# UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

## DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

Agenda Item 1.10: to review the regulatory procedures and associated
technical criteria of Appendix 30B without any action on the allotments,
the existing systems or the assignments in the List of Appendix 30B;

**Background Information:** As stated in § 1.1 of Appendix 30B the
objective of the Plan "is to guarantee in practice, for all countries,
equitable access to the geostationary-satellite orbit in the frequency
bands of the fixed-satellite service (FSS) covered by this Appendix".
While the plan has been in force for some 18 years, little use has been
made of the precious spectrum (1600 MHz) regulated by this appendix,
particularly as compared to the other bands allocated globally to the
FSS. Moreover, numerous administrations have complained that the
technical parameters and procedures are outdated, difficult to apply,
and exceedingly time-consuming. For these reasons, administrations
agreed to include consideration of this matter on the agenda for WRC-07.
Several ITU-R preparatory meetings (including WP-4A and the Special
Committee) as well as regional bodies have been studying the related
issues for several years.

Taking the foregoing into consideration, the United States considers
that the conditions for the use the Appendix 30B frequencies can be
improved and optimized for ITU Member States that want to implement
their allotments as well as for Administrations that want to use
capacity (orbit/spectrum resources) beyond that in the Plan. While some
studies are continuing, and we expect to continue to participate in the
collaborative activities in the regional bodies, we offer a number of
proposals below to facilitate fulfilment of the aspirations of *all*
administrations. We may expect to augment these proposals when further
information becomes available in the preparatory activities leading to
the WRC.

Some key points of these proposals are discussed in greater detail,
below.

[Processing of Submissions]{.underline}

One of the great concerns expressed by administrations is the lengthy
process involved in the conversion of allotments into assignments. While
the current *sequential* processing of submissions does allow for an
accurate consideration of the effect of each submission, the time taken
for this process is prohibitively long. It has been estimated that under
the current sequential approach the BR is able to process annually about
8 Appendix 30B submissions (with the possibility of simultaneous
submissions from the same administration this number can be slightly
increased). On the other hand, on 24 April 2006 there were 98 of those
submissions in the BR queue. This corresponds to a backlog of at least 5
years which is very large, especially when compared to the 8-year limit
for bringing Appendix 30B frequency assignments into use. Preparatory
discussions have highlighted the merits and disadvantages resulting of
the two approaches: 1) Continuation of Sequential Processing and 2)
Non-Sequential Processing of assignment applications.

With sequential processing, the reference situation is updated only
after the new submission enters the List and no other submission will be
examined until the fate of each one of the previous submissions has been
decided, either by including the associated network in the List or by
removing it from the queue. As a result, no submission will be examined
based on a certain reference situation and later enter the List when
this reference situation has changed.

A non-sequential processing of submissions[^1] offers the possibility of
a greatly simplified and expedited conversion of allotments into
assignments (with or without modifications) and will also reduce the
time for processing other submissions. It does not prevent the
occurrence of a situation in which a submission is examined under a
certain reference situation and enters the List after satisfying the
requirements resulting from this examination when the reference
situation has already changed. In our view the marginal inaccuracy that
may result from this kind of processing will be far outweighed by the
benefits of a non-sequential processing.

It is also important to note that non-sequential processing means that a
proposed assignment B may enter the List before an assignment A received
by the BR at an earlier date. However, if the later assignment B affects
A (i.e. does not meet the Appendix 30B protection criteria), definitive
registration of B cannot occur until A gives its agreement or B changes
its parameters so that protection of A is ensured in accordance with the
Appendix 30B criteria.

If we consider a submission under Article 6 that is not the conversion
of an allotment into an assignment without any change to the
characteristics of the allotment, it becomes clear that a non‑sequential
processing is more flexible and can potentially lead to a more efficient
use of orbit/spectrum resources. Under sequential processing an Article
6 submission (different from conversion of an allotment without any
change) that enters the List and expires after the 8-year regulatory
period without being brought into use can prevent many other submissions
from staying in the queue. Under non-sequential processing, Article 6
submissions could stay in the queue and eventually enter the List
through a coordination agreement or after the expiration of the
assignments that were blocking their access. As a consequence of
proposing a non-sequential processing of submissions the concept of
pre-determined arc (PDA) currently included in the Appendix 30B
procedures has to be eliminated since it only fits in a sequential
processing approach. It may be argued that elimination of the PDA
concept removes some flexibility in the sense that an Article 6
submission cannot change orbital locations associated with allotments or
assignments in the queue. However, this feature has also some severe
drawbacks, such as undesirable and/or unexpected changes of orbital
locations which also generate uncertainty for those administrations that
have proposed assignments in the queue or are planning to propose the
conversion of an allotment. This uncertainty is even more damaging
because of the large backlog of submissions discussed above. Such large
backlog gives administrations very little time to adapt to an ever
changing environment.

For the reasons discussed above, a new text for Article 6 similar to
that appearing in Annex 2 of the output of the WP-SC December 2005
meeting is proposed here.

[Existing Systems]{.underline}

Existing systems are associated with FSS satellite networks that had
already been submitted to the ITU BR when the Plan was developed. By
now, the frequency assignments in these networks have either been
brought into use and become assignments in the List or have been
cancelled. Therefore there seems to be a consensus that the so called
Part B of the Plan is not required any more.

However, current § 9.2 states that all the frequency assignments
associated with existing systems would have to cease operation 20 years
after the entry into force of the Plan, i.e. 16 March 2010. In this
respect, the output of the SC-WP December 2005 meeting recognizes that
"it would be neither appropriate nor practical to abruptly discontinue
on this date the operation of all "existing systems" in the List, in
particular those in which either the uplink or downlink stands from an
additional use or other networks in unplanned bands".

