WRC-07 Workshop

WRC-07 Workshop
Select Critical Issues with a Commercial Sector Focus
Jennifer A. Manner
Mobile Satellite Ventures
September 19, 2007
– AI 1.4: Candidate Bands for future developments of IMT-2000
and systems beyond IMT-2000
– AI 1.6, 7.2: Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Service
– AI 1.9: Sharing at 2500- 2690 MHz
– AI 1.10: Re-Planning of Appendix 30B
– AI 1.11: Sharing between the BSS and the terrestrial
broadcasting services
– AI 1.12: Coordination and Notification
– AI 1.19: Broadband over Satellite
– AI 7.1: Resolution 951 and Improvement of the International
Spectrum Regulatory Framework
AI 1.4 IMT Candidate Bands
AI 1.4:
“[T]o consider frequency-related matters for the future
development of IMT-2000 and systems beyond
IMT-2000 taking into account the results of ITU-R studies
in accordance with Resolution 228 (Rev.WRC-03).”
International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) is the proposed term
to encompass IMT-2000, future developments of IMT-2000, and
systems beyond IMT-2000 (which is proposed to be called IMTAdvanced)
Candidate Bands Impacting the U.S.
The following candidate bands are under consideration at WRC
– 410 - 430 MHz
– 450 – 470 MHz
– 470 – 806/862 MHz
– 2.3 – 2.4 GHz
– 2.7 – 2.9 GHz
– 3.4 – 4.2 GHz
– 4.4 – 4.9 GHz
The U.S. supports the identification only of the 698-806/862 MHz
The U.S. is neutral on the 450-470 MHz
The U.S. recommends No Change on all of the other candidate
Lower Bands
410-430 MHz:
• The U.S. and APT oppose any change to this band due to the
extensive use of the band by existing services
450-470 MHz:
• The U.S. is neutral on this band
698-806/862 MHz:
• This is part of the so-called “Digital Dividend” to be created by the
move from analog to digital broadcasting
• The United States plans to complete DTV conversion in 2009
• The United States and CITEL support identifying the 700 MHz
band for IMT and modifying the Radio Regulations to add a
primary Mobile Service allocation to the band. CEPT and APT
support creation of an Agenda Item for WRC-11
Upper Bands
2.3-2.4 GHz:
• The U.S. and RCC oppose any change to this band due to the
extensive use of the band by existing services
2.7-2.9 GHz:
• The U.S., APT, ATU, CITEL, and RCC oppose any change to this
band due to the extensive use of the band by existing services
3.4-4.2 GHz:
• The U.S., CITEL, and APT oppose any change to this band due to
the extensive use of the band by existing services
• CEPT and other administrations are proposing identification of Cband spectrum for use by next-generation broadband wireless
4.4-4.9 GHz:
• The U.S., APT, and CITEL oppose any change to this band due to
the extensive use of the band by existing services
AI 1.6, 7.2
Aeronautical Mobile Satellite (Route) Service (AMS(R)S)
AI 1.6 “[T]o consider additional allocations for the aeronautical
mobile (R) service in parts of the bands between 108 MHz and
6 GHz, in accordance with Resolution 414 [COM7/6] (WRC-03) and,
to study current satellite frequency allocations, that will support the
modernization of civil aviation telecommunication systems, taking
into account Resolution 415 [COM7/7] (WRC-03);”
AI 7.2 “[T]o recommend to the Council items for inclusion in the
agenda for the next WRC, and to give its views on the preliminary
agenda for the subsequent conference and on possible agenda
items for future conferences, taking into account Resolution 803
[COM7/B] (WRC-03).”
AI 1.6, 7.2: AMS(R)S
Many International Civil Aeronautical Organization (ICAO) member states
want an allocation for AMS(R)S in the L Band; claim coordination process
non-transparent and growing need
United States’ concerns with ICAO’s request:
1. No demonstrated need
2. Contrary to US Position on L Band non-generic allocations
3. Coordination Issues are non-WRC
U.S. Proposal:
Complete studies to consider if a future AI is necessary
Retain the generic MSS allocation in the L band
Foreign Proposals:
CEPT proposes to maintain the WRC -11 Agenda Item and refocus studies
Anticipate APT and others to support new AI and further studies
Whether there should be an identification of spectrum for
MSS/ATC in the Big Leo bands, the L band or the S band
Mexico has put forth a proposal for MSS/ATC in the L band and Big
Leo band
U.S. Position:
U.S. position still under consideration
AI 1.9
Facilitating Sharing in the 2.5-2.6 GHz Band
AI 1.9 “[T]o review the technical, operational and regulatory provisions
applicable to the use of the band 2 500-2 690 MHz by space
services in order to facilitate sharing with current and future
terrestrial services without placing undue constraint on the services
to which the band is allocated;”
- 10 -
AI 1.9 Overview
AI 1.9 involves a number of issues:
Power/Interference Limits on Satellite systems to protect terrestrial
– Value of power limits
– How limits are applied – triggers to start a coordination process
or a “hard” limit which must be met
– Which satellite systems/filings have to meet any new limits
adopted by WRC-07
MSS use of 2.5 GHz Band
– Whether MSS should be allowed in the 2500 – 2690 Band
- 11 -
United States’ Position on Interference
The U.S. Supports a uniform regulatory regime for all 2 500-2 690
MHz band space services that:
Specifies new hard limits (-136/122 dBW/m2/MHz) on satellite
systems to protect terrestrial systems such as those in the U.S.
