Space Innovation; Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space Age, 65217-65223 [2024-17093]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 154 (Friday, August 9, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65217-65223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-17093]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 5, 25, and 97

[IB Docket Nos. 18-313, 22-271; FCC 20-54, FCC 22-74, FCC 24-6; FR ID 
235363]


Space Innovation; Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space 
Age

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of effective date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC 
or Commission) announces that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
has approved, for a period of three years, the new information 
collection as a result of changes adopted in a Report and Order titled 
``Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space Age'' (Orbital Debris 
Report and Order) and a Second Report and Order titled ``Space 
Innovation; Mitigation of Orbital Debris in the New Space Age'' 
(Orbital Debris Second Report and Order), and affirmed and further 
clarified in an Order on Reconsideration titled ``Mitigation of Orbital 
Debris in the New Space Age'' (Orbital Debris Reconsideration Order). 
This document announces the effective date of rules adopted in those 
orders that contained new or modified information collection 
requirements that required review and approval by OMB and that had not 
already been announced as effective. This document also summarizes and 
makes effective the rules adopted in the Orbital Debris Second Report 
and Order, which required space stations ending their mission in, or 
passing through, the low-Earth orbit region below 2000 km altitude and 
planning disposal through uncontrolled atmospheric re-entry to complete 
disposal as soon as practicable following end of mission, and no later 
than five years after the end of the mission.

DATES: 
    Effective date: The amendments to 47 CFR 25.114(d)(14), 25.121(f), 
25.122(c) and (d), and 25.123(b) published at 85 FR 52422 on August 25, 
2020, and the amendments to 47 CFR 5.64(b)(7)(iv)(A), 
25.114(d)(14)(vii)(D)(1), 25.283(b), (d), and (e), and 
97.207(g)(1)(vii)(D)(1) in this final rule are effective September 9, 
2024.
    Compliance date: Compliance with the amendments to 47 CFR 
5.64(b)(7)(iv)(A), 25.114(d)(14)(vii)(D)(1), and 
97.207(g)(1)(vii)(D)(1) is not required until September 29, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Mackoul, Space Bureau, at (202) 
418-7498 or [email protected]. For information regarding the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) information collection requirements 
contained in the PRA, contact Cathy Williams, Office of Managing 
Director, at (202) 418-2918 or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document announces that, on July 2, 
2024, OMB approved the information collection requirements in 47 CFR 
25.114(d)(14), 25.121(f), 25.122(c) and (d), and 25.123(b). These rules 
were modified in the Orbital Debris Report and Order (FCC 20-54, IB 
Docket No. 18-313) (85 FR 52422, August 25, 2020) and the Orbital 
Debris Second Report and Order (FCC 22-74, IB Docket Nos. 18-313 and 
22-271), and affirmed and clarified in the Orbital Debris 
Reconsideration Order (FCC 24-6, IB Docket No. 18-313) (89 FR 13276, 
February 22, 2024). This document also provides a summary of the 
Orbital Debris Second Report and Order, the full text of which is 
available at https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-new-5-year-rule-deorbiting-satellites-0.
    If you have any comments on the burden estimates listed below, or 
how the Commission can improve the collections and reduce any burdens 
caused thereby, please contact Cathy Williams, Federal Communications 
Commission, [email protected], regarding OMB Control Number 3060-
1327. Please include the applicable OMB Control Number(s) in your 
correspondence. The Commission will also accept your comments via email 
at [email protected].
    To request materials in accessible formats for people with 
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), 
send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. As required by the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission 
prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) of the possible 
significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules 
adopted in the Orbital Debris

[[Page 65218]]

Second Report and Order. The FRFA is summarized below and provided in 
appendix B to the Orbital Debris Second Report and Order, the full text 
of which is available at https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-new-5-year-rule-deorbiting-satellites-0.
    Congressional Review Act. The Commission sent a copy of the Orbital 
Debris Second Report and Order in a report sent to Congress and the 
Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review 
Act (CRA), see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Synopsis

