ATTACHMENT B to FCC Public Notice DA 14-1845 Draft Proposals formulated and approved within the National Telecommunications and Information Administration: 2 WAC/094(17.12.14) Ms. Mindel De La Torre Chief of the International Bureau Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 Dear Ms. De La Torre: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on behalf of the Executive Branch agencies, approves the release of the draft Executive Branch proposals for WRC-15 agenda items 1.3 (public protection and disaster relief), 1.5 (UAS Satellite), and 9 (earth stations in motion). For agenda item 1.3, NTIA proposes a modification to Resolution 646. For agenda item 1.5, NTIA proposes allowing the use of control and non-payload communication links in the fixed-satellite service. For agenda item 9, NTIA proposes providing more spectrum in both the uplink and downlink to support growing global broadband communication requirement. NTIA considered the federal agencies’ input toward the development of U.S. proposals for WRC-15. NTIA forwards this package for your consideration and review by your WRC-15 Advisory Committee. Mr. Charles Glass is the primary contact from my staff. Sincerely, (Original Signed September 17, 2014) Karl B. Nebbia Associate Administrator Office of Spectrum Management 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 1.3: to review and revise Resolution 646 (Rev. WRC-12) for broadband public protection and disaster relief (PPDR), in accordance with Resolution 648 (WRC-12) Background Information: Resolution 646 (WRC-12), initially adopted at WRC-03, encouraged administrations to utilize a set of regionally harmonized spectrum bands identified for public protection and disaster relief (PPDR) in each region. Resolution 646 listed the following set of bands, covering all three ITU regions: - In Region 1: 380-470 MHz as the frequency range within which the band 380-385/ 390- 395 MHz is a preferred core harmonized band within certain countries; - In Region 2: 746-806 MHz, 806-869 MHz, 4 940-4 990 MHz; - In Region 3: 406.1-430 MHz, 440-470 MHz, 806-824/851-869 MHz, 4 940-4 990 MHz and 5 850-5 925 MHz; Recognizing that it would be timely to review Resolution 646 (Rev. WRC-12), Resolution 648 (WRC-12) invited ITU-R to study technical and operational issues related to broadband PPDR applications and scenarios. It also resolved to invite WRC-15 to take any action that would be appropriate to revise Resolution 646. Resolution 648 did not call specifically for identification of additional, regionally harmonized spectrum bands for PPDR, and it did not contemplate identifying a globally harmonized spectrum range. During a May 2014 meeting, ITU-R Working Party 5A completed draft text for the CPM Report to WRC-15 that describes, among others, a Method A for review and revision of Resolution 646. Method A proposes that “no change will be made to Resolution 646 (Rev.WRC-12), other than editorial amendments to Footnote 1 of Resolution 646 (Rev.WRC-12) and the text surrounding it, and updated references to ITU-R Reports.” ITU- R studies would address any further requirements for spectrum not already identified in Resolution 646. The United States proposes to resolve AI 1.3 through Method A for review and revision of Resolution 646. Proposal: MOD USA/1.3/1 RESOLUTION 646 (REV.WRC-12-15) Public protection and disaster relief The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 20122015), considering … g) that new technologies for wideband and broadband public protection and disaster relief applications are being developed in various standards organizations1; 1 For example, a joint standardization programme between the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) and the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), known as Project MESA (Mobility for Emergency and Safety Applications) has commenced for broadband public protection and disaster relief. Also, the Working Group on Emergency Telecommunications (WGET), convened by the United Nations Office for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), is an open forum to facilitate the use of telecommunications in the service of 4 … m) that the Tampere Convention on the Provision of Telecommunications Resources for Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations (Tampere, 1998), an international treaty deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General and related United Nations General Assembly Resolutions and Reports are also relevant in this regard1, … recognizing g) that currently some bands or parts thereof have been designated for existing public protection and disaster relief operations, as documented in Report ITU-R M.2033; 3 … noting c) that public protection and disaster relief agencies and organizations have an initiala set of requirements, including but not limited to interoperability, secure and reliable communications, sufficient capacity to respond to emergencies, priority access in the use of non-dedicated systems, fast response times, ability to handle multiple group calls and the ability to cover large areas as described in Report ITU-R M.2033[PPDR]; Reason: Method A completes the required review of Resolution 646, resulting in revisions to the document that will ensure its ongoing relevance and accuracy. Resolution 646 will continue to be a resource for meeting current and future requirements for PPDR applications, and the appropriate ITU-R study groups can undertake studies to address any further requirements for PPDR. humanitarian assistance comprising United Nations entities, major non-governmental organizations, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), ITU and experts from the private sector and academia. AnotherA platform for coordination and to foster harmonized global Telecommunication for Disaster Relief (TDR) standards is the TDR Partnership Coordination Panel, which has just been established under the coordination of ITU with participation of international telecommunication service providers, related government departments, standards development organizations, and disaster relief organizations. 3 3-30, 68-88, 138-144, 148-174, 380-400 MHz (including CEPT designation of 380-385/ 390-395 MHz), 400-430, 440-470, 764-776, 794-806 and 806-869 MHz (including CITEL designation of 821- 824/866-869 MHz). 5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 1.5: to consider the use of frequency bands allocated to the fixed-satellite service not subject to Appendices 30, 30A and 30B for the control and non-payload communications of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in non-segregated airspaces, in accordance with Resolution 153 (WRC-12) Background Information: Report ITU-R M.2171 identified the spectrum requirements for unmanned aircraft system (UAS) command and non-payload communication (CNPC) links that would be needed to support flight through non-segregated airspace. Those requirements identified the need for both line of sight (LOS) and beyond line of sight (BLOS) spectrum. While the LOS requirements were addressed at the last World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) held in 2012 the BLOS requirements were only partially addressed. As a result a new agenda item for the 2015 WRC (Agenda Item 1.5) was established to investigate whether fixed satellite networks, not subject to Appendix 30, 30A and 30B could be used to provide additional capacity for UAS CNPC links. This agenda item is to supports the addition of technical and regulatory provisions to enable use of portions of bands allocated to the fixed satellite service (FSS) for unmanned aircraft system (UAS) control and non-payload communications (CNPC) links in non-segregated airspace, if provided studies demonstrate compatibility with incumbent services and that the requirements of aviation authorities are satisfied without supporting the addition of an aeronautical mobile satellite (route) service (AMS(R)S) allocation to the FSS bands used for this purpose. In the context of this agenda item, a UAS consists of an unmanned aircraft (UA) with an Earth station on- board to interconnect the UA and the associated Earth station of the unmannered aircraft control station (UACS) with its own Earth station through a satellite operating in the FSS. UA are aircraft that do not carry a human pilot but that are piloted remotely, i.e. through a reliable communication link (CNPC) from outside the aircraft. UAS operations up to now have been limited to segregated airspace. However, it is planned to expand UAS deployment outside of segregated airspace. The development of UAS is based on recent technological advances in aviation, electronics and structural materials, making the economics of UAS operations more favorable, particularly for more repetitive, routine and long-haul duration applications. The current state of the art in UAS design and operation, is leading to the rapid development of UAS applications to fill many diverse requirements. There are a large variety of existing and envisioned applications of UAS in the fields of economy, public safety and science. Further details on UAS applications in non-segregated airspace can be found in Report ITU-R M.2171. The operation of UAS outside segregated airspace requires addressing the same issues as manned aircraft, namely safe and efficient integration into the air traffic control system. A huge number of More than 100 geostationary satellite communication networks operate on in frequency bands allocated to the FSS in the bands 10.7-12.75, 13.75-14.5, 17.3-20.2, and 27.5-30.0 GHz. Report ITU-R M.2171 identifies a large variety of prospects for UAS remotely piloted (Unmanned) aircraft that would need to fly long-distances (worldwide) through airspaces controlled by civil air traffic control (ATC). Immediate access to this globally existing capacity would provide great advantages for UAS fleet operators fostering new applications, enabling faster developments of new markets, while providing planning stability for significant investments. Studies under this agenda item investigated the link feasibilities and sharing conditions for using UAS CNPC links over typical frequency spectrum allocated in several FSS allocations under which such applications could be authorized. Report ITU-R M.2233 contains examples of technical characteristics for UA CNPC including FSS systems operating in portions of the frequency ranges 10.95-14.5 GHz and 17.3-30.0 GHz. These examples indicated that it may be possible to operate UAS CNPC links in these bands while meeting the desired link performance. It is recognized that a further Report may be available by the time of WRC-15. 