Comment on the SpaceX Starlink Gen3 VLEO Application to the U.S. FCC

October 3, 2026

Before the

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20554

via ICFS Electronic Filing

In the Matter of: Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Application for Authorization to Launch and Operate the Gen3 Non-Geostationary Orbit Satellite System (ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264)

COMMENTS OF THE CENTER FOR SPACE ENVIRONMENTALISM

Summary

The Center for Space Environmentalism urges the Commission to dismiss or designate for hearing SpaceX’s application for authority to construct, launch, and operate the 100,000-satellite Gen3 Non-Geostationary Orbit system (SAT-LOA-20260630-00264). As a threshold matter, SpaceX failed to submit a compliant Orbital Debris Assessment Report (ODAR) or NASA Debris Assessment Software (DAS) risk demonstration, rendering the application procedurally defective and subject to dismissal under 47 C.F.R. § 25.112(a). Packing 100,000 spacecraft into narrow, 4.5-km Very-Low-Earth-Orbit (VLEO) shells creates unprecedented spatial density, risking catastrophic runaway collisional event hazards that endanger crewed space stations and adjacent orbital operations. Continuous atmospheric replenishment of this constellation threatens severe upper-atmosphere alumina aerosol pollution, which requires full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) review under NEPA. It also generates unstudied ground casualty risks, which are severely exacerbated by SpaceX's public admission that up to 5% of spacecraft mass survives atmospheric re-entry. In addition, SpaceX’s requested expansion into sub-terahertz W- and D-bands (92.0–275.0 GHz) threatens out-of-band radio emissions that endanger protected passive Earth-sensing bands and world-class radio astronomy observatories. Finally, SpaceX’s attempt to leverage newly adopted Part 100 rules to declare processing round waivers “moot” represents a procedural distortion designed to evade statutory milestone implementation schedules (47 C.F.R. § 25.164) and surety bond requirements (§ 25.165). The Commission must enforce its rules and dismiss the application.

I. Introduction

The Center for Space Environmentalism (CSE)1 respectfully submits these comments in opposition to the application of Space Exploration Holdings, LLC (hereinafter “SpaceX”) to deploy and operate the Gen3 Non-Geostationary Orbit (NGSO) Satellite System. The CSE opposes this application.

SpaceX proposes deploying 100,000 satellites into Very-Low-Earth-Orbit (VLEO) bands.2 It represents an unprecedented expansion of orbital density, sub-terahertz spectrum usage, and atmospheric pollution that threatens the safety and sustainability of the Earth-space continuum. For the reasons detailed below, the Commission must dismiss or defer this application pending a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and inter-agency review.

II. Failure to Submit an Orbital Debris Assessment Report is a Procedural Defect

SpaceX’s application lacks a standalone Orbital Debris Assessment Report (ODAR) or equivalent technical disclosure, a strict requirement under Commission rules.3 Instead of providing verified NASA Debris Assessment Software (DAS) calculations, casualty risk evaluations (Ec) or post-mission disposal probability metrics for its 100,000-satellite constellation, SpaceX merely asserts that it “will maintain and build upon its industry-leading space sustainability practices” and that the system “will meet or exceed all Commission orbital debris mitigation rules”.4

SpaceX also points to its low operational altitudes (323 km and 473 km) as an implicit guarantee of rapid natural atmospheric decay.5 Asking the Commission to authorize 100,000 satellites without presenting verifiable casualty expectation modeling or quantified collision probabilities prevents independent public or agency evaluation. Pursuant to 47 C.F.R. § 25.112, the Commission should dismiss or withhold processing of the application as un-processable and incomplete.

III. Deconstructing the “AI Backbone” Public Interest Narrative

SpaceX pivots its public interest rationale from consumer broadband access to servicing the commercial AI sector, framing Gen3 as the necessary “communications backbone of the AI age”.6 The applicant claims that “AI requires massive uplink capacity to support high-definition spatial and auditory data necessary for real-time decision-making and industrial automation” and that without it, the United States cannot compete in the “AI revolution.”7 Commercial AI training, robotics, and machine spatial data uplink do not constitute a statutory “public interest” justification under the Communications Act.8 Shifting from bridging the digital divide for underserved human populations to serving autonomous AI agents and enterprise cloud pipelines represents a privatization of the orbital commons for commercial technology conglomerates. Exporting bandwidth and processing capacity to space merely shifts the environmental impacts of terrestrial industrial consumption to the upper atmosphere.

