1. Agenda Item: 1.12 Title: Extension of current worldwide allocation to the Earth exploration–satellite (active) service in the frequency band 9300– 9900 MHz ITU-R Group: WP7C RSA Rapporteur: Dr. Adrian Tiplady

2. Relevant Resolution/s RESOLUTION 651 (WRC-12) Possible extension of the current worldwide allocation to the Earth exploration-satellite (active) service in the frequency band 9 300-9 900 MHz by up to 600 MHz within the frequency bands 8 700-9 300 MHz and/or 9 900-10 500 MHz

3. Issues  Growing demand for increased resolution of global environmental mapping, achieved through increased bandwidth (600 MHz) to achieve 1.2 GHz contiguous bandwidth  Compatibility studies required to consider:  EESS(active) and existing services in bands under consideration, to ensure protection of existing services  Unwanted OOB emissions affecting Space Research Service in 8,400 – 8,500 MHz  Unwanted OOB emissions affecting Space Research Service, Radio Astronomy Service and EESS (passive) in 10,600 – 10,700 MHz

4. Frequency Bands under consideration Current worldwide allocation: – 9,300 MHz – 9,900 MHz Bands under consideration: – 8,700 MHz – 9,300 MHz – 9,900 MHz – 10,500 MHz

5. Summary of Relevant ITU SG/WP Progress  WP7C Meeting May 2014 (next in October 2014)  Preliminary reports and studies  DN ITU-R RS.[EESS-9GHz_OOBE] – Sharing between EESS (active) and OOB emissions with the SRS in 8 400 8 500 MHz and RAS and other passive services in 10.6-10.7 GHz.  For protection of RAS and other passive services, further mitigation measures discussed with WP 7B (SRS) and WP 7D (RAS). APPROVED  PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS-9GHz_FS/MS/AS] – Sharing between EESS (active) and the fixed service in bands 8 700 - 8 750 MHz and 10 000-10 500 MHz  Completed, but further questions raised regarding protection margins for FS. APPROVAL FOR NEXT MEETING  PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS-9GHz_RDS] - Sharing of wideband EESS SAR transmissions with stations in RDS in the bands 8 700-9 300 MHz and 9 900-10 500  Liaison statement to WP5B, indicating 8,700 – 9,200 MHz no longer under consideration. APPROVAL FOR NEXT MEETING

6. Summary of Relevant ITU SG/WP Progress  Proposed new Recommendations for Mitigation  PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS9GHz-RAS-MITIGATION] - Protection of RAS in band 10.6-10.7 GHz from unwanted OOB from synthetic aperture radars operating in EESS (active) around 9 600 MHz  Agreed at WP7C in close liaison with WP7D. Further discussion required at next meeting, as various operational aspects to be considered  PDN ITU-R RS.[EESS9GHz-SRS-MITIGATION] - Protection of SRS space-to-earth links in the 8 400 8 450 MHz and 8 450 8 500 MHz bands from unwanted OOB from synthetic aperture radars operating in the EESS (active) around 9 600 MHz  Agreed at WP7C in close liaison with WP7B. Further discussion required at next meeting, due to various operational mitigation measures and further engagement required.

7. Summary of Relevant ITU SG/WP Progress  Study Highlights (Existing in-band allocations)  Sharing between EESS & RDS  9,000 – 9,200 MHz not retained due to lack of guidance from ITU on processing gain, and safety critical service of ARNS  As a result, 8,700 MHz – 9,000 MHz no longer considered as it would not provide a contiguous 1,200 MHz band  9,300 MHz – 10,000 MHz already studied, indicating no interference  10,000 MHz – 10,500 MHz may result in interference 0.00001% * N, where N = number of systems, of time over 11 days  Sharing between EESS & FS/MS  Feasible  Sharing between EESS & Amateur RS / Amateur RSS  Very limited interference (0.004% of the time)

8. Summary of Relevant ITU SG/WP Progress  Study Highlights (OOB Emissions)  Space Research Service (SRS) – 8,400 – 8,450 MHz (deep space), 8,450 – 8,500 MHz (near earth)  For normal operations, 77dB attenuation required for deep space, 31dB attenuation required for near earth  SRS Receiver damage by:  71dB if 8,700 – 9,300 MHz  9dB if 9,000 – 9,300 MHz and 9,900 – 10,200 MHz  2dB if 9,900 – 10,500 MHz  Operational mitigation strategies exist  Radio Astronomy Service (RAS) – 10,600 – 10,700 MHz  63dB attenuation required to reduce to 2% allowable data loss  Operational mitigation strategies exist  SRS (passive) & EESS (passive) – 10,600 – 10,700 MHz  No interference expected

9. Method(s) to satisfy the agenda Item  Method A - Primary EESS (active) allocation in the frequency band 9 900-10 500 MHz.  Method A1 – Add primary allocation: Shall impose that EESS shall not cause harmful interference to, nor claim protection from, radio location service allocated in the frequency band 9 900-10 500 MHz. In addition, the extension band shall only be used by EESS (active) systems requiring a bandwidth greater than 600 MHz that cannot be accommodated in the frequency band 9 300-9 900 MHz. The protection of radio astronomy service in the frequency band 10.6-10.7 GHz will be ensured through Recommendation incorporated by reference in the RR.  Method A2 - Add primary allocation, subject to inclusion of technical and regulatory constraints in the RR: As above, but inclusions will ensure protection for radiolocation and fixed services (ensured through footnote in RR with pfd-limit).

10. Method(s) to satisfy the agenda Item  Method B - Primary EESS (active) allocation in the frequency bands 9 200-9 300 MHz and 9 900 10 400 MHz.  Impose that EESS (active) shall not cause harmful interference to, nor claim protection from the radio determination services allocated in the frequency bands 9 200-9 300 MHz and 9 900-10 400 MHz. In addition, the extension band shall only be used by EESS (active) systems requiring a bandwidth greater than 600 MHz that cannot be accommodated in the frequency band 9 300-9 900 MHz. The protection of radio astronomy service in the frequency band 10.6-10.7 GHz will be ensured through Recommendation incorporated by reference in the RR.

11. Method(s) to satisfy the agenda Item  Method A1  Advantages  Achieves required 600 MHz for EESS  Provides explicit protection of radiolocation service  Disadvantages  None  Method A2  Advantages  As above, but also specifies provisions for protection of FS  Disadvantages  Depending on value of pfd limit, may place undue constraints on EESS

12. Method(s) to satisfy the agenda Item  Method B  Advantages  Achieves required 600 MHz for EESS  Provides an explicit requirement for protection of the RLS and the RNS by footnote  Disadvantages  None

13. Preliminary SA Position  Method A2 or B  A2 provides stronger protection measures for radiolocation and fixed services  B provides for explicit protection requirement for radiolocation and radionavigation services, whilst also reducing potential impact as a result of unwanted OOB emissions (larger guard band)

14. Conclusion  No significant controversy  Discussions ongoing regarding mitigation techniques  Responsibility of coordination should be on EESS operators, not SRS/RAS