DA 06-2013

October 12, 2006

**FCC SEEKS COMMENT ON RECOMMENDATIONS APPROVED BY THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR THE 2007 WORLD RADIOCOMMUNICATION CONFERENCE**

**IB Docket No. 04-286**

On October 4, 2006, the World Radiocommunication Conference Advisory
Committee (WRC-07 Advisory Committee) approved and submitted for
Commission's consideration its recommendations with regard to a number
of issues that will be considered by the 2007 World Radiocommunication
Conference (WRC-07).[^1] These recommendations are attached to this
Public Notice.

Based upon an initial review of the attached WRC-07 Advisory Committee
recommendations, the International Bureau, in coordination with other
FCC Bureaus and Offices, tentatively concludes that it can generally
support these recommendations.

The FCC seeks comment on the attached recommendations as well as
recommendations that appear in all of the WRC-07 Advisory Committee
documents.[^2] The FCC also seeks comment on the attached draft
preliminary views and proposals that have been developed by the
Executive Branch Agencies and submitted to the FCC by the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). Finally, the
FCC seeks comment on the International Bureau's initial conclusions with
regard to the WRC-07 Advisory Committee recommendations.

The comments provided by interested parties will assist the FCC in its
upcoming consultations with the U.S. Department of State and NTIA in the
development of U.S. positions for WRC-07. As the recommendations that
are attached to this Public Notice may evolve in the course of
interagency discussions as WRC‑07 nears, they do not constitute final
U.S. Government position on any issue.

The complete text of these recommendations is available in the FCC's
Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12^th^ Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20554 or by accessing the FCC's WRC-07 world wide web
site at: <http://www.fcc.gov/wrc-07>. Comments on the recommendations
may be filed by referencing IB Docket 04-286 using the Commission's
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies.
Parties are encouraged to file electronically by following the
instructions at: <http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs> Parties who choose to
file paper copies only should submit an original and four copies of each
filing. Guidelines and address for paper filings are available at:
<http://www.fcc.gov/osec> . In addition, please submit one copy of your
comments electronically or by paper to Alexander Roytblat, FCC WRC-07
Director, Federal Communications Commission, Room 6-A865, 445 12^th^
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554; e-mail: WRC07@fcc.gov. Comments should
refer to IB Docket No. 04-286 and to specific recommendations by
document number. The deadline for comments on the recommendations is
October 27, 2006. 

I.  **Recommendations by the Advisory Committee for the 2007 World
    Radiocommunication Conference:**

**[INFORMAL WORKING GROUP 1 (IWG-1)]{.underline}**

**[Terrestrial and Space Science Services]{.underline}**

**Document WAC/127(04.10.06):**

**[IWG-1 Opposition to RCS Draft Proposal on AI 1.2 (10 GHz
Band)]{.underline}**

The FWCC or Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition represents the users
and manufacturers of fixed, point to point microwave frequency radios
operating under the FCC's Part 101 rules.

The FCC's Part 101, 10.5 GHz band extends from 10.550 to 10.680 GHz. 80
MHz of this band overlaps the 10.6 to 10.68 GHz band shared with the
EESS or Earth Exploration Satellite Service band allocation.

The primary applications for the 10.5 GHz band are for cell site
interconnection and basic communications services for:

Cellular companies.

Public safety systems for police, fire and ambulance services.

Critical infrastructure providers including:

Oil and gas exploration and pipeline control.

Electrical energy transportation and grid control.

Railroad inventory management and signals control.

All of these services require very highly reliable communications
systems typically engineered for 99.999% availability which is
equivalent to less than 5 minutes outage per year.

The Part 101, 10.5 GHz band is particularly desirable, especially in
metropolitan areas, because:

1.  Spectrum is available even in congested areas. The FCC added 100 MHz
    of unused spectrum to the 10.5 GHz band in 1996.

2.  This is the lowest frequency band in which the FCC allows the use of
    very popular small, 2 ft. antennas to reduce tower wind loading and
    improve visual aesthetics.

3.  It has reasonably good propagation characteristics.

The propagation characteristics of the 10.5 GHz band are determined by
the rain rate between the antennas.

Traditional microwave radio propagation improvement techniques such as
space diversity or frequency diversity are ineffective against fading
due to rain absorption.

Only greater transmitter power output or larger antennas will improve
the path length or increase the reliability of a system limited by rain
fading.

Calculations using industry accepted formulas show the 7 dB output power
reduction suggested by the modifications to paragraph 5.482 will reduce
a 10.5 GHz path length by approximately 27% for equivalent reliability.

Some additional 10.5 GHz facts supplied by FWCC members:

70% of the 10.5 GHz paths are located in metropolitan areas. This
information was supplied by Comsearch along with a map (included)
showing the metropolitan areas and 10.5 GHz systems.

The 10.5 GHz band usage has increased by 22% over the last 4 years and
is approximately twice the growth rate of the other Part 101 frequency
bands. This information was supplied by Doug Docherty and based on
information from the FCC's universal license system.

Approximately 83% of the 10.5 GHz transmitters in the State of
Massachusetts already exceed the 20 dBm or -10 dBW power output
restriction being recommended by the modifications to paragraph 5.482.

Existing 10.5 GHz transmitters have power outputs up to +30 dBm or 1
Watt. This is 10 dB greater than the limitations suggested by the
modifications to paragraph 5.482 and particularly useful to combat rain
fading.

The maximum EIRP of the 10.6 to 10.68 GHz portion of the 10.5 GHz band
is already 15 dB lower (+40 dBW) than other Part 101 frequency bands
(+55 dBW).

**Document WAC/129(04.10.06):**

**IWG-1 Modifications to RCS Draft Proposal on**

**A.I. 7.2 "Enhanced Maritime Ship and Port Security"**

**United States of America**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 7.2:** to recommend to the Council items for inclusion in
the agenda of the next WRC, and to give its views on the preliminary
agenda for the subsequent conference and on possible agenda items for
future conferences, taking into account Resolution **802 (WRC-03)**;

*Enhanced Maritime Ship and Port Security*

**Background Information:** There is a growing global requirement for
application of wireless technology to enhanced security of ships and
ports. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) recognized this
need by its adoption of the Code on International Ship and Port Facility
Security (ISPS), implemented as treaty by amendment to the Safety of
Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention, with the understanding "that the
establishment of such measures will further enhance and positively
contribute towards the international efforts to ensure maritime security
and to prevent and suppress acts threatening the security in the
maritime transport sector", and invited contracting governments "to
establish, as they may consider necessary, and to disseminate, as they
deem fit, appropriate measures to enhance the security of ships and of
port facilities"[^3]. The IMO Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and
Search and Rescue[^4] (COMSAR) has actively supported terrestrial and
satellite communication and data exchange systems to enhance maritime
safety and port security. IMO's Maritime Safety Committee (MSC 81)
approved new provisions in Chapter V (Safety of Navigation) of SOLAS for
Long Range Identification and Tracking following the adoption of the
ISPS Code which also introduced a requirement for a Ship Security Alert
System (SSAS). COMSAR 10 noted that integration of satellite and
terrestrial technologies enhance vessel and personal safety. As a
result, additional channels may be required for Automatic Identification
(AIS) purposes which, with the existing AIS channels, may require
protection and also authorization to operate in the mobile satellite
service.

