*Pages 1--10 from Microsoft Word - 44046.doc* Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D. C. 20554 In the matter of Applications of Verestar, Inc. (Debtor- In-Possession) for Consent to Assignment of Licenses to SES Americom, Inc. ) ) ) ) ) IB Docket No. 04- 174 File No. SES- ASG- 20040503- 00672 File No. SES- ASG- 20040503- 00673 File No. 0001685559 Memorandum Opinion, Order and Authorization Adopted: November 18, 2004 Released: November 19, 2004 By the Chief, International Bureau; Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, we grant the applications for assignment filed by Verestar, Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession) (“ Verestar”) and SES Americom, Inc. (“ SES Americom” and, collectively with Verestar, the “Applicants”) pursuant to section 310( d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the “Act”). 1 Applicants request Commission approval for the assignment of earth station and private wireless licenses held by Verestar to SES Americom. GWTP Investments, L. P. (“ GWTP”) filed a petition to dismiss or deny the applications. For the reasons discussed herein, we deny the petition and grant the applications. II. BACKGROUND A. The Applicants 2. Verestar is a provider of domestic and international communications services. Verestar resells transponder space capacity and provides teleport (earth station uplink/ downlink) services. The services include capacity for the distribution of, among other things, data, voice, broadband and Internet access and video services. Verestar’s customers include broadcasters, multi- national corporations, communications companies and government agencies. 2 3. SES Americom and its affiliates provide domestic and international satellite services through geosynchronous satellites and supporting network facilities. SES Americom’s primary business is providing bulk transponder capacity. SES Americom’s customers use its satellite capacity for video distribution (e. g., broadcast, direct- to- home, and cable), radio programming distribution, high speed Internet access, private network, data and voice services. SES Americom’s customers include carriers, private industry, video service providers, 1 47 U. S. C. § 310( d). 2 See File Nos. SES- ASG- 20040503- 00672, SES- ASG- 20040503- 00673 (SES- ASG Applications), Exhibit C at 2. 1 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 2 government agencies and resellers. SES Global S. A. (“ SES Global”), the ultimate parent of SES Americom, has subsidiaries that have interests in satellite service providers in other parts of the world and provide satellite services in the Americas, Asia, Europe and Africa. 3 B. The Proposed Transaction 4. On December 22, 2003, Verestar, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Verestar Networks, Inc. (“ Verestar Networks”) and Verestar International, Inc., filed a voluntary petition for reorganization in the United States bankruptcy court for the Southern District of New York. 4 As a result of this Chapter 11 filing, the FCC licenses and authorizations held by Verestar, Inc. and Verestar Networks underwent involuntary, pro forma assignments to Verestar, Inc. (Debtor- in-Possession) and Verestar Networks, Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession), respectively. Pursuant to an Asset Sale Agreement, SES Americom will purchase substantially all of Verestar’s assets, including Verestar’s interests in the subject FCC licenses. An Order approving the transaction was issued by the bankruptcy court on April 23, 2004. 5. On April 29 and 30, 2004, Applicants filed a series of applications seeking Commission approval of the assignment or transfer of control of licenses and authorizations held by Verestar, Inc. or Verestar Networks to SES Americom. 5 The applications pertained to licenses for earth stations, the Common Carrier Fixed Point- to- Point Microwave Service, the Local Television Transmission Service, the Private Land Mobile Radio Service, the Private Operational Fixed Microwave Service, and domestic and international section 214 authorizations. 6 The Applicants subsequently withdrew the applications relating to the domestic and international section 214 authorizations 7 and the applications relating to the common carrier microwave licenses. 8 On June 24, 2004 Verestar filed a series of applications requesting that all common carrier earth stations proposed for assignment to SES Americom be modified to non- 3 SES- ASG Applications, Exhibit C at 2- 3. 4 In re Verestar, Inc. et al., Case No. 03- 18077 (Bankr. S. D. N. Y.). 