1. WRC-07 Workshop Select Critical Issues with a Commercial Sector Focus Jennifer A. Manner Mobile Satellite Ventures USITUA WRC Seminar September 19, 2007

2. - 2 - Overview Issues: – 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 AMS(R)S – 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

3. - 3 - 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 IMT- Advanced)

4. - 4 - Candidate Bands Impacting the U.S. The following candidate bands are under consideration at WRC 2007: – 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 bands

5. - 5 - 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

6. - 6 - 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 C- band 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

7. - 7 - 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).”

8. - 8 - AI 1.6, 7.2: AMS(R)S Issue: 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

9. - 9 - MSS/ATC Issue: 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

10. - 10 - 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;”

11. - 11 - AI 1.9 Overview AI 1.9 involves a number of issues: Power/Interference Limits on Satellite systems to protect terrestrial systems – 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

12. - 12 - United States’ Position on Interference Limits 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 limits – 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.

13. - 13 - 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

14. - 14 - AI 1.9: 2500- 2690 MHz SUMMARY OF FOREIGN PROPOSALS: CITEL supports the United States’ proposals in general and also proposes to suppress the MSS allocations in 2500-2520 & 2670- 2690 MHz in Region 2 CEPT proposes new hard limits for all satellite services in 2500- 2690 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 WRC ‑ 07 The APT has not reached a common proposal on this issue

15. - 15 - 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; Background: Appendix 30B is an a priori planning mechanism for FSS in the Ku band Issue: Whether there should be re-planning to take into account new countries and what is the impact of re-planning

16. - 16 - 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

17. - 17 - 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 band 3. Suppress the BSS allocation and only allows grandfathered networks to continue to operate. This proposal would also, therefore, delete Resolution 705

18. - 18 - 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

19. - 19 - 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 systems – 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”

20. - 20 - 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;”

21. - 21 - AI 1.19: Internet Access via Satellite Background: Some countries may seek greater flexibility for FSS systems to provide internet service Issue: Whether the Radio Regulations governing FSS frequency bands should continue to be given maximum flexibility in implementing new or existing applications in the FSS bands U.S. Position There is no need for any changes to the RR because Internet applications are being developed 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

22. - 22 - 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; and – on action in response to Resolution 80

23. - 23 - 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