US Satellite Operators Comment on Canada's Proposed NGSO Rules Rewrite

Being one of the first national administrations looking at NGSO mega constellation rules means ISED "invariably will be viewed as a model by counterpart agencies in other countries," SpaceX said in operator comments posted by ISED last week. SpaceX opposed proposed limits on the number of licenses per band and requirements all NGSO FSS and mobile service satellite (MSS) systems be required to cover 100 percent of Canada 24/7, saying that could result in a barrier to entry given the sparse population of much of Canada. And it opposed "an arbitrary term of years" for launching and operating a constellation, saying there could be a cap on satellite numbers "once operations reach a steady state."

Multiple U.S. operators opposed the proposed coordination requirements for foreign licensed systems seeking approval to operate in Canada. O3b said "cumbersome coordination requirements" could delay services and drive Canadian licensees to act as gatekeepers to the Canadian market. Planet Labs said the coordination requirement poses "an undue burden" and ISED could act as a go-between in coordination discussions "if need be." Boeing, also warning that requiring coordination with Canadian networks before receiving Canadian authorization could hamper access, said ISED should instead require NGSO operators seek a spectrum license after getting approval in principle for providing FSS or MSS service in Canada.

Some operators had issue with ISED's proposed milestone metric. O3b said there should be one milestone metric -- like its proposal to the FCC that 33 percent of an authorized constellation be operational within six years of a license grant, with at least one satellite in each orbital plane -- instead of different ones for different sized NGSO systems. But requiring only a third of a constellation to be launched and operational within a year of licensing "would constitute a major windfall" for Telesat Canada, OneWeb said. It said it recommended the FCC not change its own existing milestone rules as the U.S. agency looks at updates to its Part 2 and 25 rules because that would discourage spectrum warehousing and speculative applications. It said "soften[ing]" the consequences of not meeting milestones would instead give flexibility to NGSO operators "without rendering the NGSO milestone mechanism toothless." Telesat Canada didn't comment Monday.

A collection of operators, including OneWeb, that are Canadian Satellite and Space Industry Forum members, said the milestone proposal raises questions since it doesn't specify consequences for not meeting a milestone. The group also objected to the coordination requirement since it would let authorized Canadian networks "control the timing of market entry and access" by non-Canadian systems, but suggested an alternate coordination requirement. Under those proposed terms, non-Canadian networks wouldn't have to coordinate with Canadian ones that have a later ITU date priority or to wait indefinitely for a response to reasonable coordination requests, and Canadian approval of a foreign-licensed system shouldn't be predicated on completing coordination, they said. Canadian satellite operators Telesat Canada, NorthStar Data, Microsat Systems Canada, Kepler Communications and GHGSat also commented.