I. OMB Control Number 3060-1327

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3507), the Commission is notifying the public that it received final 
OMB approval on July 2, 2024, for the information collection 
requirements contained in the Orbital Debris Report and Order, the 
Orbital Debris Second Report and Order, and the Orbital Debris 
Reconsideration Order. This document announces the effective date of 
those rules. The other part 25 rule amendments adopted in the Orbital 
Debris Report and Order that did not require OMB approval became 
effective as identified in its Federal Register publication.
    Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency may not conduct or sponsor a 
collection of information unless it displays a current, valid OMB 
Control Number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing 
to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act that does not display a current, valid OMB Control 
Number. The OMB Control Number for the information collection 
requirements in these rules is 3060-1327.
    The foregoing notification is required by the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, October 1, 1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507.
    The total annual reporting burdens and costs for the respondents 
are as follows:
    OMB Control Number: 3060-1327.
    OMB Approval Date: July 2, 2024.
    OMB Expiration Date: July 31, 2027.
    Title: Part 25 Rules Addressing the Mitigation of Orbital Debris.
    Type of Review: New collection.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit 
institutions.
    Number of Respondents and Responses: 28 respondents and 28 
responses.
    Estimated Time per Response: 4-15 hours.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.
    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The 
statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 
U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, and 310.
    Total Annual Burden: 341 hours.
    Annual Cost Burden: $53,900.
    Needs and Uses: Notification of orbital debris mitigation plans as 
part of requests for Commission authorization will help preserve the 
United States' continued affordable access to space and the continued 
provision of experimental and amateur services. Notification of debris 
mitigation plans will allow the Commission and potentially affected 
third parties to evaluate operators' debris mitigation plans prior to 
the issuance of an FCC approval for communications activities. 
Notification may also aid in the wider dissemination of information 
concerning debris mitigation techniques and may provide a baseline of 
information that will aid in analyzing and refining those techniques. 
Without notification of orbital debris mitigation plans as part of 
applications for FCC authority, the Commission would be denied any 
opportunity to ascertain whether satellite operators are in fact 
considering and adopting reasonable debris mitigation practices, which 
could result in an increase in orbital debris and a decrease in the 
utility of space for communications and other uses.

II. Summary of the Orbital Debris Second Report and Order

A. Introduction

    In the Orbital Debris Second Report and Order, the Commission 
adopts a first-ever rule requiring non-geostationary satellite 
operators to deorbit their satellites after the end of their operations 
to minimize the risk of collisions that would create debris. The 
Commission's action formalizes a longstanding orbital debris guideline, 
updates it to better reflect the realities of today's space activities, 
and uniformly applies it to space stations in low-Earth orbit (LEO).
    Strong compliance with post-mission disposal guidelines is an 
effective tool that can help stabilize the orbital debris environment. 
Before the Commission adopted the Orbital Debris Second Report and 
Order, it was recommended that operators with objects in LEO ensure 
that their spacecraft are either removed from orbit immediately post-
mission or left in an orbit that will decay and re-enter Earth's 
atmosphere within no more than 25 years to mitigate the creation of 
more orbital debris. However, the Commission believes it is no longer 
sustainable to leave satellites in LEO to deorbit over decades. 
Accordingly, as part of its continued efforts to mitigate the 
generation of orbital debris, the Commission shortens the 25-year 
benchmark for post-mission disposal of space stations in LEO to five 
years. The regulations the Commission adopts are designed to ensure 
that its actions concerning radio communications, including licensing 
U.S. spacecraft and granting access to the U.S. market for non-U.S. 
spacecraft, promote the sustainable use of outer space without creating 
undue regulatory obstacles to new satellite ventures. The action by the 
Commission furthers the public interest in preserving viable options 
for future satellites and systems and the many services that those 
systems provide to the public.

B. Background

    There are multiple existing guidelines concerning orbital debris, 
none of which are legally binding. One of these is the longstanding 
guideline for deorbiting satellites within 25 years. It has been 
adopted by the space agencies of other nations, the Inter-Agency Space 
Debris Coordination Committee (IADC), and incorporated into a National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Standard and the U.S. 
Government Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices (ODMSP). Both 
the NASA Standard and ODMSP specify a maximum 25-year post-mission 
orbital lifetime, with the 2019 revised ODMSP stating that for 
spacecraft disposed of by atmospheric reentry, the spacecraft shall be 
``left in an orbit in which, using conservative projections for solar 
activity, atmospheric drag will limit the lifetime to as short as 
practicable but no more than 25 years.''
    The Commission adopted comprehensive rules on orbital debris in 
2004, pursuant to its authority to determine whether the public 
interest would be served by the authorization of satellite 
communications systems. The 2004 rules generally consisted of 
disclosure requirements that yielded information critical to the 
Commission's overall determination of whether the public interest would 
be served by approving the proposed operations. Applicants were 
required to include a statement that they have assessed and limited the 
amount of debris released in a planned manner during normal operations, 
and have assessed and limited the probability of the satellite becoming 
a source of debris by collisions with small debris. Applicants also 
were required to state that they have assessed and limited the 
probability of accidental explosions during and after completion of 
mission