The proposal presented below treats existing systems as suggested in
Annex 2 of the output of the SC-WP December meeting. By not
distinguishing assignments in the List that are associated with existing
systems from those that stem from allotments or from subregional
systems, the concept of existing systems can be eliminated and
continuity of their operation can be ensured.

[Subregional Systems and Additional Uses]{.underline}

Subregional systems were introduced in the procedures of Appendix 30B in
order to allow neighboring countries to combine their allotments into a
system with regional coverage. For this reason, the submission of
subregional systems in the current regulations contemplates the
possibility of suspending allotments of the Member States participating
in the system. However, up to now the submissions for subregional
systems have never included requests for suspension or partial
suspension of allotments. Therefore, subregional systems have actually
been implemented as additional uses in the sense that they will coexist
with allotments and assignments in the same way additional uses do.

Given all the above, there is no reason for the distinction between
these two types of use of Appendix 30B frequencies and in the proposals
below these two categories are merged into one category, referred to as
"additional uses".

Currently, the main distinctions between the two categories are: (i)
subregional systems can explore the PDA concept and additional uses
cannot ; (ii) frequency assignments of subregional systems have an
unlimited period of validity while those of additional uses are limited
to 15-year period of validity. In the proposals below the distinction
with respect to the application of the PDA is not relevant since this
concept is being eliminated while the period of validity of frequency
assignments of the new category of additional uses would not be limited.

[Multinational Service Areas]{.underline}

Currently, § 2.6 of Appendix 30B limits the service area associated with
additional uses to the national territory of the administration
submitting the additional use "unless otherwise agreed". The Rule of
Procedure of § 2.6 states that additional uses may have multinational
service areas if agreement from other administrations included in the
service area are obtained. It is being proposed here that assignments
resulting from modifications of allotments or submitted as additional
uses can have multinational service areas. It is noted that if an
administration A has its territory included in the service area of an
additional use proposed by another administration:

(i) Any allotments or assignments of Administration A are protected
    because a submission requesting the use of Appendix 30B frequencies
    for an additional use has to be compatible with allotments,
    assignments in the List and assignments for which complete
    information has been received by the BR;

(ii) Terrestrial systems in the territory of administration A are
     protected by the power-flux density limits of Article 21 of the
     Radio Regulations;

(iii) Any emission from the territory of administration A intended for
      reception at the space station under consideration has to be
      authorized by this administration and the provision of service
      through the deployment of receive earth stations in the territory
      of administration A can only occur with its approval.

Proposal

APPENDIX **30B** (Rev. WRC-2000)[^2]

Provisions and associated Plan for the fixed-satellite service\
in the frequency bands 4 500-4 800 MHz, 6 725-7 025 MHz,\
10.70-10.95 GHz, 11.20-11.45 GHz and 12.75-13.25 GHz

ARTICLE 1

Objective of the provisions and associated Plan

USA/ /01 NOC

1.1 The objective of the procedures prescribed in this Appendix is to
guarantee in practice, for all countries, equitable access to the
geostationary-satellite orbit in the frequency bands of the
fixed-satellite service covered by this Appendix.

1.2 The procedures prescribed in this Appendix shall in no way prevent
the implementa­tion of assignments in conformity with Part A of the Plan.

ARTICLE 2

Definitions

2.1 *Conference:* World Administrative Radio Conference on the Use of
the Geostationary-Satellite Orbit and the Planning of Space Services
Utilizing It, First Session, Geneva, 1985; Second Session, Geneva, 1988.

**Reasons:** The United States supports the objectives stated in Article
1 and the definition in 2.1.

USA/ /02 MOD

2.2 *Plan:* The Plan for the fixed-satellite service in the frequency
bands contained in this Appendix ~~consisting of two parts:~~

~~*a)* Part A, containing the national allotments;~~

~~*b)* Part B, containing the networks of existing systems.~~

**Reasons:** Existing systems are associated with FSS satellite networks
that had already been submitted to the ITU BR when the Plan was
developed. By now, the frequency assignments in these networks have
either been brought into use and become assignments in the List or have
been cancelled. Therefore there is no need for keeping the concept of
Part B of the Plan.

USA/ /03 MOD

2.3 *Allotment:* For the purpose of this Appendix, an allotment
comprises:

-- a nominal orbital position;

-- a bandwidth of 800 MHz (up-link and down-link) in the frequency bands
listed in Article 3 of this Appendix;

-- a service area for national coverage.

~~-- generalized parameters as defined in Annex 1 to this Appendix;~~

~~-- a predetermined arc (PDA).~~

**Reasons:** The generalized parameters are not considered to be
necessary since examination of the compatibility of any proposed
assignment with allotments in the Plan or assignments in the List can be
conducted without calculating such parameters. As discussed and
justified in connection with Article 6 below, a non-sequential
processing of submissions is being proposed here and such approach is
not compatible with retention of the PDA concept.

USA/ /04 SUP

~~2.4 *Existing systems:* Those satellite systems, in the frequency
bands covered by this Appendix:~~

~~*a)* which are recorded in the Master International Frequency Register
(MIFR); *or*~~

~~*b)* for which the coordination procedure has been initiated; *or*~~

~~*c)* for which the information relating to advance publication was
received by the Radiocom­munication Bureau before 8 August 1985,~~

~~and which in all cases are listed in Part B of the Plan.~~

**Reasons:** As noted in connection with **USA/ /02 MOD**, existing
systems are either assignments in the List or have been cancelled. As
discussed with respect to **§ 9.2** below, assignments in the List that
are associated with existing systems should not be distinguished from
any other assignments in the List and, as a consequence, there is no
need to define existing systems.

