Planet Labs backs faster satellite licensing, with a warning about what would still slow it down

FCC ECFS · Docket 25-306 · Reply comments · 2026-02-19

Planet Labs wants the FCC to license satellites faster, and it has a warning about why faster licensing alone will not be enough. In reply comments filed February 19, 2026, the company said it "strongly supports" modernizing the FCC's space and earth station rules, because the "health and competitiveness of the U.S. satellite industry depend on a regulatory environment that matches the speed of private-sector innovation." It backs certification-based licensing and dropping bond requirements for NGSO systems with fewer than 200 spacecraft. But the benefits of streamlined FCC licensing, Planet argued, will stay "unrealized" as long as the separate federal interagency spectrum-coordination process remains a bottleneck.

On safety it draws a line: Planet supports information-sharing certifications to reduce orbital debris risk, but rejects "unsupported, stringent new thresholds for maneuvers, accidental explosions and reliability" beyond what the FCC or NASA propose. Docket 25-306 holds 121 filings, including 107 comments.

"a regulatory environment that matches the speed of private-sector innovation"

— Planet Labs, FCC docket 25-306

Sources: FCC ECFS filing → · Orbit Sentinel (docket 25-306)

Filed underDocket 25-306Satellite LicensingSpace PolicyOrbital DebrisPlanet LabsPart 100FCC

Questions & answers

What is Planet Labs supporting in docket 25-306?
The FCC's effort to modernize and streamline its space and earth station licensing rules, including a nationwide immoveable earth station framework and a move toward certification-based licensing.
What specific changes does Planet back?
Among others, transitioning from narrative-based to certification-based licensing and eliminating bond requirements for NGSO satellite systems with fewer than 200 spacecraft.
Where does Planet stand on orbital-debris rules?
It supports information-sharing certification requirements to reduce orbital debris risk, while rejecting "unsupported, stringent new thresholds for maneuvers, accidental explosions and reliability" beyond Commission or NASA proposals.