There is a need for improved identification, tracking, and surveillance
of international shipping and its cargo. Some administrations as well as
the International Standards Organization (ISO) are studying the spectrum
and standardization requirements for electronic seals used on freight
containers to provide a more secure international transportation system.
[^5]

IMO has also addressed measures to enhance maritime security and has
drafted performance standards and functional requirements and adopted
SOLAS Convention carriage requirements for the Long-Range Identification
and Tracking of Ships (LRIT) and the Ship Security Alerting System
(SSAS), noting that the integration of satellite and terrestrial
technologies enhance vessel and personal safety. The implementation of
communication systems in the VHF/UHF, MF/HF, and Satellite spectrum will
enable the LRIT and SSAS functions. Changes to the Radio Regulations,
and in particular the spectrum allocation table, are expected to be
necessary in order to ensure enhanced safety and security of ships and
ports.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ /1 MOD**

**RESOLUTION 803 (WRC-~~03~~[07]{.underline})**

**~~Preliminary~~ Agenda for the 2010 World Radiocommunication
Conference**

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
200~~3~~[7]{.underline}),

**USA/ /2 ADD**

**2.XF** to consider spectrum requirements and possible additional
spectrum allocations to support enhanced ship and port security in
accordance with Resolution **Enhanced Port and Ship Security**
**(WRC-07)**.

**Reasons:** Meet international maritime shipping need for ship and
cargo identification, tracking, and surveillance, and ship and port
facility security.

**USA/ /3 ADD**

**RESOLUTION \[Enhanced Port and Port Security\] (WRC-07)**

**Consideration of spectrum allocations for use by maritime ship and
port security systems**

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2007),

*considering*

*a)* that there is increasing need, on a global basis, to enhance ship
and cargo identification, tracking, and surveillance as well as ship and
port security;

*b)* that IMO adoption of the International Ship and Port Facility
Security (ISPS) Code, specifically Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)
Convention Chapter XI-2 on special measures to enhance maritime security
requires long range spectrum dependent systems;

*c)* that the introduction of the shipborne universal Automatic
Identification System (AIS) (ITU-R Rec. M.1371 series) offers potential
enhancements to ship safety and port security;

*d)* that studies within ITU-R WP 8B indicate that additional AIS
channels in the mobile satellite service may be required to enhance
global ship tracking capabilities;

*e)* that advanced maritime HF data systems may be used to deliver
security alerts and safety information to global regions not under
satellite coverage,

noting

*a)* that Resolution **342 (Rev. WRC-2000)** has considered new
technologies to provide improved efficiency in the use of the bands in
**Appendix 18** by stations in the maritime mobile service;

*b)* that Resolution **351 (WRC-03)** has reviewed the frequencies and
channelling arrangements in the MF and HF bands, of **Appendix 17**,
with a view to improving efficiency by considering the use of new
digital technology,

recognizing

*a)* that there is a global requirement to enhance ship and port
security via spectrum dependent systems;

*b)* that existing and future technologies for Ship Security and
Alerting Systems (SSAS) will require long range communications links and
networks between mobile ships and shorebased stations;

*c)* that due to the importance of these radio links in ensuring the
safe and secure operation of international shipping and commerce, they
must be resilient to interference;

*d)* that studies will be required to provide a basis for considering
regulatory changes, including additional allocations and
recommendations, designed to accommodate spectrum requirements of ship
and port security, consistent with the protection of incumbent services
[and ensuring that incumbent services are not]{.underline} [unduly
constrained]{.underline},

resolves

1 that WRC-10 consider the spectrum requirements for the operation of
ship and port security systems;

2 that WRC-10 consider additional allocations to the maritime mobile
and/or maritime mobile-satellite service to support the requirements
identified in *resolves* 1 [taking into account the need to protect and
not impose undue constraints on existing services]{.underline}, with a
view towards using existing maritime mobile allocations where
practicable, particularly where international interoperability is
required,

*further resolves to invite the ITU-R*

1 to conduct, as a matter of urgency, studies to determine the spectrum
requirements and potential frequency bands suitable to support ship
safety and port security systems;

2.  that the studies referred to in *further resolves* 1 should include
    sharing and compatibility studies with services already having
    allocations in potential spectrum for ship safety and port security
    systems,

*further invites*

all members of the Radiocommunications Sector, the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Association of Marine
Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) to contribute to
these studies,

*instructs the Secretary-General*

to bring this Resolution to the attention of the International Maritime
Organization (IMO), the International Association of Marine Aids to
Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) and other international and
regional organizations concerned.

**[INFORMAL WORKING GROUP 2 (IWG-2)]{.underline}**

**[Space Services and High Altitude Platform Stations
(HAPS)]{.underline}**

**Excerpt from Document WAC/130(04.10.06) -- Minutes of the meeting of
IWG-2 on September 21, 2006:**

[Consideration of Draft Proposals from Exec. Branch
Agencies]{.underline}:

Three documents from the Exec. Branch Agencies were considered:

1\. [Doc. IWG-2/065 (Exec. Branch Agencies proposals for Agenda Item 4,
review of resolutions and recommendations)]{.underline}. IWG-2 had the
following comments on the various proposals impacting satellite services
and/or HAPS:

  --------------------------- -------------------------------------------
  **[Exec. Branch Agencies    **[IWG-2 Comments/Response]{.underline}**
  Proposal]{.underline}**     

  USA//1 SUP Res. 21          N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//2 SUP Res. 51          IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//3 SUP Res. 56          IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//4 SUP Res. 57          IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//5 SUP Res. 87          IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//6 SUP Res. 88          IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//7 SUP Res. 96          IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//8 and 9 SUP Res. 124   IWG-2 Neither Endorses Nor Opposes These
  and No. 5.462A              Proposals

  USA//10 SUP Res. 136        IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//11 SUP Res. 144        IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//12 SUP Res. 405        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//13 SUP Res. 527        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//14 SUP Res. 528        IWG-2 Seeks to Retain Resolution 528

  USA//15 SUP Res. 728        IWG-2 Endorses Suppression; notes that no
                              "reasons" have been provided

  USA//16 SUP Res. 734        IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//17 SUP Rec. 14         N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//18 SUP Rec. 36         IWG-2 Endorses Suppression

  USA//19 SUP Rec. 520        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//20 SUP Rec. 604        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//21 SUP Rec. 606        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//22 SUP Rec. 707        IWG-2 Endorses Suppression; notes that no
                              "reasons" have been provided

  USA//23 SUP Rec. 722        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS

  USA//24 SUP Rec. 723        N/A -- Not related to satellites or HAPS
  --------------------------- -------------------------------------------

In addition, IWG-2 noted that Resolution 140 (WRC-03), addressing epfd
limits in the 19.7-20.2 GHz band, could be a candidate for suppression,
for the reason that the studies have been concluded in the ITU-R
(resulting in adoption of Recommendation ITU-R S.1715), and that no
further WRC action is needed or contemplated.

IWG-2 members will be encouraged to look at additional resolutions and
recommendations to see if there are any additional candidates for
suppression, and bring any proposals on this subject into IWG-2's
November/December meeting.