USA/ /05 SUP

~~2.5 *Subregional systems:* For the purpose of the application of the
provisions of this Appendix, a subregional system is a satellite system
created by agreement among neighbouring countries Member States of the
ITU or their authorized telecommunications operating agencies and
intended to provide domestic or subregional services within the
geographical areas of the countries concerned.~~

USA/ /06 MOD

2.6 *Additional use:* For the application of the provisions of this
Appendix, additional uses shall ~~be those of an administration:~~[be
those associated with submissions for use of Appendix 30B frequencies
that do not involve the conversion of an allotment into an assignment
with or without modifications to the characteristics of the allotment.
Therefore, additional uses correspond to the use of capacity
(orbit/spectrum resources) beyond that in the Plan. Submissions for
additional uses may also be made by a number of administrations with one
among them designated as the notifying administration.]{.underline}

~~*a)* which has a requirement whose characteristics differ from those
used in the preparation of Part A of the Plan; any such requirement
shall be limited to the national coverage, taking into account technical
constraints, of the administration concerned, unless otherwise agreed.
Additionally, such requirement can be met only if the allotment of the
interested administra­tion, or part of this allotment, has been converted
into an assignment, or if the requirement cannot be met by the
conversion of the allotment into an assignment;~~

~~*b)* which requires the use of all or part of its national allotment
that has been suspended in accordance with § 6.54 of Article 6;~~

~~*c)* which intends to participate in a subregional system using the
procedures of Section III of Article 6, instead of using the procedures
of Section II thereof.~~

**Reasons:** The concepts of subregional systems and additional uses
have been introduced in the Appendix 30B Plan with different
motivations. In particular, subregional systems intended to allow
neighboring countries to combine their allotments into a system with
regional coverage. For that reason, the possibility of suspending
allotments was associated with subregional systems. However, up to now
the submissions for subregional systems have never included requests for
suspension or partial suspension of allotments and such submissions have
been implemented in a way that does not affect allotments in the Plan or
assignments in the List (see **§ 6.39)**. Therefore, subregional systems
have actually been implemented as "additional uses" in the sense that
they will coexist with allotments and assignments as additional uses do.
In view of the above, it is proposed to eliminate the category of
subregional systems and to have a simplified definition for 'additional
uses', capable of accommodating requirements being currently met by the
two existing categories.

USA/ /07 NOC

ARTICLE 3

Frequency bands

ARTICLE 4

Execution of the provisions and associated Plan

**Reasons:** Article 3 does not need to be changed because the frequency
bands subject to Appendix 30B will remain the same. Article 4 should be
retained as it is because it conveys the general idea of operation with
the characteristics of the Plan (4.1) and at the same time refers to the
possible exceptions contemplated in Appendix 30B itself or elsewhere in
the Radio Regulations.

ARTICLE 5     (WRC-03)

The Plan and the associated List of assignments

**USA/ /08 MOD**

~~5.1 The Plan consists of:~~

~~*a)* Part A containing the allotments;~~

~~*b)* Part B containing the networks of existing systems.~~

**Reasons:** As discussed above there is no need to retain the concepts
of Part A and Part B because all frequency assignments associated with
existing systems have either been included in the List as assignments or
have been cancelled.

USA/ /09 MOD

~~5.2~~[5.1]{.underline} A List of assignments ~~as described in
§ 5.5~~will be associated with the [Plan and will contain:]{.underline}

[*a)* assignments resulting from the conversion of allotments (with or
without modifications to the characteristics of the allotments in the
Plan);]{.underline}

[*b)* assignments resulting from submissions for additional
uses..]{.underline}

**Reasons:** This is a consequence of the elimination of Part B and of
the merger of the categories "subregional systems" and "additional
uses". In view of that, instead of describing the assignments in a
separate provision (**§ 5.5** in the current Appendix 30B), the
description was also included in **§ 5.2**.

USA/ /10 MOD

~~5.3 The predetermined arc (PDA) is a segment of the
geostationary-satellite orbit (GSO) about a nominal orbital position
intended to provide flexibility in the Plan.~~

~~*a)* The size of the PDA depends on the stage of development of the
satellite system:~~

~~-- for a system in the *pre‑design stage*, the PDA is the fixed
portion of the GSO defined by the intersection between a segment of ±10°
about the nominal orbital position established at the Conference and the
corresponding service arc. After twenty years from the date of entry
into force of this Appendix, the PDA for a system in the pre-design
stage is the fixed portion of the GSO defined by the intersection
between a segment of ±20° about the nominal orbital position established
at the Conference and the corresponding service arc, provided that the
minimum elevation angle after the application of this procedure is not
less than 20° or than the value indicated for each climatic zone in
Annex 1 to this Appendix, whichever is larger, for all allotments
affected;~~

~~-- for a system in the *design stage*, the PDA is the fixed portion of
the GSO defined by the intersection between a segment of ±5° about the
nominal orbital position as may be modified by the application of this
Appendix and the PDA defined for the pre-design stage;~~

~~-- for a system in the *operational stage*, the PDA will be considered
as being zero.~~

~~*b)* The stage of development to be associated with allotments in Part
A and assignments in the List derived from allotments in Part A, with
existing systems in Part B, with subregional systems or additional uses,
is given in Table 1.~~

~~*c)* An administration will not be considered to be affected if the
nominal orbital position associated with its allotment in the Plan or
with its assignments in the List is moved within the corresponding PDA
while keeping an aggregate *C */* I* ≥ 26 dB. WRC‑03 decided that for
submissions received as from 5 July 2003 the value *C */* I* ≥ 23 dB
shall be applied.     (WRC-03)~~

~~TABLE 1~~

~~5.4 The PDA concept may be applied only:~~

~~-- to provide an allotment to a new Member State of the ITU;~~

~~-- in the process of conversion of an allotment into an assignment;~~

~~-- to accommodate a subregional system;~~

~~-- to resolve incompatibilities with existing systems (except for the
implementation of additional uses);~~

~~-- to resolve incompatibilities with the assignments in the List
(except for the implementation of additional uses).~~

**Reasons: §5.3** and **§5.4** are being suppressed because, as
discussed and justified in connection with Article 6 below, a
non-sequential processing of submissions is being proposed here and such
approach is not compatible with retention of the PDA concept.

