adjacent spectrum.

Conversely, satellite systems in space seek to receive low power signals from the

earth for a wide variety of purposes that can be constrained by high levels of noise

observed in space caused by other communication services (terrestrial or space) as

well as natural events such as space weather.

NTIA should gather information from stakeholders on specific interference

concerns for space operations and actions that could mitigate harmful

interference, including best practices that would encourage innovation and

deployment of next-generation space operations. At the same time, space systems

should leverage innovative technologies, to the extent feasible, to tolerate certain

levels of interference, increasing resiliency and maximizing the potential for

spectrum sharing with other communications services.

Interference is of particular and immediate concern regarding the Global

Positioning System (GPS) satellite constellation, which provides critical, precise

geographic location on the Earth. GPS applications are driving innovation and

creating major economic growth in farming, aviation, weather forecasting,

construction, mining, banking systems, financial markets, power grids, and a host

of other markets.

GPS contributes between $37.1 and $74.5 billion to the U.S.

economy each year

and provides vital information to first responders across the

nation.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See SPD-3 Section 6(g), supra note 12.

See GPS Applications, GPS.GOV, available at https://www.gps.gov/applications (last visited Sept. 12, 2018).

See Leveson Report, supra note 25.

See GPS Applications – Public Safety and Disaster Relief, GPS.GOV, available at

https://www.gps.gov/applications/safety/.

16!

Critical federal stakeholders—including the U.S. Air Force

—support the

adoption of the International Telecommunications Union-recommended 1 dB

interference protection criterion (IPC) for radio navigation services, including

GPS.

Disruption to GPS could have significant impact to U.S. industry, safety,

and economy. Beyond losing life-saving, mission-critical communications, GPS

disruption could result in costs to U.S. GPS users and manufacturers of as much

as $96 billion per year.

In order to advance our national interests in both GPS and other spectrum-based

services, NTIA will gather data from stakeholders on interference protection

needs for space communications, potential mitigating technologies against

harmful interference, and best practices that would encourage innovation and

deployment of next generation space communications and report to the Secretary

no later than June 1, 2019. The NTIA report will include recommendations and

analysis that address, inter alia, the ITU-R M.1903 recommendation and the U.S.

Air Force’s proposal for a 1 dB IPC

and prior work done within NTIA and the

U.S. government on this and related issues.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Memorandum from Air Force IRAC Representative to the IRAC Chairman, re: Doc. 43501/1 OET Public Notice

on TAC Spectrum Policy Recommendations, ET Docket No. 17-430 (Dec. 29, 2017); see also Background Paper

on Use of A 1-Db Decrease In C/N0 As GPS Interference Protection Criterion, GPS.GOV,

https://www.gps.gov/spectrum/ABC/1dB-background-paper.pdf (last visited Sept. 12, 2018).

See ITU-R Recommendation M.1903 at 9 (2012), available at https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-

REC-M.1903-0-201201-I!!PDF-E.pdf (“[T]he accepted approach is to define the aggregate interference power

density threshold at a level that will not raise the total noise floor by more than 1 dB above the environmental noise

floor.”).

See Nam D. Pham, The Economic Benefits of Commercial GPS Use in the U.S. and The Costs of Potential

Disruption, NDP CONSULTING 2 (June 2011),

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52850a5ce4b068394a270176/t/52d84e86e4b042903508ec47/1389907590034/

GPS|Report|June|21|2011.pdf (last visited Sept. 19, 2018).

See supra notes 56 and 57.

See Final Report, GPS TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP (June 30, 2011), available at

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7021690471.pdf; Letter from Lawrence E. Strickling, Assistant Secretary for

Communications and Information, U.S. Department of Commerce, to Julius Genachowski, Chairman, Federal

Communications Commission (Feb. 14, 2012), available at

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publiations/lightsquared_letter_to_chairman_genachowski_feb_14_2012.pdf;

Tom Powell, Adjacent Band Interference to Consumer Receivers, THE AEROSPACE CORPORATION 4, 5 (May 7,

2013), available at https://www.gps.gov/governance/advisory/meetings/2013-05/powell.pdf (last visited Sept. 12,

2018); W. Young et al., NIST Technical Note 1952: LTE Impacts on GPS – Final Report, NASCTN (Feb. 2017),

available at https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/TechnicalNotes/NIST.TN.1952.pdf; Final Report: Assessment to

Identify Gaps in Testing of Adjacent Band Interference to the Global Positioning System (GPS) L1 Frequency Band,

NATIONAL SPACE-BASED POSITIONING, NAVIGATION, AND TIMING SYSTEMS ENGINEERING FORUM (Mar. 2018),

available at https://go.usa.gov/xPQE8; Global Positioning System (GPS) Adjacent Band Compatibility Assessment:

Final Report, U.S. DEP’T OF TRANSPORTATION (Apr. 2018), available at https://go.usa.gov/xPQPt.