5 See Verestar Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession), Verestar Networks, Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession), and SES Americom, Inc. Seek FCC Consent to Assign and/ or Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, Pleading Cycle Established, IB Docket No. 04- 174, Public Notice, DA 04- 1502 (rel. May 26, 2004) (May 26 Notice). 6 The Applicants also requested that the Commission assign to SES Americom any and all pending applications for licenses and authorizations issued to Verestar while the instant assignment applications are pending. SES Applications, Exhibit B at 3. See also letter from Jeffrey H. Olson, attorney for SES Americom, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated Oct. 15, 2004). 7 Letter from Jeffrey H. Olson, attorney for SES Americom, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated June 7, 2004). The domestic and international section 214 authorizations are the only authorizations or licenses held by Verestar Networks. All of the licenses that remain subject to the applications are held by Verestar, Inc. Consequently, Verestar Networks is no longer a party to the applications. See letter from Jeffrey H. Olson, attorney for SES Americom, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated Oct. 15, 2004). 8 See letter from Jeffrey H. Olson, attorney for SES Americom, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated June 24, 2004). 2 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 3 common carrier status. 9 The Commission granted the requested modifications of the earth station licenses to non- common carrier status. 10 C. GWTP Petition and Executive Branch Letter 6. On May 26, 2004, the applications were placed on Public Notice. 11 On June 25, 2004, GWTP filed a petition to dismiss or deny the applications. 12 In its petition, GWTP raises four arguments to support its request that we dismiss or deny the applications. First, GWTP argues that the Commission should not grant the applications while GWTP prosecutes its pending court case against SES Americom. 13 Second, GWTP contends that SES Americom is required to request a declaratory ruling that its foreign ownership is in the public interest as a prerequisite to approval of the proposed assignments. 14 Third, GWPT argues that the Applicants have not demonstrated that the proposed assignments will benefit the public interest. 15 Finally, GWTP states that the Commission must undertake a thorough analysis of the national security, law enforcement, foreign policy and trade policy concerns raised by the proposed assignments. 16 Applicants filed an opposition on July 6, 2004, and GWTP filed a reply on July 12, 2004. 7. On July 12, 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“ FBI”) filed a letter on behalf of itself, the U. S. Department of Justice (“ DOJ”) and the Department of Homeland Security (“ DHS,” collectively with DOJ and FBI, the “Executive Branch Agencies”) stating that, based on representations made on behalf of SES Americom, the Executive Branch Agencies have decided not to file objections or other comments regarding the applications. 17 9 Letter from Jeffrey H. Olson, attorney for SES Americom, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated June 24, 2004). See Satellite Communications Services RE: Satellite Radio Applications Accepted for Filing, Report No. SES- 00622, Public Notice, at 10- 24 (rel. July 14, 2004); Satellite Communications Services RE: Satellite Radio Applications Accepted for Filing, Report No. SES- 00624, Public Notice, at 7- 19 (rel. July 21, 2004). 10 Satellite Communications Services Information RE: Actions Taken, Report No. SES- 00637, Public Notice, at 10- 36 (rel. Sept. 1, 2004). 11 May 26 Notice. On June 9, 2004, a Public Notice was released which, among other things, revised the pleading cycle. Verestar Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession), Verestar Networks, Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession), and SES Americom, Inc. Seek FCC Consent to Assign and/ or Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, Revised Pleading Cycle, IB Docket No. 04- 174, Public Notice, DA 04- 1686 (rel. June 9, 2004) (June 9 Notice). 12 GWTP Investments, L. P. is a Texas limited partnership. Mission Holdings, Inc. (“ Mission”) is a member of GWTP Holdings, a Texas limited liability company, which is the general partner of GWTP Investments, L. P. GWTP Petition at 5. According to GWTP’s Petition, Mission had an agreement with SES Americom under which Mission would have received certain assets of Verestar as part of SES Americom’s Asset Purchase Agreement in the Verestar bankruptcy. Mission has assigned to GWTP its rights related to the agreement with SES Americom. GWTP Petition at 7- 9. 