2\. [Doc. IWG-2/066 (Exec. Branch Agencies proposals for Agenda Item
1.12, Mod to 9.14 and Mod to Appendix 5)]{.underline}. IWG-2 had the
following comments on the two proposals from the Exec. Branch agencies
on Agenda Item 1.12:

a.  Mod to 9.14: IWG-2 endorsed and supported this proposal.

b.  Mod to Appendix 5: After discussion, IWG-2 participants had several
    unresolved questions about aspects of the proposal, its intentions,
    and whether the resulting text may go farther than intended. IWG-2
    did not endorse the proposal. IWG-2 understands that the proposal is
    being considered in the U.S. preparatory process for the December
    2006 SCRPM meeting, and that revisions to the proposal are
    contemplated by the authors. IWG-2 would appreciate the opportunity
    to review a revised draft U.S. proposal from the Exec. Branch
    Agencies, if one is able to be developed.

3\. [Doc. IWG-2/067 (Exec. Branch Agencies proposals for Agenda Item
1.4)]{.underline}. This proposal was distributed to IWG-2 participants
pursuant to an instruction from the FCC issued upon its receipt from
NTIA. IWG-2 limited its consideration to the FSS downlink band at
3650-4200 MHz. IWG-2 noted that there is a discrepancy between the Table
element in Proposal USA//3 ([NOC]{.underline} for 3400-4200 MHz) and the
reason below the proposal (which is limited to 3400-3650 MHz). IWG-2
strongly felt that the reason below USA//3 should be aligned to coincide
with the table (i.e., to extend to 4200 MHz on the upper end), and that
a corresponding paragraph should be added to the background section
emphasizing the extreme significance of the 3650-4200 MHz band for the
FSS industry and for the billions of people around the world who rely on
C-band telecommunications satellites for the dissemination of
information, entertainment, and communications. There was no
disagreement with these comments on Doc. IWG-2/067.

## 

**[INFORMAL WORKING GROUP 3 (IWG-3)]{.underline}**

**[IMT-2000 and 2.5 GHz Sharing Issues]{.underline}**

**Document WAC/135(04.10.06):**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**WRC-07 Agenda Item 1.4:** To consider frequency-related matters for
the future development of IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000 taking
into account the results of ITU-R studies in accordance with Resolution
**228 (Rev. WRC-03)**.

**Background Information:**

In WRC-03, the ITU adopted Resolution 228 concerning studies on
frequency related matters for the future development of IMT-2000 and
systems beyond IMT-2000. This resolution requested that:

-- The ITU-R to further study technical and operational issues relating
to the future development of IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000 and
develop Recommendations as required.

-- The ITU-R report in time for WRC-07 on the results of the studies on
spectrum requirements and potential frequency usage suitable for the
future development of IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000.

-- The ITU-R studies should include sharing and compatibility studies
with services already having allocations in potential spectrum for the
future development of IMT‑2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000, taking into
account the needs of other services.

Sharing studies have been conducted within the ITU-R regarding sharing
of IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000 ("IMT-Advanced") with FSS
receive earth stations. To provide protection of the FSS receive earth
stations, some physical separation to the stations of the mobile
terrestrial network is required. The magnitude of this separation
distance depends on the parameters of the networks and the deployment of
the two services, including the elevation angle of the earth station,
the position of the IMT-Advanced terminal and/or base station relative
to the FSS earth station and the amount of clutter loss. While the
studies are still ongoing, the current range of separation distances
associated with a single IMT-Advanced macro base station is from 36 to
70 km for the non-site specific studies (flat terrain model) if only
long term interference is considered, and from 34-430 km if short term
effects are also considered. It should be noted that the 34 kilometer
distance for short-term interference does not include the effects of
ducting. If ducting effects are taken into account, the separation
distance associated with short term interference ranges from 140 -- 430
km. For site specific studies, where actual terrain profiles were taken
into account, the current range of separation distances for associated
with a single IMT-Advanced macro base station is 1 to 110 km if only
long term interference is considered and 270 km to 280 km if short term
effects are also considered. It is noted that the 270 -- 280 km distance
corresponds to the results of a single (and only) site specific sharing
study by Working Party 8F that considered the effects of short-term
interference It should also be noted that mitigation techniques are also
under study that may reduce the separation distances. The minimum
separation distances related to the IMT-Advanced micro and/or mobile
station will generally be smaller than the ranges listed above.

Although the studies have differences in assumptions and methodologies
and need to be continued to find convergence, they all show that
ubiquitously deployed IMT-Advanced systems can not share in the same
geographical area with FSS, when the FSS is deployed in a ubiquitous
manner and/or with no individual licensing of earth stations, since no
minimum separation can be guaranteed. Sharing may be feasible only when
the receiving earth station is specific under the condition that the
minimum required separation distance together with the criteria mutually
agreed between the concerned administrations are observed.

The results of the ITU-R sharing studies show that sharing of the 3700
-- 4200 MHz frequency band by IMT-Advanced systems and the fixed
satellite system is not feasible within the same geographic area. This
conclusion can be reached if one looks at either the single entry
minimum distance separations required for long-term or short-term
protection of an FSS receive station, where the smallest required
separation is approximately 36 kilometers for an IMT-Advanced macro base
station for the non-site specific studies; for site specific studies,
the distance reduces to a minimum of 1 km. A similar conclusion is also
reached if one looks at the minimum distance separation required for the
protection of an FSS earth station from the aggregate interference
effects of multiple IMT-Advanced macro or micro cell base stations.

By comparison, the radius of a large city is in the range of 15 -- 30
kilometers. Hence, operation of even one FSS earth station in the 3700
-- 4200 MHz within a city would preclude the use of a co-frequency
IMT-Advanced system within that city, and vice-versa. Given that FSS
receive stations are deployed throughout the United States in the 3700
-- 4200 MHz band[^6] and that IMT-Advanced systems would be deployed in
a ubiquitous manner, it is it is concluded that sharing of the 3700 --
4200 MHz band between IMT-Advanced and FSS is not feasible in the United
States.

FSS operators use the 3700-4200 MHz band to serve customers requiring a
high degree of reliability. Among other things, these customers use the
3700-4200 MHz band for program distribution to cable head-ends and
radio/TV broadcast stations, broadband communications to U.S. Navy
vessels, commercial weather data distribution to airlines and pilots,
and position location and status for trucking fleets.

In view of the results of the IMT-Advanced and FSS sharing studies to
date within the ITU-R and the above considerations, the band 3700-4200
MHz should be removed from consideration as a candidate band for
IMT-Advanced systems.

**Proposal**

No Change to the Table of Allocation of the Radio Regulation with regard
to the 3700 -- 4200 MHz band.

**Reasons:** The results of the ITU-R sharing studies to date have shown
that sharing of the 3700 -- 4200 MHz frequency band by IMT-Advanced
systems and the fixed satellite system is not feasible within the same
geographic area.

**[Attachment 1]{.underline}**

**[Locations of C-Band Earth Stations in the United
States]{.underline}**

![](media/image2.png){width="7.522222222222222in"
height="4.952083333333333in"}

**Document WAC/136(04.10.06):**

[IWG-3 Comments on the RCS Proposal Contained in IWG-3 Background
Document 4]{.underline}

The RCS document in question proposes no change to the international
Table of Frequency Allocations in the bands 410-430 MHz, 2 700-2 900
MHz, 3 400-3 650 MHz, and 4 400-4 940 MHz.

