Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No

DA 95-1342 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 14

2. Given the seriousness of Columbia©s allegations and Before the our commitment to a fully competitive marketplace, we Federal Communications Commission have deferred action on these applications pending review Washington, D.C. 20554 of Columbia©s allegations. Based on our review and subse quent events bearing on these issues, we now dismiss Co In the Matter of lumbia©s petitions and grant these applications, which will improve communications between the U.S. and the Rus IDB WORLDCOM File No. I-T-C-92-164 sian Federation and other international points. SERVICES, INC. BACKGROUND Application for blanket authority pursuant 3. Traditionally, satellite services between the U.S. and to Section 214 of the Communications Act the countries of the former Soviet Union, including Russia, of 1934, as amended, to establish channels have been provided using the Intelsat system. However, the communications between the U.S. and the establishment of U.S.-licensed international satellite systems countries of the former Soviet Union via separate from Intelsat provided U.S. customers with a choice in the use of space segment capacity for telecom the Statsionar 11 satellite for the provision munications services between the U.S. and Russia.3 This of public switched network services choice has been expanded to permit the use of Intersputnik satellite system capacity to provide various switched and non-switched services between U.S. and Russia. For exam MEMORANDUM OPINION, ORDER, ple, initially we authorized use of the Intersputnik system AND AUTHORIZATION for television and data service based on a finding that insufficient ground and space segment capacity were avail Adopted: June 23,1995; Released: July 5,1995 able over the world-wide Intelsat system.4 More recently, we authorized use of the Intersputnik system in an effort to By the Chief, International Bureau: improve the unacceptable quality of telephone service be tween the U.S. and the Russian Federation, and to meet 1. Over the past two and one-half years, an increasing the rapidly increasing demand for PSN service.5 We found number of applications have been filed for authority to that the demand for services could not be met solely provide a full range of telecommunications services be through use of the Intelsat system and that additional ca tween the United States and the Russian Federation and pacity needed to be established using the Intersputnik sys other international locations using satellites owned, op tem/ erated, or licensed by the Russian Federation. 1 Columbia 4. The applications that are the subject of Columbia©s Communications Corp., a U.S.-licensed separate interna petitions seek authority, pursuant to Section 214 and Title tional satellite system, opposes authorization of these ap III of the Communications Act of 1934, to establish chan plications until the Russian Federation grants "landing nels of communications between appropriately-licensed rights" to permit its satellite system in Russia.2 Columbia earth stations in the United States and the Russian Feder claims that various anticompetitive actions by officials in ation and other locations via the Russian Intersputnik and the Russian Federation have denied its system "landing other satellites of the former Soviet Union. rights." 5. Columbia opposes the authorization of any additional Intersputnik or other Russian satellite capacity because it believes the Russian Federation has engaged in conduct