6 The proposal found below sets forth the basis for accomplishing the this objective of using frequency bands allocated to the FSS for safe operation of UAS CNPC links. It includes text for a footnote to the appropriate FSS bands which points to a Resolution that spells out the conditions of use for supporting safe and efficient operation of UAS. Proposal: ADD USA/1.5/1 ARTICLE 5 Frequency allocations Section IV – Table of Frequency Allocations (See No. 2.1) 10-11.7 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 10.7-11.7 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.441 5.484A 5.XXX (Earth-to-space) 5.484 MOBILE except aeronautical mobile 10.7-11.7 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.441 5.484A 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile 7 11.7-14 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 11.7-12.5 FIXED MOBILE except aeronautical mobile BROADCASTING BROADCASTING- SATELLITE 5.492 11.7-12.1 FIXED 5.486 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.488 5.XXX Mobile except aeronautical mobile 5.485 11.7-12.2 FIXED MOBILE except aeronautical mobile BROADCASTING BROADCASTING- SATELLITE 5.492 12.1-12.2 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.488 5.XXX 5.485 5.489 5.487 5.487A 12.2-12.7 FIXED MOBILE except aeronautical mobile BROADCASTING BROADCASTING- SATELLITE 5.492 12.2-12.5 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth)5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile BROADCASTING 5.487 5.487A 5.484A 5.487 12.5-12.75 5.487A 5.488 5.490 12.5-12.75 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.XXX (Earth-to-space) 5.494 5.495 5.496 12.7-12.75 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) MOBILE except aeronautical mobile FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile BROADCASTING- SATELLITE 5.493 13.75-14 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.XXX RADIOLOCATION Earth exploration-satellite Standard frequency and time signal-satellite (Earth-to-space) Space research 5.499 5.500 5.501 5.502 5.503 8 14-14.5 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 14-14.25 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.457B 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX RADIONAVIGATION 5.504 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.504B 5.504C 5.506A Space research 5.504A 5.505 14.25-14.3 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.457B 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX RADIONAVIGATION 5.504 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.504B 5.506A 5.508A Space research 5.504A 5.505 5.508 14.3-14.4 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.457B 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.504B 5.506A 5.509A Radionavigation-satellite 5.504A 14.3-14.4 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.506A Radionavigation-satellite 5.504A 14.3-14.4 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.504B 5.506A 5.509A Radionavigation-satellite 5.504A 14.4-14.47 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.457B 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.504B 5.506A 5.509A Space research (space-to-Earth) 5.504A 14.47-14.5 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.457A 5.457B 5.484A 5.506 5.506B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.504B 5.506A 5.509A Radio astronomy 5.149 5.504A 9 17.3-18.4 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 17.3-17.7 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.516 (space-to-Earth) 5.516A 5.516B 5.XXX Radiolocation 17.3-17.7 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.516 BROADCASTING- SATELLITE Radiolocation 17.3-17.7 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.516 Radiolocation 5.514 5.514 5.515 5.514 17.7-18.1 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A (Earth-to-space) 5.516 MOBILE 17.7-17.8 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.517 (Earth-to-space) 5.516 BROADCASTING- SATELLITE Mobile 5.515 17.7-18.1 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A (Earth-to-space) 5.516 MOBILE 17.8-18.1 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A (Earth-to-space) 5.516 MOBILE 5.519 18.1-18.4 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B 5.XXX (Earth-to-space) 5.520 MOBILE 5.519 5.521 10 18.4-20.2 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 18.4-18.6 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B 5.XXX MOBILE 18.6-18.8 EARTH EXPLORATION- SATELLITE (passive) FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.522B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile Space research (passive) 18.6-18.8 EARTH EXPLORATION- SATELLITE (passive) FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.516B 5.522B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile SPACE RESEARCH (passive) 18.6-18.8 EARTH EXPLORATION- SATELLITE (passive) FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.522B 5.XXX MOBILE except aeronautical mobile Space research (passive) 5.522A 5.522C 5.522A 5.522A … 19.7-20.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B 5.XXX Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) 19.7-20.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 19.7-20.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B 5.XXX Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) 5.524 5.524 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.528 5.529 5.524 20.1-20.2 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.524 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.528 11 27.5-29.9 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 27.5-28.5 FIXED5.537A FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.XXX MOBILE 5.538 5.540 28.5-28.629.1 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.523A 5.539 5.XXX MOBILE Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 5.540 28.6-29.1 FIXED FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.523A 5.539 MOBILE Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 5.540 ... 29.5-29.9 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.XXX Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 29.5-29.9 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 29.5-29.9 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.XXX Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.540 5.542 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.529 5.540 5.542 5.540 5.542 12 29.9-30 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 29.9-30 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 5.543 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.538 5.540 5.542 Reasons: To provide a footnote allowing the use of UAS CNPC links in the fixed-satellite service not subject to Appendices 30, 30A and 30B. ADD USA/1.5/2 5.XXX This The FSS in this frequency band may also be used for the control and non-payload communication (CNPC) of unmanned aircraft systems., sSuch use shall be in accordance with Resolution [FSS-UA-CNPC] (WRC-15). 13 ADD USA/1.5/3 DRAFT RESOLUTION [FSS-UA-CNPC] (WRC-15) Provision related to Earth stations on board unmanned aircraft which operate with geostationary satellites in the fixed-satellite service for the control and non-payload communications (CNPC) of unmanned aircraft systems in non-segregated airspaces The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2015), considering a) that worldwide use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) ,which includes the unmanned aircraft (UA) and the unmanned aircraft control station (UACS), is expected to increase significantly in the near future; b) that unmanned aircraft (UA) need to operate seamlessly with piloted aircraft in non- segregated airspace; c) that the operation of UAS in non-segregated airspace requires reliable control and non- payload communication (CNPC) links, in particular to relay the air traffic control communications and for the remote pilot to control the flight; d) that there is a demand for the control of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) CNPC links via satellite communication networks to relay control and non-payload for communications (CNPC) beyond the radio horizon while operating in non-segregated airspace as shown in Annex 12; e) that there is a need to provide regulation for the internationally harmonized use of spectrum for UAS CNPC links application; f) that appropriate the use of fixed satellite service (FSS) frequency assignments by UAS CNPC links should take into account their Article 11 notification status of a FSS network is a pre- requisite for the use of FSS space system (channel) for UA CNPC links; considering further a) that there is a need to limit the number amount of communication equipments onboard a UA; b) that, as a dedicated satellite system for UAS CNPC links is not likely to be implemented in the short or medium term, it is necessary to take into account the existing and future satellite systems to accommodate the growth in of the use of UAS operations; c) that there are various technical methods that may be used to increase the reliability of digital communication links, e.g. modulation, coding, redundancy, etc. that can be used to ensure safe operations of UAS in all non-segregated air space; d) hat for UAS CNPC communications used for the control of UA, relay of air traffic control (ATC) voice communications, and sense and avoid, relate to the safe operation of UAS and have certain technical, operational, and regulatory requirements; 14 e) that the requirements in considering further d) can be specified for UAS use of FSS networks, notingrecognizing a) that Report ITU-R M.2171 provides information on the vast number of applications for UAS Unmanned Aircraft needing access to non-segregated airspaces; b) that Recommendation 724 (WRC-07) notes that FSS is not, intrinsically, a safety service; recognizing a) that appropriate technical and operational provisions can be implemented in the ITU-R to enhance the robustness of the UAS CNPC links; bc) that the UAS CNPC links shall be operated , in accordance with international standards and recommended practices and procedures established the Convention in accordance with the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the operation of UAS in non-segregated airspace has to meet standards and recommended practices; c) that the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) will carry out their mutual responsibilities in a cooperative manner; d) that the respective roles of ICAO and the ITU must be fully understood to ensure appropriate separation of provisions to be addressed in the Radio Regulations and regulatory and operational matters that need to be addressed by ICAO; e) that in this context, ITU will develop the typical conditions for operation of CNPC links, and then, ICAO will develop further operational conditions to ensure safe UAS operation, resolves 1 that earth stations on-board UA can communicate with a space station operating in the fixed satellite service, including while the UA is in motionthat UA control and non-payload communication shall operate under the regulatory and operational provisions contained in Annex 1; 2 that the use of such links and their associated performance requirements shall be operated in accordance with the international standards and recommended practices (SARPS) and procedures established by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in accordance consistent with Article 37 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation; 3. that a fixed satellite service earth station on an unmanned aircraft shall be considered defined as an earth station operating in the fixed satellite service; 4. that the FSS space stations operating in frequency bands supporting these CNPC links shall conform to the applicable technical provisions of the radio regulations; 5 that the use of UAS CNPC links is for safe operation and regularity of flight and requires absolute international protection; 6 that the freedom from harmful interference to UAS CNPC links is imperative to ensure safe operation and administrations shall act immediately when their attention is drawn to any such harmful interference; 15 7 that the FSS operator will ensure that the assignments associated with the FSS networks to be used for UAS CNPC links (see figure 1 in Annex 1) have obtained the necessary protected status under the provisions of No. 11.32, 11.32A, 11.42, or 11.42A including the examinations made by the BR and have been successfully registered in the MIFR; 8 that, real time interference monitoring and predicting interference risks, and planning solutions for potential interference scenarios, shall be addressed in the specific agreements between FSS operators and UAS operators with guidance from Aaviation Aauthorities, encourages concerned administrations 1 to cooperate with administrations which license UAS CNPC while seeking agreement under the abovementioned provisions, instructs the Secretary-General to bring this Resolution to the attention of the Secretary-General of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). 