IWG-3 neither supports nor opposes this proposal. IWG-3, however, does
note that commercial systems are licensed and have been deployed in a
number of countries in the 3400-3650 MHz band, and that deployments in
other countries are expected.

IWG-3 opposes extending the "no change" proposal from 3400-3650 MHz to
3400-4200 MHz as suggested by IWG-2, and also opposes adding sharing
issues with fixed-satellite service (FSS) earth stations to the
justification or background of the RCS proposal. IWG-3 notes that
satellite use is prevalent above 3700 MHz in the United States.
Therefore, IWG-3 is proposing "no change" for the band 3700-4200 MHz on
a separate document. However, IWG-3 does not agree that sharing between
IMT systems and FSS earth stations below 3700 MHz presents similar
difficulties, as the density of FSS earth station deployment is much
lower below 3700 MHz. In the United States, fixed and mobile terrestrial
services are allocated in 3650-3700 MHz and FSS use is limited to
certain grandfathered sites[^7]. Further, while there is an FSS
allocation in 3600-3650 MHz, it is limited to international,
inter-continental systems subject to a case-by-case electromagnetic
compatibility analysis. The FCC's rules state that it is expected that
only one earth station on each coast could be successfully coordinated.
With respect to the 3650-3700 MHz band, IWG-3 notes that this band is
still under consideration in IWG-3 with respect to agenda item 1.4.

IWG-3 offers the following comments which it believes are necessary to
avoid confusion regarding the proposal.

-   Footnote 1 ("The United States has not identified any additional
    bands that might be suitable.") on page 2 should be deleted.
    Otherwise, the reader could infer that the US is supporting
    identification of the listed candidate bands.

-   With respect to the proposal USA//3 on page 4, the proposal's intent
    is to specify "no change" to 3400-3650 MHz, as described above.
    However, the portion of the Table of Frequency Allocations displayed
    covers all the way up to 4200 MHz. Accordingly, IWG-3 requests that
    the proposal be modified so that only the portion of the Table
    leading up to 3650 MHz be displayed. This may entail splitting up
    the current frequency ranges in the Table.

-   Similarly, with respect to the proposal USA//4 on page 5, the
    proposal's intent is to specify "no change" to the Table of
    Frequency allocations from 4400-4940 MHz, as described above.
    However, the portion of the Table of Frequency Allocations displayed
    covers frequencies all the way up to 5000 MHz. Accordingly, if the
    intent is just to specify no change up to 4940 MHz, then the
    proposal should be modified so that only the portion of the Table
    leading up to 4940 MHz be displayed.

Modifications to the RCS proposal to take into account the above
comments are provided below.

# United States of America

## DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.4**: to consider frequency-related matters for the
future development of IMT 2000 and systems beyond IMT 2000 taking into
account the results of ITU-R studies in accordance with Resolution **228
(Rev.WRC 03)**;

**Background Information**: Resolution **228 (WRC-03)** calls for
studies on frequency-related matters for the future development of
IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000 (IMT-Advanced) as defined by ITU-R.
Resolves 2 under Resolution **228 (WRC-03)** invites the ITU R to
report, in time for WRC 07, on the results of studies on the spectrum
requirements and potential frequency ranges suitable for the future
development of IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT 2000, taking into
account:

-   the evolving user needs, including the growth in demand for IMT 2000
    services;

-   the evolution of IMT-2000 and pre-IMT-2000 systems through advances
    in technology;

-   the bands currently identified for IMT-2000;

-   the time-frame in which spectrum would be needed;

-   the period for migration from existing to future systems;

-   the extensive use of frequencies below those identified for IMT-2000
    in No. **5.317A**.

WARC-92 identified the bands 1 885-2 025 MHz / 2 110-2 200 MHz and
WRC-2000 identified the bands 806-960 MHz (ITU-R Region 1: 862-960 MHz)
/ 1 710-1 885 MHz / 2 500-2 690 MHz for use on a worldwide basis by
administrations wishing to implement IMT-2000 systems. Resolutions **212
(WARC 92)**, **223 (WRC-2000)** and **224 (WRC-2000)** invite
administrations to make available the necessary portion of these
identified bands for IMT-2000 development, while recognizing that
administrations have the flexibility to use the bands for other
applications of services to which the bands are allocated and to
implement IMT-2000 in other mobile bands.

In order to identify additional spectrum to meet IMT-Advanced
requirement, compatibility with existing services in the bands of
interest must be demonstrated through ITU-R technical studies. However,
at this time such studies have not been completed.

The prioritized candidate bands for IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced systems
are between 400 MHz and 5 GHz (ITU-R Report \[IMT.CANDI\]) and are:

1.  410-430 MHz

2.  450-470 MHz

3.  470-862 MHz (portions already identified for Region 2 and some
    administrations by Resolution **224**)

4.  2 300-2 400 MHz (already identified for some administrations (U.S.)
    by Resolution **223**)

5.  2 700-2 900 MHz

6.  3 400-3 650 MHz

7.  3 650-4 200 MHz

8.  4 400-4 940 MHz

9.  4 940-5 000 MHz

Four of the bands identified as candidates, 410-430 MHz, 2 700-2 900
MHz, 3 400-3 650 MHz, and 4 400-4 940 MHz are considered in this
proposal. The remaining bands are 450-470 MHz, 470-698 MHz, 2 300-2 400
MHz, 3 650-4 200 and 4 940-5 000 MHz.

The band 410-430 MHz is used extensively by many administrations for
fixed and mobile communications systems, long-range surveillance
systems, as well as personnel location systems. Ground, shipborne, and
airborne radars, which are used for national security, utilize this
particular frequency band. Parts of the band are also used for extra
vehicular activity (EVA) communications by both the Shuttle and
International Space Station on a primary basis for the space research
service; and for transmitting hydrological and meteorological data.

In all three ITU-R Regions, the 2 700-2 900 MHz band is allocated to
aeronautical radionavigation. The radionavigation service is designated
as a safety service under RR No. **4.10** and harmful interference to it
cannot be accepted. By footnote No. **5.423**, ground-based
meteorological radars are authorized to operate on an equal primary
basis. Previous detailed analysis and sharing studies undertaken by
various ITU administrations and ongoing within the working parties have
shown that the utilization of the 2 700-2 900 MHz band by IMT systems is
not feasible.

The 3 400-3 650 MHz band is allocated to the radiolocation service on a
primary basis in ITU-R Regions 2 and 3. The band 3 400-3 600 MHz is
allocated to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis in ITU-R
Region 1 and the band 3 600-3 700 MHz band is allocated to the
radiolocation service on a secondary basis in ITU-R Regions 2 and 3. In
this frequency range, administrations have developed and deployed a
variety of mobile and transportable high power radar systems that
operate on land, on ships, and on aircraft. The shipborne radars are
principally used in coastal areas, but can be used during open ocean
transit also. The airborne radars are highly mobile and operate in many
areas of the world. A number of ongoing sharing studies submitted to the
ITU-R have indicated that sharing in the 3 400-3 700 MHz band between
the radiolocation service and IMT-Advanced systems operating in the
mobile service is not feasible due to significant levels of interference
into both the radar systems and IMT-Advanced devices.