IV. Atmospheric Harm and Ground Casualty Risks

SpaceX proposes concentrating 100,000 satellites into two VLEO shells at 323.0-327.5 km and 473.0-477.5 km.9 While SpaceX relies on high atmospheric drag to claim “self-cleaning” orbital safety, this environment forces a short operational dwell time. SpaceX specifies an estimated operational lifetime of 5 years per satellite.10 Maintaining a 100,000-satellite constellation requires replacing approximately 20,000 satellites per year (roughly 55 deorbits and launches per day, or an average rate of one launch/reentry every 25 minutes).

This industrial ‘treadmill’ will incinerate thousands of metric tons of high-performance materials in the upper atmosphere annually. Re-entering spacecraft deposit reactive alumina aerosol particles, black carbon, and water vapor directly into the stratosphere, which absorbs solar radiation, heats the upper atmosphere, and accelerates ozone depletion.11

Furthermore, SpaceX relies on assumptions of 100% atmospheric demise. Under FCC rules, aggregate ground casualty risk Ec must not exceed 1×10-4 (1 in 10,000).12 To remain under the standard 15-Joule human injury energy cap, any surviving solid aluminum fragment cannot exceed 2.4 cm in diameter (20.2 g). SpaceX hardware predicted to “burn up” fully has repeatedly survived re-entry and impacted land, including documented incidents in North Carolina (June 2024),13 Saskatchewan (2024),14 Poland (February 2025),15 and Mexico (June 2025).16 With 20,000 satellites de-orbiting per year (based on a five-year lifetime for 100,000 satellites), even a 0.1% failure rate equals 20 unmanaged spacecraft annually across orbital inclinations ranging from 26° to 96.9°.

SpaceX's assumption of complete, 100% atmospheric demise is further contradicted by its own public statements. As reported recently in a New York Times article, the company expects up to 5% of the mass of some of their spacecraft to reach the ground.17 That contradicts their assumption in this filing and would result in a completely unacceptable ground casualty risk.

Furthermore, operating 50,000 active spacecraft in the lower 323.0-327.5 km VLEO shell exposes the constellation to significant thermospheric drag variability. Indeed, SpaceX lost an entire batch of Starlink satellites to an incredibly minor solar storm in 2022,18 so this is not an unfounded fear. During solar storms, uncertainties in satellite positions can reach many kilometers due to rapidly changing atmospheric drag.19 With 50,000 spacecraft in an extremely tight range of orbital altitudes, the collision risks grow very quickly. And though Solar Cycle 25 is currently ramping down in activity, large storms have historically occurred outside of solar maximum.20

While the risk of “Kessler Syndrome,” a decades-to-centuries long collisional cascade event,21 is indeed lower for lower altitude orbits due to relatively high atmospheric drag, massive destruction can still occur very quickly with large costs to any operators close to the altitude of collision, and huge amounts of atmospheric pollution even faster than the planned demise schedule. The resulting debris would also be detrimental to astronomy research, particularly close to twilight when key measurements need to be made for many potentially hazardous asteroid orbits.

V. VLEO Shell Density and Crewed Space Station Hazards

Packing 100,000 active spacecraft into 4.5-km-wide altitude bands creates unprecedented physical cross-sectional density.22 At these densities, a single propulsion failure or orbital collision could initiate a runaway collisional event, contaminating VLEO corridors for all spacefarers. SpaceX asserts that “the split-layer design leaves ample room around crewed space stations”.23

In reality, these two shells directly bracket the orbital corridor of human spaceflight, including the International Space Station (orbiting at ~400-420 km) and Tiangong (~380-450 km). This effectively sandwiches human habitats between an upper shell at 473 km and a lower shell at 323 km, dictating that every disabled satellite, decaying unit, or collision fragment originating from the upper 50,000-satellite band must cross directly through the crewed station corridor on its orbital decay path to Earth. This altitude of LEO is already becoming hazardous, with damage reported to Tiangong from likely debris strikes on separate occasions in 202424 and 2025.25

VI. Threats to Passive Atmospheric Sensing and Astronomy

SpaceX requests authority to operate across W-band and D-band sub-terahertz frequencies spanning 92.0 GHz to 275.0 GHz for satellite backhaul.26 While SpaceX omits co-frequency channels in the 114.25–122.25 GHz window, its requested operations in the 92.0–275.0 GHz range directly flank critical passive microwave allocations such as the protected 118.75 GHz oxygen absorption line utilized for global atmospheric temperature profiling. This risks severe Out-of-Band Emission (OOBE) that threatens numerical weather prediction models. Additionally, an expansive Optical Inter-Satellite Link (OISL) network across 100,000 satellites27 increases overall satellite albedo and optical glint, risking saturation of ground- and space-based astronomical observatories and exacerbating Unintended Electromagnetic Radiation (UEMR) in protected passive bands.