13 GWTP Petition at 10- 11. On June 24, 2004, GWTP filed a complaint in U. S. District Court alleging that SES Americom breached its agreement with Mission Holdings, Inc. GWTP Investments, L. P. v. SES Americom, Inc. Civil Action No. 3- 04CV- 1383L, D. Tex., N. D. Tx. 14 GWTP Petition at 11- 16. 15 Id. at 16- 19. 16 Id. at 19- 22. 17 Letter from Patrick W. Kelley, Deputy General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Investigation, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated July 12, 2004) (Executive Branch Letter). 3 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 4 III. PUBLIC INTEREST ANALYSIS A. Framework for Analysis 8. The legal standards that govern our public interest analysis for the assignment or transfer of control of licenses and authorizations under section 310( d) require that we weigh the potential public interest harms against the potential public interest benefits to ensure that, on balance, the proposed transaction will serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity. 18 Our analysis starts with an examination of whether the Applicants are qualified to hold and assign licenses pursuant to section 310( d). 19 Next, we consider the arguments raised by GWTP regarding the foreign ownership of SES Americom. Then we consider the likely competitive effects of the proposed assignment, and whether such assignment raises significant anti-competitive issues. We also consider the issues related to national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, and trade policy. Finally, we consider the relevance of the pending litigation between GWTP and SES Americom. B. Qualifications of Applicants 9. As a threshold matter, we must determine whether the Applicants meet the requisite qualifications to hold and assign licenses under section 310( d) of the Act and our rules. In general, when evaluating assignments under section 310( d), we do not re- evaluate the qualifications of the assignor. 20 The exception to this rule occurs where issues related to basic qualifications have been designated for hearing by the Commission or have been sufficiently raised in petitions to warrant the designation of a hearing. 21 That is not the case here, and no issues have been raised that would require us to re- evaluate the basic qualifications of Verestar. 10. Section 310( d) also requires that the Commission consider the qualifications of the proposed assignees as if the assignees were applying for the license directly under section 308 of the Act. 22 We note that no party has challenged the basic qualifications of SES Americom, and our independent review finds no evidence to suggest that SES Americom lacks financial, technical, legal, or other basic qualifications necessary to be a Commission licensee. Thus, we find that SES Americom possesses the requisite basic qualifications as the assignee. 18 See, e. g., Application of VoiceStream Wireless Corporation, Powertel, Inc., Transferors, and Deutsche Telekom AG, Transferee, for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations Pursuant to Sections 214 and 310( d) of the Communications Act and for Declaratory Ruling Pursuant to Section 310 of the Communications Act, IB Docket No. 0- 187, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 9779, 9789 (2001) (VoiceStream/ Deutsche Telekom Order). See also AT& T Corp., British Telecommunications, plc, VLT Co. L. L. C., Violet License Co. LLC, and TNV [Bahamas] Limited Applications For Grant of Section 214 Authority, Modification of Authorizations and Assignment of Licenses in Connection with the Proposed Joint Venture Between AT& T Corp. and British Telecommunications, plc, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 19140, 19147 (1999) (AT& T/ BT Order). 19 47 U. S. C. § 310( d). 20 See VoiceStream/ Deutsche Telekom Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 9790 ¶ 19. 21 Id. 22 Section 308 requires that applicants for Commission licenses set forth such facts as the Commission may require as to citizenship, character, and financial, technical, and other qualifications. See 47 U. S. C. § 308. Our rules implementing the provisions of section 308 regarding an applicant’s qualifications to hold the Commission licenses involved in this assignment are set forth in Parts 25 and 101 of the Commission’s rules. See 47 C. F. R. Parts 25, 101. 4 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 5 C. Foreign Ownership 11. We find that, contrary to GWTP’s claims, 23 SES Americom does not need to seek a declaratory ruling regarding its foreign ownership in order to acquire the licenses at issue here. Under section 310( b)( 4) of the Act, 24 applicants or licensees of broadcast, common carrier, aeronautical en route, or aeronautical fixed radio station licenses are required to inform the Commission and obtain prior approval before their indirect foreign ownership exceeds 25 percent. 