The 4 400-4 940 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis to the fixed
service. The 4 400-4 800 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis to the
mobile service. The 4 500-4 800 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis
to the fixed satellite service, subject to Appendix **30B**. The
4 800-5 000 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis to the mobile
service, expect aeronautical mobile. The 4 990-5 000 MHz band is
allocated on a primary basis to the radio astronomy service. ITU-R
Working Party 8B successfully concluded studies under agenda item 1.5
that show aeronautical telemetry systems for flight test can share with
fixed and mobile systems in this band. Use of this band includes many
datalinks and a number of unmanned air systems networks. Troposcatter
radio terminals are deployed in this band to provide secure digital
long-haul radio trunking. Systems in this band include deployable
communications systems as well as fixed and mobile radio relay networks.

The band 4 400--5 000 MHz is designated by several administrations in
Europe and North America as a harmonised band to be used for defense
communications and thus is critical to these administrations' ability to
fulfill their peacekeeping obligations.

**Proposal**

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 1 [NOC]{.underline}**

410-460 MHz

**Reasons**: ITU-R studies have not shown compatibility between IMT
systems and the incumbent services in the 410-430 MHz band. Extensive
use of this band for national security and public safety purposes
preclude the use of this band for commercial wireless purposes.

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 2 [NOC]{.underline}**

2 700-4 800 MHz

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Allocation to     |                       |                       |
| > services**          |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Region 1**        | > **Region 2**        | > **Region 3**        |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **2 700-2 900**       |                       |                       |
| AERONAUTICAL          |                       |                       |
| RADIONAVIGATION 5.337 |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| Radiolocation         |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| 5.423 5.424           |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| .......               |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**Reasons**: ITU-R detailed analysis and sharing studies undertaken by
various ITU administrations and working parties have shown that the
utilization of the 2 700 - 2 900 MHz band by IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced
systems is not feasible.

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 3 [NOC]{.underline}**

2 700-4 800 MHz

+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Allocation to    |                      |                       |
| > services**         |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Region 1**       | > **Region 2**       | > **Region 3**        |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > .....              |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **3 400-3 600**    | > **3 400-3 500**    |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > FIXED              | > FIXED              |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > FIXED-SATELLITE\   | > FIXED-SATELLITE    |                       |
| > (space-to-Earth)   | > (space-to-Earth)   |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > Mobile             | > Amateur            |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > Radiolocation      | > Mobile             |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > 5.431              | > Radiolocation      |                       |
| >                    | > 5.433              |                       |
| > **3 600-[3650]{.u  | >                    |                       |
| nderline}~~4 200~~** | > 5.282 5.432        |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > FIXED              | > **3 500-3 [650]{   |                       |
| >                    | .underline}~~700~~** |                       |
| > FIXED-SATELLITE\   | >                    |                       |
| > (space-to-Earth)   | > FIXED              |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > Mobile             | > FIXED-SATELLITE    |                       |
|                      | > (space-to-Earth)   |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > MOBILE except      |                       |
|                      | > aeronautical       |                       |
|                      | > mobile             |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > Radiolocation      |                       |
|                      | > 5.433              |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > 5.435              |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      |  **~~3 700-4 200~~** |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > ~~FIXED~~          |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > ~~FIXED-SATELLITE  |                       |
|                      | > (space-to-Earth)~~ |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > ~~MOBILE except    |                       |
|                      | > aeronautical       |                       |
|                      | > mobile~~           |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
|                      |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **....**           |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+

**Reasons**: ITU-R studies have not shown compatibility between IMT
systems and the radiolocation service ~~, nor between IMT systems and
the fixed or fixed satellite service~~ in the 3 400-3 650 MHz band.

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 4 [NOC]{.underline}**

2 700- 4 800 MHz

+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| > **Allocation to    |                      |                      |
| > services**         |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| > **Region 1**       | > **Region 2**       | > **Region 3**       |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **...........**      |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **4 400-4 500**      |                      |                      |
| FIXED                |                      |                      |
|                      |                      |                      |
| MOBILE               |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **4 500-4 800**      |                      |                      |
| FIXED                |                      |                      |
|                      |                      |                      |
| FIXED-SATELLITE      |                      |                      |
| (space-to-Earth)     |                      |                      |
| 5.441                |                      |                      |
|                      |                      |                      |
| MOBILE               |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

4 800-5 570 MHz

**Reasons**: Studies have not shown the compatibility of IMT with the
radio relay and troposcatter networks operating within the fixed and
mobile services [in the 4400-4940 MHz band]{.underline}. This NOC
proposal applies to Agenda Item 1.4 and the identification of spectrum
for IMT. The 4 500-4 940 MHz band is being considered for aeronautical
mobile telemetry for flight test (air-to-ground) under Agenda Item 1.5.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**[Attachment 1 (for information; not intended to be part of the
proposal)]{.underline}**

![](media/image3.wmf){width="8.997916666666667in" height="6.5in"}

**Document WAC/134(04.10.06):**

**IWG-3 COMMENTS ON THE RCS PROPOSAL ON AGENDA ITEM 4 (including
Recommendation 722 (WRC-03))**

***Agenda Item 4: in accordance with Resolution 95 (Rev.WRC‑03), to
review the Resolutions and Recommendations of previous conferences with
a view to their possible revision, replacement or abrogation;***

**ISSUE**

Recommendation 722 (WRC-03) invited administrations to participate in
ITU-R studies to review the technical, operational and frequency issues
for terrestrial wireless interactive multimedia applications (TWIMs) on
a global basis. The issue is whether or not to suppress this
Recommendation.

WRC-07 will set the agenda for the subsequent WRC, WRC-10. The
preliminary, or tentative, WRC-10 agenda resides in Resolution
803(WRC-03). The issue is whether or not the regulatory developments in
terrestrial wireless interactive multimedia applications (TWIMs) require
review by WRC-10 for action to be taken.

**BACKGROUND**

This proposal is directly related to a previous proposal from the RCS on
Agenda Item 7.2 (including Agenda Item 2.8 in Resolution 803 (WRC-03),
Preliminary agenda for the 2010 World Radiocommunication Conference).
Agenda Item 2.8 is "to consider the progress of the ITU R studies
concerning the development and regulatory requirements of terrestrial
wireless interactive multimedia applications, in accordance with
Recommendation 722 (WRC 03) and to take any appropriate action on this
subject." At that time, IWG-3 submitted comments stating IWG-3's view
that suppression of the agenda item was premature and that the US should
wait until the relevant studies have concluded before reaching a
decision on the retention and final wording of agenda item 2.8 for the
WRC-10 agenda to the WAC (WAC Document 069). This latest RCS proposal
seems to be another attempt to address the same topic. IWG-3 therefore
reiterates its previous comments.

WRC-10 provisional agenda item 2.8 derives from the WRC-03 agenda item
1.21, "to consider progress of the ITU-R studies concerning the
technical and regulatory requirements of terrestrial wireless
interactive multimedia applications, in accordance with Resolution 737
(WRC-2000), with a view to facilitating global harmonization." As no
significant input was submitted to the ITU-R group, Joint Task Group
(JTG) 1-6-8-9, formed to develop the text for this agenda item for the
CPM Report to WRC-03, there were no substantial study results that could
form a basis for proposals at WRC-03. Consequently, WRC-03 formed this
agenda item 2.8 for WRC-10, which invited studies in accordance with
Recommendation 722 (WRC-03).

