*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 48620.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  Washington,  D.  C.  20554 
 DA  05-  1027 
 May  18,  2005 
 Joseph  A.  Godles,  Esq.  Goldberg  Godles  Wiener  &  Wright 
 1229  19  th  Street  N.  W.  Washington,  D.  C.  20036-  2413 


 Re:  Call  Sign  E050081  File  No.  SES-  LIC-  20050324-  00346 
 File  No.  SES-  AMD-  20050416-  00464 
 Dear  Mr.  Godles: 
 On  March  24,  2005,  PanAmSat  Licensee  Corp.  (“  PanAmSat”)  filed  the  above-  captioned  application  for  authority  to  operate  a  new  conventional  Ku-  Band  1  VSAT  network  earth  station  in 
 Ellenwood,  Georgia  and  on  April  16,  2005  filed  an  amendment  to  the  pending  application.  For  the  reasons  discussed  below,  we  dismiss  the  application  and  the  amendment  as  defective,  without 
 prejudice. 
 A  review  of  the  application  and  the  amendment  revealed  the  application  is  incomplete.  Specifically, 


 (1)  PanAmSat  failed  to  complete  the  FCC  Form  312,  Schedule  B  section  regarding  the  hub  station.  As  stated  in  the  Location  for  Earth  Station  Site  section  of  the  Instructions  for 
 Completion  of  FCC  Form  312  Application  for  Satellite  Space  and  Earth  Stations  Authorization,  “…[  S]  chedule  B  and  the  Main  Form  must  be  completed  when  filing  for  all 
 new  earth  stations  including  VSAT  networks…  Each  hub  station  of  a  VSAT  network  must  have  its  own  completed  Schedule  B”; 


 (2)  PanAmSat  failed  to  provide  technical  and  operational  information  in  Items  E33/  E34  for  the  proposed  antenna  75QS;  and  Items  E36-  E40  and  Items  E56-  E60  for  all  proposed 
 antennas  in  the  Schedule  B  of  FCC  Form  312;  and 
 (3)  PanAmSat  failed  to  completely  provide  a  series  of  antenna  gain  plots  as  required  under  47  C.  F.  R.  §  25.132(  b)  for  the  proposed  antennas:  .75m,  .96m, 
 1.0  m,  and  1.2  m. 


 1  11.  7-  12.2  GHz  and  14.  00-  14.  50  GHz. 
1
 FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSION  DA  05-  1027 
 2 
 Accordingly,  pursuant  to  Sections  25.112(  a)(  1)  2  ,  and  0.  261,  we  dismiss  your  application,  as  amended,  as  defective,  without  prejudice  to  refiling.  3 
 Sincerely, 


 Scott  A.  Kotler  Chief,  Systems  Analysis  Branch 
 Satellite  Division  International  Bureau 


 2  47  C.  F.  R.  §§  25.  112(  a)(  1)  and  0.261..  See  also  Echostar  Satellite  LLC,  Order  on  Reconsideration, 
 DA  04-  4056  (released  December  27,  2004). 
 3  If  Panamsat  refiles  an  application  for  a  new  license  identical  to  the  one  dismissed,  with  the  exception  of 
 supplying  the  missing  information,  it  need  not  pay  an  application  fee.  See  47  C.  F.  R.  Section  1.  1109(  d). 
2