[[Page 65219]]

operations. The rules also required a statement that the satellite 
applicant has assessed and limited the probability of the satellite 
becoming a source of debris by collisions with large debris or other 
operational satellites. Finally, applicants were required to include a 
statement detailing the post-mission disposal plans for the satellite 
as it enters its end-of-life stage, including the quantity of fuel--if 
any--that will be reserved for post-mission disposal maneuvers.
    Although not specifically codified in the Commission's 2004 rules, 
the Commission has consistently applied the 25-year benchmark in 
licensing decisions for non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) systems. On 
November 15, 2018, recognizing that there had been a variety of 
technical and policy updates to orbital debris mitigation standards, 
policy, and guidance documents since 2004, the Commission adopted a 
notice of proposed rulemaking (84 FR 4742, February 19, 2019) seeking 
comment on a comprehensive update to its orbital debris rules to better 
reflect the significant increase in satellites and types of operations 
in orbit. As part of that effort, the Commission sought comment on the 
25-year benchmark and whether it was still a relevant guideline or 
whether a shorter deorbit deadline was appropriate for new systems.
    In 2020, the Commission comprehensively updating the 2004 rules 
when it adopted the Orbital Debris Report and Order. At the same time, 
the Commission adopted a further notice of proposed rulemaking (Orbital 
Debris FNPRM) (85 FR 52455, August 25, 2020) seeking comment on the 
probability of accidental explosions, collision risk for multi-
satellite systems, maneuverability requirements, casualty risk, 
indemnification, and performance bonds tied to post-mission disposal. 
In the Orbital Debris Report and Order, the Commission maintained its 
existing rule requiring a statement detailing post-mission disposal 
plans for the space station at end of life and adopted a new 
requirement that applicants planning disposal by atmospheric re-entry 
specify the planned time period for post-mission disposal as part of 
the description of disposal plans for the space station. In the Orbital 
Debris FNPRM, the Commission sought further comment on whether the 25-
year benchmark for completion of NGSO post-mission disposal by 
atmospheric re-entry remains a relevant benchmark as applied to 
commercial or other non-Federal systems.
    Specifically, in the Orbital Debris FNPRM, the Commission noted 
broad support in the record for shortening the 25-year benchmark and 
sought comment on alternative post-mission disposal lifetimes. The 
Commission sought comment on how to apply the ODMSP guidance that the 
post-mission lifetime be ``as short as practicable but no more than 25 
years,'' noting that incorporating only the 25-year metric into its 
rules may not incentivize commercial and other non-Federal operators to 
limit the post-mission orbital lifetime to ``as short as practicable.'' 
The Commission further asked whether a maximum 25-year limit on post-
mission orbital lifetime would provide any incentive to operators to 
shorten the post-mission time in orbit or whether there is another 
preferable approach, such as a requirement for spacecraft to utilize 
propulsion, and if there were any potential scenarios in which 
spacecraft with maneuverability would remain in orbit for significant 
amounts of time following the conclusion of the mission. The Commission 
also asked for input on whether these scenarios would be sufficiently 
unlikely to warrant a case-by-case approach or if a bright-line rule 
would be more appropriate in these circumstances. The Commission 
presented a number of potential frameworks, including a safe-harbor 
provision, wherein operators would be encouraged to dispose of their 
spacecraft ``as soon as practicable'' but no more than five years 
following the end of the mission, and allow applicants to provide 
additional demonstrations in support of longer post-mission lifetimes 
for the Commission to consider. The Commission sought comment on this 
proposal and asked whether five years would be sufficient for such a 
safe harbor provision or if there were any alternative timeframes that 
should be considered.