25 As amended, however, the applications do not request Commission approval to assign or transfer any common carrier licenses, but rather only seek to assign non- common carrier earth station and private wireless licenses. 26 Consequently section 310( b)( 4) is not applicable to this transaction. 27 Rather, the Commission reviews these assignments under section 310( d). 28 Therefore, SES Americom does not need a section 310( b)( 4) declaratory ruling from the Commission prior to Verestar assigning these licenses to SES Americom. D. Competitive Analysis 12. To evaluate the competitive effects of the proposed transaction, the Commission first identifies the relevant product and geographic markets. 29 For satellite service providers, the Commission has determined that the relevant product markets include domestic and international telecommunications markets. 30 In examining these product markets, we consider whether the proposed transaction will lessen or enhance competition in the provision of communications services within the geographic markets in, to, or from the United States and foreign points. 31 13. We find that the proposed assignment will not have an adverse effect on competition. The Applicants state that the assignment will not lessen competition in the relevant markets. Verestar does not own any fiber or satellite transponders, but obtains capacity from 23 GWTP Petition at 11- 16; GWTP Reply at 5- 7. 24 47 U. S. C. § 310( b)( 4). 25 See Fox Television Stations, Inc., Order, 10 FCC Rcd 8452, 8474 ¶ 52 (1995). 26 See Verestar/ SES Americom Opposition at 9. 27 The proposed assignments are also not inconsistent with the other ownership provisions of sections 310( a) and (b). The licenses will be held by SES Americom, a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware, and not by a foreign government or the representative of a foreign government. Thus, the proposed assignment does not violate section 310( a). 47 U. S. C. § 310( a). Also, as discussed, because the proposed assignments involve non- common earth stations and private wireless licenses, sections 310( b)( 1), (2), and (3) do not apply. 47 U. S. C. §§ 310( b)( 1), (2), (3). 28 47 U. S. C.§ 310( d). 29 See, e. g., AT& T/ BT Order, 14 FCC Rcd 19410; Voicestream/ Deutsche Telekom Order, 16 FCC Rcd 9779. 30 See Application of WorldCom, Inc., and MCI Communications Corporation for Transfer of Control of MCI Communications Corporation to WorldCom, Inc., CC Docket No. 97- 211, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 18025, 18039 ¶ 23, 18070 ¶ 78 (1998); In re Application of General Electric Capital Corporation and SES Global, S. A., Order and Authorization, 16 FCC Rcd 17575, 17594 ¶ 43 (2001) (GE/ SES). 31 See, e. g., Lockheed Martin Corporation, COMSAT Government Systems, LLC, and COMSAT Corporation, Application for Transfer of Control of COMSAT Corporation and its Subsidiaries, Licensees of Various Satellite, Earth Station, Private Land Mobile Radio and Experimental Licenses, and Holders of International Section 214 Authorizations, Order and Authorization, 15 FCC Rcd 22910, 22916 ¶ 18 (2000). 5 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 6 terrestrial and satellite providers to meet customer requirements. Verestar has transponder service agreements, which expire no later than 2011. Excluding agreements that expire in 2004, Verestar has agreements with suppliers, other than SES Americom, involving approximately 623.3 megahertz or 17.3 transponder equivalents. 32 The Applicants argue there will be little impact on the U. S. satellite services/ transponder leasing market because the market is competitive and the capacity on which SES Americom will acquire service agreements is small relative to the size of the market. 33 The Verestar contracts with suppliers other than SES Americom that expire after 2004 represent 1.6 percent of the available transponder capacity. Verestar also provides various ground segment capabilities, including teleport services and the design and implementation of VSAT networks. The Applicants also note that the teleport market is competitive and Verestar competes against hundreds of other teleport and earth station operators. 34 GWTP does not dispute these claims. 35 14. In evaluating the competitive effects, we also consider public interest benefits that are likely to result from the proposed assignments. 36 The Applicants state that assignment of the Verestar licenses to SES Americom will ensure that Verestar’s customers, which include the U. S. government, continue to receive service without interruption. 