16 ANNEX 1 TO RESOLUTION [FSS-UA-CNPC] (WRC-15) Regulatory and operational provisions for UA CNPC links operating through satellite systems operated in the FSS frequency bands 1 It is anticipated that ICAO will develop associated standards and recommended practices (SARPs), taking into account the above. 2 Conformity with the Radio Regulations is ensured by application of Articles 9 and 11. In the course of this action, the BR always checks the consistency of any frequency assignment with the relevant technical and regulatory provisions contained in the RR, thus meeting the requirement in the ICAO conditions Any UAS CNPC link will operate under the protection provided by the registered FSS frequency assignments. 3 FSS frequencies used for UAS will use frequency assignments that are “successfully coordinated”. Satellite operators and administrations are required to carry out coordination of their FSS frequency assignments in accordance with the provisions contained in Article 9 of the Radio Regulations. The application of such provisions ensures that FSS frequency assignments can operate free from harmful interference caused by and to other systems. The efficiency of those rules is proven by the fact that FSS frequency assignments have been successfully operated for many years. 4 When the coordination process is completed, the BR will be notified (according to the provisions of RR Article 11) by the administration proposing the new system and the frequency assignments will be recorded in the MIFR. If a frequency assignment is recorded in the MIFR under RR 11.41, such an assignment is still entitled to protect and be protected against frequency assignments of other networks with which coordination has been successfully completed. The FSS operator then has to make sure that the outstanding coordination issues are examined to determine if UAS CNPC operations can take place within the ICAO requirements. This would be done for example by determining whether the affected network with which coordination has not been achieved is actually in operation and if so what the operational parameters are (e.g. orbital location and filed power levels) to ensure that any resultant impact would be acceptable. 5 Predicting interference risks, planning solutions for potential interference scenarios, adopting measures to solve the interference issues and reporting on the interference cases, are elements which are well known to FSS operators and which should be included in the specific agreements between FSS operators and UAS operators with guidance from Aviation Authorities (some of which could be included in SARPs). 6 Innovative ways to detect and prosecute the interference cases are being developed nowadays at international level, in order to gain further experience and contribute to harmonized and transparent reporting mechanisms of interference cases. 7 The ITU and ICAO will carry out their mutual responsibilities in a cooperative manner. It is important that the respective roles of ICAO and the ITU be fully understood to ensure appropriate separation of regulatory needs to be addressed in the RR and operational issues to be addressed by ICAO processes. In this context, ITU will develop the typical conditions for operation of CNPC links, and then, ICAO will develop further operational conditions to ensure safe operation. 17 ANNEX 12 TO RESOLUTION [FSS-UA-CNPC] (WRC-15) UA CNPC links architecture 1 UA CNPC FSS Links FIGURE 1 Elements of UAS architecture using the FSS Typical BLOS CNPC links in an unmanned aircraft system The forward and return (UAS) links via an FSS network 18 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 9.0: to consider and approve the Report of the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau, in accordance with Article 7 of the Constitution. Background Information: The global demand for broadband communications continues unabated and is not location specific. Such demand includes requirements of connectivity for users on vessels, aircraft and vehicles that operate at both fixed locations and while in motion, often in very remote parts of the globe. The ITU for many years has and continues to address ways of meeting this important need. State of the art 30/20 GHz GSO FSS satellite networks and earth stations that employ advanced technology available today are capable of meeting the connectivity requirements of broadband users on vehicles and vessels, including high-throughput applications. Advances in satellite manufacturing and directional earth station technology, particularly the development of multi-axis stabilized earth station antennas capable of maintaining a high degree of pointing accuracy while stationary or on rapidly moving platforms, have made earth stations with very stable pointing characteristics both available and practical. These earth stations can operate in the same interference environment, and comply with same regulatory and technical constraints as typical GSO FSS earth stations. Satellite network operators are designing, coordinating, and bringing into use GSO FSS networks that can offer both stationary and moving broadband services using a single stabilized directional antenna within existing GSO FSS technical parameters. The ITU-R, which has been studying deployment of earth stations in motion operating with GSO FSS networks for many years, has adopted Report S.2223, “technical and operational requirements for GSO FSS earth stations on mobile platforms in bands from 17.3 to 30.0 GHz”. Additional technical work continues in the ITU-R, with the Preliminary Draft New Recommendation, ITU-R S.[GSO FSS E/S in 29.5-30.0 GHz], “technical and operational requirements for earth stations on moving platforms operating with geostationary FSS satellite networks in the bands 29.5-30.0/19.7-20.2 GHz” (“Recommendation”), expected to be approved prior to WRC-15. The ‘upper 500 MHz’ of the 30/20 GHz band was studied first because the band is predominately allocated to satellite services. The FSS (Earth-to-space) bands between 27.5-29.5 GHz are shared on a global basis with the fixed and mobile services as well as other users and, therefore, more study on use of these bands by earth stations in motion is required. The Recommendation provides technical and operational guidelines to Administrations that wish to deploy earth stations on moving platforms communicating with geostationary space stations in the fixed-satellite service in the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz. The Recommendation includes a set of recommended off-axis e.i.r.p. spectral density levels for earth stations in motion as well as an overview of various satellite tracking and pointing techniques that will enable these earth stations to communicate with GSO space stations in the FSS without causing interference at levels in excess of that caused by conventional FSS earth stations. Currently, in accordance with No. 5.526, of the Radio Regulations, a satellite network which is both in the FSS and in the MSS can include links between the FSS portion of the network and earth stations in motion using frequency assignments in the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 29.5-30.0 GHz (Earth-to-space) in Region 2 and in the bands 20.1-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 29.9-30.0 GHz (Earth- to-space) in Regions 1 and 3. The Radiocommunication Bureau in implementing this footnote introduced 19 through a Circular Letter a new class of earth station, UC, for use by Administrations when filing an earth station while in motion associated with a space station in the FSS in the bands listed in No. 5.526 (see CR/358). The Circular Letter also noted that in the absence of particular criteria the BR’s findings will be based on existing criteria for FSS links in the relevant bands, as appropriate. Thus, the demand for broadband satellite communications to single earth stations that are used at fixed locations and while in motion can be met in 500 megahertz in Region 2 but only 100 megahertz in Regions 1 and 3. Given that the demand from many users of these satellite services, e.g., shipping companies, is global and cannot be met in only 100 megahertz of spectrum, the United States proposes to complement No. 5.526 by adding a new footnote to the FSS allocation in all three regions in the 29.5-30 GHz and 19.7-20.2 GHz bands to make clear in the Radio Regulations that earth stations while stationary or in motion may communicate with GSO FSS networks on the same basis as conventional FSS earth stations. The United States also proposes an associated Resolution that provides technical and operational guidance, based on the studies in the ITU-R, for administrations when deploying earth stations that will operate while in motion. Adoption of this proposal will provide 500 megahertz in both the uplink and downlink to support these important and growing global broadband requirements, on an equal basis in all three Regions and result in rational and efficient use of the radio spectrum resource. Adoption of this proposal will also allow the coordination, notification and recording of these earth stations on an equal basis in all three Regions. 20 Proposals: ARTICLE 5 Frequency allocations Section IV – Table of Frequency Allocations (See No. 2.1) MOD USA/9/1 18.4-22 GHz Reason: Changes required to Article 5 Table of Frequency Allocations to facilitate the introduction of earth stations in motion. MOD USA/9/2 24.75-29.9 GHz Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 ….. 19.7-20.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B ADD 5.XXX Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) 19.7-20.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B ADD 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 19.7-20.1 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B ADD 5.XXX Mobile-satellite (space-to-Earth) 5.524 5.524 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.528 5.529 5.524 20.1-20.2 FIXED-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.484A 5.516B ADD 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (space-to-Earth) 5.524 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.528 ….. Allocation to services  ….. 