C. Discussion

1. Promoting Space Safety Through Post-Mission Disposal Requirements
    In response to the Orbital Debris FNPRM, the Commission received 
additional support in the record for reducing the 25-year benchmark, 
with many commenters echoing prior concerns that the 25-year benchmark 
is outdated and may no longer serve the public interest. Commenters 
noted that, while the 25-year benchmark may be an effective standard to 
limit the rate of debris growth in LEO, it fails to account for the 
growth of the commercial space industry and does not consider the 
disruption to satellite operations due to the increased need for 
collision avoidance maneuvers. Many commenters assert that shortening 
the 25-year benchmark would not only address the threat of long-term 
debris generation, but would also address issues like the mounting 
number of conjunctions, collision avoidance maneuvers, fuel costs and 
other operational expenditures, time concerns, and other considerations 
faced by operators as LEO becomes more populated. The Consortium for 
Execution of Rendezvous and Servicing Operations (CONFERS) also 
contends that the increased need for collision avoidance maneuvers due 
to the congestion in LEO impacts the general public as well because it 
increases the likelihood of service disruptions.
    Some commenters argue that the 25-year benchmark remains relevant 
to sufficiently mitigate orbital debris generation, asserting that many 
organizations have studied and confirmed the effectiveness of this 
standard in reducing the rate of orbital debris generation in LEO. Most 
commenters who supported retaining that benchmark cite a report 
published by NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office, which stated that 
reducing the 25-year rule to a five-year rule would lead to a 10% 
debris reduction over 200 years, which NASA described as ``not a 
statistically significant benefit.'' However, other commenters note 
that the NASA analysis does not fully account for the risks of leaving 
defunct satellites in lower orbits for periods up to 25 years. 
According to one commenter, ``the 200-year simulation used in this 
assertion aggregates cataloged debris from all of LEO'' and ``ignores 
debris generated below []800 km because debris at these altitudes 
washes out in decades.'' That commenter further asserts that events 
below 850 km are not considered in NASA's analysis because they do not 
accumulate over the 200-year period, but these events may still 
significantly increase lethal, non-trackable collision risk and 
collision avoidance burdens for commercially-relevant altitudes. 
``Lethal non-trackable'' objects, or LNTs, are space objects that are 
10 cm or smaller that are too small to be cataloged but still possess 
enough kinetic energy to disable a satellite upon impact. LNTs in LEO 
are primarily caused by the several hundred explosions of satellites 
and spent launch vehicle upper stages, but a few collision events have 
contributed to the LNT population as well LNTs account for 97-98% of 
mission-terminating risk in LEO and cannot be mitigated by space 
traffic management (STM) or space situational awareness (SSA) alone, 
even as SSA and STM capabilities continue to improve and

[[Page 65220]]