37 The proposed assignments arise in connection with the resolution of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Verestar and affiliated companies. Allowing the assignment of these assets to SES Americom is critical to the uninterrupted provision of service to Verestar’s customers, which we find, in this instance, to be a specific benefit of the proposed assignments. Since we find that the proposed assignments will not harm competition and will permit Verestar’s assets to remain in the market and not disrupt service to Verestar’s customers, we find that the proposed assignments are in the public interest. E. National Security, Law Enforcement, Foreign Policy and Trade Policy Concerns 15. We find that there are no national security, law enforcement, foreign policy or trade policy concerns which merit either dismissal or denial of the applications or placing any conditions on the licenses. The Commission accords deference to the expertise of the Executive Branch on national security, law enforcement, foreign policy or trade policy matters. 38 After 32 Letter from Jeffrey H. Olson, attorney for SES Americom, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC (dated June 23, 2004). According to the Applicants, the service agreements for transponder capacity that will be assigned to SES Americom, and which are set to expire in 2005, cover a total of approximately 3.8 transponder equivalents. The service agreements set to expire in 2006 cover approximately 7. 1 transponder equivalents, and those set to expire between 2007 and 2011 involve a total of 9. 6 transponder equivalents, with approximately 3. 2 transponder equivalents provided by SES. Id. at 5- 6. 33 The Applicants state that there are over 1, 100 transponders, or over 40, 000 MHz of capacity, available to serve the U. S. market. Id. at 8. 34 Id. at 5. 35 See GWTP Petition at 17- 18. GWTP did not address competitive issues in its reply. See GWTP Reply. 36 See, e. g., VoiceStream/ Deutsche Telekom Order, 16 FCC Rcd at 9789. 37 SES- ASG Applications, Exhibit F. 38 The Commission considers national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, and trade policy concerns when analyzing a transfer of control or assignment application in which foreign ownership is an issue. See Amendment of the Commission’s Regulatory Policies to Allow Non- U. S. Licensed Satellites Providing Domestic and International Service in the United States, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 24094, 24170- 72 ¶¶ 178- 182 (1997) (“ DISCO II (continued....) 6 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 7 having an opportunity to review the applications, the Executive Branch Agencies had an exchange of letters with SES Americom and decided not to file any objections or other comments regarding the applications. 39 We do not independently find that there are any national security, law enforcement, foreign policy or trade policy concerns with the proposed assignments. F. Pending Litigation 16. We do not find that the pending litigation between GWPT and SES Americom justifies either deferring action on the applications or dismissing them. It is long- standing Commission policy not to involve itself with private contract disputes. 40 Controversies which do not reflect on the qualifications of a Commission licensee are best left to appropriate courts for resolution. 41 GWTP does not allege that the court case reflects on the qualifications of SES Americom to hold the licenses at issue. 42 Rather, GWTP contends that grant of the applications would prejudice the outcome of its case against SES Americom. 43 Our action granting the applications is without prejudice to the court’s decision in the contract dispute. 44 We have not been asked to, nor would we, address the contractual issues in dispute in the court case. If GWTP prevails in the litigation, and the court orders that the licenses at issue be assigned to GWTP, the parties may file an application for assignment and we will process it according to our rules. We will not, however, delay the processing of these applications while GWTP pursues its contractual claims in court. 45 (... continued from previous page) Order”); Rules and Policies on Foreign Participation in the U. S. Telecommunications Market, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 12 FCC Rcd 23891, 23919- 921 ¶¶ 61- 66 (1997), Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 18158 (2000) (Foreign Participation Order). In assessing the public interest, the Commission considers the record and accords the appropriate level of deference to Executive Branch expertise on national security and law enforcement issues. See Foreign Participation Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 23919- 921 ¶¶ 61- 66. 39 See Executive Branch Letter. 