While JTG 1-6-8-9 has held its final meeting, the legacy of WRC-03
Agenda Item 1.21 and now WRC-10 Agenda Item 2.8 are present in other
ongoing ITU-R studies. Since WRC-2003, Working Party (WP) 1B of ITU-R SG
1 has been developing a Working Document Towards a Preliminary Draft New
Report on Technical Convergence with Respect to Terrestrial Fixed,
Mobile, and Broadcasting Interactive Multimedia Applications per
Question ITU-R 224/1, "Technical Convergence with respect to Terrestrial
Fixed, Mobile, and Broadcasting Interactive Multimedia Applications and
the Associated Regulatory Environment." This item currently under study
in WP 1B can be considered a follow on to the original WRC-03 TWIMs
agenda item.

CPM06-01 gave WPs 1B and 4A (of ITU-R SG 4) the lead for responding to
Resolution 951 (WRC-03), "Options to Improve the International Spectrum
Regulatory Framework". This Resolution instructs the Director of the ITU
Radiocommunication Bureau to include the results of these studies in his
report to WRC-07, with the purpose of consideration of the suitability
of this subject on a future WRC agenda.

After WRC-03, Study Group (SG) 1 developed a new Study Question, 229/1,
pursuant to the matter of Res. 951(WRC-03). Likewise, SG 1 has sent a
liaison statement (Doc. 4A/131, 8/53, 9B/84, etc.) to several WPs across
various SGs, seeking their input from their radio service perspective on
options to improve the international spectrum regulatory framework.
Since then several ITU-R groups have sent back liaison replies to this
query. Doc. 1B/83, Annex 3 is the current Working Document Towards the
Report to the BR Director in response to the Resolution 951 matter.

The Resolution 951(WRC-03) study, the results of which will be reported
to WRC-07, is similar to the TWIMs matter in that replies from ITU-R
groups to the above-mentioned SG 1 liaison statement have focused on the
issues of convergence of current and future wireless applications, and
how they fit into the spectrum regulatory framework. Doc. 1B/50, Annex
4, from the Report of the October 2004 meeting of WP 1B, indicated in
its introduction that the scope of these issues may be perceived to fall
under the scope of Resolution 951(WRC-03).

**IWG-3 RECOMMENDATION ON RCS VIEW**

Given that these ITU-R studies are still ongoing and have not yet
presented results, IWG-3 is of the view that the US should wait until
these studies have concluded before reaching a decision on the retention
and final wording of agenda item 2.8 for the WRC-10 agenda and
suppression of Recommendation 722 (WRC-03) with which this agenda item
is currently associated. Further, although it is noted that the work
under Resolution 951 (WRC-03) is related to TWIMs, there is no time
limit to the studies under Recommendation 722 (WRC-03), and they may
continue in the time after WRC-07 and leading up to WRC-10.

**[INFORMAL WORKING GROUP 4 (IWG-4)]{.underline}**

**[Broadcasting and Amateur Issues]{.underline}**

**Document WAC/137(04.10.06):**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 1.13:** taking into account Resolutions **729 (WRC-97)**,
**351 (WRC-03)** and **544 (WRC-03)**, to review the allocations to all
services in the HF bands between 4 MHz and 10 MHz, excluding those
allocations to services in the frequency range 7 000-7 200 kHz and those
bands whose allotment plans are in Appendices **25**, **26** and **27**
and those whose channeling arrangements are in Appendix **17**, taking
account of the impact of new modulation techniques, adaptive control
techniques and the spectrum requirements for HF broadcasting;

**Background Information:** Changes to Article 25 made at WRC-03
encourage administrations to take the necessary steps to allow amateur
stations to prepare for and meet communication needs in support of
disaster relief. Most administrations recognize the amateur services as
serving humanitarian and disaster relief agencies as well as
non-government organizations such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement. The amateur services provide emergency communications on a
local, national and international basis as an adjunct to normal
communications, and in many cases provide the first information about
disasters and serve as the only communications link when communications
infrastructures are destroyed.

Based on the recommendation of the 1978 CCIR Special Preparatory
Meeting, WARC-79 accepted the principle that, like other high-frequency
radio services, the amateur service should have access to a family of
frequency bands so communications can be maintained as propagation
conditions change. Particularly in the higher latitudes, there are many
times when the maximum usable frequency (MUF) is below 7 MHz but is too
far above the next lowest amateur frequency band (3.8, 3.9 or 4.0 MHz,
depending upon the Region) for communication to be supported in that
band.

There is successful experience with amateur operation in the band 10
100-10 150 kHz, which is allocated to the fixed service on a primary
basis and the amateur service on a secondary basis.

Since 1999, a number of administrations have authorized amateur service
operations on specific voice-frequency bandwidth channels, subject to
No. 4.4 of the Radio Regulations, as follows:

+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| 5 260 CAN, G                     | 5 332 USA, FNL, ISL, NOR          |
|                                  |                                   |
| 5 269 CAN                        | 5 348 USA, FNL, ISL, NOR          |
|                                  |                                   |
| 5 280 CAN, FNL, ISL, NOR, G      | 5 368 USA, FNL, ISL, NOR          |
|                                  |                                   |
| 5 290 CAN, FNL, ISL, NOR, G      | 5 373 USA, FNL, ISL, NOR          |
|                                  |                                   |
| 5 300 FNL                        | 5 400 CAN, FNL, ISL, NOR, G       |
|                                  |                                   |
| 5 319 CAN                        | 5 405 USA, CAN, ISL, NOR, G       |
|                                  |                                   |
| 5 329 CAN                        |                                   |
+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

Operating experience has shown that these frequencies have the desired
radio propagation characteristics and that amateur operations can
co-exist without interference to the fixed and mobile services.

A secondary allocation of 150 kHz would allow sufficient bandwidth to
meet amateur service requirements while dynamically avoiding frequencies
in use by other services.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ /1 MOD**

**ARTICLE 5**

**Frequency allocations**

**Section IV -- Table of Frequency Allocations**

5 003-7 450 kHz

+-----------------------+------------------+---------------------------+
| Allocation to         |                  |                           |
| services              |                  |                           |
+-----------------------+------------------+---------------------------+
| **Region 1**          | **Region 2**     | **Region 3**              |
+-----------------------+------------------+---------------------------+
| **5                   |                  |                           |
| 250-5 ~~450           |                  |                           |
| ~~[260]{.underline}** |                  |                           |
| FIXED                 |                  |                           |
|                       |                  |                           |
| MOBILE except         |                  |                           |
| aeronautical mobile   |                  |                           |
+-----------------------+------------------+---------------------------+
| **[5                  |                  |                           |
| 260                   |                  |                           |
| -5-410]{.underline}** |                  |                           |
| FIXED                 |                  |                           |
|                       |                  |                           |
| MOBILE except         |                  |                           |
| aeronautical mobile   |                  |                           |
|                       |                  |                           |
| [Amateur]{.underline} |                  |                           |
+-----------------------+------------------+---------------------------+
| **[5                  |                  |                           |
| 410]{.underline}-5    |                  |                           |
| 450** FIXED           |                  |                           |
|                       |                  |                           |
| MOBILE except         |                  |                           |
| aeronautical mobile   |                  |                           |
+-----------------------+------------------+---------------------------+

**Reasons:** Allocation of a band at 5 MHz to the amateur service, on a
secondary basis, will provide communications at times when the MUF is
below 7 MHz and above the next lower amateur frequency band. Use of
listen-before-transmit techniques avoids interference to the primary
services.