USA/ /11 MOD

~~5.5 The List of Assignments to be associated with the Plan will
contain:~~

~~*a)* assignments derived from allotments in Part A of the Plan;~~

~~*b)* assignments relating to existing systems in Part B of the Plan;~~

~~*c)* assignments resulting from the introduction of subregional
systems;~~

~~*d)* assignments relating to additional uses.~~

USA/ /12 MOD

~~5.6 Whenever a new assignment is entered in this List, the Bureau
shall inform admin­istrations in its International Frequency Information
Circular (BR IFIC), indicating the character­istics of the assignment
concerned.~~

**Reasons: § 5.5** is being suppressed because description of the
assignments in the List was incorporated in **§ 5.2**. **§ 5.6** is
being suppressed because its content is being included in Article 6.

USA/ /13 SUP

ARTICLE 6     (Rev.WRC-03)

Procedures for implementation of the Plan and regulation of\
the fixed-satellite service in the planned bands     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** Given the simplifications introduced in the previous
Articles, namely elimination of Part B and merger of the categories
"subregional systems" and "additional uses", Article 6 can be
significantly shortened. In this respect, it became easier to suppress
the current Article 6 and to propose a completely new text.

USA/ /14 ADD

ARTICLE 6     (Rev.WRC-03)

Procedures for implementation of the Plan and regulation of\
the fixed-satellite service in the planned bands     (WRC-03)

6.1 When an administration intends to

-   convert an allotment into an assignment (with or without
    modifications to the allotment in the Plan),

-   introduce an additional use or

-   modify the characteristics of assignments in the List,

> it shall, not earlier than eight years and not later than two years
> before the planned date of bringing the assignment into use, send to
> the Bureau the information specified in Appendix 4[^3].

2.  Submission of an additional use can also be made by a group of named
    administrations in which case one among these administrations
    (notifying administration) will be designated to act on their behalf
    in the application of the provisions of this Appendix.

3.  If the information received by the Bureau under §6.1 is found to be
    incomplete, the Bureau shall immediately seek from the
    administration concerned any clarification required and information
    not provided.

4.  Upon receipt of a complete (Appendix 4) notice relating to the
    proposed assignment, the Bureau shall examine each notice as to its
    conformity with the Table of Frequency Allocations and the other
    provisions[^4] of these Regulations, except those provisions
    relating to conformity with the fixed-satellite service Plan.

5.  When the examination of all or parts of the notice with respect to §
    6.4 leads to an unfavourable finding, the relevant part of the
    notice shall be returned to the notifying administration with an
    indication of the appropriate action.

6.  When the examination of all or parts of the notice with respect to §
    6.3 leads to a favourable finding, the Bureau shall use the method
    of Annex 4, with respect to the relevant part of the notice to
    determine administrations whose

\- allotments in the Plan;

\- assignments which appear in the List;

\- assignments for which the Bureau has previously received complete
information in accordance with this Article; 

are considered as being affected.

6.7. The Bureau shall publish, in a Special Section of its International
Frequency Information Circular (BR IFIC), the complete information
received under § 6.1, together with the names of the affected
administrations and the corresponding allotments in the Plan,
assignments in the List and/or assignments for which the Bureau has
previously received complete information in accordance with this
Article. The Bureau shall immediately send the results of its
examination to the administration proposing the assignment.

6.8. The Bureau shall send a telegram/fax to the administrations listed
in the Special Section of the BR IFIC drawing their attention to the
information it contains and shall send them the results of its
examination.

6.9. Comments from administrations on the information published pursuant
to § 6.7 shall be sent to the administration proposing the assignment
with a copy to the Bureau.

6.10. An administration which considers that it should have been
identified in the publication referred to under § 6.7 above shall,
within four months of the date of publication of its relevant BR IFIC,
and identifying the affected allotment, assignment or proposed
assignment, request the Bureau to include its name in the publication.
The Bureau shall study this information on the basis of Annex 4 and
shall inform both this administration and the administration proposing
the assignment of its conclusions. Should the Bureau agree to the
administration\'s request, it shall publish an addendum to the
publication under § 6.7.

6.11. An administration that has not notified its comments either to the
administration seeking agreement or to the Bureau within a period of
four months following the date of its BR IFIC referred to in § 6.7 shall
be deemed to have agreed to the proposed assignment.

6.12. Thirty days prior to the expiry of the same four-month period, the
Bureau shall dispatch a reminder telegram or fax to an administration
which has not made its comments under § 6.9, bringing the matter to its
attention.

6.13. After expiry of the deadline for comments in respect of the
proposed assignment, the Bureau shall, according to its records, publish
a Special Section indicating the list of admin­istrations whose
agreements are required for completion of the Article 6 procedure.

6.14. If no comments have been received on the expiry of the four-month
period specified in § 6.10 and 6.11, or if agreement has been reached
with the administrations which have made comments and with which
agreement is necessary, the administration proposing the new or modified
assignment may request the Bureau to have the assignment entered into
the List, indicating the final characteristics of the frequency
assignment together with the names of the administrations with which
agreement has been reached. For this purpose, it shall send to the
Bureau the information specified in Appendix 4. In submitting the
notice, the administration may request the Bureau to examine the notice
simultaneously under § 6.16 (entry into the List) and § 8.8, 8.9
(notification).