40 MCI Telecommunications Corporation, Assignor, and Echostar 110 Corporation, Assignee, File No. SAT- ASG-19981202- 0093, Order and Authorization, 16 FCC Rcd 21608, 21624 ¶ 30 (1999) (MCI Telecomunications); O. D. T. International, For Voluntary Assignment of License of Station KILU (FM), Paauilo, Hawaii, File No. BALH-911216HO, 9 FCC Rcd 2575, 2576 ¶ 9 (1994) (O. D. T. International) (Commission has consistently held that it is not the proper forum for resolving contractual matters); Loral Corporation, Request for Declaratory Ruling Concerning Section 310( b)( 4) of the Communications Act of 1934, File No. 70- SAT- DR- 76, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 21164, 21171 ¶13 (IB 1997) (Loral Corporation); Bank America & SA, Assignor, and Customtronics, Assignee, FCC File No. 0000321514, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 15772, 15773 ¶ 5 (PSPWD/ WTB 2001) (Bank America) (declining to address merits of a petition in light of the Commission’s long- standing policy of repudiating involvement in contractual disputes). 41 O. D. T. International, 9 FCC Rcd at 2576 ¶ 9; Loral Satellite Inc. (Debtor- in- Possession) and Loral SpaceCom Corporation (Debtor- in- Possession), Assignors, and Intelsat North America, LLC, Assignee, File Nos. SES- ASG-20030728- 00138, SES- ASG- 20030728- 00139, Order and Authorization, 19 FCC Rcd 2404, 2420 ¶ 37 (Int’l Bur. 2004) (Loral Satellite). 42 See GWTP Petition at 9- 11; GWTP Reply at 4. 43 GWTP Petition at 10- 11; GWTP Reply at 4. 44 Loral Satellite, 19 FCC Rcd at 2420 ¶ 37; Bank America, 16 FCC Rcd at 15773 ¶ 5; Loral Corporation, 12 FCC Rcd at 21172 ¶ 13. 45 See MCI Telecommunications, 16 FCC Rcd at 21624 ¶ 30. 7 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 8 IV. CONCLUSION 17. Upon review of the applications and the record in this proceeding, we find that grant of the assignments from Verestar to SES Americom will serve the public interest. We do not find that GWTP has provided any persuasive arguments either to deny or dismiss the applications or to delay our action on the applications. Further, we find that the proposed assignments will not harm competition and will permit Verestar’s assets to remain in the market and not disrupt service to Verestar’s customers. Thus, we find that the proposed assignments serve the public interest, and consequently we deny GWTP’s petition and grant the assignments. V. ORDERING CLAUSES 18. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to section 310( d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U. S. C. § 310( d), the Petition to Dismiss or Deny filed by GWTP Investments, L. P. IS DENIED. 19. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to section 310( d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U. S. C. § 310( d), the applications for assignment of the licenses set forth in Appendix A held by Verestar, Inc. (Debtor- in Possession) to SES Americom, Inc. ARE GRANTED. 20. This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to sections 0.51, 0.131, 0.261, 0.331 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C. F. R. §§ 0.51, 0.131, 0.261, 0.331, and SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release. 21. Petitions for reconsideration under section 1.106 or applications for review under section 1.115 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C. F. R. §§ 1.106, 1.115, may be filed within 30 days of the date of this Order. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Donald Abelson Chief, International Bureau John B. Muleta Chief, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 8 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 9 APPENDIX A List of Licenses Being Assigned from Verestar, Inc. (Debtor- in Possession) to SES Americom, Inc.* I. Satellite Earth Stations E000061 E859623 E930089 E990353 E020093 E860029 E940373 E990439 E020153 E860099 E940425 KA20 E020254 E873883 E950302 KA257 E020255 E881061 E950460 KA277 E020256 E881174 E960044 KA294 E020257 E891020 E960222 KA322 E020258 E900017 E970267 KA337 E020259 E900018 E990065 KA434 E020321 E910390 E990066 KA81 E020322 E910548 E990067 KB23 E020323 E910614 E990068 E040232 E020324 E910639 E990069 E040249 E030294 E920028 E990305 E040193 E2505 E920490 E990325 E040377 E2651 E920585 E990328 E040378 E5199 E930018 E990352 */ As required by Commission rules, pending applications related to any license and authorization listed herein should be amended to reflect this assignment. See 47 C. F. R. § 1.65. 9 Federal Communications Commission DA 04- 3639 10 II. Private Wireless Licenses A. Local Television Transmission Service KA86423 KA86437 WLT642 WMN599 B. Private Land Mobile Radio Service WPGT853 C. Private Operational- Fixed Microwave Service WPJA875 WPJA876 WTOP624 10