**Document WAC/138(04.10.06):**

**IWG-4 Comments on WRC-07 Agenda Items 4 and 7.2**

1.  **WRC-07 Agenda Item 4**, *to review the Resolutions and
    Recommendations of previous Conferences with a view to their
    possible revision, replacement or abrogation.*

> IWG-4 reviewed Doc.WAC/079(25.01.06) submitted by NTIA.
>
> The following, under the auspices of IWG-4, were reviewed and are
> hereby proposed:
>
> AI-1.6, Aeronautical mobile (R) service
>
> Res. 413 (WRC-03)
>
> Res. 414 (WRC-03)
>
> Res. 415 (WRC-03)
>
> AI-1.11, BSS services in the band 620-790 MHz
>
> Res. 545 (WRC-03)
>
> AI-1.13, Services in the HF bands
>
> Res. 351 (WRC-03)
>
> Res. 544 (WRC-03)
>
> Res. 729 (WRC-97)
>
> Resolution 528 (Rev. WRC-03), BSS in the range 1-3 GHz

2.  **IWG-4 Agenda Item 4 proposals:**

> **[Res. 351:]{.underline}** NTIA proposal **is MOD**, without
> explanation. IWG-4 does not object to this proposal.
>
> **[Res. 413:]{.underline}** **[NOC]{.underline}**, in order to protect
> existing broadcast services in the adjacent band 87-108 MHz and future
> digital sound broadcast services in that band.

**[Res. 414:]{.underline}** NTIA proposal is **SUP.** IWG-4 does not
object to this proposal.

**[Res. 415:]{.underline}** NTIA proposal is **SUP**. IWG-4 does not
object to this proposal.

> **[Res. 528:]{.underline}** NTIA proposed SUP. [IWG-4 proposes
> NOC]{.underline}. WorldSpace indicated that the studies called for in
> Resolution 528 have not been conducted because the planning conference
> that should review such studies has not been convened. That is not to
> say that the technical studies called for by Resolution 528 are
> superfluous. Resolution 528 called for a planning conference to be
> convened preferably no later than 1998: however, no initiative has
> been taken by administrations to plan the BSS(S) in these bands.
> WorldSpace believes that studies should be conducted.
>
> **[Res. 544:]{.underline}** NTIA proposal is **SUP,** with "Noting RRC
> issue". IWG-4 does not object to this proposal.
>
> **[Res. 545:]{.underline}** SUP this Resolution and the Footnote
> 5.311. IWG-4 supports the method "B-4" in the CPM text.

**[Res. 729:]{.underline}** NTIA proposal is **SUP**. IWG-4 does not
object to this proposal.

> IWG-4 submitted two Draft Proposals relating to Resolution 544 to the
> last meeting of the WAC for resolution; one proposing additional HF
> spectrum allocations to the broadcasting service, and the second
> opposing additional HF spectrum to the broadcasting service

3.  **WRC-07 AI-7.2,** recommend agenda items for the next and future
    WRCs, taking into account Resolution **803** (WRC-03).

IWG-4 did not identify any changes or additions to WRC-2010 or future
agendas.

**[INFORMAL WORKING GROUP 5 (IWG-5)]{.underline}**

**[Regulatory Issues]{.underline}**

**Document WAC/139(04.10.06):**

## DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.12**[^8]**:** *to consider possible changes in response
to Resolution **86** (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002) of the Plenipotentiary
Conference: "Advance publication, coordination, notification and
recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to satellite
networks" in accordance with Resolution **86** (WRC‑**03**);*

**Background**:

WRC-**03** identified in Resolution **86 (WRC-03)** the scope and the
criteria to be used for the implementation of Resolution **86 (Rev.
Marrakesh, 2002)**. Resolves 1) of Resolution **86 (WRC-03)**
specifically states that WRC-**07** should "consider any proposals which
deal with deficiencies in the advance publication, coordination,
notification and recording procedures of the Radio Regulations for space
services which have either been identified by the Board and included in
the Rules of Procedure or which have been identified by administrations
or by the Bureau as appropriate." WRC-**03** also resolved that future
WRCs consider any proposals that are intended to transform the content
of the Rules of Procedure into regulatory text.

There has been a longstanding requirement in Article 9 of the Radio
Regulations, under **No. 9.1**, for the Radiocommunications Bureau to
wait a requisite six months after receiving the advanced publication
information for satellite networks requiring coordination under Section
II of Article 9 before receiving the accompanying coordination request
information, even if both sets of information are submitted to the
Bureau at the same time. While this six-month delay may have served a
purpose in years past when there was a substantial amount of technical
data included in the API for administrations to consider and potentially
comment upon, this is no longer the case. As a consequence of the
simplification of the Radio Regulations at WRC-95, the API for satellite
networks requiring coordination under Section II of Article 9 includes
very limited information, e.g. orbital position and frequency bands, and
as such, there is little for administrations to review and comment upon.
This required six month delay therefore serves no purpose other than to
delay the overall coordination process for satellite networks.

# Proposal:

This proposal modifies the provisions of No. **9.1** to allow for the
simultaneous receipt of advanced publication and coordination request
information for satellite networks requiring coordination under Section
II of Article 9. The requisite six-month delay between receipt of the
coordination request information and the notification request
information has been retained.

**USA/ / 1 MOD**

**9.1** Before initiating any action under this Article or under
Article **11** in respect of frequency assignments for a satellite
network or a satellite system, an administration, or one[^9] acting on
behalf of a group of named administrations, shall, prior to the
coordination procedure described in Section II of Article **9** below,
where applicable, send to the Bureau a general description of the
network or system for advance publication in the International Frequency
Information Circular (BR IFIC) not earlier than seven years and
preferably not later than two years before the planned date of bringing
into use of the network or system (see also No. **11.44**). The
characteristics to be provided for this purpose are listed in Appendix
**4**. The coordination or notification information may also be
communicated to the Bureau at the same time[.]{.underline}~~;~~ [Where
coordination information is required by Section II of Article 9, the
coordination information]{.underline} ~~it~~ shall be considered as
having been received by the Bureau [upon its actual date of receipt
whereas notification information shall be considered as having been
received by the Bureau]{.underline} not earlier than six months after
the date of receipt of the [coordination]{.underline}
information[.]{.underline} ~~for advance publication [,]{.underline}
where coordination is required by Section II of Article **9**.~~ Where
coordination is not required by Section II, notification shall be
considered as having been received by the Bureau not earlier than six
months after the date of publication of the advance publication
information.     (WRC-0[7]{.underline}~~3~~)

**9.5B** If, upon receipt of the BR IFIC containing information
published under No. **9.2B**, any administration considers its existing
or planned satellite systems or networks or terrestrial stations[^10]^1^
to be affected, it may send its comments to the publishing
administration, so that the latter may take those comments into
consideration [during]{.underline}~~when initiating~~ the coordination
procedure. A copy of these comments may also be sent to the Bureau.
Thereafter, both administrations shall endeavour to cooperate in joint
efforts to resolve any difficulties, with the assistance of the Bureau,
if so requested by either of the parties, and shall exchange any
additional relevant information that may be
available.     (WRC‑200[7]{.underline}~~0~~)

**Reasons:**

1\) to address the unnecessary requirement for the Radiocommunications
Bureau to wait six months after receipt of the advanced publication
information before receiving the coordination request information for
satellite networks requiring coordination under Section II of Article 9.