1 Because of the number of applications involved, only one may have been deferred in previous Commission orders in application is included in the heading. The remaining applica which requests to use non-Russian facilities were granted. We tions which are the subject of this order are: IDB WorldCom will address those deferred requests in a subsequent order. Services, Inc. (File Nos. I-T-C-91-196, l-T-C-92-164, 1-T-C- 2 In addition to the appropriate Russian regulatory approvals, 93-075, l-T-C-94-259 and I-T-C-94-306); MCI Telecommunica "landing rights" also involves completion of the Intelsat Article tions Corp. (File No. I-T-C-92-189); AT&T Corp. (File No. XIV(d) consultation process by which a country agrees to per I-T-C-93-164); Pacific Gateway Exchange (File No. I-T-C- mit use of a foreign satellite for international service between 93-215); Mariga Communications Corporation (File No. I-T- that country and other international locations. Under Article C-94-030); Transworld Communications (U.S.A.), Inc. (File Nos. XIV(d) of the Intelsat Agreement, a Party or Signatory that I-T-C-94-126 and l-T-C-94-159); Micronet, Inc. (File No. l-T- desires to use non-Intelsat space segment (i.e., a "separate sys C-94-245); Alascom, Inc. (File No. I-T-C-94-352); Sprint Com tem") for the provision of public international telecommunica munications Co., LP (File Nos. I-T-C-94-403 and I-T-C-94-411); tions service must consult with Intelsat to determine if the use Transworld International, Inc. (File No. CSG-94-078-P/L); Cable of non-Intelsat space segment will cause either technical or News Network, Inc. (File No. CSG-94-129-P/L); Micronet, Inc. significant economic harm. (File No. CSG-94-096-ML); Bridgewater State College (File No. 3 Establishment of Satellite Systems Providing International CSG-95-028-P/L); Melbourne International Communications Communications, 101 F.C.C.2d 1046 (1985) ("Separate Systems Limited (File No. CSG-94-088-ML); and Alascom, Inc. (File No. Decision"), recon., 61 R.R.2d 649 (1986), further recon., 1 F.C.C. CSG-94-160-P/L). All pending applications filed by IDB Com Red. 439 (1986). munications Group. Inc. and CICI d/b/a IDB International are 4 IDB Communications Group, Inc. et al., 6 FCC. Red. 2932 authorized under the name IDB WorldCom Services, Inc. as a (1991). result of a transfer of control. A description of the services 5 American Telephone and Telegraph Co. et al., 8 FCC. Red. authorized for each application is set forth in the ordering 2668, 2669 (1993). clauses. We are aware that authority to use Russian satellites 5 Id.

7278 10 FCC Red No. 14 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1342

designed to prevent additional entrants into its market for DISCUSSION international telecommunications services. Columbia cites 7. Underlying U.S. international satellite policy is the its unsuccessful efforts over a three-year period to obtain establishment of a competitive environment that provides "landing rights" to offer low-cost business telecommunica customers with increased service options and lower prices. tions services to, from, and within Russia.7 Columbia be We have extended our Separate Systems Policy to allow use lieves that the lack of Russian interest in its business of non-U.S. satellite systems such as Intersputnik where proposal there stems from a "desire to keep American such use is required to satisfy traffic demand that other satellite capacity providers from competing with Russian international systems could not address. In view of these telecommunications ventures" in which prominent Russian policies, we are concerned if any U.S. satellite provider is Government officials may have a direct financial interest.8 denied access to a country, particularly where the satellite Columbia also suggests that its inability to gain landing systems of that country are permitted access to the U.S. rights stems from its refusal to offer the same financial international market. In this case, however, we find no inducements as other companies seeking to do business in lack of reciprocal access to the Russian Federation for Russia. Thus, Columbia requests that the Commission au U.S.-licensed satellite systems. thorize no additional access to U.S. markets by the Russian 8. To begin with, Columbia has not presented us with Federation via any Russian satellite facilities until U.S. any specific regulatory policy or decision of the Russian international separate systems are granted unfettered access Federation that denies Columbia the ability to provide to Russian international telecommunications markets. Co service between the U.S. and Russia. We note that no U.S. lumbia also suggests that the Commission refer this matter carrier has applied to us for authority to serve Russia via to the Department of State. the Columbia system. Moreover, Columbia states that it 6. The applicants cite a number of reasons why the knows of no similar application pending before any gov applications should be granted and suggest reasons, other ernmental entity within Russia. Columbia©s inability to than those described by Columbia, to explain Columbia©s point to any specific regulatory denial has made it difficult difficulties. First, the applicants observe the need for im for us even to define the alleged exclusion from the Rus proved communications between the U.S. and Russia, and sian market, let alone determine its causes. note that use of the Intersputnik satellite system is consis 9. As Columbia suggested, we sought the views of the tent with our Separate Systems Decision. They also note that Department of State on the issues raised by Columbia.10 In the evidence does not indicate a Russian policy to exclude response, the State Department advised that there are "no non-Russian satellite systems from operating within Russia. fundamental foreign policy reasons which would lead the For example, they point out that the Intelsat and Eutelsat Russian Federation or the United States to deny use of satellite systems provide service to Russia, and that each other©s satellite systems for commercial uses." 11 The PanAmSat, a U.S.-licensed international separate satellite State Department also referred to a letter to Columbia system, has "landing rights" to provide U.S.-Russia service. from the Russian Federation©s Signatory to Intelsat, the One applicant suggests Columbia©s difficulties may stem Russian Satellite Communications Company, confirming from slow-moving Russian bureaucracy, Columbia©s un- that it was prepared to support a consultation for Colum familiarity with the Russian telecommunications structure, bia to provide U.S.-Russia service if Columbia provided and the fact that Columbia dealt with a private entity and confirmation of commercial demand for use of its system. 12 not the Russian government. Another applicant points out that Columbia seeks to use U.S. transponders to provide 10. We also raised Columbia©s concerns directly with domestic services within Russia, which is a greater right representatives of the Russian Federation in bilateral dis than has been granted to foreign-owned satellites in con cussions held in March 1995. In response to our inquiry, nection with the U.S. domestic market. Another asserts the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications of the Rus that Columbia lacks standing to object to its specific ap sian Federation denied in writing the existence of any plication because Columbia©s system cannot provide the "special" policy governing the provision of satellite capac service proposed in that application.9 ity between the U.S. and the Russian Federation. On the contrary, the letter stated that, in addition to Intelsat and Intersputnik satellites, service between the U.S. and the Russian Federation has been provided by the Aurora sat ellite system operated by Alascom, a U.S. company.

