January 17, 2023

BY ELECTRONIC FILING
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
45 L Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20554

Re: IBFS No. SAT-MPL-20200526-00056, Call Sign S2985.

Dear Ms. Dortch:

To preserve the sustainability of space for services that help people on the ground, for space
exploration, and for human space travel, now and into the future, the Commission should impose,
as conditions on any authorization granted to Viasat, Inc. (“Viasat”) in this proceeding, the space
sustainability requirements it recently determined were in the public interest when authorizing
SpaceX’s second-generation (“Gen2”) NGSO system. Specifically, as in the Gen2 Order, the
Commission should require Viasat to:

• file semi-annual reports on collision avoidance maneuvers and satellite disposal, including
any difficulties or failures related thereto;
• apply a new performance-based method for assessing disposal failures that accounts for
both the number of failed satellites and their entire passive decay time;
• communicate and collaborate with NASA to promote space safety and sustainability;
• take all possible steps to assess and mitigate collision risk after receiving a conjunction
warning from the 19th Space Defense Squadron or other source; and
• coordinate with NSF to reach a mutually acceptable agreement to mitigate the impact of
its satellites on optical ground-based astronomy, with associated annual reporting
requirements. 1

For all of its bluster on orbital debris policy and anti-competitive demands to harm its U.S.-
licensed competitors, Viasat has never demonstrated any understanding or experience with how to
operate an NGSO satellite system. Indeed, Viasat does not seem to have made any progress
whatsoever in developing its space station design and operating strategies, years after pressing the
Commission to process its application. 2 Viasat’s immaturity in NGSO satellite operations is

1
See Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Order and Authorization, FCC 22-91, Call Sign S3069, ¶¶ 135z, 135aa,
135cc, 135ee-gg (rel. Dec. 1, 2022) (“Gen2 Order”). For completeness, SpaceX includes the specific
requirements at issue in Attachment 1 hereto, except for the second-to-last requirement, which implements a rule
already adopted in the Commission’s orbital debris proceeding that has not yet taken effect. See Mitigation of
Orbital Debris in the New Space Age, 35 FCC Rcd. 4156, ¶¶ 72-74 (2020) (“2020 Orbital Debris Further
Notice”).
2
See Petition to Deny or Defer of Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, IBFS File No. SAT-MPL-20200526-00056,
at 18 (Aug. 31, 2020).
Marlene H. Dortch
January 17, 2023
Page 2 of 4

particularly evident in its application in this proceeding, which is littered with wildly improbable
assumptions that undermine core claims about the sustainability of its system. For example, the
collision risk analysis Viasat submitted unrealistically assumes that it will successfully maneuver
all of its satellites into their intended disposal orbits. Thus, Viasat totally failed to consider the
possibility—indeed the near certainty for an operator with as little experience with NGSOs as
Viasat—that some number of its satellites would fail at their operational altitudes or before
reaching their intended disposal orbits. 3 By not including any analysis of the risk that its failed
satellites will cause, Viasat grossly underreported its collision probability to give the false
impression that its satellites can comply with applicable limits.

But satellites in Viasat’s pending application for a non-U.S.-licensed NGSO constellation

that fail on-orbit at its planned 1,300 km altitude would have a collision risk of 0.0033—much
higher than the 0.001 limit—over just their first 100 years of demise (the longest period of time
that NASA’s Debris Assessment Software (“DAS”) measures). 4 And even this figure
underestimates the risk of Viasat’s proposed constellation. In fact, the orbital decay of Viasat’s
satellites at its proposed altitude could take seven to ten times longer than the 100-year limit of the
DAS analysis, decaying through regions with some of the highest debris density and thereby
creating a high risk of debris clouds that would persist for centuries, as illustrated in Figure 1:

Figure 1: Comparison of SpaceX Gen2 and Viasat Passive Decay

3
See id. at 18-27.
4
See Petition to Deny or Defer of Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, IBFS File No. SAT-MPL-20200526-00056,
at 18-24 (Aug. 31, 2020) (“SpaceX Petition”).
Marlene H. Dortch
January 17, 2023
Page 3 of 4

At a minimum, the Commission must require Viasat to correct these misleading flaws in
its application before processing it, accounting for the entire passive decay time of its proposed
satellites in its analysis. But even if Viasat were to rectify its application to adopt more realistic
assumptions and analyses, the Commission must still impose conditions that mitigate the risks that
Viasat’s operations—and especially any failed satellites—would cause to low Earth orbit.