17!

6. Examine the impact of quantum satellite communication technologies on the

U.S. radio frequency ecosystem. The use of quantum technologies could lead to

ultra-fast, ultra-secure communications networks. Some countries have already

initiated experiments related to space-to-ground quantum communication. With

the use of satellites for space-to-ground quantum communications, the effects of

quantum communication on the spectrum ecosystem need to be understood,

including whether the spectrum requirements of these networks would differ from

traditional communications networks. To develop policies that might leverage

quantum technologies, NTIA and OSTP should seek stakeholder data on future

applications, how they would affect spectrum needs for space operations, and how

quantum communications networks will interact with legacy networks. In

addition to the reports mentioned in the first recommendation, the Spectrum PM

directs OSTP to submit a report on recommendations for research and

development priorities that advance spectrum access and efficiency; consideration

of quantum communications may be ripe for inclusion.

7. Develop short-term and long-term spectrum policies that ensure deep space

communications and navigation capabilities will meet demand.

As it develops recommendations to ensure spectrum policies encourage space

innovation and activity, the Department must examine future demands for deep

space communications and navigation and consider near-term and longer-term

technical requirements and solutions to meet those demands. The data capacity

requirements for deep space communications systems are projected to increase by

almost a factor of ten in each of the next three decades.

The expectation is that

increasingly complex inquiries and advanced imaging technologies will require

transmission of significantly more data.

See Figure 1.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See Deep Space Communications, JET PROPULSION LABORATORY, available at

https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/research/research-topics-list/communications-computing-software/deep-

space-communications (“JPL: Deep Space Comms”) (last visited Oct. 2, 2018).

See id.

18!

Figure 1. Source: Deep Space Communications, JET PROPULSION LABORATORY,

https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/research/research-topics-

list/communications-computing-software/deep-space-communications.

Federal researchers currently regard deep space optical communications (DSOC)

as the technology likely to meet the deep space communications demand in the

future given present challenges with the use of radio frequency. DSOC will

enable streaming of high definition imagery and data over interplanetary distances

and boost surface asset-to-orbiter performance by 20 dB (a factor of 100) over

current state-of-the-art spectrum technology.

Moreover, if successfully

implemented, DSOC would not experience the growing spectral congestion,

regulatory burdens, and potential for harmful interference inherent in radio

frequency use.

Private sector space innovators also identify these long-term

benefits of DSOC and some are collaborating with federal agencies to optimize

communications through optics for commercial deep space missions.

Space innovators, however, would not reap the benefits of DSOC, as an end-to-

end solution for deep space activity, for many years. For example, NASA’s Jet

Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) as part of a technology demonstration mission is

currently developing DSOC technologies.

A DSOC payload will undergo

validation testing in 2019 and will launch in 2022.

This DSOC payload will be

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See id.

See Deep Space Optical Communications (DSOC), JET PROPULSION LABORATORY, available at

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/tdm/dsoc/index.html (last visited Oct. 2, 2018). DSOC technologies being

developed include: a low-mass spacecraft disturbance isolation and pointing assembly; a high-efficiency flight laser

transmitter; and a pair of high-efficiency photon counting detector arrays for the flight optical transceiver and the

ground-based receiver.

See id.

19!

a part of NASA’s robotic Psyche mission and will not begin transmission as a

demonstration technology until 2026.

While DSOC promises to provide superior deep space communications without

the regulatory and interference concerns of transmissions, near-term deep space

activity will need to rely on radio frequency technologies. Given current radio

frequency technology shortcomings for deep space operations, JPL’s Deep Space

network (DSN) uses specific equipment and radio frequencies for Moon and Mars

operations.

Further, JPL is investigating new radio frequency-based

technologies that would allow current radio systems to accommodate the

increasing need to move more data between deep space and Earth.