7 Columbia©s Petition to Deny or Defer Action in application International Communications and Information Policy to Kath File No. CSG-94-078-P/L (May 13, 1994). leen Wallman, Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC. (Septem 8 Id. ber 2, 1994). 9 Whether Columbia has standing was raised in the context of 12 Moreover, we note that recent action by Intelsat has re a single application for service to be provided by Alascom, Inc. moved the necessity of Columbia completing any further con and has not been raised generally in connection with all of the sultation, under Article XIV(d) of the Intelsat Agreement, for applications. Because our resolution of Columbia©s other peti the provision of service between the U.S. and the Russian tions on the merits effectively disposes of the petition to deny Federation. Intelsat has now determined that once a satellite is Alascom©s application as well, we need not reach the question of "consulted" for one country under Article XIV(d), it is deemed standing Alascom has raised. consulted for all locations unless a particular country objects to 10 "Letter from A. Richard Metzger, Acting Chief, Common its use. Since Columbia©s satellites have been consulted to a Carrier Bureau, F.C.C. to Richard C. Beaird, Senior Deputy number of countries, they are now deemed consulted for the U.S. Coordinator and Director, Bureau of International Com Russian Federation also. There has been no objection from, the munications and Information Policy, Department of State (June Russian Federation to the use of Columbia©s system. Under the 17, 1994). new Intelsat procedures, such an objection would likely arise, if 11 Letter from Michael T.N. Fitch, Deputy U.S. Coordinator, at all, once Columbia has a customer.