VII. Procedural Distortion and Waiver Abuse

SpaceX leverages the FCC’s Space Modernization Order28 to argue that its application “presumptively serve[s] the public interest to the extent that those applications comply with applicable Commission rules and policies”.29 SpaceX asserts that under the new Part 100 framework, operating in non-conforming spectrum “would not require a waiver of the processing round rules or targeted staff review,” rendering its requests to bypass processing rounds and pending application limits “moot”.30 A 100,000-satellite constellation with massive associated environmental harms cannot enjoy a “public interest presumption.” Neutralizing processing rounds deprives the public of meaningful administrative review. The Commission should reject this. Finally, SpaceX requests a waiver of standard Equivalent Power Flux Density (EPFD) limits,31 asking the Commission to “narrow the set of GSO reference links applied to Gen3 to those reasonably representative of U.S. operations Gen3 would actually affect”.32 Selectively shrinking GSO reference links degrades safeguards for incumbent geostationary operators.

VIII. Requested Actions

In consideration of the evidence presented here, the CSE urges the Commission to:  

1. Dismiss or withhold processing of the application under 47 C.F.R. § 25.112 due to the omission of the required technical disclosures under § 25.114(d)(14) (Orbital Debris Assessment Report);

2. Deny or defer ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264 until a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is conducted under NEPA, requiring empirical data on upper-atmosphere alumina and soot deposition;

3. Mandate formal inter-agency concurrence from NASA (crewed spaceflight collision hazards), NOAA (sub-THz interference with EESS weather bands), and the NSF (optical/radio astronomy mitigations) prior to taking any final licensing action;

4. Deny authorization for the upper 473.0-477.5 km shell unless SpaceX demonstrates zero net increase in collision risk for crewed space stations, mandating a 150 km vertical orbital exclusion zone surrounding the ISS and Tiangong;

5. Issue a formal finding that allocating vast public orbital resources to service commercial AI uplink pipelines does not satisfy the statutory “public interest, convenience, and necessity” standard under 47 U.S.C. § 309;

6. Issue an explicit administrative ruling rebutting SpaceX's claimed “Public Interest Presumption” and confirming this deployment falls under the Commission's Targeted Review Categories;

7. Deny non-conforming sub-terahertz operations (92.0-275.0 GHz) or condition any authorization on strict Out-of-Band Emission limits coordinated with NOAA, NASA, and the ITU;

8. Deny the request to narrow GSO reference links and enforce standard ITU and FCC EPFD limits;

9. Reject SpaceX's argument that processing round waivers are “moot” and enforce strict adherence to milestone schedules and high-value performance bonds;3

10. Mandate physical destruction testing (e.g., plasma-arc wind tunnel test data and physical metallurgy destruction results) to prove Gen3 components demise below the 15-Joule casualty cap; and

11. Require targeted disposal safeguards, mandating independent, fail-safe de-orbit propulsion to the South Pacific Ocean Unpopulated Area (SPOUA) and enforcing a 0.01% uncommanded re-entry failure cap.

References

1 The Center for Space Environmentalism is a multidisciplinary consortium of astrophysicists, orbital dynamicists, and policy experts whose mission is to inspire, inform, and guide the preservation and protection of the space environment.

2 Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Gen3 Technical Attachment, ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264, at 1 (filed June 30, 2026).

3 47 C.F.R. § 25.114(d)(14).

4 Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Gen3 Narrative, ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264, at 2 (filed June 30, 2026).

5 Gen3 Technical Attachment, supra note 2, at 1.

6 Gen3 Narrative, supra note 4, at 2.

7 Id. at 2-3.

8 47 U.S.C. § 309.

9 Gen3 Technical Attachment, supra note 2, at 1.

10 Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Schedule S, ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264, at 1 (filed June 30, 2026).

11 Christopher M. Maloney et al., Investigating the Potential Atmospheric Accumulation and Radiative Impact of the Coming Increase in Satellite Reentry Frequency, 130 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. e2024JD042442, at 1 (2025), https://doi.org/10.1029/2024JD042442; J. P. Ferreira et al., Potential Ozone Depletion From Satellite Demise During Atmospheric Reentry in the Era of Mega-Constellations, 51 Geophys. Res. Lett. e2024GL109280 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1029/2024GL109280.

12 47 C.F.R. § 25.114(d)(14)(vii).

13 Brett Tingley, NASA Confirms Space Debris in North Carolina Was From SpaceX Crew Dragon, Space.com (June 25, 2024), https://www.space.com/nasa-confirms-debris-spacex-crew-dragon (documenting carbon-composite hardware surviving reentry and impacting a mountain trail in Canton, N.C.).

14 Scott Larson, 2nd Piece of Space Junk Landed on Saskatchewan Farmland in 2024, CBC News (Apr. 6, 2025), https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/2nd-piece-of-space-junk-landed-on-saskatchewan-farmland-in-2024-1.7502192 (reporting Starlink hardware and 40 kg rocket debris impacting farmland near Hodgeville and Ituna, Saskatchewan).