Given the growing need for spectrum to accommodate radio frequency

transmissions to and from deep space, the Department, NTIA, and other federal

stakeholders should work with the private sector to develop policies that will

enable deep space radio frequency communications near-term. Considerations of

power levels, methods to encourage new spectrally efficient technologies, and

other policies could help drive efficient and effective deep space communications.

Moreover, the Department, NTIA, and other federal stakeholders should work

with the private sector to consider establishing a roadmap for DSOC deployments.

Ultimately, this could lead to future repurposing of spectrum currently used for

deep space communications for other uses.

8. Support appropriate policies that can help speed the delivery of satellite

broadband solutions to market. Informed by stakeholders, NTIA should work

to facilitate and advance policies that hold promise to speed delivery of satellite

broadband systems to unserved areas in the United States and globally. Satellite

broadband represents an important U.S. competitive advantage that complement

terrestrial services to ensure U.S. leadership in 5G.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See id.

DSN uses cryogenically cooled HEMT receivers that would be able to support missions to both the Moon and

Mars. For Moon operations, DSN’s uplink bands are 2025-2110 MHz, 7190-7235 MHz, 22.55-23.15 GHz, and the

downlink bands are 2200-2290 MHz, 8450-8500 MHz, 25.5-27 GHz. For Mars operations, DSN uses 2110-2120

MHz (with restriction in Spain), 7145-7190 MHz, 34.2-34.7 GHz for uplink and 2290-2300 MHz, 8400-8450 MHz,

31.8-32.3 GHz for downlink.

See JPL: Deep Space Comms, supra note 63 (noting that JPL is examining “spectral-efficient technologies that

increase the data rate that can be reliably transmitted within a given spectral band; power-efficient technologies that

reduce the amount of energy needed to transmit a given number of bits; propagation effects, to better understand

atmospheric modeling and allocate frequency bands; improved flight and ground transceivers that enable future

radio systems; antennas, both flight and ground, that enable NASA’s move to higher radio frequencies such as Ka-

band (26 to 40 GHz), and deployable and arraying antenna technology.”).

20!

II. Radio frequency Licensing Policies

9. Advance a streamlined U.S. radio frequency licensing process for satellites of

all sizes. The FCC designed its current satellite licensing process around

international requirements and procedures for large and expensive satellites.

Innovative small satellites are becoming more prevalent. However, they are often

developed and funded by small businesses or academia with limited resources and

little knowledge of or experience with the regulatory process for gaining authority

to access spectrum.

Further, even for larger satellite companies, complex

licensing frameworks increase cost, slow deployment, and provide disincentives

for using the United States as a base for their space commerce activities.

Collectively, these processes can discourage innovators from using the United

States as a flag nation for space operations.

Additionally, under certain

circumstances, the regulatory process involving federal and non-federal missions

necessitates working with various federal agencies including the FCC.

The Department of Commerce, through NTIA and in consultation with the FCC

and Executive Branch agencies, should continue collaborating with the FCC to

develop a licensing framework for commercial small satellite missions, and NTIA

and the FCC together should streamline and improve inter-agency processes that

facilitate deployment of nascent small satellites and alleviate burdens on the U.S.

satellite and space industry. This should be accomplished in a manner that

ensures protection of incumbent systems. The Federal government should base its

streamlining and other improvements to processes and policies on data and on

other input from small satellite innovators and all other space commerce

stakeholders, to include determining if a combined licensing process to address

missions that have both Federal and non-Federal payloads is possible. Additional

Federal support (including outreach and education) to universities, research

institutions and small businesses may be necessary in order to improve knowledge

and experience concerning domestic and international satellite regulatory

processes. Specific attention should also be paid to ways to reduce the licensing

costs on smaller satellite operators or those with experimental design.

10. Streamline the U.S. process for authorizing use of radio frequencies for

international satellite Positioning, Navigation and Timing systems. Foreign-

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The FCC has initiated a rulemaking to streamline the licensing process for commercial small satellites, seeking to

reduce the burdens and costs for licensees. See Streamlining Licensing Procedures for Small Satellites, Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No. 18-86, FCC 18-44 (Apr. 17, 2018), available at

https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0417/FCC-18-44A1.pdf. NTIA urges the FCC to

complete this process.

See, e.g., White Paper on Encouraging the United States as the Flag Country for Commercial Space Stations,

ECHOSTAR & HUGHES (Sept. 5, 2018) (citing federal regulations that inhibit streamlined space station filings at the

ITU, require high bonding fees for ITU filings advanced through federal agencies, and mandate overly prescriptive

milestones which have, collectively, decreased the number of United States flagged commercial space stations).