these space objects become increasingly visible to operators.
    This commenter also argues that the 25-year benchmark encourages 
new satellites to be deployed below 650 km as such an altitude is 
``naturally compliant'' with the 25-year benchmark and encourages 
massive, nonfunctioning hardware to be moved below 650 km from missions 
above 650 km, resting on the assumption that 25 years is not a long 
time. However, for typical LEO satellites, 25 years represents five 
generations of spacecraft, performing 135,000 uncontrolled orbits, and 
transiting 800 active spacecraft and more as the population of LEO 
satellites grows. As Astroscale has observed, operators formulating 
designs and plans to adhere to the maximum 25-year requirement has 
ultimately contributed to the increased congestion around and below the 
600-650 km altitude range and the associated increase in conjunctions 
and risk in LEO operations.
    The Commission finds these arguments persuasive and agrees with 
commenters that the threat of long-term debris generation is not the 
only relevant risk factor to consider in weighing shortening the 
benchmark, and any analysis concerning post-mission disposal lifetimes 
should account for the effects on the orbital environment raised by the 
commenters, such as the collision risks posed by LNT generation and 
increased collision avoidance burdens on operators. Accordingly, the 
Commission concludes that shortening the 25-year benchmark for all 
missions is warranted and in the public interest.
    In the Orbital Debris FNPRM, the Commission considered whether 
specifying a post-mission orbital lifetime requirement would be 
necessary in light of potentially adopting a maneuverability 
requirement for spacecraft operating above 400 km. Although the Orbital 
Debris Second Report and Order does not adopt rules relating to 
maneuverability, given the risks associated with the increasing 
congestion in the orbital environment and the strong support in the 
record for shortening permissible post-mission orbital lifetime, the 
Commission believes it is appropriate to adopt a rule reducing the 
post-mission disposal orbital lifetime while it continues to assess 
potential maneuverability requirements, additional measures with 
respect to large constellations, and other possible approaches to 
mitigation of debris risks.
    Accordingly, the Commission adopts a rule requiring space stations 
ending their mission in, or passing through, the LEO region below 2,000 
km altitude and planning disposal through uncontrolled atmospheric re-
entry to complete disposal as soon as practicable following end of 
mission, and no later than five years after the end of the mission. For 
purposes of administering this rule, ``end of mission'' will be defined 
to be the time at which the individual spacecraft is no longer capable 
of conducting collision avoidance maneuvers. For spacecraft without 
collision avoidance capabilities, ``end of mission'' will be defined as 
the point in which the individual spacecraft has completed its primary 
mission, e.g., communications services, handling customer message 
traffic, remote-sensing, etc. Consistent with other requirements in 
part 25 of Commission's rules, this requirement will also apply to 
entities seeking to access the U.S. market using a non-U.S.-licensed 
satellite or satellite system. This requirement will also apply to 
small satellites licensed under the streamlined processes outlined in 
47 CFR 25.122. Additionally, the requirements adopted in this final 
rule will also apply to any entities applying for satellites licensed 
under part 5 of the Commission's rules, as well as amateur satellites 
authorized under part 97.
    While the record indicates support for shortening the 25-year 
benchmark to five years in general, many commenters express that five 
years may still be too long for large constellations, given the greater 
risks for generating orbital debris that these systems may pose over 
extended periods of time. Large constellations could impose specific 
risks to the orbital environment that may be mitigated by a shorter 
post-mission orbital lifetime, among other factors; therefore the 
Commission will continue to assess whether a shorter post-mission 
disposal requirement, such as one year, would be appropriate for large 
constellations in light of the potential risks to the orbital 
environment posed by those systems. In the interim, the Commission will 
continue evaluating large constellations consistent with the revised 
rules, including conditioning authorizations as appropriate to address 
collision risk and post-mission disposal matters on a case-by-case 
basis.
    Commenters also indicated that any updated rule should be 
performance-based as to how the requirements are met in order to 
maintain flexibility and better accommodate different technologies and 
mission profiles. In this spirit, the Commission declines to prescribe 
a specific method of post-mission disposal at this time. In adopting 
this five-year benchmark for LEO missions, the Commission also 
acknowledges the possibility that satellite failures may give rise to 
non-compliance. The Commission in the Orbital Debris Second Report and 
Order declines to provide a blanket exception for satellite failures 
that was suggested by some commenters, as appropriate with the spirit 
of a performance-based objective. However, in the event of a failure or 
anomaly giving rise to non-compliance, parties are permitted to seek 
waivers of such requirements for good cause shown under the 
Commission's existing rules. In evaluating such a request for the 
waiver, the Commission will take into account all the facts and 
circumstances surrounding any potential satellite failure or anomaly 
that has occurred, including the assessed cause of the failure or 
anomaly, matters beyond the operator's control, and any steps taken by 
the operator to avoid non-compliance. Such waivers will not be 
liberally granted.
2. Grandfathering Existing Operations
    The Commission is aware that adopting a rule shortening the 25-year 
benchmark may impose a burden and increase costs for existing 
operators. In light of the potential financial and mission-planning 
impact of this new requirement, a transition period sufficient to 
permit operators to adjust their mission timelines and operations is in 
the public interest and supported by the record.
    Accordingly, satellites already in orbit are exempt from the new 
requirement. For satellites already authorized by the Commission that 
have not yet been launched, the Commission will provide a 
grandfathering period of two years, beginning on September 29, 2022, in 
order to allow operators to incorporate the five-year post-mission 
disposal requirement into their mission objectives. The Commission 
believes a two-year period strikes a reasonable balance that will 
advance the goals of the reduced post-mission orbital lifetime while 
providing time for any necessary adjustments by operators in order to 
continue existing services and adjust planned operations. New licensees 
and existing applicants with authorized satellites to be launched after 
September 29, 2024, must comply with the five-year post-mission 
disposal requirement, though in individual cases the Commission will 
consider waivers requesting additional time for systems with existing 
authorizations that extend beyond the two-year period. For pending 
applications, the Commission will continue to process them consistent 
with the current rules. For any

[[Page 65221]]

