WASHINGTON-An embarrassing dispute has erupted over Final Analysis’ little low-earth-orbit satellite license, which has the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) clashing with the Federal Communications Commission.
Dingell, in a Nov. 18 letter to NTIA head Larry Irving, blasted the FCC’s handling of Final Analysis’ application for a global data satellite system. The company’s LEO system is based on a novel spectrum time-sharing approach.
“Acting on delegated authority, the staff of the FCC’s International Bureau has released a decision to grant a license to Final Analysis that denies critical elements of Final Analysis’ amended application in reliance upon information not fully coordinated with NTIA,” said Dingell, ranking minority member of the House Commerce Committee.
Indeed, in a June 11 letter to FCC Chairman Bill Kennard, NTIA acting spectrum management chief William Hatch said the FCC failed to coordinate with NTIA on the Final Analysis’ time-sharing of 137-138 MHz frequencies with satellite operations of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
According to correspondences of NTIA and Dingell, Final Analysis filed an amendment to its satellite application after little LEO rules were adopted last year, only to see the FCC grant it a license in April without many of the modifications requested.
In its petition for review of that action, according to NTIA, Final Analysis claimed the International Bureau improperly relied on communications from NTIA and NOAA in formulating its decision to deny amendments to the little LEO application.
“NTIA seeks to clarify that the NTIA/NOAA staff communications to International Bureau staff reference in the bureau’s Final Analysis Order were part of the normal interagency coordination process for shared spectrum bands and were of a preliminary nature,” said Hatch.
“Under the commission’s revised ex parte rules regarding issues of shared jurisdiction,” Hatch continued, “information provided by NTIA to the International Bureau in this matter should have been disclosed and relied upon in the International Bureau’s decision-making process only after advance coordination with NTIA about the timing and extent of any disclosure. Unfortunately, in this instance, this advanced coordination did not take place, and therefore, NTIA was not given an opportunity to indicate that the staff-to-staff correspondence did not represent final federal agency views with regard to Final Analysis’ requested amendments to its satellite constellation.”
The FCC did not respond to calls for comment.
Spats like this between the FCC, which regulates non-federal government spectrum, and NTIA, which manages federal government spectrum, are not altogether unusual. The fact that this one made its way into the public domain is highly embarrassing for two federal agencies that generally are supportive of one another in public.
“We have no comment,” said Mary Kay Williams, a spokesman for Final Analysis.
After Dingell’s intervention, the FCC has requested more technical data from NTIA. Irving told Dingell in a Nov. 24 letter NTIA will respond to the questions this week and will brief Dingell on the matter.