6.15. If the information received by the Bureau under § 6.14 is found to
be incomplete, the Bureau shall immediately seek from the administration
concerned any clarification required and information not provided.

6.16. Upon receipt of a complete (Appendix 4) notice relating to the
proposed assignment under § 6.14, the Bureau shall determine whether
this Appendix 4 submission is identical to the initial notice. If this
is the case, the submission under § 6.14 will be treated as specified in
§ 6.20. However, if, in seeking agreement, an administration modifies
its initial notice, the Bureau shall conduct the examination described
in § 6.17 through § 6.19.

6.17. The Bureau shall examine the Appendix 4 information received under
§ 6.14 with respect to its conformity to the Table of Frequency
Allocations and the other provisions[^5] of these Regulations, except
those provisions relating to conformity with the fixed-satellite service
Plan.

6.18. When the examination of all or parts of the § 6.14 submission with
respect to § 6.17 leads to an unfavourable finding, the relevant part of
the notice shall be returned to the notifying administration with an
indication of the appropriate action.

6.19. When the examination of all or parts of the modifications with
respect to § 6.17 leads to a favourable finding, the Bureau shall use
the method of Annex 4 with respect to the relevant part of the notice to
identify administrations for which agreement has not been already
obtained whose

> \- allotments in the Plan;
>
> \- assignments which appear in the List;
>
> \- assignments for which the Bureau has previously received complete
> information in accordance with this Article;  
>
> are considered as being affected by the notice submitted under
> § 6.14[^6].

6.20. In the event of a favourable finding with regard to compatibility
under § 6.19, the Bureau shall enter the proposed assignment in the List
and publish in a Special Section to its BR IFIC the information received
under § 6.14 together with the names of any administrations identified
under § 6.13 and § 6.19 with which the provisions of this Article have
been successfully applied. The administration proposing the assignment
may then notify the assignment in accordance with Article 8.

6.21. When the examination under § 6.19 leads to an unfavourable
finding, the Bureau shall publish in a Special Section of its BR IFIC
the information received under § 6.14 together with the names of any
administrations with which the provisions of this Article have been
successfully applied as well as the administrations with which they have
not.

6.22. After addressing the remaining coordination requirements
identified under § 6.21, the administration proposing the new or
modified assignment may request the Bureau to have the assignment
entered into the List, indicating the final characteristics of the
frequency assignment together with the names of the administrations with
which agreement has been reached. For this purpose, it shall send to the
Bureau the information specified in Appendix 4. In submitting the
notice, the administration may request the Bureau to examine the notice
simultaneously for entry into the List and for notification (§ 8.8,
8.9).

6.23. The Bureau will then conduct the examination specified in § 6.15
and § 6.16 (comparing the Appendix 4 submission under examination with
that previously submitted under § 6.14 or § 6.22). If necessary,
examination under § 6.17 through § 6.19 is then conducted.

6.24. After a notice is published under § 6.21, should the notifying
adminis­tration resubmit the notice and insist upon its reconsideration,
the Bureau shall enter the assignments provisionally in the List with an
indication of those administrations whose allotments or assignments were
the basis of the unfavourable finding[^7]. The entry shall be changed
from provisional to definitive recording in the List only if the Bureau
is informed by the administration that submitted the assignment that the
new assignment has been in use, together with the assignments which were
the basis for the unfavourable finding, for at least four months without
any complaint of harmful interference being made or if the assignments
which were the basis for the unfavourable finding are cancelled.

6.25. When an assignment is entered provisionally in the List under the
provisions of § 6.24, the Bureau shall not update the reference
situation for the Plan and the List until the recording is changed to
definitive in accordance with § 6.24.

6.26. Should harmful interference be caused by an assignment included in
the List under § 6.24 to any assignment in the List which was the basis
of the disagreement, the administration using the frequency assignment
included in the List under § 6.24 shall, upon receipt of advice thereof,
immediately eliminate this harmful interference.

6.27. When a frequency assignment included in the List is no longer
required, the notifying administration shall immediately inform the
Bureau.

6.28. The date of bringing into use of a frequency assignment may be
extended by the notifying administration up to no more than eight years
from the date of receipt by the Bureau of the complete Appendix 4
information under § 6.1.

6.29. Any frequency assignment that

\- is no longer required, as per information provided by the notifying
administration to the BR in accordance with § 6.27; or

\- has not been brought into use within the period specified in § 6.28
shall be canceled by the BR.

30. Assignments canceled under § 6.29 that result from the conversion of
    an allotment (with or without modifications to the characteristics
    of the allotment) shall be transferred back to the Plan without any
    changes to the technical parameters or orbital location that they
    had in the List in the case of a definitive recording and shall be
    transferred back to the Plan with the characteristics of the
    original allotment in the case of a provisional entry in the List.

31. After taking the action described in § 6.29, the BR shall update the
    reference situation of all allotments in the Plan and assignments in
    the List, as appropriate.

32. The procedure of this Article may be applied by the administration
    of a new ITU Member State in order to include a new assignment in
    the List over its national territory. The next World
    Radiocommunication Conference may then be requested to consider the
    inclusion in the Plan of a new allotment over the national territory
    of the new Member State with the characteristics of its assignment
    that has entered the List after successful completion of the
    procedure described here.

33. Should the assignments mentioned in § 6.32 over the national
    territory of the administration not be brought into use within the
    regulatory time-limit specified in § 6.28, they would be retained in
    the List until the end of the World Radiocommunication Conference
    immediately following the successful completion of the procedure
    referred to in § 6.32, and thereafter they shall be removed from the
    List.

34. An administration may, at any stage in the procedure described in
    this Article, or before applying it, request the assistance of the
    Bureau.