7279 DA 95-1342 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 14

11. Finally, closer scrutiny of the information provided tion for the provision of private line, television and by Columbia reveals that a significant aspect of Columbia©s program audio services; and (File No. I-T-C-94-306) initial proposals to provide service to the Russian Feder establish channels of communication via the ation involved domestic service solely within the Russian Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. between Federation, not international service. This distinction is appropriately licensed earth stations in the U.S. and significant because non-U.S. satellites currently are not Algeria (15 64-kbps circuits), Madagascar (30 64-kbps permitted to serve the U.S. domestic market absent a show circuits), Syria (15 64-kbps circuits) and Zimbabwe ing that U.S. domestic satellite capacity is inadequate to (15 64-kbps circuits), for the provision of switched satisfy a particular requirement. 13 Thus, we find no lack of voice services. reciprocal access with respect to this aspect of Columbia©s b. MCI Telecommunications Corp. (File No. I-T- argument. C-92-189) is authorized to resell the services of IDB 12. In summary, Columbia can point to no specific WorldCom Services, Inc. (formerly IDB Communica governmental decision or policy to substantiate its claim tions Group, Inc.) for the provision of its authorized that the Russian government is responsible for keeping services, including switched voice service, between Columbia out of the Russian market. Nor have our inves the U.S. and the countries of the former Soviet tigations, or those of the State Department, uncovered any Union. official policy restricting Columbia©s ability to provide ser vice between the U.S. and Russia. Under these circum c. AT&T Corp. (File No. I-T-C-93-164) is authorized stances, we find no reason to continue to delay the to establish channels of communication via the Rus processing of these applications which will allow additional sian Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. between capacity to be authorized to address the unacceptable level AT&T©s Roaring Creek, Pennsylvania earth station of quality of telecommunications service between the U.S. and Nicaragua (sixty 64-Kbps circuits) and Bulgaria and the Russian Federation and the increasing demand for (thirty 64-kbps circuits) for the provision of its au such services. We will continue to monitor this situation, thorized services. 14 particularly if an application is filed to use Columbia©s d. Pacific Gateway Exchange (File No. I-T-C-93-215) system for service between the U.S. and the Russian Feder is authorized to establish channels of communication ation and service is not permitted to be implemented. (thirty 64-kbps circuits) via the Statsionar 4 satellite 13. Accordingly. IT IS ORDERED that the applications located at 14 W.L. between appropriately licensed set forth below ARE GRANTED and: earth stations in the U.S. and countries of the former Soviet Union for the provision of switched and pri vate line services. a. IDB WorldCom Services, Inc. is authorized to: (File No. I-T-C-91-196) establish a total of 100 e. Mariga Communications Corporation (File No. I- 64-kbps channels of communication via the Russian T-C-94-030) is authorized to establish channels of Statsionar 11 satellite located at 11 W.L. between the communication (One 1.544 Mbps circuit) via the appropriately licensed earth stations in the U.S. and Statsionar 11 satellite located at 11 W.L. between similar facilities in those countries that constituted appropriately licensed earth stations in the U.S. and the former Soviet Union; (File No. I-T-C-92-164) es the Russian Federation for the provision of private tablish channels of communication (two 36-MHz vid line service. eo channels and six T-l circuits) via the Statsionar 10 f. Transworld Communications (U.S.A.), Inc. (File satellite located at 170 W.L. between appropriately No. I-T-C-93-159) is authorized to establish channels licensed earth stations in the U.S. and Russia for the of communications (thirty 64-kbps circuits) via the provision of television and private line services; (File Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. between No. I-T.-C-93-075) establish channels of communica appropriately licensed earth stations in the U.S. and tion (two 36-MHz video channels, 5 T-l circuits and the Russian Federation for the provision of public five 15-kHz program audio channels) via the switched services; 15 and (File No. I-T-C-94-126) estab Statsionar 11 satellite located at 11 W.L. between lish channels of communication (two 36-MHz appropriately licensed earth stations in the U.S. and channels and two T-l channels) via the WSDRN each of the locations set forth in its application for satellite between appropriately licensed earth stations the provision of private line, television, and program in the U.S. and countries within the footprint of the audio services; (File No. I-T-C-94-259) establish chan WSDRN satellite. nels of communication (two 36-MHz video channels, 5 T-l circuits and five 15-kHz program audio chan g. Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (File No. nels) via the Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. I-T-C-94-403) is authorized to establish channels of between appropriately licensed earth stations in the communication via the Statsionar 4 satellite located U.S. and each of the locations set forth in its applica at 14 W.L. between appropriately licensed earth sta tions in the U.S. and various countries for the provi-