applications granted involving space stations that would exceed the 
five-year limit, those space stations would need to be launched prior 
to September 30, 2024.
    In some cases, already-authorized systems may require approval of a 
modification to update their license or grant to reflect alterations in 
system characteristics in order to achieve compliance. Accordingly, any 
licensee or grantee with a license or market access grant requiring 
modification should file an application for a modification with respect 
to any satellites to be launched after September 29, 2024, including 
any replacement satellites, no later than March 29, 2024, to provide 
the Commission with sufficient time to process the modification 
requests before the conclusion of the two-year grandfathering period.
3. Additional Flexibility for Academic and Research Missions
    The Commission observes that there may be circumstances that 
warrant a waiver of the five-year post-mission disposal requirement. 
The Commission acknowledges the public interest benefits of scientific 
research missions and recognize the possibility that there may be 
specific scientific objectives that are not achievable at lower 
altitudes that would comply with the five-year post-mission disposal 
requirement. While it does not adopt a blanket waiver for these types 
of missions, the Commission will consider such missions as a special 
category for purposes of analyzing waiver requests.
    In determining whether research and scientific missions warrant a 
waiver of the five-year post-mission disposal requirement, some factors 
that the Commission may consider include the level of government 
funding, coordination, and oversight of the mission, the need to 
conduct research at altitudes in which a five-year post-mission 
disposal requirement may be unduly burdensome, the predictability of 
mission trajectory and associated burdens on other operators, unique 
spacecraft characteristics, and whether the mission involves any 
unusual risks to the space environment.
    Applicants requesting waiver of the five-year post-mission disposal 
requirement should consider submitting certain information to 
facilitate the Commission's analysis as to whether a waiver is 
warranted, including a statement describing the unique mission and 
research objectives that could not be achieved at a lower altitude, as 
well as a document of anticipated findings and a description of any 
plans for publishing or producing a report of such findings. Operators 
may provide a survey of outstanding research and missions indicating 
that the proposed operations would satisfy a unique area of research, 
including any findings and actions of other government agencies and 
educational institutions that support the importance of the mission. 
The Commission notes that a general statement that the mission is for 
the general education and practical experience of future space-oriented 
professionals, while laudable, is in itself unlikely to make a mission 
sufficiently unique to warrant a waiver. If the only purpose of the 
mission is to provide students with hands-on participation in space 
activities, this may not justify consideration for a waiver of the 
post-mission disposal rule adopted in the Orbital Debris Second Report 
and Order. However, operators seeking a waiver of the five-year post-
mission disposal rule may submit, for the Commission's consideration, a 
statement demonstrating that the educational purposes of the mission 
would not be served should students participate in a mission with a 
post-mission disposal lifetime of fewer than five years. In addition, 
there should be a direct nexus between the orbital altitude at which 
the research is to be conducted and the need for a waiver, unrelated to 
whether there is a particular ``rideshare'' launch available to the 
altitude range sought.
    The Commission is also sensitive to the needs of government-
supported missions. Operators seeking a waiver consistent with this 
guidance should also consider providing a statement identifying 
specific facts demonstrating that their proposed mission supports and 
serves a government purpose. Demonstrations should include, if 
applicable, participation in government research programs, the level of 
government oversight, how any government funds were used for the 
development and operation of the proposed mission, as well as 
government support for launch operations, including ridesharing 
agreements through NASA. The Commission will consider statements 
demonstrating that the proposed mission is at least 50% funded by the 
U.S. Government, excluding funding for launch operations, as 
government-supported, in order to facilitate equitable analysis of this 
demonstration.
4. Costs-Benefits
    The rules adopted in the Orbital Debris Second Report and Order may 
impose additional costs on the industry, including in some instances 
fuel and other costs for more rapid decommissioning needed to 
accommodate the shortened post-mission disposal timeframe, and 
opportunity costs associated with certain entities altering their 
mission plans to comply with the rule. However, these rules are 
intended to incrementally slow the growth of orbital debris, 
particularly in LEO, with its increasing numbers of satellites. While 
it is difficult to quantify the economic value of the orbital debris 
mitigation measures adopted in the Orbital Debris Second Report and 
Order, the Commission finds that the benefits of the rules in terms of 
reducing the probability of costly collisions and commensurate 
reduction in service outages, as well as reducing the frequency of 
collision avoidance maneuvers, outweigh any costs resulting from the 
rules.

D. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as 
amended, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated in the Orbital Debris FNPRM. The Commission sought written 
public comment on the proposals in the Orbital Debris FNPRM, including 
comment on the IRFA. No comments were filed addressing the IRFA. The 
FRFA in the Orbital Debris Second Report and Order conforms to the RFA.
Need for, and Objectives of, the Final Rule
    The Orbital Debris Second Report and Order requires space stations 
ending their mission in or passing through the low-Earth orbit region 
below 2000 km altitude and planning disposal through uncontrolled 
atmospheric re-entry following the completion of the mission, to 
complete as soon as practicable following end of mission, and no later 
than five years after the end of the mission. Adoption of this 
requirement is a significant step in updating the Commission's rules on 
orbital debris mitigation. Updates to the Commission's rules on orbital 
debris mitigation are informed by the Commission's experience gained in 
the licensing process and address updates in mitigation guidelines and 
practices as well as market developments. Adoption of this requirement 
will ensure that applicants for a Commission space station license or 
authorization, or grant of market access, will not contribute to 
orbital congestion longer than necessary. This action will help ensure 
that Commission decisions are consistent with the public interest in