**Reasons:** The changes proposed in Article 6 incorporate the key
points discussed in the Background Information section. In particular,
for the reasons discussed therein the proposed Article 6 is consistent
with a non-sequential processing of submissions with no distinction made
between the current categories of "subregional systems" and "additional
uses".

§ 6.1 through § 6.23 define how submissions for use of Appendix 30B
frequencies are to be processed. This procedure is considered to be
appropriate and is similar to that currently used in Appendices 30 and
30a.

§ 6.24 through § 6.26 open the possibility of provisional entry in the
list. It is important that this flexibility be introduced to prevent
that assignments that may never be brought into use unduly block the
implementation of assignments that would otherwise be implemented.

§ 6.29 through § 6.31 address the cancellation of assignments. In
particular, § 6.30 proposes that in the case of assignments resulting
from the conversion of allotments, cancelled assignments will be
transferred to the Plan in a way that does disrupt the current reference
situation.

§ 6.32 and § 6.33 propose that, similarly to the treatment given in
Appendix 30 and 30A for Regions 1 and 3, new ITU Member States can use
the provisions of Article 6 to have allotments (with national coverage)
included in the Plan.

USA/ /15 SUP

ARTICLE 7

Procedure for the addition of a new allotment to the Plan\
for a new Member State of the Union

**Reasons:** The procedures for the addition of a new allotment to the
Plan for a new Member State of the Union have been included in § 6.32
through § 6.34 and as a consequence Article 7 is no longer required.

ARTICLE 8     (WRC-03)

Procedure for notification and recording in the Master Register of
assignments in the planned bands for the fixed-satellite service

USA/ /16 NOC

8.1 Any assignment for which the relevant procedure of Article 6 has
been successfully applied shall be notified to the Bureau using the
relevant characteristics listed in Appendix** 4**, not earlier than
three years before the assignments are brought into use.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** § 8.1 states the need for notification of frequency
assignments and establishes that notification should not occur before 3
years from the date of bringing into use. Both provisions should be
maintained.

USA/ /17 MOD

8.2 If the first notice referred to in § 8.1[, § 6.14 and
§ 6.22]{.underline} has not been received by the Bureau within the
eight-year period mentioned in § 6.1 [and § 6.28]{.underline} ~~6.38
or 6.57~~ of Article 6~~asappropriate~~, the assignments in the List
shall no longer be taken into account by the Bureau and administrations.
The Bureau shall then act as if the assignment in the List has not been
brought into use in conformity with § 6.[29]{.underline}~~6.38 or 6.57~~
of Article 6, as appropriate. The Bureau shall inform the notifying
administration, three months in advance of the end of the eight-year
period, of the actions it intends to take.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** Changes are consequential of those introduced in Article 6.

USA/ /18 NOC

8.3 Notices not containing those characteristics specified in
Appendix **4** as mandatory or required shall be returned with comments
to help the notifying administration to complete and resubmit them,
unless the information not provided is immediately forthcoming in
response to an inquiry by the Bureau.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** § 8.3 reaffirms the need for Appendix 4 information to be
complete. The United States supports the retention of this provision.

USA/ /19 SUP

~~8.4 Upon reception by the Bureau of a complete notice under § 8.1, a
PDA of zero degrees (operational stage) shall be associated with this
assignment.     (WRC-03)~~

**Reasons:** Suppression is consequential of the elimination of the PDA
concept proposed in USA/ /03 MOD.

USA/ /20 NOC

8.5 Complete notices shall be marked by the Bureau with their date of
receipt and shall be examined in the date order of their receipt.
Following receipt of a complete notice the Bureau shall, within not more
than two months, publish its contents, with any diagrams and maps and
the date of receipt, in the BR IFIC, which shall constitute the
acknowledgement to the notifying administration of receipt of its
notice. When the Bureau is not in a position to comply with the
time-limit referred to above, it shall periodically so inform the
administrations, giving the reasons therefor.     (WRC-03)

8.6 The Bureau shall not postpone the formulation of a finding on a
complete notice unless it lacks sufficient data to reach a conclusion
thereon.     (WRC-03)

8.7 Each notice shall be examined:     (WRC-03)

8.8 *a)* with respect to its conformity with the Table of Frequency
Allocations and the other provisions[^8] of these Regulations, except
those provisions relating to conformity with the fixed-satellite service
Plan which are the subject of the following subpara­graph;     (WRC-03)

8.9 *b)* with respect to its conformity with the fixed-satellite service
Plan and the associated provisions.     (WRC-03)

8.10 When the examination with respect to § 8.8 leads to a favourable
finding, the assignment shall be examined further with respect to § 8.9;
otherwise the notice shall be returned with an indication of the
appropriate action.     (WRC-03)

8.11 When the examination with respect to § 8.9 leads to a favourable
finding, the assignment shall be recorded in the Master Register. When
the finding is unfavourable, the notice shall be returned to the
notifying administration, with an indication of the appropriate
action.     (WRC-03)

8.12 In every case when a new assignment is recorded in the Master
Register it shall, in accordance with the provisions of Article** 8**,
include an indication of the finding reflecting the status of the
assignment. This information shall also be published in the
BR IFIC.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** § 8.4 through § 8.12 contain the treatment that the BR
should give to complete notices, specifying how examination should be
conducted and the actions to be taken in case of favorable or
unfavorable findings. The text in its current form is consistent with
changes being proposed to other portions of Appendix 30B and should
therefore be maintained.