13 In a recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that proposes to allocated to it for service between the U.S. and the Russian subject all U.S.-licensed satellites to the same regulatory policy, Federation be reallocated for service ton) Bulgaria. See Ameri we asked for comment on whether, and under what conditions, can Telephone & Telegraph, et al., 8 F.C.C. Red. 2668 (1993). non-U.S. satellites should be permitted to serve the U.S. domes 15 The thirty circuits authorized herein were revoked from tic market. See Amendment to the Commission©s Regulatory authorized carriers whose allocated circuits were not in use. See Policies Governing Domestic Fixed Satellites and Separate Inter Transworld Communications (U.S.A.), Inc., DA No. 95-758, re national Satellite Systems, FCC 95-146, released April 25, 1995. leased April 11, 1995). 14 For U.S.-Bulgaria service, AT&T requests that 30 of the 230

7280 10 FCC Red No. 14 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1342

sion of public switched services (207 total 64-kbps o. Alascom, Inc. (File No. CSG-94-160-P/L) is au circuits) and non-switched services (213 total 64-kbps thorized to construct and operate a 9.1-meter, C-band circuits); and (File No. I-T-C-94-411) establish chan earth station at Diamond Ridge, Alaska to commu nels of communication (thirty 64-kbps circuits) via nicate with the Russian Statsionar 16 satellite at 215 the Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14"1 W.L. between W.L. for the provision of video and data services appropriately licensed earth stations in the U.S. and consistent with the technical parameters set forth in Bulgaria for the provision of its authorized services, its license. including switched voice service. h. MicroNet. Inc. (File No. I-T-C-94-245) is autho 14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that circuits authorized rized to establish channels of communications via the herein are subject to the limits set forth in existing Intelsat Statsionar 4 an 11 satellites between appropriately Article XIV(d) consultations for each satellite consistent licensed earth stations in the U.S. and the Russian with Separate Systems Policy. Federation for the provision of private line video, 15. This authorization is issued pursuant to Section 0.261 voice, and data services not interconnected with the of the Commission©s rules and is effective upon adoption. public switched network. Petitions for reconsideration under Section 1.106 or ap i. Alascom, Inc. (File No. I-T-C-94-352) is authorized plications review under Section 1.115 of the Commission©s to establish up to 1,250 64-Kbps equivalent channels rules may be filed within 30 days of the public notice of via the Ghorizont 21 satellite between its fixed trans this order (see Section 1.4(b)(2)). mit/receive earth station located at Diamond Ridge, Alaska and points in Russia for the provision of FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION switched message and private-line services. j. Transworld International, Inc. (File No. CSG- 94-078-P/L) is authorized to construct and operate a 4.8 meter receive-only fixed international earth sta tion at Alexandria, Virginia in the 10.81-10.86 GHz Scott Blake Harris frequency band to provide video and data services via Chief, International Bureau the WSDRN satellite located at 16 W.L. consistent with the technical parameters set forth in its applica tion. k. Cable News Network, Inc. (File No. CSG- 94-129-P/L) is authorized to construct and operate a 4.8 meter receive-only fixed international earth sta tion at Atlanta, Georgia in the 10.81-10.86 GHz fre quency band to receive video and associated audio signals from WSDRN satellite located at 16 W.L. consistent with the technical parameters set forth in its application. 1. Micronet, Inc. (File No. CSG-94-096-ML) is au thorized to use its international earth station (KA330) located at Glenwood, New Jersey to communicate with the Russian Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. and the Statsionar 11 satellite at 11 W.L. in the Intersputnik system for the provision of private line video, voice and data services consistent with the technical parameters set forth in its application. m. Bridgewater State College (File No. CSG- 95-028-P/L) is authorized to construct and operate an 11-meter C-band transmit/receive international earth station at Bridgewater (Plymouth), Massachusetts to communicate with the Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. for the provision of video, with associated audio and data services, consistent with the technical parameters set forth in its application. n. Melbourne International Communications Limited (File No. CSG-94-088-ML) is authorized to use its international earth station (KA354) located at Palm Bay (Brevard), Florida to communicate with the Rus sian Statsionar 4 satellite located at 14 W.L. and the Statsionar 11 satellite at 11 W.L. in the Intersputnik system for the provision of video and data services consistent with the technical parameters set forth in its application.

7281