FCC opens comment on unified space licensing under new part 100

The Federal Communications Commission has opened a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on a second round of reforms to its new part 100 space licensing regime, from “operational envelopes” to a possible requirement that every satellite licensed in the United States maintain a U.S.-based control point. The proposal, identified as FCC 26–47 in SB Docket No. 25–306, was published in the Federal Register of Monday, 26 October 2026 (Vol. 91, No. 205, p. 67225). Comments are due 25 November 2026 and reply comments 28 December 2026.

The FNPRM was adopted on 22 July 2026 and released the following day, and it follows the Order in the same proceeding that creates part 100 of the Commission’s rules (47 CFR Parts 5 and 100). That Order splits the new part into subparts for applications and review, for operations under an authorization, and for enforcement, and the Commission presents the whole exercise as building a space “licensing assembly line” that moves requests “in standard and predictable ways”. The document anchors the effort in Executive Order 14369 of December 2025, quoted on “American space superiority”.

The problem the Commission says it is fixing is structural: space station and earth station applications are currently split between part 5, the experimental radio service, and part 25, the commercial satellite rules, and operations “do not always fit neatly” into either. The FNPRM therefore proposes to consolidate all space-related experimental applications under a single process, with initial processing handled by the Space Bureau rather than shared with the Office of Engineering and Technology.

Operational envelopes and a single experimental pathway

The centrepiece is the refinement of subpart C to build “operational envelopes”. Instead of forcing applicants to specify exact technical parameters that later require repeated modifications, an envelope would let a licensee request broader authority and change operations inside it “without further permission from the Commission”. The Commission seeks comment on how such envelopes should be defined for both space stations and earth stations.

For experimental licensing, the FNPRM proposes a dedicated space and earth station licence with a two-year term, extendable by one renewal of up to two years, operated on an unprotected and non-interference basis and not placed on public notice before grant. Applicants would certify that operations serve testing, experimentation, demonstration or validation, and a licensee could later request conversion to a regular part 100 licence — treated as a major modification and put on public notice. The rules would sit in a new subpart J of part 5, cross-referenced from part 100.

The Commission tentatively concludes that routing experimental space and earth station work to the Space Bureau would save roughly $66,000 a year in review costs for Commission staff.

Earth stations, call signs and spectrum

On earth stations, the FNPRM asks whether to adopt a single uniform definition of “site”, whether to codify a definition of user terminals, and whether to create a “Nomadic Terminals” category covering ESIMs, consumer handsets, IoT devices and other portable equipment. It also proposes allowing non-geostationary satellite system operators to merge satellites held under multiple call signs into one call sign per system.

On spectrum, the Commission notes that § 100.211(d) already requires state-of-the-art full frequency reuse for Fixed-Satellite Service space stations in a long list of bands, including 3600–4200 MHz, 5850–7025 MHz, 10.7–12.7 GHz, 17.3–17.8 GHz and 27.5–30.0 GHz, and asks whether that requirement should become a general rule for all FSS and BSS operations. It also seeks comment on updating two-degree GSO spacing requirements and on power-flux-density contours protecting U.S. radio astronomy sites, including coordination with the National Radio Astronomy Observatory.

Control point, export controls and other questions

The most consequential tentative conclusion concerns geography: the Commission “tentatively conclude[s]” that all satellites, spacecraft and space stations it licenses should have a U.S.-based control point, arguing this would help operators communicate with one another and respond to hazardous events. It asks what burdens this would impose and whether third-party control points under contract could relieve them.

Other questions opened include:

• Whether part 100 rules should expressly address export control obligations under the Export Administration Regulations and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
• Whether to require cybersecurity practices or information from satellite operators.
• Whether to license inter-satellite service links between U.S.-licensed and non-U.S.-licensed spacecraft.
• Whether to extend the hosted-payload framework to non-U.S.-licensed host stations.
• Whether spacecraft going beyond low Earth orbit should be at least 1 metre in the smallest dimension to remain trackable.
• Whether a processing round’s ten-year priority period should start on 1 January of the following year.
• Whether to close additional open dockets, including the orbital debris proceeding.

Deadlines and the small-operator calculus

The FNPRM carries an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in Appendix D, addressed to the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy, and the Commission argues that simpler forms, fewer special temporary authority requests and fewer waivers would let small applicants file routine paperwork without hiring lawyers or engineers. Key dates:

• Comments: 25 November 2026.
• Reply comments: 28 December 2026.
• Filings identified as IRFA responses must carry a separate heading.
• Contacts: Carolyn Mahoney, Acting Division Chief, Satellite Programs and Policy Division, and Brandon Padgett, Acting Associate Division Chief.
• Signature: Marlene Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.

For satellite operators, ground-segment providers and the small firms the Commission says it wants to keep in the pipeline, the FNPRM is where the flexibility promised by part 100 either becomes usable or stays on paper. The control-point question in particular would touch every licence the Commission issues, and the envelope framework would determine how much a licensee can change on orbit before filing again.

Source: Federal Register, Vol. 91, No. 205, 26 October 2026, Proposed Rules, p. 67225 (official reference: FCC 26–47; SB Docket No. 25–306; FR Doc. 2026–21818).