21!

based positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) systems require a waiver from

the FCC of its own rules and interagency coordination to allow signal reception in

the United States. The recent approval of one such system took many years.

Additionally, there is widespread confusion regarding the U.S. approval process;

this results in equipment manufacturers often building devices to receive PNT

signals from foreign systems without regard to the authorization process. NTIA,

in consultation with the FCC, should expedite input from PNT stakeholders,

including federal agencies, and clarify the process and objectives of the review to

enhance GPS services domestically. Especially as allies and other countries

create independent or supplementary capabilities, such delays impede

collaboration, create international friction, and especially create business

uncertainty for commercial satellite operators and their partners.

III. International Spectrum Policies Impacting Space Operations

11. Improve the space-related activities and processes of the International

Telecommunications Union and other multilateral organizations. The current

international satellite coordination and related processes are cumbersome, costly,

and time-consuming. Efforts should be made to encourage a regulatory

environment internationally that is conducive to promoting spectrum

harmonization, innovation, and investment in spectrally efficient next-generation

space technologies.

IV. Stakeholder Input

12. Develop a robust, periodic process for stakeholder input. Implementing these

recommendations will require input from and collaboration with key stakeholders,

within the U.S. Government, in the U.S. space commerce sector and in other

sectors potentially impacted by any new policies and regulations. Importantly, as

our national spectrum decisions and policies do not occur in a vacuum, these

efforts must include non-space users of spectrum on a routine basis as we work to

address ever-escalating and widespread demand for spectrum access. These efforts

should align with NTIA’s work to implement the Spectrum PM and develop a

national spectrum strategy.

13. Assess spectrum demand for space operation and report on efforts to meet it.

Stakeholder input will provide federal policymakers with data to support future

spectrum policy recommendations to help drive U.S. space commerce today and in

the coming years. To this end, NTIA’s efforts to work with the White House,

executive branch departments and agencies, and the FCC to implement the

Spectrum PM will be critical. Areas for assessment could include: 1) current

spectrum allocations for space communications and other space services; 2) the

anticipated growth of space service demand over the next 15 years; 3) whether

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See, e.g., Waiver of Part 25 Licensing Requirements for Receive-Only Earth Stations Operating with the Galileo

Radionavigation-Satellite Service, Order, FCC 18-158 (Nov. 2018) (approving a waiver sought in 2013).

22!

current and anticipated spectrum allocations in the United States and

internationally will meet those demands; and 4) how new technologies, including

quantum mechanics and optical communications, may mitigate spectrum

requirements for U.S. space commerce over time. In addition to informing the

national spectrum strategy, NTIA will include applicable actions that address space

spectrum requirements in annual reporting the Spectrum PM requires.

23!

ANNEX A

Spectrum Policies Background

Congress has divided spectrum management in the United States between the FCC, which

manages radio frequency spectrum use by all non-federal systems, and NTIA, which manages

the use of the radio frequency spectrum by all federal government systems. Together the two

agencies manage the allocation and assignment of spectrum among various types of uses. The

figure below shows the structural framework for this effort.

Figure A-1

24!

ANNEX B

FCC Space Systems Licensing Policies and Procedures

I. Introduction

The Communications Act of 1934 and the implementing regulations of the Federal

Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) require licensing of the use of the radio

frequency spectrum in the United States. This includes all non-federal geostationary and non-

geostationary satellite systems (both the space segment and the ground segment) that provide

service to or from the United States. The FCC is also able to license the space segment of

satellite systems that operate outside the United States if their operators want their system to be

flagged as a U.S. system for purposes of international frequency coordination through the

International Telecommunication Union (ITU) processes for such coordination.

In order to facilitate operation of earth stations located in the United States with satellites

licensed by other countries, the FCC has a process for granting requests for access to the U.S.

market by satellites licensed by other countries.

The information requirements for such

requests, and the substantive criteria applied in reviewing these requests, are the same as those

for entities seeking authority to operate a U.S. satellite.

The FCC reviews applications for commercial satellites under the rules contained in 47 CFR Part

25. In the last several years, the FCC has authorized numerous small satellites for experimental

operations — including scientific and research missions for purposes of experimentation, product

development, and market trials — in non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) under Part 5 of the

Commission’s rules. Some amateur small satellite operations have also been authorized under

Part 97 of the Commission’s rules.