[[Page 65222]]

space remaining viable for future satellites and systems and the many 
services those systems provide to the public.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to 
the IRFA
    No comments were filed that specifically addressed the IRFA.
Response to Comments by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business
    Pursuant to the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, which amended the 
RFA, the Commission is required to respond to any comments filed by the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA), 
and to provide a detailed statement of any change made to the proposed 
rules as a result of those comments. The Chief Counsel did not file any 
comments in response to the proposed rules in this proceeding.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the 
Rules Will Apply
    The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and, where 
feasible, an estimate of, the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A ``small business concern'' is one which: (1) is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA. The 
Commission describes and estimates the number of small entities that 
may be affected by the adoption of the final rules.
    Satellite Telecommunications. This industry comprises firms 
``primarily engaged in providing telecommunications services to other 
establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by 
forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of 
satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.'' Satellite 
telecommunications service providers include satellite and earth 
station operators. The SBA small business size standard for this 
industry classifies a business with $38 million or less in annual 
receipts as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 275 firms 
in this industry operated for the entire year. Of this number, 242 
firms had revenue of less than $25 million. Additionally, based on 
Commission data in the 2021 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of 
December 31, 2020, there were 71 providers that reported they were 
engaged in the provision of satellite telecommunications services. Of 
these providers, the Commission estimates that approximately 48 
providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's 
small business size standard, a little more than half of these 
providers can be considered small entities.
    All Other Telecommunications. The ``All Other Telecommunications'' 
category is comprised of establishments primarily engaged in providing 
specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, 
communications telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry 
also includes establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite 
terminal stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. 
Establishments providing internet services or voice over internet 
protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications 
connections are also included in this industry. The SBA has developed a 
small business size standard for ``All Other Telecommunications,'' 
which consists of all such firms with annual receipts of $35 million or 
less. For this category, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2012 show that 
there were 1,442 firms that operated for the entire year. Of those 
firms, a total of 1,400 had annual receipts of less than $25 million 
and 15 firms had annual receipts of $25 million to $49,999,999. Thus, 
the Commission estimates that the majority of ``All Other 
Telecommunications'' firms potentially affected by our action can be 
considered small.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements for Small Entities
    The Orbital Debris Second Report and Order amends rules that are 
applicable to space station operators requesting a license or 
authorization from the Commission, or entities requesting that the 
Commission grant a request for U.S. market access. Specifically, the 
revised rules now require space stations ending their mission in or 
passing through the low-Earth orbit region below 2000 km altitude and 
planning disposal through uncontrolled atmospheric re-entry following 
the completion of the mission, to complete disposal as soon as 
practicable following end of mission, and no later than five years 
after the end of the mission.
    Applicants requesting authorization from the Commission must 
already comply with existing operational requirements, including those 
related to orbital debris mitigation and post-mission disposal. 
Operators must prepare and provide a disclosure as part of their 
application detailing their orbital debris mitigation plan. There may 
be fuel and other costs for more rapid decommissioning needed to 
accommodate the shortened post-mission disposal timeframe and 
opportunity costs associated with certain entities altering their 
mission plans to comply with the rule. However, this requirement will 
slow the growth of collision avoidance maneuvers, saving fuel costs. 
Faster deorbiting may also foster technological progress as firms are 
able to implement newer socially-valuable technologies over a shortened 
time horizon that might not have been implemented under the 25-year 
guidelines. Further, launch services will likely evolve to provide 
initial deployments compatible with the five-year post-mission disposal 
benchmark, thereby avoiding or reducing impacts on ``rideshare'' 
customers.
Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
    The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives 
that it has considered in developing its approach, which may include 
the following four alternatives (among others): (1) the establishment 
of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that 
take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and 
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the 
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small 
entities.
    The Orbital Debris Second Report and Order requires all space 
stations ending their mission in or passing through the low-Earth orbit 
region below 2000 km altitude and planning disposal through 
uncontrolled atmospheric re-entry following the completion of the 
mission, to complete disposal as soon as practicable following end of 
mission, and no later than five years after the end of the mission. The 
Commission has elected to provide a two-year

[[Page 65223]]

grandfathering period to provide additional time for small entities to 
comply with this requirement. The Orbital Debris Second Report and 
Order also codifies a post-mission disposal lifetime requirement of 
five years or less, thus providing a clear and objective benchmark for 
small entities to comply with. Additionally, the Commission has opted 
to adopt this new requirement as a performance-based rule, instead of 
prescribing specific design standards or requirements.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Parts 5 and 97

    Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Satellites.