29.5-29.9 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 ADD 5.XXX Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 29.5-29.9 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 ADD 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 29.5-29.9 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 ADD 5.XXX Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 Mobile-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.540 5.542 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.529 5.540 5.540 5.542 21 Reason: Changes required to Article 5 Table of Frequency Allocations to facilitate the introduction of earth stations in motion. MOD USA/9/3 29.9-34.2 GHz Reason: Changes required to Article 5 Table of Frequency Allocations to facilitate the introduction of earth stations in motion. ADD USA/9/4 5.XXX In the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz, earth stations that are in motion may communicate with geostationary space stations of the fixed-satellite service. Operation of earth stations while in motion shall be in accordance with Resolution XXX. Reason: Adoption of this proposal would provide the availability of 500 megahertz in both the uplink and downlink to support important and growing global broadband communication requirements for users on ships, airplanes, and land vehicles, on an equal basis in all three Regions and result in rational and efficient use of the radio spectrum resource. This also allows the coordination, notification and recording of these earth stations on an equal basis in all three Regions. ADD USA/9/5 RESOLUTION XXX (WRC-15) Use of the frequency bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz by earth stations in motion communicating with geostationary space stations of the fixed-satellite service The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2015) considering a) that the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz are globally allocated on a primary basis to the FSS and that there are a large number of FSS satellite networks operating in these frequency bands at the geostationary satellite orbit (GSO); b) that there is an increasing need for mobile communications, including global broadband satellite services, and that some of this need can be met by allowing earth stations that can operate while Allocation to services Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 29.9-30 FIXED-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) 5.484A 5.516B 5.539 ADD 5.XXX MOBILE-SATELLITE (Earth-to-space) Earth exploration-satellite (Earth-to-space) 5.541 5.543 5.525 5.526 5.527 5.538 5.540 5.542 22 stationary or in motion on platforms (such as ships, aircraft and land vehicles) to communicate with space stations of the FSS operating in the frequency bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz; c) that this Conference has adopted No. 5.XXX in order to address this need; d) that GSO FSS networks in the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz, are required to be coordinated in accordance with the provisions of Article 9 and 11 of the Radio Regulations; e) that earth stations in motion are currently communicating with GSO FSS networks in the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz, and there are plans to expand the use of such earth stations with operational and future GSO FSS networks; f) that the ITU-R has studied the technical and operational use of these earth stations in motion in the referenced bands; considering further a) that some administrations have addressed this matter nationally or regionally by adopting technical and operational criteria for the operation of earth stations in motion communicating with GSO FSS networks; b) that a consistent approach to deployment of these earth stations in motion will support this important and growing global broadband communication requirement; c) that these earth stations in motion will operate consistent with the coordination agreements between administrations applicable to the GSO FSS networks with which they communicate; resolves 1 that administrations authorizing earth stations in motion communicating with GSO FSS networks in the band 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz require that GSO FSS operators employing earth stations in motion: a. comply with the off-axis e.i.r.p. density levels given in Annex 1 or other levels mutually coordinated with other affected satellite network operators and their administrations; b. employ techniques such as those described in Annex 2 that allow the tracking of the wanted GSO FSS satellite and that are resistant to capturing and tracking adjacent GSO satellites; c. immediately reduce or cease transmission when the earth station antenna mispointing would result in exceeding the levels referred to in resolves 1a); d. be subject to permanent monitoring and control by a Network Control and Monitoring Center (NCMC) or equivalent facility and that these earth stations be capable to receive and act upon at least “enable transmission” and “disable transmission” commands from the NCMC. In addition, it should be possible for the NCMC to monitor the operation of an earth station in motion to determine if it is malfunctioning; 23 e. maintain points of contact for the purpose of tracing any suspected cases of interference from Earth stations in motion; and f. not claim greater protection for such earth stations in the 19.7-20.2 GHz band than the level afforded to stationary FSS earth stations. 24 Annex 1 Off axis e.i.r.p. density levels for earth stations in motion communicating with geostationary space stations of the fixed-satellite service in the band 29.5-30.0 GHz This Annex provides a set of recommended off-axis e.i.r.p. levels for earth stations in motion operating in the band 29.5-30.0 GHz. However, as stated in resolves 1a, other levels may be coordinated between satellite operators and administrations. Earth stations in motion operating in GSO FSS networks transmitting in the band 29.5-30.0 GHz should be designed in such a manner that at any angle, ?, which is 2??or more from the vector from the earth station antenna to the wanted GSO FSS satellite (see Figure 1 below for the reference geometry of an earth station in motion compared to an earth station at a fixed location), the e.i.r.p. density in any direction within 3??of the GSO, should not exceed the following values: Angle ? Maximum e.i.r.p. per 40 kHz 2???? ?????7?? (19 – 25 log ?) dB(W/40 kHz) 7???? ?????9.2?? –2 dB(W/40 kHz) 9.2???? ?????48?? (22 – 25 log ?) dB(W/40 kHz) 48???? ?????180?? –10 dB(W/40 kHz) NOTE 1– The values above should be maximal values under clear-sky conditions. In case of networks employing uplink power control, these levels should include any additional margins above the minimum clear-sky level necessary for the implementation of uplink power control. When uplink power control (UPC) is used and rain fade makes UPC necessary, the levels stated above may be exceeded for the duration of that rain fade period. When uplink power control is not used and the e.i.r.p. density levels given above are not met, different values could be used in compliance with the values agreed to through bilateral coordination of GSO FSS satellite networks. NOTE 2 – The e.i.r.p. density levels for angles of ? less than 2 may be determined from GSO FSS coordination agreements taking into account the specific parameters of the two GSO FSS satellite networks. 25 NOTE 3 – For geostationary space stations in the fixed-satellite service with which the earth stations in motion are expected to transmit simultaneously in the same 40 kHz band, e.g., employing code division multiple access (CDMA), the maximum e.i.r.p. density values should be decreased by 10 log(N) dB, where N is the number of earth stations in motion that are in the receive satellite beam of the satellite with which these earth stations are communicating and that are expected to transmit simultaneously on the same frequency. Alternative methods may be used as long as the maximum e.i.r.p. density values are met in the aggregate. NOTE 4 – potential aggregate interference from earth stations in motion operating with satellites using multi-spot frequency reuse technologies should be taken into account in coordination between the GSO FSS satellite operators and their administrations. NOTE 5 – Earth stations in motion operating in the band 29.5-30.0 GHz that have lower elevation angles to the GSO will require higher e.i.r.p. levels relative to the same terminals at higher elevation angles to achieve the same power flux-densities (pfds) at the GSO due to the combined effect of increased distance and atmospheric absorption. Earth stations with low elevation angles may exceed the above levels by the following amount: Elevation angle to GSO (?) Increase in e.i.r.p. spectral density (dB) ?????????? ???? ?????? ??????????? ??– ??? ??? Figure 1 below illustrates the definition of angle ? 1. 1 In Figure 1 proportions are illustrative and not to scale. 26 where: a represents the earth station in motion; b represents the boresight of the earth station antenna; c represents the geostationary satellite orbit (GSO); d represents the vector from the earth station in motion to the wanted GSO FSS satellite; ? represents the angle between the boresight of the earth station antenna and a point P on the GSO arc; ? represents the angle between the vector d and point P on the GSO arc; P represents a generic point on the GSO arc to which angles ? and ? are refer to. 27 Annex 2 Satellite tracking and pointing techniques of earth stations in motion communicating with geostationary space stations of the fixed-satellite service in the bands 19.7-20.2 GHz and 29.5-30.0 GHz 1 Introduction Earth stations operating while in motion employ relatively high gain directional antennas with multiple- axis stabilization that allows the signal quality of the link between the earth station antenna and the wanted GSO FSS satellite (and vice versa) to be high. To maintain the signal quality it is also necessary for these earth stations to maintain high pointing accuracy towards the wanted GSO FSS satellite. This Annex describes algorithms that may be employed by earth stations that operate in motion for tracking of the wanted satellite as well as techniques that reduce the possibility of capturing and tracking an adjacent GSO satellite. There are well-known techniques for antenna tracking of a GSO FSS satellite which can be classified into two categories: those that make use of open-loop algorithms and those that make use of RF closed-loop algorithms. The following subsections provide a brief description of each of the two types. 1.1 Open-loop pointing technique An open-loop pointing technique employs a process of calculating the azimuth A and elevation E based upon the position of the earth station antenna on the earth (i.e., its latitude and longitude, acquired, for example, through a GPS signal) and the nominal longitude of the wanted satellite. The following equations show the relationship between the variables mentioned above: ? ? arctan ???????? ? ? (1) ? ? arctan ?????? ?? ????? ???? ? (2) where: l is the earth station latitude; L is the earth station relative longitude2; cos? ? cos ? cos ?; ?? is the earth radius; ?? is the altitude of the satellite. Due to the movement (relative to the earth station) of the GSO FSS satellite within its station-keeping box, depending on the width of the main beam of the earth station antenna, the azimuth and elevation angles of that antenna might need to be adjusted at consecutive instants in order for the link between the earth station and the satellite not to be deteriorated or – eventually – lost. By employing an open-loop pointing strategy, the angles are calculated in advance for each instant by taking into account the predicted apparent movement of the GSO satellite. Earth stations in motion typically operate as part of a network and under control of a network management system. One method employed by network operators is to broadcast satellite ephemeris data as part of a system bulletin board message that is repeated regularly. Earth stations operating in motion may download this updated ephemeris information and use it as part of the pointing solution to maintain accurate pointing toward the GSO satellite over 2 The relative longitude is defined as the absolute value of the difference from the longitude of the earth station to that of the GSO satellite. 28 time. This information is then used by the Antenna Control Unit (ACU), as well as information about the orientation of the antenna platform from an inertial reference unit (IRU) to calculate the earth station antenna pointing angles to the GSO satellite. 