USA/ /21 MOD

8.13 A notice of a change in the characteristics of an assignment
already recorded, as specified in Appendix **4**, shall be examined by
the Bureau under § 8.8, and 8.9 as appropriate. Any changes to the
characteristics of an assignment, that has been notified and confirmed
as having been brought into use, shall be brought into use within eight
years from the date of the notification of the modification. Any changes
to the characteristics of an assignment that has been notified but not
yet brought into use shall be brought into use within the period
provided for in § 6.1 [and § 6.28]{.underline}~~6.29, 6.38 or 6.57~~ of
Article 6~~as appropriate~~.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** Changes are consequential of those introduced in Article 6.

USA/ /22 NOC

8.14 In the case of a change in the characteristics of an assignment
which is in conformity with § 8.8, should the Bureau reach a favourable
finding with respect to § 8.9, the amended assignment shall retain the
original date of entry in the Master Register. The date of receipt by
the Bureau of the notice relating to the change shall be entered in the
Master Register.     (WRC-03)

8.15 In applying the provisions of this Article, any resubmitted notice
which is received by the Bureau more than six months after the date on
which the original notice was returned by the Bureau shall be considered
to be a new notice.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** § 8.14 and 8.15 address the treatment to be given to
modifications to frequency assignments that received an unfavorable
finding with respect to Appendix 30B provisions but were in conformance
with the Table of Frequency Allocations and other provisions of the
Radio Regulations. In particular the 6-month limit set in § 8.15 in
order for the notice not to be considered a new notice is appropriate.

USA/ /23 NOC

8.16 All frequency assignments notified in advance of their being
brought into use shall be entered provisionally in the Master Register.
Any frequency assignment provisionally recorded under this provision
shall be brought into use by the date specified in the notice. Within
thirty days of such an assignment being brought into use, the notifying
administration shall so inform the Bureau. If the Bureau does not
receive that confirmation within the above period, after sending a
reminder, it shall cancel the entry. The Bureau shall, however, inform
the administration concerned before taking such action.     (WRC-03)

8.17 Where the use of a recorded assignment to a space station is
suspended for a period not exceeding eighteen months, the notifying
administration shall, as soon as possible, inform the Bureau of the date
on which such use was suspended and the date on which the assignment is
to be brought back into regular use. This latter date shall not exceed
two years from the date of suspension.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** § 8.16 addresses frequency assignments notified in advance
of their date of bringing into use and mirrors No. 11.47. § 8.17
addresses the suspension of frequency assignments and mirrors No. 11.49.
Proposals for modifying both 11.47 and 11.49 have been discussed in the
Working Party of the Special Committee in connection with WRC-07 agenda
item 1.12. For the moment, the United States is proposing that § 8.16
and § 8.17 remain unchanged but theses provisions may have to be revised
in case 11.47 and/or 11.49 are actually modified.

USA/ /24 NOC

8.18 No provision of this Appendix shall be considered as modifying the
requirements of Article **9** relating to coordination between earth
stations in the fixed-satellite service and stations of terrestrial
services sharing the planned bands on an equal primary
basis.     (WRC-03)

8.19 Notification of assignments to a specific earth station using
assignments included in the List shall be effected applying the
provisions of Article **11**.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons:** The United States supports that coordination of FSS earth
stations and stations of terrestrial services in the Appendix 30B bands
should follow the provisions of Article 9 and therefore supports
retention of § 8.18 without any change. The United States also supports
that notification of a specific earth station using a frequency
assignment included in the Appendix 30B List be conducted in accordance
with the provisions of Article 11. Therefore, § 8.19 should be retained
without any changes.

ARTICLE 9

General provisions

USA/ /25 MOD

9.1 ~~Part A of t~~[T]{.underline}he Plan is limited to national systems
providing a domestic service. Administrations may, however, in
accordance with the provisions ~~of Section II~~ of Article 6, ~~use all
or part of~~ [modify]{.underline} their allotments [or propose
additional uses]{.underline} to [provide multi-national
services]{.underline}~~form a subregional system~~.

**Reasons:** Changes are consequential of those introduced in Article 6.

USA/ /26 SUP 9.2

~~9.2 The existing systems listed in Part B of the Plan may continue in
operation for a maximum period of 20 years from the date of entry into
force of this Appendix.~~

**Reasons:** Existing systems are associated with FSS satellite networks
that had already been submitted to the ITU BR when the Plan was
developed. By now, the frequency assignments in these networks have
either been brought into use and become assignments in the List or have
been cancelled.

Current § 9.2 means that all these frequency assignments would have to
cease operation (or operate under No. 4.4 of the Radio Regulations)
after 16 March 2010. Operation under No. 4.4 is not a realistic option,
at least as Appendix 30B frequencies are more widely used. Moreover,
requiring that operational satellite networks with large number of users
cease abruptly their operation is unreasonable.

By suppressing § 9.2, frequency assignments of existing systems that
have been brought into use just remain in the List similarly to the way
in which frequency assignments associated with subregional systems are
currently treated.

ARTICLE 10

Plan for the fixed-satellite service in the frequency bands\
4 500-4 800 MHz, 6 725-7 025 MHz, 10.70-10.95 GHz,\
11.20-11.45 GHz and 12.75-13.25 GHz [^9]

USA/ /27 MOD

A.1 COLUMN HEADINGS OF ~~PART A OF~~ THE PLAN

**Reasons:** Change is consequential to the changes proposed in USA/ /02
MOD (elimination of Part B).

USA/ /28 NOC

A.2 TEXT FOR SYMBOLS IN REMARKS COLUMN OF THE PLAN

Tables with Allotments.

**Reasons:** No need to change section A2 or the tables containing the
allotments because, consistent with the scope of the agenda item, no
changes to the Plan are being proposed.

