Contents

Introduction. 1

The New Application Process Should Simplify and Speed Up Licensing. 2

Greater Flexibility for Applicants Will Better Accommodate Innovation. 2

A New License Type for Future Space Vehicles Will Encourage Development 3

New Earth Station Licensing Will Need Proactive Spectrum Coordination. 3

A Standardized Processing Round and Surety Bond Requirement Will Increase Predictability for Applicants and Ensure Timely Deployment 4

Conclusion. 4

Endnotes 4

Introduction

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation appreciates the opportunity to comment on Space Modernization for the 21st Century.^[1] We commend the Commission for its effort to overhaul the licensing process for space and earth stations. The massive growth of the space industry necessitates regulatory updates because a competitive space industry is necessary to achieve long-term economic and national security goals, and existing regulations hold the industry back.^[2] Faster application processing and greater predictability and flexibility will encourage more operators to get a license in the United States, which will spur innovation without unnecessary regulatory oversight.

The New Application Process Should Simplify and Speed Up Licensing, While Still Encouraging Innovation

The Commission’s efforts to create new applications, licensing regimes, and review processes should make it easier for applicants to obtain licenses while maintaining the critical functions of the licensing process. A licensing “assembly line” with clear, bright-line criteria is a good approach, as it establishes a standardized pathway for applicants to follow.^[3] ITIF also supports the use of a modularized application that dynamically adjusts as applicants input information and allows applicants to segment modules for faster approval because it will augment the assembly line approach.^[4] This new approach will make the application process more expeditious and straightforward for most applicants.^[5] Finally, the Commission is right to propose shot clocks for the various stages of the application process, which is important because they will hold the Commission accountable for processing applications promptly.^[6]

The Commission must ensure that the bright-line criteria remain dynamic so that when an applicant proposes and receives approval for a novel licensing methodology, that approach is incorporated into the criteria for future applications. The Commission could frequently expand the list of acceptable criteria to allow licensing rules to continuously evolve as applicants introduce new means of compliance. This process will prevent unnecessarily lengthy and redundant reviews in the future.

Greater Flexibility for Applicants Will Better Accommodate Innovation

The Commission’s proposals to make licensing rules more flexible will empower applicants to innovate. Expanding the number of modifications that only require notification or simple certification will allow satellite operators to improve systems without unnecessary regulatory delays.^[7] The use of conditional grants for applicants that qualify for expedited processing will be beneficial, provided that operators conduct activities under the grants on a non-interference and unprotected basis, and that the grants expire after a specified period.^[8] This approach is desirable because it will enable satellites to begin critical commercial and military operations while the licensing process proceeds.^[9] Similarly, operators should be able to launch under a conditional grant in frequency bands that do not require coordination or protection because it will enable more rapid innovation by expediting deployment and iteration timelines.

A New License Type for Future Space Vehicles Will Encourage Development

The NPRM’s proposal to create a new license type for Variable Trajectory Spacecraft Systems (VTSS) is a forward-looking approach that reflects the increasing dynamism of commercial spacecraft systems and will encourage their development. This proposal is useful because licensing for In-space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) operations and lunar missions, which will be critical for space competitiveness in the future, may fall under this category.^[10] It will be a boon for the U.S. space industry if the Commission has a regulatory structure in place for when VTSS technologies and operations become common.

New Earth Station Licensing Will Need Proactive Spectrum Coordination, and Could Benefit from a Light-Licensing Approach

ITIF supports switching to a two-step earth station licensing system in which operators apply for a nationwide license, then register individual sites and coordinate spectrum with other users at those sites. Rather than having to go through the full application process for each earth station, applicants will only need to undergo the full process once and can then register individual stations that fall under the approved application as needed, which will allow each station to come online more quickly. This framework mirrors the Commission’s approach to launch spectrum under Part 26 rules, which allows more rapid launch cadences.^[11] This new approach will be effective, so long as the Commission takes frequency-specific rules into account.^[12] To successfully implement this framework, the Commission should require proof of coordination at every registered site before operations begin, similar to the proof of coordination required ahead of individual launch operations.

A light-licensing model and database, as in the 70/80/90 GHz bands, offers a useful governance model for earth stations.^[13] This method, in which coordination with prior users at a site occurs after receiving a license, but must be complete before operations begin, would speed up the licensing process by decoupling the coordination process from the license review phase. This approach also eliminates the need for buildout requirements and concerns about warehousing. Buildout requirements are meant to prevent warehousing, in which an operator holds spectrum rights it does not use simply to keep other parties from using that spectrum. But under a light-licensing framework, the fact of non-use by one party explicitly permits use by others, the very opposite of warehousing.

Finally, enabling pre-grant operations on a temporary, non-interference, and unprotected basis for earth stations will benefit consumers because operations can begin more quickly. The Commission already permits this approach for special temporary authorities (STAs), so extending it would eliminate the need to apply separately for an STA and condense the process. However, the Commission should consistently apply the non-interference and unprotected standard until it grants full approval for this process to work effectively.

A Standardized Processing Round and Surety Bond Requirement Will Increase Predictability for Applicants and Ensure Timely Deployment

A standardized processing round will make it easier to obtain licenses for large constellations, which is beneficial because it will increase the number of operators that provide critical services like satellite broadband. The Commission should adopt a synthetic processing round that runs from January 1 to October 31 of each year because it will improve the application process by creating greater predictability, allowing applicants to file for inclusion at any time, and eliminating cut-off dates and the need for lead applications. All applicants will have more time to work on and submit a complete application, which will streamline the review process. In addition, this approach would allow the Commission to grant approvals in some frequency bands before others within the same application, giving licensees the ability to deploy with fewer regulatory slowdowns.

The Commission should also require a de-escalating surety bond for processing round bands because operators incur costs to coordinate with a licensee that enters a processing round, and without a substantial incentive to follow through on deployment, processing rounds may invite many more applicants than can reasonably expect to deploy. The de-escalating surety bond works to prevent that scenario. Since the cost of coordinating multiplies with the number of processing round members, the Commission should adopt a bond to ensure only serious applicants enter. Simultaneously, we support the Commission’s proposal not to include surety bond requirements for non-processing-round bands because such requirements are not necessary in bands without priority.

Lastly, the Commission should not overhaul the general substance of operational and spectrum rules as part of this rulemaking. Instead, the Commission should keep this proceeding focused on the licensing process and address any necessary changes to spectrum and satellite operational requirements in separate proceedings.

Conclusion

This rulemaking will benefit the space industry by updating and improving regulations to keep pace with commercial technological progress. Simpler, flexible, and more straightforward licensing will encourage the most innovative companies to seek a U.S. license, consequently helping maintain U.S. leadership in the global space economy.

Thank you for your consideration.

Endnotes