1.2 RF closed-loop tracking technique The second technique – RF closed-loop tracking – employs an algorithm that minimizes the pointing error by analysis of a pre-determined signal received from the wanted GSO satellite. Since earth stations in motion can change their position on the earth continuously and GSO FSS spacecraft move about within their orbital station keeping limits, this technique may be more accurate than the open-loop method. The RF closed-loop automatic tracking technique consists in adjusting, at successive steps, the antenna pointing by maximising the strength of a reference signal or a carrier transmitted by the wanted space station. In addition to an accuracy that can be very high (up to 0.05·? 3dB 3), an advantage of this procedure is its autonomy, since the information used for tracking does not rely on the accuracy of the orbital data of the wanted GSO FSS satellite. Furthermore, the precision with which the earth station in motion points at the wanted GSO FSS satellite can be increased and maintained by an inertial platform in which the earth station antenna is installed. Such platforms are equipped with angular rate gyroscopes that can accurately measure the angular speed in pitch, yaw and roll to allow the servo-loops of the ACU to account for the platform’s motion. Figure 2a and Figure 2b provide example block diagrams for earth station antenna systems using open- loop pointing and using RF closed-loop tracking, respectively. The figures illustrate the relationships between the different elements composing the typical antenna system used by an earth station in motion to perform the pointing and tracking of the wanted satellite network. FIGURE 2 a. b. 2 Summary Meeting the limits specified in Annex 1 of this Resolution helps to minimize potential harmful interference from mis-pointing of earth stations in motion. 3 ?3dB is the 3 dB angular width of the earth station in motion antenna and can be approximated by the following: ???? ? 70 ?? where: ? is the transmission wavelength (in m); and D is the earth station antenna diameter (in m). Az/El ResolversAz/El Antenna Motors Antenna mechanical components Antenna RF components ACU Memory Az/El computation tool Wanted satellite orbital parameters Earth station location Other Earth station parameters ANTENNA Az/El Resolvers Az/El Antenna Motors Antenna mechanical components Antenna RF components ACUBeacon/Ref. Signal receiver ANTENNA Adjustments from inertial platform Adjustments from inertial platform 29 Taking into account the pointing accuracy and tracking capabilities of earth stations in motion, it is important to implement measures to ensure that GSO FSS satellite networks located near the wanted GSO FSS satellite do not receive harmful interference from these earth stations. This Annex provides two example measures that can be applied to ensure that earth stations in motion comply with the e.i.r.p. density limits specified above. In the case of the open-loop pointing technique, the maximum mis-pointing of the earth station is determined by design and operational knowledge of wanted GSO satellite station keeping manoeuvers and the maximum transmitted e.i.r.p of the earth station is set accordingly to ensure that the recommended limits are met. In the case of the RF closed-loop tracking technique, the antenna pointing is continuously adjusted by maximising a pre-determined signal received from the wanted GSO FSS satellite. The choice of the signal is up to the satellite operator – some employ a separate carrier, such as a satellite beacon, while others use the same wide band carrier as that used for the forward link. The technical parameters of the signal employed by the RF closed-loop algorithm are important and should be coordinated between GSO FSS satellite network operators. This is to ensure, the pointing error to the wanted geostationary satellite can be determined instantaneously, so that continuous adjustments to the transmitted e.i.r.p. can be applied, as needed. In the case of both open and closed loop systems, the earth station ceases transmission if it loses its wanted GSO FSS satellite acquisition. Reason: Adoption of this proposal would provide the availability of 500 megahertz in both the uplink and downlink to support important and growing global broadband communication requirements for users on ships, airplanes, and land vehicles, on an equal basis in all three Regions and result in rational and efficient use of the radio spectrum resource. This also allows the coordination, notification and recording of these earth stations on an equal basis in all three Regions. 30 WAC/095(17.12.14) Ms. Mindel De La Torre Chief of the International Bureau Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 Dear Ms. De La Torre: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on behalf of the Executive Branch agencies, approves the release of the draft Executive Branch proposal for WRC-15 agenda item 9.1.8. NTIA proposes a modification to Resolution 808. NTIA considered the federal agencies’ input toward the development of U.S. proposals for WRC-15. NTIA forwards this package for your consideration and review by your WRC-15 Advisory Committee. Mr. Charles Glass is the primary contact from my staff. Sincerely, (Original Signed October 8, 2014) Karl B. Nebbia Associate Administrator Office of Spectrum Management 31 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 9: to consider and approve the Report of the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention: 9.1: on the activities of the Radiocommunication Sector since WRC-12 Section 9.1.8 of the CPM Report: Resolution 757 (WRC-12) Regulatory aspects for nanosatellites and picosatellites Issue: This issue under WRC-15 Agenda item 9 invites the ITU-R to examine the procedures for notifying space networks and consider possible modifications to enable the deployment and operation of nanosatellites and picosatellites, taking into account the short development time, short mission time and unique orbital characteristics and instructs the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau to report to WRC-15 on the results of these studies. Background Information: WRC-12 adopted Resolution 757 (WRC-12) which resolves to invite WRC- 15 to consider whether modifications to the regulatory procedures for notifying satellite networks are needed to facilitate the deployment and operation of nanosatellites and picosatellites, and to take appropriate actions. Resolution 757 (WRC-12) further invites ITU-R studies to examine the procedures for notifying space networks and consider modifications to enable the deployment and operation of nanosatellites and picosatellites, taking into account the satellites’ short development time, short mission time, and unique orbital characteristics. Resolution 757 (WRC-12) recognizes that the missions of some nanosatellites and picosatellites are potentially inconsistent with the services in which they operate and/or have limited orbit control capabilities. The Resolution also instructs the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau to report to WRC-15 on the results of these studies. The regulatory procedures for notifying frequency assignments to satellite networks in unplanned bands apply to all satellite networks and systems in order to avoid causing or receiving harmful interference. Consistent with Resolution 757 (WRC-12), and in response to Question ITU-R 254/7, ITU-R Working Party 7B has developed Draft New Reports on technical and operational characteristics of nanosatellites and picosatellites as well as current practices for nanosatellite and picosatellite operators. Resolution 757 (WRC-12) calls for consideration of regulatory aspects for nanosatellites and picosatellites. The Draft New Reports prepared in ITU-R WP 7B have concluded that from the perspective of the Radio Regulations, nanosatellites and picosatellites are not significantly different from other classes of satellites. The main differences, from a regulatory aspect, are the short mission development times and mission operating lifetimes, compared with the time scale for registering satellite networks using ITU procedures, and the lack of knowledge of orbital parameters needed to register a satellite network with ITU until just before or just after launch for many of these missions. Given the conclusions of the Reports, the United States proposes that a future conference agenda item dedicated to nanosatellite and picosatellite issues with filing procedures for registering satellite networks is not needed. Instead, these issues can be addressed under the WRC standing agenda item for issues pertaining to satellite networks pursuant to Resolution 86 (WRC-07) which is Item 8 in Resolution 808 (WRC-12). The United States is of the belief that a topic on regulatory issues faced by nanosatellites and picosatellites with respect to the filing procedures for registering satellite networks with the ITU should be added to the standing agenda item for WRC-19 for issues pertaining to satellite networks. 32 Proposal: MOD USA/9.1.8/1 RESOLUTION 808 (WRC-12) Preliminary agenda for the 2018 World Radiocommunication Conference The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2012), resolves to give the view that the following items should be included in the preliminary agenda for WRC-18: 1 to take appropriate action in respect of those urgent issues that were specifically requested by WRC-15; 2 on the basis of proposals from administrations and the Report of the Conference Preparatory Meeting, and taking account of the results of WRC-15, to consider and take appropriate action in respect of the following items: 2.1 to consider regulatory actions, including spectrum allocations, to support GMDSS modernization and implementation of e-navigation in accordance with Resolution 359 (WRC-12); 2.2 to consider the appropriate regulatory procedures for notifying satellite networks needed to facilitate the deployment and operation of nano- and picosatellites, in accordance with Resolution 757 (WRC-12); 3 to examine the revised ITU-R Recommendations incorporated by reference in the Radio Regulations communicated by the Radiocommunication Assembly, in accordance with Resolution 28 (Rev.WRC-03), and to decide whether or not to update the corresponding references in the Radio Regulations, in accordance with the principles contained in Annex 1 to Resolution 27 (Rev.WRC-12); 4 to consider such consequential changes and amendments to the Radio Regulations as may be necessitated by the decisions of the Conference; 5 in accordance with Resolution 95 (Rev.WRC-07), to review the resolutions and recommendations of previous conferences with a view to their possible revision, replacement or abrogation; 6 to review, and take appropriate action on, the Report from the Radiocommunication Assembly submitted in accordance with Nos. 135 and 136 of the Convention; 7 to identify those items requiring urgent action by the Radiocommunication Study Groups; 8 to consider possible changes, and other options, in response to Resolution 86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002) of the Plenipotentiary Conference, an advance publication, coordination, notification and recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to satellite networks, in accordance with Resolution 86 (Rev.WRC-07) to facilitate the rational, efficient, and economical use of radio frequencies and any associated orbits, including the geostationary-satellite orbit; 9 to consider and take appropriate action on requests from administrations to delete their country footnotes or to have their country name deleted from footnotes, if no longer required, taking into account Resolution 26 (Rev.WRC-07); 33 10 to consider and approve the Report of the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention: 10.1 on the activities of the Radiocommunication Sector since WRC-15; 10.2 on any difficulties or inconsistencies encountered in the application of the Radio Regulations; and 10.3 on action in response to Resolution 80 (Rev.WRC-07); 11 to recommend to the Council items for inclusion in the agenda for the following WRC, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention, invites the Council to consider the views given in this Resolution, instructs the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau to make the necessary arrangements to convene meetings of the Conference Preparatory Meeting and to prepare a report to WRC-18, instructs the Secretary-General to communicate this Resolution to international and regional organizations concerned. Reasons: There is no need for a dedicated agenda item to address filing procedures for nanosatellites and picosatellites that could be addressed under the standing WRC agenda item for issues pertaining to satellite networks. SUP USA/9.1.8/2 RESOLUTION 757 (WRC-12) Regulatory aspects for nanosatellites and picosatellites Reasons: The resolution instructs the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau to report to WRC-15 on the results of studies. Those studies are complete. The regulatory aspects pertaining to filing procedures for nanosatellites and picosatellites can be addressed under the standing WRC agenda item for issues pertaining to satellite networks. Therefore, this resolution is no longer needed. 