USA/ /29 SUP

~~B COLUMN HEADINGS OF PART B OF THE PLAN~~

**Reasons:** Consequential to the treatment proposed for existing
systems (see USA/ /04 SUP and USA/ /23 MOD).

ARTICLE 11

Period of validity of the provisions and associated Plan

USA/ /30 NOC

11.1 These provisions and associated Plan have been prepared in order to
guarantee in practice for all countries equitable access to the GSO and
the frequency bands contained in Article 3, to meet the requirements of
the fixed-satellite service for a period of at least 20 years from the
date of entry into force of this Appendix.

**Reasons:** § 11.1 re-emphasizes the objectives of the Plan, as stated
in Article 1, and should be retained.

USA/ /31 MOD

11.2 These provisions and associated Plan shall, in any event, remain in
force until their revision by a competent world ~~administrative~~
radio[communication]{.underline} conference, convened in accordance with
the relevant provisions of the Convention in force.

**Reasons:** Editorial change to take account of the fact that world
administrative radiocommunication conferences are now referred to as
world radiocommunication conferences.

ANNEX 1     (WRC-03)

Parameters used in characterizing the fixed-satellite service Plan[^10]

Section A -- Technical data used in establishing the Allotment Plan\
and the associated provisions

\[Note 1: Discussions on the technical parameters used in connection
with the Allotment Plan are being held in ITU-R Working Party 4A. The
United States of America is following these discussions but does not
have a proposal on this matter at this point in time.\]

USA/ /32 SUP

~~Section B -- Generalized parameters used for determining when the
assignments of a proposed satellite network are in conformity with the
Plan~~

**Reasons:** This suppression is consequential of the proposed
elimination of the generalized parameters (see USA/ /03 MOD above).

USA/ /33 MOD

ANNEX 2     (WRC-03)

Basic data to be furnished in notices relating to stations\
in the fixed-satellite service ~~entering the design stage~~\
using frequency bands of the Plan

These data are listed in Appendix **4**.

**Reasons:** The change in the title is required as a consequence of the
proposal to eliminate the concept of design stage (see USA/ /10 SUP
above).

USA/ /34 SUP

ANNEX 3A

Criteria for determining when proposed assignments\
are considered as being in conformity with the Plan

ANNEX 3B

Macrosegmentation concept

**Reasons:** Suppression of Annexes 3A and 3B is consequential of the
proposed elimination of the generalized parameters (see USA/ /03 MOD and
USA/ /29 SUP above). The concept of segregating \"high density
carriers\" from \"low density carriers\" is still maintained in Annex 6,
item 2.

ANNEX [3]{.underline}~~4~~     (WRC-0~~3~~[7]{.underline})

Limits for determining whether an allotment or an assignment\
made in accordance with the provisions of Appendix 30B is\
considered to be affected

APPENDIX 1 TO ANNEX [3]{.underline}~~4~~ 

Method for determination of the single-entry and aggregate\
carrier-to-interference ratio averaged over the necessary\
bandwidth of the modulated carrier

\[Note 2: Discussions on the protection criteria to be used in
connection with the Plan are being held in ITU-R Working Party 4A. The
United States of America is following these discussions but does not
have a proposal on this matter at this point in time.\]

USA/ /35 SUP

ANNEX 5     (WRC-03)

Application of the PDA (predetermined arc) concept

**Reasons:** This suppression is consequential of the proposed
elimination of the PDA concept (see **USA/ /10 SUP** above).

USA/ /36 NOC

ANNEX 6     (WRC-03)

Technical means which may be used to avoid incompatibilities between\
systems in the fixed-satellite service at their implementation stage

**Reasons:** The general measures listed in this Annex to facilitate the
use of the Appendix 30B frequencies are still appropriate and should be
retained.

[^1]: For instance as considered in Annex 2 of Doc. 4A/277 (output from
    the Working Party of the Special Committee, WP-SC, December 2005
    meeting, on WRC-07 Agenda Item 1.10) or as currently contained in
    the procedures of Appendices 30 and 30A of the Radio Regulations.

[^2]: Editorial Note: For the convenience of the reader, the proposal
    presented here includes in most cases text proposed for no change
    (NOC) as well as text proposed for suppression (SUP).

[^3]: If the payments are not received in accordance with the provisions
    of Council Decision 482, as amended, on the implementation of cost
    recovery for satellite network filings, the Bureau shall cancel the
    publication, after informing the administration concerned. The
    Bureau shall inform all administrations of such action and that the
    network specified in the publication in question no longer has to be
    taken into consideration by the Bureau and other administrations.
    The Bureau shall send a reminder to the notifying administration,
    not later than two months prior to the deadline for the payment in
    accordance with Council Decision 482 unless the payment has already
    been received (see also Resolution **87 (WRC‑03)**).     (WRC‑03)

[^4]: The "other provisions" shall be identified and included in the
    Rules of Procedure.

[^5]: The "other provisions" shall be identified and included in the
    Rules of Procedure.

[^6]: The allotments in the Plan, assignments in the List and
    assignments with complete information previously submitted are those
    that had been identified as such at the date of receipt of the
    initial submission under § 6.1 of the assignment under examination,
    i.e. examination under § 6.19 is conducted with respect to the same
    reference situation previously used for the examination under § 6.1.

[^7]: The entry shall be definitive in the case of a frequency
    assignment to a receiving station, under the condition that the
    notifying administration has undertaken that no complaint will be
    made in respect of any harmful interference which may be caused to
    that assignment by the assignment which was the basis for the
    unfavourable finding.

[^8]: ^4^ The "other provisions" shall be identified and included in the
    Rules of Procedure.     (WRC-03)

[^9]: ^5^ The Plan has been prepared with a view to assuring for each
    allotment an aggregate *C */* I* ratio of at least 26 dB.

[^10]: Discussions on the technical parameters used in connection with
    the Allotment Plan are being held in ITU-R Working Party 4A. The
    United States of America is following these discussions but does not
    have a proposal on this matter at this point in time.\]