47 CFR Part 25

    Administrative practice and procedure, Earth stations, Satellites.

Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.

Final Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR parts 5, 25, and 97 as follows:

PART 5--EXPERIMENTAL RADIO SERVICE

0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 336.


0
2. Amend Sec.  5.64 by revising paragraph (b)(7)(iv)(A) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  5.64  Special provisions for satellite systems.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (7) * * *
    (iv) * * *
    (A) The statement must include a demonstration that the probability 
of success of the chosen disposal method will be 0.9 or greater for any 
individual space station. For space station systems consisting of 
multiple space stations, the demonstration should include additional 
information regarding efforts to achieve a higher probability of 
success, with a goal, for large systems, of a probability of success 
for any individual space station of 0.99 or better. For space stations 
under paragraph (b)(7)(ii) of this section that will be terminating 
operations in or passing through the low-Earth orbit region below 2000 
km altitude, successful disposal is defined, for the purposes of this 
paragraph (b)(7)(iv)(A), as atmospheric re-entry of the spacecraft as 
soon as practicable, but no later than five years following completion 
of the mission. For space stations under paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of this 
section, successful disposal will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * *

PART 25--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS

0
3. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 310, 319, 
332, 605, and 721, unless otherwise noted.


0
4. Amend Sec.  25.114 by revising paragraph (d)(14)(vii)(D)(1) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  25.114  Applications for space station authorizations.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (14) * * *
    (vii) * * *
    (D) * * *
    (1) The statement must include a demonstration that the probability 
of success of the chosen disposal method will be 0.9 or greater for any 
individual space station. For space station systems consisting of 
multiple space stations, the demonstration should include additional 
information regarding efforts to achieve a higher probability of 
success, with a goal, for large systems, of a probability of success 
for any individual space station of 0.99 or better. For space stations 
under paragraph (d)(14)(vii)(B) of this section ending their mission in 
or passing through the low-Earth orbit region below 2000 km altitude, 
successful disposal is defined, for the purposes of this paragraph 
(d)(14)(vii)(D)(1), as atmospheric re-entry of the spacecraft as soon 
as practicable, but no later than five years following completion of 
the mission. For all other space stations under paragraphs 
(d)(14)(vii)(B) and (C) of this section, successful disposal will be 
assessed on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  25.283 by adding headings to paragraphs (b) and (d) and 
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  25.283  End-of-life disposal.

* * * * *
    (b) Geostationary orbit space station end of life operations. * * *
* * * * *
    (d) Applicability of minimum perigee for geostationary orbit space 
stations. * * *
    (e) Low-Earth orbit space stations. For space stations ending their 
mission in or passing through the low-Earth orbit region below 2000 km 
altitude and planning disposal through uncontrolled atmospheric re-
entry, disposal must be completed as soon as practicable following end 
of mission, and no later than five years after the end of the mission. 
For purposes of this paragraph (e), end of mission is defined as the 
time at which the individual spacecraft is no longer capable of 
conducting collision avoidance maneuvers. For spacecraft without 
collision avoidance capabilities, end of mission is defined as the 
point in which the individual spacecraft has completed its primary 
mission.

PART 97--AMATEUR RADIO SERVICE

0
6. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 301-609, unless otherwise noted.


0
7. Amend Sec.  97.207 by revising paragraph (g)(1)(vii)(D)(1) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  97.207  Space station.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (vii) * * *
    (D) * * *
    (1) The statement must include a demonstration that the probability 
of success of the chosen disposal method will be 0.9 or greater for any 
individual space station. For space station systems consisting of 
multiple space stations, the demonstration should include additional 
information regarding efforts to achieve a higher probability of 
success, with a goal, for large systems, of a probability of success 
for any individual space station of 0.99 or better. For space stations 
under paragraph (g)(1)(vii)(B) of this section that will be terminating 
operations in or passing through the low-Earth orbit region below 2000 
km altitude, successful disposal, for the purposes of this paragraph 
(g)(1)(vii)(D)(1), is defined as atmospheric re-entry of the spacecraft 
as soon as practicable, but no later than five years following 
completion of the mission. For space stations under paragraph 
(g)(1)(vii)(C) of this section, successful disposal will be assessed on 
a case-by-case basis.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-17093 Filed 8-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P