*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 54780.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  Washington,  D.  C.  20554 
 DA  06-  276 
 February  3,  2006 
 Brian  Jones,  Esq.  Qualcomm,  Inc. 
 5775  Morehouse  Drive  San  Diego,  CA  92121 


 Re:  Call  Sign:  E040324  File  No.  SES-  LIC-  20051206-  01702 
 Dear  Mr.  Jones: 
 On  December  6,  2005,  Qualcomm  Inc.  filed  the  above-  captioned  application  for  authority  to  operate  earth  stations  on-  board  vessels  (ESV)  that  would  communicate  with  ALSAT-designated 
 satellites  in  the  conventional  Ku-  Band.  1  Pursuant  to  Section  25.112(  a)(  1)  of  the  Commission’s  rules,  47  C.  F.  R.  §25.112(  a)(  1),  we  dismiss  this  application  as 
 defective. 
 Specifically,  in  Form  312  Schedule  B,  you  list  the  value  of  the  Maximum  EIRP  Density  per  Carrier  for  emission  designator  15M0F1D  (E47)  as  -16.9  dBW/  4  kHz  (E49).  This  is 
 less  than  and  therefore  inconsistent  with  the  maximum  value  of  -12.7  dBW/  4  kHz  we  derive  from  the  bandwidth  of  the  emission  and  the  Maximum  EIRP  per  Carrier  value  of 
 23  dBW  (E48).  In  addition,  Qualcomm  indicated  that  the  Total  EIRP  for  All  Carriers  is  23  dBW  (E40).  This  value  is  also  inconsistent  with  the  value  of  21  dBW  Total  EIRP  for 
 All  Carriers  we  calculate  from  the  2  watts  of  the  Total  Input  Power  at  Antenna  Flange  (E38),  and  18  dBi  of  the  Transmit  Gain  of  the  Antenna  (E41)  you  list  in  the  application. 
 Given  these  inconsistencies,  we  cannot  determine  the  proposed  emission  power  of  your  proposed  earth  stations.  Further  in  Form  312  Schedule  B,  you  did  not  complete  the 
 required  Section  on  Frequency  Coordination  (Items  E51  through  E60).  Finally,  on  Form  312,  in  response  to  Question  20  (Nature  of  Service),  Qualcomm  selected  the  secondary-allocated 
 Mobile  Satellite  Service  rather  than  the  primary-  allocated  Fixed  Satellite  Service  for  this  ESV  application.  The  use  of  the  secondary  allocation  is  inconsistent  with 
 indicating  ALSAT-  designated  satellites  as  a  point  of  communication.  We  note  that  the  Table  of  Frequency  Allocations,  47  C.  F.  R.  §2.106,  permits  ESVs  to  operate  in  the  Fixed 
 Satellite  Service.  2 


 1  11.  7-  12.2  and  14.  0-  14.5  GHz  bands. 
 2  See  footnote  NG183  of  47  C.  F.  R.  §  2.  106. 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  DA  05-  276 
 2 
 Further  while  not  a  basis  for  dismissal,  Qualcomm  should  address  the  following  if  it  refiles  the  application.  Qualcomm  lists  several  remote  control  points  in  Schedule  B  of 
 Form  312  (Questions  E61  through  E65).  Any  refiling  should  identify  which  of  these  remote  control  points  are  considered  the  primary  remote  control  point  and  which  remote 
 control  points  are  considered  the  backup  points.  Alternatively,  please  provide  an  explanation  for  the  multiple  remote  control  points  in  the  application. 


 Accordingly,  pursuant  to  Section  25.112(  a)(  1)  of  the  Commission’s  rules,  47  C.  F.  R.  §25.112(  a)(  1),  and  Section  0.261  of  the  Commission’s  rules  on  delegations  of  authority, 
 47  C.  F.  R.  §0.261,  we  dismiss  your  application  without  prejudice  to  refiling.  3 


 Sincerely, 


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


 3  If  Qualcomm  refiles  an  application  identical  to  the  one  dismissed,  with  the  exception  of  supplying  the 
 corrected  information,  it  need  not  pay  an  application  fee.  See  47  C.  F.  R.  Section  1.1109(  d). 
2