34 WAC/097(17.12.14) Ms. Mindel De La Torre Chief of the International Bureau Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 Dear Ms. De La Torre: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on behalf of the Executive Branch agencies, approves the release of the draft Executive Branch proposal for WRC-15 which address agenda items 1.9.1 (FSS downlink in the 7/8 GHz range, 7 (Satellite Regulatory Procedures Issue E), and 9.1.2 (Coordination Arc Reduction). NTIA proposes no change to Radio Regulation (RR) Article 5 for agenda item 1.9.1. Under agenda item 7 (Issue E), NTIA also proposes no change to RR Article 11. With regard to agenda item 9.1, Issue 9.1.2, NTIA proposes changes to RR Appendix 5 to address the coordination arc for the 6/4 and 14/10/11/12 GHz frequency bands, while also proposing no change to the RR Appendix 5 coordination arc for the 30/20 GHz frequency bands. In addition, NTIA proposes no change to RR Article 9, Article 11, and Appendix 8 in addressing the current criterion (?T/T > 6%) used in the application of RR No. 9.41. NTIA considered the federal agencies’ input toward the development of U.S. proposals for WRC-15. NTIA forwards this package for your consideration and review by your WRC-15 Advisory Committee. Mr. Charles Glass is the primary contact from my staff. Sincerely, (Original Signed November 21, 2014) Paige R. Atkins Acting Associate Administrator Office of Spectrum Management 35 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 1.9.1: to consider, in accordance with Resolution 758 (WRC-12), possible new allocations to the fixed-satellite service in the frequency bands 7 150-7 250 MHz (space-to-Earth) and 8 400-8 500 MHz (Earth-to-space), subject to appropriate sharing conditions; Bacckground Information: 7-GHz band ITU-R has studied the interference from a potential constellation of 90 fixed satellite service (FSS) geostationary (GSO) satellites into space research service (SRS) missions in the 7150-7250 MHz band. In the 7 150-7 190 MHz deep space SRS band, during the near Earth operations of the SRS mission, there is a region around the GSO orbit that the interference received by SRS spacecraft from the FSS satellites would exceed the ITU protection criterion of the SRS spacecraft. The extent of this region depends on the gain of the SRS spacecraft antenna, the transmitter power density of the FSS satellites, and the location of the FSS GSO satellites. The interference region below the GSO orbit is determined by the low gain antenna and medium gain antenna of the SRS spacecraft, whereas above the GSO orbit it is determined by the high gain antenna of the SRS spacecraft. The studies concluded that sharing the 7 150- 7 190 MHz band between SRS and FSS is not feasible without specific regulatory provisions, mitigation techniques, or operational coordination during near-Earth operations of deep-space SRS missions. Operational coordination would be very difficult and an undue burden for SRS operators, noting that such operational coordination agreement would have to be reached with all FSS operators and the responsible administrations around the world and that the SRS operators may need to execute the terms of the operational coordination agreement with multiple FSS satellites from the relevant administrations during the near-Earth critical events of SRS missions. The operational coordination is further complicated by the fact that the launch of deep-space SRS missions is frequently delayed due to weather or technical reasons. In the 7 190-7 235 MHz near-Earth SRS band, based on the studies, sharing between FSS (space-to- Earth) and SRS (Earth-to-space) could result in excessive interference into the SRS receiver when the SRS satellite orbit is close to the GSO orbit. Since it would not be possible to coordinate the transmissions of a global FSS network to avoid interference into an SRS mission with an orbit of this type, it is concluded that FSS operations would not be compatible with SRS (near-Earth) missions in the 7 190 – 7 235 MHz band. 8 GHz band For the 8 400-8 500 MHz band, a future allocation to the FSS (Earth-to-space) in this band may create a potential for harmful interference to the SRS earth stations operating near FSS earth stations transmitting to FSS satellites. The level of interference depends on the distance between the FSS and SRS earth stations. Thus, to avoid interference, separation distances ranging from 84 km to 675 km between FSS and SRS earth stations are required. These required separation distances are based on the presence of a single FSS terminal operating on a single channel around the deep-space SRS earth station. In case of multiple FSS terminals operating on multiple channels, the required distances may grow accordingly depending on the channel width. The required separation distance may extend into the territory of another administration and, therefore, would require that international coordination be carried out. Conclusion 36 In the 7150-7235 MHz band, the studies have concluded that sharing between FSS (space-to-Earth) and SRS (Earth-to-space) would not be feasible without very difficult operational coordination. This would impose undue burden on SRS and would require that the FSS satellites terminate their operation in the affected frequency channels. In the 8400-8500 MHz band, the results show that SRS earth stations can be protected from FSS earth station transmissions by coordination, but large separation distances are required around SRS earth stations. In view of the foregoing, the United States proposes/supports no changes to the Article 5 Table of Allocations for the 7150-7250 MHz and 8400-8500 MHz bands. Proposal: NOC USA/1.9.1/1 ARTICLE 5 Frequency allocations Section IV – Table of Frequency Allocations (See No. 2.1) Reasons: No change to the Table of Allocations would avoid any impact to existing services and would ensure the continued operation of these services within their existing environment. It would also avoid the required operational coordination between SRS and potentially many FSS operators from different administrations that would need to disrupt the FSS satellite transmissions during the near-Earth operations of deep-space SRS missions. For the band 7?150- 7?190 MHz band, no other practical solution exists. SUP USA/1.9.1/2 RESOLUTION 758 (WRC-12): Allocation to the fixed-satellite service and the maritime-mobile satellite service in the 7/8 GHz range Reasons: Suppression of Resolution 758 (WRC-12) is consequential to the completion of work under WRC-15 agenda item 1.9.1. 37 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 7: to consider possible changes, and other options, in response to Resolution 86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002) of the Plenipotentiary Conference, an advance publication, coordination, notification and recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to satellite networks, in accordance with Resolution 86 (Rev. WRC-07) to facilitate rational efficient, and economical use of radio frequencies and any associated orbits, including the geostationary-satellite orbit Issue E: Failure of a satellite during the ninety-day bringing into use period Background Information: WRC-12 introduced the additional provisions No. 11.44.2 and No. 11.44B in the Radio Regulations (RR) in order to better define the bringing into use of a frequency assignment to a space station in the geostationary satellite orbit. According to RR No. 11.44B, "A frequency assignment to a space station in the geostationary-satellite orbit shall be considered as having been brought into use when a space station in the geostationary-satellite orbit with the capability of transmitting or receiving that frequency assignment has been deployed and maintained at the notified orbital position for a continuous period of ninety days …". However, the current provisions regarding the bringing into use do not address a possible scenario of a satellite failure during the above-mentioned period of ninety days. WRC-12 discussed the issue of a satellite failure, especially that of a newly launched satellite, during the ninety-day bringing into use period that renders the satellite technically incapable of operating in a given frequency band. WRC-12 invited the ITU-R to study the issue, as a matter of urgency, to determine what regulatory changes, if any, should be made to the RR under WRC-15 agenda item 7 to address this issue. Furthermore, WRC-12 decided that in case of such failure, the notifying administration may submit the case to the Radio Regulations Board (RRB) for its consideration and decision on a case-by-case basis. Method A in the Draft Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM) text proposes to allow a frequency assignment to be considered as having been brought into use in accordance with RR No. 11.44B, in cases for which a frequency assignment could not be brought into use due to a failure of a newly launched satellite during the ninety-day bringing into use period. However, after consideration of the discussions within the ITU-R of this issue, it would be better to continue to apply the current procedures in the Radio Regulations since the failure of any satellite during a 90-day BIU or bringing back into use (BBIU) period is considered to be extremely rare. In the case of a newly-launched or on-orbit satellite failure during the 90-day BIU or BBIU period, Administrations already have the possibility of petitioning the RRB for relief under the current procedures. If not successful at the RRB, then Administrations may petition a WRC. There is no regulatory difference between a newly launched satellite or an on-orbit satellite, and adding provisions giving special treatment to a newly launched satellite could penalize operators conducting legitimate satellite fleet movements. Additionally, Method A in the draft CPM text could encourage abuse of the newly proposed BIU provisions by unintentionally sanctioning the movement of aging and older satellites from one orbital location to another for the purpose of bringing into use orbital slots without worry about potential satellite failure. Since there have not been any demonstrable events of a satellite failure during the BIU period, it is premature and unnecessary to modify the current regulatory procedures. Therefore, the United States proposes No Change to Article 11 of the Radio Regulations for this Issue under WRC-15 agenda item 7. Proposal: 38 NOC USA/AI 7/1 ARTICLE 11 Notification and recording of frequency assignments1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (WRC-07) Reason: There have not been any demonstrable events of a satellite failure during the BIU period so it is premature and unnecessary to modify the current regulatory procedures. 