In this case, conditioning Viasat’s license on compliance with licensing conditions that
match those of the Gen2 Order, which were derived from broadly applicable concerns voiced by
NASA and other key stakeholders, would serve the public interest by promoting fair competition
and innovation while helping to preserve space for future generations. As Amazon correctly
explained in its comments in SpaceX’s Gen2 proceeding, the Commission must:

[E]nsure that the conditions imposed on SpaceX match those imposed on Amazon
and other similarly situated operators. Balanced rules and conditions on similarly
situated operators promote fair competition and cooperation. Disparate conditions
distort the playing field, introduce uncertainty and ambiguity that ossifies the
licensing process with fighting and advocacy, and make coordination among
operators more difficult. Beyond being required by the Administrative Procedure
Act, similar treatment of similarly situated operators is necessary to further the
Commission’s goal of making the licensing process faster and more efficient. 5

Beyond just benefitting consumers, competition, and administrative efficiency, applying

the Gen2 requirements to Viasat’s constellation would also improve space sustainability. For
example, imposing a semi-annual satellite health reporting requirement on Viasat consistent with
the Gen2 requirement would provide the Commission and industry with an ongoing, consistent set
of data on the reliability and collision risks associated with its system, while addressing general
concerns that NASA has raised about both small and large constellations. Indeed, annual reporting
from all operators, including Viasat, would enable the public to efficiently compare satellite health
and space sustainability efforts across the industry. Similarly, applying LeoLabs’ “object-years”
method to Viasat would provide a scalable, performance-based orbital debris mitigation
framework with a trigger for pausing launches if Viasat’s system imposes unacceptable burdens
on space, regardless of the size of its operations. Other operational requirements would address
NASA’s desire to protect its critical assets and missions, as reflected in NASA’s comments in the
Commission’s ongoing orbital debris proceeding and in response to individual licensing
applications. 6

While the Commission initially imposed the Gen2 conditions only on SpaceX, the
principles underlying those requirements are equally applicable to Viasat. Several requirements—

5
Comments of Kuiper Systems LLC, IBFS File Nos. SAT-LOA-20200526-00055 and SAT-AMD-20210818-
00105, at 17-18 (Feb. 8, 2022).
6
See, e.g., Letter from Samantha Johnson to Marlene Dortch, IBFS File No. SAT-MOD-20211207-00186 (June
29, 2022) (commenting on Amazon’s orbital debris modification application); Letter from Samantha Johnson to
Marlene Dortch, IBFS File No. SAT-MPL-20200526-00062 (Apr. 22, 2022) (commenting on OneWeb’s second
processing round application); Letter from Anne E. Sweet to Marlene Dortch, IB Docket No. 18-313, at 6 (filed
Apr. 4, 2019) (commenting in first round of the orbital debris proceeding).
Marlene H. Dortch
January 17, 2023
Page 4 of 4

including the semi-annual reporting obligation—stem from generalized concerns that NASA has
raised in the Commission’s pending orbital debris proceeding and has filed in multiple other
NGSO-licensing proceedings, including those of Amazon and OneWeb. But NASA’s concerns
are not limited solely to large constellations, and therefore should not apply only to them.
Specifically, based on its analysis of the risks involved and other factors, NASA has recommended
that any constellation of 25 or more satellites should be subject to the same level of additional
orbital debris requirements. 7 NASA also “recommends strongly against increasing the level
beyond 25” as doing so could have a cumulative effect that would “provide the same overall sets
of problems as a large constellation.” 8 However, because the Gen2 requirements involve
relatively straightforward reporting and coordination obligations, no reasonable justification exists
for exempting even smaller constellations.

Similarly, the Commission derived the performance-based Gen2 disposal failure condition
from a general proposal that LeoLabs also submitted in the Commission’s broader orbital debris
proceeding to enhance space sustainability for all operators. In its comments, LeoLabs explained
that its proposal was designed to inform “the future direction of regulatory requirements” for all
operators, “no matter how many satellites they have,” rather than to constrain a single U.S.-
licensed operator. 9 While LeoLabs has petitioned for reconsideration of the use of 100 as the
appropriate number of object-years in the Gen2 proceeding, whatever metric the Commission
determines is appropriate, the “object-years” method represents a major step forward in measuring
responsible operations and should apply evenly to all operators, including Viasat.

Finally, NASA and NSF have raised general concerns about the potential impact of NGSO
satellite systems on science missions, and in particular, the effects of sunlight reflected from
satellites on astronomical observation. 10 For example, in a letter filed in the Gen2 proceeding,
NSF identified several mitigation strategies of general applicability that it encouraged satellite
operators to adopt to reduce satellite reflectivity, including “reducing optical brightness to 7th
magnitude or fainter via darkening, deflecting light away from the Earth, or attitude maneuvering,
moving orbital elevations to ~700 km or lower, provision of orbital information for astronomers
to work on scheduling observations around satellite locations, and other ideas to be developed.” 11
To address these concerns, the Commission adopted a condition in the Gen2 Order requiring
collaboration with NASA and NSF to achieve agreements to minimize the impact of satellites on
astronomy and other science missions and the filing of an annual progress report with the
Commission. 12 Any grant in this proceeding should include similar conditions for Viasat.