Because of the increasingly commercial nature of small satellite missions, many of these

satellites are not suitable for licensing under the Commission’s Part 5 experimental licensing

process. Obtaining a regular commercial authorization under Part 25 for an NGSO system,

however, can be challenging for some small satellite applicants because of the costs and

timelines involved. In view of that, the Commission has recently proposed a streamlined

authorization process within Part 25 that is tailored to small satellites.

This document focuses on the licensing process for commercial operations under Part 25 and

does not address the licensing process for experimental and amateur operations under Parts 5 and

97, unless specifically indicated otherwise.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

47 C.F.R. § 25.137.

Streamlining Licensing Procedures for Small Satellites, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 18-44 (Apr. 17,

2018).

25!

II. Licensing Process for Commercial Satellites

For applications for new geostationary-like (GSO-like) satellite operation, the FCC uses a “first-

come, first-served” procedure to process applications.

Under this procedure, applications are

placed in a queue and considered in the order that they are filed. The FCC reviews the first

application in the queue and if it is found to be acceptable for filing, it is placed on public notice.

After conclusion of a 30-day comment period, the application may be granted. The FCC will

grant the application if it finds that the applicant is legally, technically and otherwise qualified

and that the proposed operations are compatible with previously authorized operations. In

several frequency bands compatibility is established by compliance with the “two-degree rules”

or coordination agreements with affected previously authorized systems in case of any violation

of these rules.

A place in the processing queue for geostationary satellite space stations can also be established

by submitting to the FCC a request for coordination of frequencies under the auspices of the

ITU. An application that follows this “two-step process” will be considered complete if all

required application information is submitted within two years of the date of submission of the

initial materials.

The process for NGSO-like satellite operations is different. An application for NGSO-like

operations may trigger a “processing round” if it conflicts with a previously-authorized satellite

system or a previously filed-application.

Additional applications can then be filed until a

deadline the FCC sets in the same public notice that accepts for filing the “leading application.”

If the systems use non-directional earth station antennas and are unable to avoid co-frequency

interference, available spectrum will be divided equally among qualified applicants.

On the

other hand, if the systems use directional earth station antennas and co-frequency interference

can be avoided, authorized systems must coordinate their operations. In case two or more

satellite systems cannot agree on coordination, then, during any period of time in which a certain

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

47 C.F.R. § 25.158(b). “GSO-like satellite operation” means operation of a GSO satellite to communicate with

earth stations with directional antennas. Id. at § 25.158(a)(1).

See 45 C.F.R. § 25.103. These rules set power limits that, if met, will ensure compatible operations at two-degree

spacing on the geostationary orbit. Id.

47 C.F.R. § 25.110(b)(3)(iii).

47 C.F.R. § 25.157. “NGSO-like satellite operation” means operation of a NGSO satellite system or of a GSO

MSS satellite to communicate with earth stations with non-directional antennas. Id. at § 25.157(a).

47 C.F.R. § 25.157(c)(2).

47 C.F.R. § 25.157(e).

26!

interference threshold is exceeded in a commonly-authorized frequency band, such band will be

divided among the affected satellite systems.

To prevent warehousing spectrum, licenses for GSO and NGSO systems are conditioned on the

licensee meeting certain milestones.

GSO satellites must be deployed and operational within

five years of the grant. For an NGSO constellation, the milestone is launch and operation of

50% of the satellites within six years of the grant. In addition, all licensees and recipients of

grants of U.S. market access must post a surety bond in order to discourage warehousing of

scarce resources.

The bond must be posted within 30 days of the grant of a license or U.S.

market access. The required bond amount escalates from $1 million to $3 million over five years

for a GSO space station and escalates from $1 million to $5 million over six years for a NGSO

constellation. If a license or market access grant is surrendered or revoked prior to achieving the

requisite milestone, the licensee is liable only for the pro rata amount of the bond on the date of

the surrender. For an application following the “two-step process” described above, a surety

bond of $500,000 is also required for the first step of the process to establish a place in the

licensing queue.

Milestones and bond requirements apply only to commercial satellites licensed under Part 25 and

do not apply to experimental and amateur satellites. For some types of satellites that do not seek

to use spectrum as intensively as typical fixed satellite and mobile satellite service

communications satellites, the FCC has either not applied or has waived portions of these

milestone requirement. This is the case for many satellites operating in the earth exploration

satellite service.