39 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 9: to consider and approve the Report of the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention: Agenda Item 9.1: on the activities of the Radiocommunication Sector since WRC-12; Issue 9.1.2: Studies on possible reduction of the coordination arc and technical criteria used in application of No. 9.41 in respect of coordination under No. 9.7 (Resolution 756 (WRC-12)) Background Information: The ITU-R has sought improved ways to accommodate new satellite networks and facilitate more efficient use of the spectrum resources while at the same time ensuring adequate protection of networks operating in accordance with the Radio Regulations. WRC-12 agreed to reduce the coordination arc in the 6/4, 14/10/11/12 and 21.4-22 GHz frequency bands, but did not come to a decision regarding the 30/20 GHz frequency bands. To continue studies, WRC-12 adopted Resolution 756 (WRC-12), which resolves to invite ITU-R: 1 to carry out studies to examine the effectiveness and appropriateness of the current criterion (?T/T > 6%) used in the application of No. 9.41 and consider any other possible alternatives (including the alternatives outlined in Annexes 1 and 2 to this Resolution), as appropriate, for the bands referred to in recognizing e); 2 to study whether additional reductions in the coordination arcs in RR Appendix 5 (Rev.WRC-12) are appropriate for the 6/4 GHz and 14/10/11/12 GHz frequency bands, and whether it is appropriate to reduce the coordination arc in the 30/20 GHz band, The ITU-R has conducted studies related to resolves 1 and 2 for the 6/4, 14/10/11/12, 21.4-22, and 30/20 GHz frequency bands. Resolves 1 It is recognized that resolves 1 considers the effects of changing both the criterion itself (currently ?T/T) and the equivalent criterion threshold (currently 6%). In the draft Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM) text for this issue, Options 1A and 1B propose changes to both the criterion and the equivalent criterion threshold. Option 1C proposes changing the criterion, but not the equivalent criterion threshold. Option 1D proposes no change to either to the criterion or the criterion threshold. The United States supports Option 1D. With regard to Options 1A and 1B: - There is general concern that changing two items simultaneously may result in unforeseen consequences / difficulties in implementation. - With regard to Options 1A and 1B, the ?T/T value of 6 % is justified based on the fact that satellite links have typical interference margins of 1dB. This is particularly relevant for coordination of networks with larger orbital separations than the coordination arc value. The figures of ?T/T for networks within the coordination arc are not relevant as ?T/T is a parameter used to launch the coordination process but not for conducting detailed coordination between networks. 40 With regard to Options 1A, 1B, and 1C: - It is noted that the ITU-R WP 4A Chairman’s Report (4A/591) states, “this draft CPM text calls for, in part, converting the existing Rule of Procedure on RR No. 11.32A into regulatory text, and this could prove to be a very challenging task.” - Studies submitted to the ITU have shown that changing the criterion from ?T/T to C/I (while not changing the equivalent criterion threshold) does not significantly reduce the number of Affected Administrations that must be dealt with in order to complete coordination of a satellite network. The United States’ experience is that the number of Affected Administrations is a more important qualitative determinant of how difficult it will be to complete coordination, more so than the number of networks. - It is noted the Radiocommunication Bureau (BR) Director’s contribution (4A/579) supports ?T/T as the criterion, stating, The Bureau concludes that the C/I criterion alone for identifying potentially affected administrations / networks under RR Nos. 9.7 and 9.41 would not significantly reduce coordination requirement. Results of simulation demonstrate that the orbital separation required establishing coordination requirement using C/I criterion would not significantly improve the situation in the absence of any other mechanism. The Bureau considers that simple transition to C/I would not address the problem of “effectiveness and appropriateness” of the existing and proposed criteria while increasing the workload of the Bureau to implement the changes and the process. Resolves 2 In the draft CPM text for this issue, Option 2A proposes changes to the coordination arc for the 6/4 and 14/10/11/12 GHz frequency bands. Option 2B proposes changes to the coordination arc for the 6/4, 14/10/11/12 and 30/20 GHz frequency bands. Option 2C proposes no changes. The United States supports Option 2A, noting that the content of Option 2A (i.e., reducing the 6/4 GHz coordination arc to 6° and reducing the 14/10/11/12 GHz coordination arc to 5°) was originally studied and proposed during the WRC-12 cycle but was not implemented. With regard to Option 2B, an ITU-R study evaluated the density of GSO FSS space stations using the 29.5-30.0 GHz/19.7-20.2 GHz bands that have actually been brought into use (active) or placed into construction (planned) according to publicly available publications. The analysis indicated that the current deployment of Ka-band networks is not uniformly dense throughout the GSO. While the average orbital separation between stations was on the order of 5 degrees, its standard deviation was greater than 5 degrees and the maximum separation was at least 27 degrees when taken both active and planned networks into account. This reveals that it is not yet appropriate for the protection of incumbent Ka-band networks to reduce the coordination arc in the 29.5-30.0 GHz / 19.7-20.2 GHz bands from its current value as contained in Appendix 5 of the Radio Regulations. With regard to Option 2C, the United States notes that changes to the coordination arc were studied prior to WRC-12 and that some of the changes proposed in Options 2A and 2B (i.e., reducing the 6/4 GHz coordination arc to 6° and reducing the 14/10/11/12 GHz coordination arc to 5°) were originally proposed during the WRC-12 cycle. Summary Based on studies conducted within the ITU-R related to resolves 1 and 2 for the 6/4, 14/10/11/12 and 30/20 GHz frequency bands, the United States supports draft CPM text Options 1D and 2A, as shown in the summary chart below. 41 Res 756 (WRC-12) Resolves 1 Resolves 2 Criterion Criterion Threshold Coord Arc Band 6/4 NOC (?T/T) NOC (6%) 8° ? 6° 14/10/11/12 NOC (?T/T) NOC (6%) 7° ? 5° 30/20 NOC (?T/T) NOC (6%) NOC (8°) The No Change aspects of the proposal are reflected in Articles 9 and 11 and Appendices 5 and 8. The changes made by this proposal are in Appendix 5. Proposals: NOC USA/9.1.2/1 ARTICLE 9 Procedure for effecting coordination with or obtaining agreement of other administrations1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8bis (WRC-12) Reasons: No changes to the provisions of RR Articles 9 in respect of resolves 1. NOC USA/9.1.2/2 ARTICLE 11 Notification and recording of frequency assignments1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7bis (WRC-12) Reasons: No changes to the provisions of RR 11 in respect of resolves 1. 42 MOD USA/9.1.2/3 APPENDIX 5 (REV.WRC-12) Identification of administrations with which coordination is to be effected or agreement sought under the provisions of Article 9 TABLE 5-1 (REV.WRC-1215) Technical conditions for coordination (see Article 9) Reference of Article 9 Case Frequency bands (and Region) of the service for which coordination is sought Threshold/condition Calculation method Remarks No. 9.7 GSO/GSO A station in a satellite network using the geostationary-satellite orbit (GSO), in any space radiocommunication service, in a frequency band and in a Region where this service is not subject to a Plan, in respect of any other satellite network using that orbit, in any space radiocommunication service in a frequency band and in a Region where this service is not subject to a Plan, with the exception of the coordination between earth stations operating in the opposite direction of transmission 1) 3 400-4 200 MHz 5 725-5 850 MHz (Region 1) and 5 850-6 725 MHz 7 025-7 075 MHz i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) any network in the fixed-satellite service (FSS) and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?86° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS With respect to the space services listed in the threshold/condition column in the bands in 1), 2), 3), 4), 5), 6), 7) and 8), an administration may request, pursuant to No. 9.41, to be included in requests for coordination, indicating the networks for which the value of ?T/T calculated by the method in § 2.2.1.2 and 3.2 of Appendix 8 exceeds 6%. When the Bureau, on request by an affected administration, studies this information pursuant to No. 9.42, the calculation method given in § 2.2.1.2 and 3.2 of Appendix 8 shall be used 2) 10.95-11.2 GHz 11.45-11.7 GHz 11.7-12.2 GHz (Region 2) 12.2-12.5 GHz (Region 3) 12.5-12.75 GHz (Regions 1 and 3) 12.7-12.75 GHz (Region 2) and 13.75-14.5 GHz i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) any network in the FSS or broadcasting- satellite service (BSS), not subject to a Plan, and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?75° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS or BSS, not subject to a Plan Reason: No changes with respect to resolves 1 (in the Remarks column); change the coordination arc in 6/4, 14/10/11/12 GHz frequency bands (resolves 2) 43 NOC USA/9.1.2/4 APPENDIX 5 (REV.WRC-12) Identification of administrations with which coordination is to be effected or agreement sought under the provisions of Article 9 TABLE 5-1 (continued) (REV.WRC-12) Reference of Article 9 Case Frequency bands (and Region) of the service for which coordination is sought Threshold/condition Calculation method Remarks No. 9.7 GSO/GSO (cont.) 3) 17.7-20.2 GHz, (Regions 2 and 3), 17.3-20.2 GHz (Region 1) and 27.5-30 GHz i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) any network in the FSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS 4) 17.3-17.7 GHz (Regions 1 and 2) i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) a) any network in the FSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the BSS, or b) any network in the BSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS 44 TABLE 5-1 (continued) (REV.WRC-12) Reference of Article 9 Case Frequency bands (and Region) of the service for which coordination is sought Threshold/condition Calculation method Remarks No. 9.7 GSO/GSO (cont.) 5) 17.7-17.8 GHz i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) a) any network in the FSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the BSS, or b) any network in the BSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS NOTE – No. 5.517 applies in Region 2. 