Specifies that all satellite systems not notified by the end of
WRC-07 and brought into use by the end of 2008 meet the new
Provides a long term safeguard to terrestrial systems from
satellite interference
Provides security to the long-term development of space service
Alleviates coordination burdens and provides regulatory certainty
to all services in the band.
- 12 -
AI 1.9: Limits on Satellite Systems
The United States proposes limiting MSS in the 2.5 GHz band to
national and regional MSS systems
Facilitates MSS and Terrestrial Service sharing
Ensures MSS systems can be implemented
Interference limits must also be implemented
- 13 -
AI 1.9: 2500- 2690 MHz
• CITEL supports the United States’ proposals in general and also
proposes to suppress the MSS allocations in 2500-2520 & 26702690 MHz in Region 2
• CEPT proposes new hard limits for all satellite services in 25002690 MHz, except BSS (Sound)
– CEPT proposes to remove the need for terrestrial stations to
coordinate with BSS receiving earth stations located on the
territory of another administration
• Kenya, Tanzania & Uganda support new limits in 2500-2690 MHz
to remove uncertainty for potential investment
• The RCC administrations recognize the possibility of introducing
new limits for satellite services immediately following the end of
• The APT has not reached a common proposal on this issue
- 14 -
AI 1.10:
Appendix 30B Re-planning
AI 1.10 “[T]o review the regulatory procedures and associated
technical criteria of Appendix 30B without any action on the
allotments, the existing systems or the assignments in the List of
Appendix 30B;
Appendix 30B is an a priori planning mechanism for FSS in the Ku
Whether there should be re-planning to take into account new
countries and what is the impact of re-planning
- 15 -
AI 1.10
U.S. Position
The U.S. supports multinational systems and their need to be
accommodated in Appendix 30 B:
Safeguard existing satellites in the Band
Eliminate sub regional system procedures
Consider multinational systems as additional systems
Clarify the notifying and permission seeking requirements.
Seek protections for systems in queue at RRB
International Positions
Due to the potential, world-wide impact, international positions on
re-planning vary greatly
This may be a political topic
- 16 -
AI 1.11
AI 1.11 Sharing between the BSS and terrestrial broadcasting services
AI 1.11: To review the sharing criteria and regulatory provisions for
protection of terrestrial services, in particular terrestrial broadcasting
services, in the band 620-790 MHz from BSS networks and systems, in
accordance with Resolution 545
CITEL has a proposal:
1. suppress No 5.311 and Resolution 545 to ensure protection of the
current and future usage of broadcast, mobile and fixed services in the
620 MHz-790 MHz band from interference from new broadcast
satellite operations in the same band
2. adopt a new Resolution that would provide the regulatory basis for
continuing operation of the BSS networks currently operating in the
3. Suppress the BSS allocation and only allows grandfathered networks
to continue to operate. This proposal would also, therefore, delete
Resolution 705
- 17 -
AI 1.12; Possible Changes to Articles 9 & 11
AI 1.12
‘[T]o consider possible changes in response to
Resolution 86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002) of the Plenipotentiary
Conference: “Advance publication, coordination, notification and
recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to
satellite networks” in accordance with Resolution 86 (WRC-03);
Background: This is a generic agenda item addressed at every
WRC that looks at possible changes/improvements to Articles 9
(coordination) and 11 (Notification) of the RR
Issue: There are actually 25 or more potential ”sub-issues” under
AI 1.12, ranging from the simple to the potentially controversial
- 18 -
AI 1.12
U.S. Position
• Between the U.S. and CITEL proposals to the WRC, most of the
sub-issues under this AI are covered.
International Positions
At this point, there appears to be controversy brewing on at least:
– No. 22.2 regulatory status of NGSO systems vis-à-vis GSO
– No. 9.1 eliminating the 6 month period between BR receipt of
API and CR/C information
– No. 9.11A dealing with coordination between systems “with
equal or higher status”
- 19 -
AI 1.19
Internet Access Via Satellite
AI 1.19 “[T]o consider the results of the ITU-R studies regarding
spectrum requirement for global broadband satellite systems in
order to identify possible global harmonized FSS frequency bands
for the use of Internet applications, and consider the appropriate
regulatory/technical provisions, taking also into account
No. 5.BC03 of the Radio Regulations;”
- 20 -
AI 1.19:
Internet Access via Satellite
Some countries may seek greater flexibility for FSS systems to provide internet
Whether the Radio Regulations governing FSS frequency bands should continue to
be given maximum flexibility in implementing new or existing applications in the FSS
U.S. Position
There is no need for any changes to the RR because Internet applications are being
It is expected band use will continue to grow as requirements are defined, and that
new satellite systems dedicated to broadband internet access could evolve in
existing FSS allocations
International Positions
CEPT support U.S. position
- 21 -
AI 7.1
Resolution 951
AI 7.1: to consider and approve the Report of the Director of the
Radiocommunication Bureau:
on the activities of the R-Sector since WRC-03
on any difficulties encountered in the application of the RRs;
on action in response to Resolution 80
- 22 -
AI 7.2
Resolution 951
Issue: Do the existing RRs accommodate rapidly changing national
and international requirements for existing, emerging and future
applications, systems and technologies such as IMT, public safety,
and satellite systems, among others
The U.S. believes that the RRs are flexible enough to support new
technologies and services
This is another potential political issue for the Conference
- 23 -

similar documents