The FCC also has adopted rules to mitigate orbital debris, applicable to commercial satellite

operations under Part 25, as well as experimental and amateur satellite operations under Parts 5

and 97.

These rules require applicants for a satellite license or a grant of U.S. market access to

describe what steps it will take to lessen the risk of their operations contributing to orbital debris,

including their post-mission disposal plans for the satellite.

Since the existing rules were

adopted in 2004, there have been significant developments, including an increase in the number

of debris objects capable of producing catastrophic damage to functional spacecraft and plans for

deployment of constellations with large numbers of satellites. In view of these developments,

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

47 C.F.R. § 25.261.

47 C.F.R. § 25.164.

47 C.F.R. § 25.165.

Mitigation of Orbital Debris, Second Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 11567 (2004).

47 C.F.R. § 25.114(d)(14). Such an orbital debris mitigation plan, must disclose: (i) the amount of debris released

in a planned manner during normal operations, as well as the probability of the satellite becoming a source of debris

by collisions with small debris; (ii) the probability of accidental explosions during and after completion of mission

operations; (iii) the probability of the satellite becoming a source of debris by collisions with large debris or other

operational satellites; and (iv) the post-mission disposal plans for the space station at end of life. Id.

27!

the FCC is developing proposed changes to the orbital debris rules, designed to improve and

clarify these rules based on recent experience gained in licensing large NGSO constellations and

on improvements in mitigation guidelines and practices, as well as to address market

developments.

III. Licensing Procedures for Earth Stations

All earth stations transmitting from U.S. territory must be licensed. No license is required,

however, for receive-only earth stations operating with U.S. licensed satellites or foreign-

licensed satellites that have been granted market access. An option to register receive-only earth

stations is available in several frequency bands in order to ensure that the earth station is

protected from transmitting terrestrial stations in the same band. A large number of technically-

identical earth stations can be authorized under a single blanket-license.

Earth Stations in Motion (ESIMs), which comprise ESAAs (Earth Stations Aboard Aircraft),

ESVs (Earths Stations on Vessels) and VMESs (Vehicle-Mounted Earth Stations), have been

authorized as applications in the fixed-satellite service. The FCC has recently proposed to

streamline existing rules and extend their applicability to other frequency bands.

Completion

of these proposed changes is expected in the near future.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Amendment of Parts 2 and 25 of the Commission’s Rules to Facilitate the Use of Earth Stations in Motion

Communicating with Geostationary Orbit Space Stations in Frequency Bands Allocated to the Fixed Satellite

Service, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 32 FCC Rcd 4239 (2017).

28!

ANNEX C

International Space Communications Background

The U.S. Department of State (State) is ultimately responsible for development of the United

States’ positions at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). State has developed a

robust process by which interested parties (State, NTIA, the FCC, federal agencies and the

private sector) address international spectrum issues. The ITU maintains treaty text. This treaty

text contains the international table of allocations and international procedures for registration

and coordination of satellite systems. Approximately every four years the ITU

Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R) holds a World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) to

revise the international treaty text.

The United States develops policy positions for issues on the agenda of each WRC, addressing a

wide variety of technical and operational affecting the radio frequency spectrum operations of

space systems. There are satellite-related agenda items at each WRC, including items addressing

spectrum sharing between new entrants and existing systems. NTIA and FCC work through

established processes shown in the figure below, and based on that advice and administration

priorities, reconcile the government and private industry proposed positions into U.S. positions.

As part of its preparations for the WRC, the FCC establishes a Federal Advisory Committee

focused on the international frequency spectrum issues identified on the WRC agenda. The

WRC Advisory Committee (or WAC), provides to the FCC advice, technical support, and

recommended proposals for WRCs. The WRC-19 WAC, composed of entities from both the

public and private sectors, is charged with gathering data and information necessary to formulate

meaningful recommendations for WRC-19 agenda items with the goal of identifying the private

sector/public priorities and objectives.

As part of the federal preparations, NTIA utilizes the Interdepartment Radio Advisory

Committee (IRAC), to provide advice of the federal agencies developed through its sub-

committee, the Radio Conference Sub-committee (RCS) on WRC agenda items. The RCS is

dedicated to development of federal positions and proposals for WRCs.

To the extent possible, the U.S. utilizes the Americas regional group, the Inter-American

Telecommunication Commission (CITEL), to develop regional proposals to each WRC. CITEL

support maximizes the U.S. chance of success at each WRC.

29!