15 Shweta Sharma, SpaceX Rocket Debris Crash Lands Into Man's Lawn in Poland, The Independent (Feb. 20, 2025), https://www.independent.co.uk/space/spacex-rocket-debris-lawn-crash-b2701496.html (documenting a 4-ton SpaceX stage from a Starlink mission making an uncontrolled reentry and crashing near Poznan, Poland).

16 William Savinar, Mexico to Pursue Legal Action Over Falling SpaceX Rocket Debris, Courthouse News Service (June 25, 2025), https://www.courthousenews.com/mexico-to-pursue-legal-action-over-falling-spacex-rocket-debris/ (reporting large structural fragments and 4,500-pound tanks washing ashore and impacting coastal areas in Tamaulipas, Mexico).

17 Selam Gebrekidan, A Ton of Space Junk Tumbles Unpredictably to Earth Every Week, N.Y. Times (July 31, 2026), https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/31/world/asia/space-debris-falling-crashing-earth-risk.html.

18 Tzu-Wei Fang et al. Space Weather Environment During the SpaceX Starlink Satellite Loss in February 2022. 20 AGU Space Weather e2022SW003193 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1029/2022SW003193.

19 William E. Parker et al. Influences of Space Weather Forecasting Uncertainty on Satellite Conjunction Assessment. 22 AGU Space Weather e2023SW003818 (2024), https://doi.org/10.1029/2023SW003818.

20 See, e.g., Joan Feynman, Geomagnetic and Solar Wind Cycles, 1900–1975, 87 J. Geophys. Res.: Space Phys. 6153 (1982), https://doi.org/10.1029/JA087iA08p06153 (demonstrating that severe geomagnetic storms routinely peak 2 to 4 years into the declining phase of the solar cycle); see also W.D. Gonzalez, A.L.C. Gonzalez & B.T. Tsurutani, Dual-Peak Solar Cycle Distribution of Intense Geomagnetic Storms, 38 Planet. Space Sci. 181 (1990), https://doi.org/10.1016/0032-0633(90)90082-2; Ian G. Richardson & Hilary V. Cane, Solar Wind Drivers of Geomagnetic Storms During More Than Four Solar Cycles, 2 J. Space Weather Space Clim. A01 (2012), https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2012001.

21 Donald J. Kessler & Burton G. Cour-Palais, Collision Frequency of Artificial Satellites: The Creation of a Debris Belt, 83 J. Geophys. Res.: Space Phys. 2637 (1978), https://doi.org/10.1029/JA083iA06p02637; see also Donald J. Kessler, Nicholas L. Johnson, J.-C. Liou & Mark Matney, The Kessler Syndrome: Implications to Future Space Operations, 137 Adv. Astronautical Sci. 47 (2010) (Paper AAS 10-016), https://aquarid.physics.uwo.ca/kessler/Kessler%20Syndrome-AAS%20Paper.pdf; and Hugh Lewis & Donald Kessler, Critical Number of Spacecraft in Low Earth Orbit: A New Assessment of the Stability of the Orbital Debris Environment, in Proc. 9th Eur. Conf. Space Debris (Apr. 1–4, 2025), https://conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/proceedings/sdc9/paper/305.

22 Gen3 Technical Attachment, supra note 2, at 1.

23 Id.

24 Elizabeth Howell, China's Tiangong Space Station Damaged by Debris Strike: Report, Space.com (Apr. 24, 2024), https://www.space.com/china-tiangong-space-station-space-debris-measures.

25 Brett Tingley, Chinese Astronauts “Stuck” on Space Station to Get a New Spacecraft After Debris Strike Leaves Them Without a Ride Home, Space.com (Nov. 17, 2025), https://www.space.com/space-exploration/launches-spacecraft/chinese-astronauts-to-get-replacement-spacecraft-after-debris-strike-leaves-them-without-a-ride-home.

26 Gen3 Narrative, supra note 4, at 3; Schedule S, supra note 10, at 1-2.

27 Gen3 Technical Attachment, supra note 2, at 2.

28 Space Modernization, Report and Order, FCC 26-47, SB Docket No. 25-306 (rel. July 23, 2026), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-47A1.pdf.

29 Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, SpaceX Gen3 Space Modernization Supplement, ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264, at 1 (filed Aug. 26, 2026).

30 Id., at 2.

31 47 C.F.R. § 25.146.

32 Space Modernization Supplement, supra note 29, at 3; Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Gen3 Waiver Request, ICFS File No. SAT-LOA-20260630-00264, at 36-38 (filed June 30, 2026).