Exploring the Unknown - NASA's History Office

EXPLORING THE UNKNOWN 121
to explore various legal, technical and policy questions associated with the possible authorization
of domestic communications satellite facilities to nongovernmental entities. On
March 24, 1970, the Commission issued a first Report and Order (1970 Report) inviting the
submission of applications to assist our determinations (22 FCC 2d 86, 35 F.R. 5356), and
consolidated a concurrently issued Notice of Proposal Rule Making (22 FCC 2d 810). In
response to the 1970 Report, system applications were filed by the following:
The Western Union Telegraph Company (Western Union)
Hughes Aircraft Company and various telephone operating companies of GTE
Service Corporation (Hughes/GTE)
Western Tele-Communications, Inc. (WTCI)
RCA Global Communications Inc. and RCA Alaska Communications, Inc. (RCA
Globcom/RCA Alascom or “the RCA applicants”)
Communications Satellite Corporation and American Telephone and Telegraph
Company (Comsat/AT&T)
Comsat
MCI Lockheed Satellite Corporation (MCI Lockheed)
Fairchild Industries, Inc. (Fairchild)
In addition, applications for earth stations only were filed by:
Hawaiian Telephone Company
Twin County Trans-Video, Inc.
TelePrompTer Corporation
LVO Cable, Inc., and United Video, Inc.
Phoenix Satellite Corporation
[845] 2. Comments and reply comments on the applications and rule making issues were
received from the applicants and other interested parties. By a Memorandum Opinion
and Order issued on March 17, 1972 (34 FCC 2d 1), the Commission afforded the parties
an opportunity to file written comments and to be heard orally on a proposed Second
Report and Order (34 FCC 2d 9) recommended by the Chief of the Common Carrier
Bureau (staff recommendation). Written comments were received and oral argument
before the Commission en banc was held on May 1–2, 1972. 1
3. Upon consideration of the entire record, we are of the view that the staff recommendation
adequately describes the background of this proceeding, the general nature of
the pending applications, and the previously filed comments and reply comments of the
parties on the applications and rule making issues. Accordingly, we will adopt the descriptive
portions of the staff recommendation without reiterating such material here.
However, as stated in the Memorandum Opinion and Order of March 17, 1972, our action
in designating the staff recommendation for written and oral comment was taken “before
reaching any determinations in this matter” and “therefore does not reflect any predisposition
by the Commission with respect to the resolution of the issues involved” (34 FCC
2d at 2). The Commission’s determinations, which are set forth below, incorporate the
staff’s reasoning and conclusions on the issues only as expressly indicated herein or to the
extent that they are clearly consistent with our statements of policy and conclusions.
1. The two entities who had not previously participated in this proceeding were granted leave to be
heard orally: the Department of Defense and the Network Project (FCC 72-314).The motions of various parties
to correct the transcript of oral argument are hereby granted. Some applicants have submitted statements, without
leave from the Commission, purportedly in further response to questions from individual Commissioners at
the oral argument. While such statements have been placed in the record, we do not rely on them.