6) 18.0-18.3 GHz (Region 2) 18.1-18.4 GHz (Regions 1 and 3) i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) any network in the FSS or meteorological-satellite service and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS or the meteorological-satellite service TABLE 5-1 (continued) (REV.WRC-12) Reference of Case Frequency bands (and Region) of the service Threshold/condition Calculation method Remarks 45 Article 9 for which coordination is sought No. 9.7 GSO/GSO (cont.) 6bis) 21.4-22 GHz (Regions 1 and 3) 7) Bands above 17.3 GHz, except those defined in § 3) and 6) i) Bandwidth overlap; and ii) any network in the BSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ±12° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the BSS (see also Resolutions 554 (WRC-12) and 553 (WRC-12)). i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) any network in the FSS and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?8° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS (see also Resolution 901 (Rev.WRC-07)) No. 9.41 does not apply. 8) Bands above 17.3 GHz except those defined in § 4), 5) and 6bis) i) Bandwidth overlap, and ii) any network in the FSS or BSS, not subject to a Plan, and any associated space operation functions (see No. 1.23) with a space station within an orbital arc of ?16° of the nominal orbital position of a proposed network in the FSS or BSS, not subject to a Plan, except in the case of a network in the FSS with respect to a network in the FSS (see also Resolution 901 (Rev.WRC-07)) Reason: No changes with respect to resolves 1 (in the Remarks column). No change in 30/20 GHz frequency band (resolves 2). 46 NOC USA/9.1.2/5 APPENDIX 8 (Rev.WRC-03) Method of calculation for determining if coordination is required between geostationary-satellite networks sharing the same frequency bands Reason: No changes to RR Appendix 8 with respect to resolves 1. ___________________ 47 WAC/098(17.12.14) Ms. Mindel De La Torre Chief of the International Bureau Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 Dear Ms. De La Torre: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on behalf of the Executive Branch agencies, approves the release of the draft Executive Branch proposal for WRC-15 which addresses agenda item 10 (Future Conference Agenda Item). NTIA proposes a modification to Resolution 808 (WRC-12). This future conference agenda item proposes to correct an existing issue in the current Radio Regulations. Other approaches are also being pursued to effect the necessary changes in the Radio Regulations, which may obviate the need for a future conference agenda proposal. NTIA considered the federal agencies’ input toward the development of U.S. proposals for WRC-15. NTIA forwards this package for your consideration and review by your WRC-15 Advisory Committee. Mr. Charles Glass is the primary contact from my staff. Sincerely, (Original Signed November 24, 2014) Paige R. Atkins Acting Associate Administrator Office of Spectrum Management 48 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE Agenda Item 10: to 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, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention Background Information: In the 2 200-2 290 MHz band, administrations had previously agreed to use 1050 km as the predetermined coordination distance between space research earth stations and mobile (aircraft) stations based on the distances specified in Table III, Appendix S7 of the Radio Regulations (RR) (1998), which gave the maximum coordination distance for propagation mode (1), determined by requiring that interference from all sources (line-of-sight and non-line-of-sight) would not exceed the protection criterion of the space research earth stations. The ITU-R determined that this coordination distance was adequate for protecting the space research service earth stations from transmissions of aircrafts flying over the ocean surface, where signals would propagate through ducting mechanism and would potentially create interference at the space research stations. WRC-07 added a new row to Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of the RR that specified a 500-km predetermined coordination distance between mobile (aircraft) stations and ground-based stations in the bands in which the frequency sharing situation is not covered in the other rows. Since the current Table 10 does not include a row that specifies the required coordination distance between space research earth stations and mobile (aircraft) stations, the administrations are likely to use 500 km as the coordination distance between these stations. This distance may not be sufficient to protect the space research earth stations. This future conference agenda item proposes to study this case and potentially modify Table 10 to explicitly include an appropriate coordination distance between the stations of the space research service and mobile (aircraft) stations. Proposal: MOD USA/10/1 RESOLUTION 808 (Rev. WRC-1215) Preliminary aAgenda for the 2018 World Radiocommunication Conference The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 20122015), Reasons: To modify the agenda for WRC-18 to add a new item. ADD USA/10/2 2.XX to review Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 for the suitability of 500-km predetermined coordination distance between space research service earth stations and mobile (aircraft) stations in the 2 200 - 2 290 MHz band, with a view of amending it to ensure protection of the space research service, in accordance with Resolution [USA-YYY] (WRC-15). 49 Reasons: To conduct studies to examine if 500-km predetermined coordination distance given in Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of the RR is adequate to protect the space research service earth stations from the emission of mobile (aircraft) stations in the 2 200 - 2 290 MHz band with a view of possible modification of that Table. ADD USA/10/3 RESOLUTION USA-YYY (WRC-15) Protection of space research service earth stations from mobile (aircraft) stations in the 2 200 - 2 290 MHz band The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2015), considering a) that the band 2 200 - 2 290 MHz is allocated to the space operation (s-E)(s-s), Earth exploration-satellite (s-E)(s-s), fixed, mobile, and space research (s-s) services on a primary basis; b) that Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of the RR gives predetermined coordination distances between earth stations and terrestrial stations in sharing situations involving services allocated with equal rights; c) that in the band 2 200 - 2 290 MHz, for the frequency sharing between space research service and mobile (aircraft) service, Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of RR does not specify explicitly the required coordination distance; d) that the last row of Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of RR gives a coordination distance of 500 km between mobile (aircraft) stations and ground-based stations in the bands in which the frequency sharing situation is not covered in the other rows; recognizing a) that the predetermined coordination distance of 500 km may not be enough to meet the protection criterion of space research service earth stations; b) that in the past administrations have used a coordination distance of 1 050 km to meet the protection criterion of space research service earth stations; resolves to invite ITU-R 1 to conduct sharing studies between space research service (s-E) and mobile (aircraft) service in the band 2 200 - 2 290 MHz; 2 to complete the studies, taking into account the present use of the allocated band, with a view of presenting, at the appropriate time, the technical basis for the work of WRC-18; 3 to determine the appropriate coordination distance so that the emissions from transmissions of the mobile (aircraft) stations meet the protection criterion of space research service earth stations in the 2200-2290 MHz band; resolves to invite WRC-18 to consider modifications to Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of RR, taking into account the results of ITU-R studies, including addition of a new row specifying the appropriate coordination distance between space research earth stations and mobile (aircraft) station, without modifying the other rows; 50 invites administrations to participate actively in the studies by submitting contributions to ITU-R; instructs the Secretary-General to bring this resolution to the attention of the Space Frequency Coordination Group (SFCG) and other international and regional organizations concerned. Reasons: A resolution will support the ITU-R studies needed under the relevant WRC-18 agenda item. 51 ATTACHMENT PROPOSAL FOR AGENDA ITEM STUDYING PROTECTION OF SPACE RESEARCH EARTH STATIONS FROM MOBILE (AIRCRAFT) STATIONS IN THE 2 200 - 2 290 MHZ BAND Subject: Proposed future WRC agenda item for WRC-2018 studying the protection of space research earth stations from mobile (aircraft) stations in the 2 200 - 2 290 MHz band. Origin: United States of America Proposal: to review Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 with a view to modify it by specifying a more appropriate coordination distance to protect the space research earth stations from mobile (aircraft) stations in the 2200 - 2290 MHz band, in accordance with Resolution [USA-YYY] (WRC-15). Background/reason: In the 2 200-2 290 MHz band, administrations had previously agreed to use 1050 km as the predetermined coordination distance between space research earth stations and mobile (aircraft) stations based on the distances specified in Table III, Appendix S7 of the RR (1998), which gave the maximum coordination distance for propagation mode (1), determined by requiring that interference from all sources (line-of-sight and non-line-of-sight) would not exceed the protection criterion of the space research earth stations. The ITU-R determined that this coordination distance was adequate for protecting the space research service earth stations from transmissions of aircrafts flying over the ocean surface, where signals would propagate through ducting mechanism and would potentially create interference at the space research stations. WRC-07 added a new row to Table 10, Annex 7, Appendix 7 of the RR that specifies a 500-km predetermined coordination distance between mobile (aircraft) stations and ground-based stations in the bands in which the frequency sharing situation is not covered in the other rows. Since the current Table 10 does not include a row that specifies the required coordination distance between space research earth stations and mobile (aircraft) stations, the administrations are likely to use 500 km as the coordination distance between these stations. This distance may not be sufficient to protect the space research earth stations. It is therefore necessary to study this case and to possibly modify Table 10 to explicitly include appropriate coordination distance between the stations of space research service and mobile (aircraft) stations. 52 Radiocommunication services concerned: mobile (aircraft), space research (s-E) Indication of possible difficulties: none foreseen Previous/ongoing studies on the issue: TBD ITU-R Study Groups concerned: SG7 ITU resource implications, including financial implications (refer to CV126): minimal Common regional proposal: No Multi-country proposal: No Number of countries: Remarks Studies to be carried out by: WP 7B with the participation of: WPs 5B