7
See Comments of NASA at 2, 6, IB Docket No. 18-313 (filed Nov. 10, 2020).
8
See id. at 8.
9
Letter from Darren McKnight to Karl Kensinger, IB Docket No. 18-313; IBFS File Nos. SAT-LOA-20200526-
00055 and SAT-AMD-20210818-00105, at 2, 5 (filed Mar. 29, 2022).
10
See Letter from Samantha Johnson, NASA to Marlene Dortch, FCC, IBFS File No. SAT-MPL-20200526-00062,
at 3-5 (filed Apr. 22, 2022); Letter from Jonathan Williams to FCC, IBFS File No. SAT-MPL-20200526-00062,
at 1 (filed Apr. 22, 2022) (“NSF Comments”).
11
See NSF Comments at 1.
12
See Gen2 Order ¶¶ 135ff and gg. These conditions, revised to apply to Viasat, are set forth as numbers 4 and 5
on Attachment 1.
Marlene H. Dortch
January 17, 2023
Page 5 of 4

***

SpaceX remains steadfast in its commitment to industry-leading operations to ensure space

sustainability for all. But only with all operators working together under a common set of
requirements can we truly promote space sustainability for future operations and human space
flight. While questions remain about the extent of the Commission’s authority over space
sustainability, to be effective, the Commission must apply its requirements equally to similarly
situated operators, and not through a patchwork of conflicting licensing conditions. The
Commission has already determined that the space sustainability requirements included in the
Gen2 Order will serve the public interest, and should therefore adopt them as conditions on
Viasat’s authorization as well, thereby establishing a meaningful and broadly applicable baseline
for sustainable operations in space.

Sincerely,

/s/ David Goldman

David Goldman
Senior Director of Satellite Policy

SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

1155 F Street, NW
Suite 475
Washington, DC 20004
Email: [email protected]

Attachment
 ATTACHMENT 1
SPACE SUSTAINABILITY REQUIREMENTS

1. Viasat, Inc. (“Viasat”) must provide a semi-annual report, by January 1 and July 1 each year,
covering the preceding six-month period, respectively, from June 1 to November 30 and
December 1 to May 31. The report should include the following information:
i. The number of conjunction events identified for Viasat’s satellites during the reporting
period, and the number of events that resulted in an action (maneuver or coordination
with another operator), as well as any difficulties encountered in connection with the
collision avoidance process and any measures taken to address those difficulties,
ii. Satellites that, for purposes of disposal, were removed from operation or screened from
further deployment at any time following initial deployment, and identifying whether this
occurred less than five years after the satellite began regular operations or were available
for use as an on-orbit replacement satellite,
iii. Satellites that re-entered the atmosphere,
iv. Satellites for which there was a disposal failure, i.e., a satellite that loses the capability
to maneuver effectively after being raised from its injection, including a discussion of
any assessed cause of the failure and remedial actions. For each such satellite, Viasat
shall report an estimated orbital lifetime for the satellite following the failure, and for
Viasat’s constellation the cumulative number of failed satellite object years,
v. Identification of any collision avoidance system outages or unavailability, either on a
system-wide basis or for individual satellites. An “outage” would include any individual
satellite anomaly that results in a satellite not achieving targeted risk mitigation via
maneuver.
2. In the event of satellite failures resulting in more than 100 post-failure object years, Viasat may
not deploy any additional satellites until the Commission has approved a license modification
that includes an updated orbital debris mitigation plan addressing reduction in the failure rate
or mitigation of the risk of satellite failures.
3. Viasat must communicate and collaborate with NASA to enable safe launch windows to
support safety of both Viasat and NASA assets and missions and to preserve long-term
sustainable space-based communications services. Viasat must report on the progress of its
communications and collaboration efforts to the Commission in its regular reports specified in
requirement [1].
4. Viasat must continue to coordinate and collaborate with NASA to promote a mutually
beneficial space environment that would minimize impacts to NASA’s science missions
involving astronomy.
5. Viasat must coordinate with NSF to achieve a mutually acceptable agreement to mitigate the
impact of its satellites on optical ground-based astronomy. Viasat must submit an annual report
to the Commission, by January 1st each year covering the preceding year containing the
following information: (1) whether it has reached a coordination agreement with NSF
addressing optical astronomy; and (2) any steps Viasat has taken to reduce the impact of its
satellites on optical astronomy, including but not limited to darkening, deflecting light away
from the Earth, attitude maneuvering, and provision of orbital information to astronomers for
scheduling observations around satellites’ locations.
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on this 17th day of January 2023, a copy of the foregoing pleading

was served by first class U.S. mail upon:

Daryl T. Hunter P.E.

Viasat, Inc.
6155 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92009

John P. Janka
Viasat, Inc.
901 K Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20001

/s/ Jameson Dempsey_

Jameson Dempsey