**Document WAC/140(04.10.06):**

**Subject: Agenda item 1.12**

United States of America

**Modification of Appendix 5**

**(equal rights ONLY)**

1 Background

APPENDIX 5 (rev.WRC‑03), "Identification of administrations with which
coordination is to be effected or agreement sought under the provisions
of article 9", paragraph 1 reads as follows :

> 1 For the purpose of effecting coordination under Article **9**,
> except in the case under No. **9.21**, and for identifying the
> administrations with which coordination is to be effected, the
> frequency assignments to be taken into account are those in the same
> frequency band as the planned assignment, pertaining to the same
> service or to another service to which the band is allocated with
> equal rights or a higher category[^11] of allocation, which might
> affect or be affected, as appropriate, and which are:........

The purpose of this proposal is to consider the phrase, "to which the
band is allocated with equal rights or a higher category". The Radio
Regulations are very clear that in some situations coordination is
limited to services with equal rights:

1.  No. **9.15** states, "...in respect of terrestrial stations in
    frequency bands allocated with equal rights to space and terrestrial
    services.."

2.  No. **9.17** states, "...allocated with equal rights to space and
    terrestrial services....".

3.  No. **9.17A** states, ".....in frequency bands allocated with equal
    rights to space radiocommunication services in both directions of
    transmission..."

No. **9.11A** applies "the provisions of Nos. **9.12** to **9.16**" and
the Rule of Procedure (RoP) on No. **9.11A** specify that the procedure
of No. **9.11A** is applicable to, "...satellite services having
allocations with equal rights...". Additionally, while there is no text
in the RR or in the RoP on No. **9.7** it doesn't appear that
administrations responsible for a geostationary-satellite networks
should have to coordinate if they are not allocated on an equal basis.
Based on the current principle of "allocated with equal rights or a
higher category of allocation," new GSO networks allocated on a
secondary basis have to coordinate under this provision with the GSO
networks allocated on a primary basis that are ahead of them, but not
with the GSO networks behind them in the process.

Also, the successful coordination between stations with primary and
secondary allocations may infer, or lead to confusion, of the status of
the rights of the station with a secondary allocation.

While it may be appear that coordination between primary and secondary
services may provide for an opportunity for them to agree on ways the
secondary service can operate compatibly with the primary service, it is
recognized that there is no incentive for a secondary service to
coordinate with a primary service, as no reciprocity is allowed and the
provisions of Nos. **5.28** to **5.31** apply regardless of the result
of the coordination procedure. Any such discussions could take place on
a bilateral basis between the administrations, including during the
Advance Publication process or when the secondary GSO network
coordination special section is published for coordination with other
networks allocated on a secondary basis.

Proposal - Modification Appendix 5 (Paragraph 1)

USA/ / 1 MOD

APPENDIX 5 (Rev.WRC‑03)

Identification of administrations with which coordination is to be
effected or\
agreement sought under the provisions of Article 9

1 For the purpose of effecting coordination under Article **9**, except
in the case under No. **9.21**, and for identifying the administrations
with which coordination is to be effected, the frequency assignments to
be taken into account are those in the same frequency band as the
planned assignment, pertaining to the same service or to another service
to which the band is allocated with equal rights ~~or a higher
category^1^ of allocation~~, which might affect or be affected, as
appropriate, and which are:

> ~~^1^ The coordination between an earth station and terrestrial
> stations under Nos. **9.15**, **9.16**, **9.17**, **9.18** and
> **9.19**, or between earth stations operating in opposite directions
> of transmission under **9.17A**, applies only to assignments in bands
> allocated with equal rights~~.

**Reasons:** To clarify that Nos. **9.7** and **9.11A** to **9.19**
applies only between assignments in bands allocated with equal rights.

\* \* \*

**Document WAC/141(04.10.06):**

IWG-5 Comments on Document IWG-5/66 (RCS draft proposal on active and
passive sensors)

IWG-5 has tabled a Draft Proposal for the Work of the Conference from
the NTIA offered under agenda item 1.12, IWG-5/066 (02.27.06). The
proposal concerns modifications to Appendix 4 of the Radio Regulations
to provide for data elements for active and passive sensors on board
satellites to provide for , "analyzing the compatibility of these
sensors with systems operating in other services.....and subsequent
entry into the Master International Frequency Register (MIRF)." These
sensors operate in the Earth Exploration Service (EESS).

After long consideration, IWG-5, at its meeting of 17 July, 2006, and as
reflected in its minutes of the meeting, determined to oppose this
proposal. It was noted that this proposal is related to the still
un-reconciled FCC/NTIA proposals for agenda item 1.20. This agenda item
concerns consideration of band pairs of EESS passive sensors and active
satellite services. The NTIA proposal advocates mandatory Out of Band
Emission limits on the active satellite services and the WAC/FCC
proposal is opposed to such limits.

In summary it was the view of IWG-5 that agreement to the referenced
proposal in advance of the resolution of the agenda item 1.20 would put
the industry at considerable disadvantage. It is hoped that such
resolution will take place soon.

**Draft Proposals**

**for the**

**2007**

**World Radiocommunication Conference**

**developed by the**

**Executive Branch Agencies**

**and provided by the**

**National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)**

**II. Draft Proposals on WRC-07 Agenda Items received from the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA):**

**Document WAC/121(04.10.06) -- *Draft Proposal No. 1*:**

DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.2:** to consider allocations and regulatory issues
related to the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) service, space
research (passive) service and the meteorological-satellite service in
accordance with Resolutions **746 (WRC--03)** and **742** **(WRC--03)**;

**Background Information:** This proposal addresses Resolution **742**
**(WRC‑03), "**consideration of sharing criteria between the passive
services and the fixed and mobile services in the band 36-37 GHz to
determine appropriate sharing criteria and to consider the possible
inclusion of such sharing criteria within the Radio Regulations."

The frequency band 36-37 GHz is allocated to the Earth
exploration-satellite (passive), the space research (passive), the fixed
and the mobile services on a primary basis. This band has been used for
passive sensing of the Earth and its atmosphere for many years. It is an
important resource for remote sensing of rain rates, snow, sea ice and
clouds and is often used in conjunction with a number of other passive
sensing bands to extract such data. A variety of scientific and
meteorological spacecraft carry instruments that utilize this band.
There is limited use of the band by the fixed or mobile services.
However, determination of appropriate sharing criteria should not place
undue constraints on the future use of the band by the fixed and mobile
services.

The ITU-R has undertaken studies that should result in Recommendations
in Study Group 9 and Study Group 7, which would recommend various
interference mitigation measures to be taken. These studies indicate
that passive sensing systems may receive excessive interference if there
are no limitations on the power of fixed and mobile service transmitters
as deployment densities of the terrestrial services in this band
increase. Based on the results of these studies, a new footnote in
Article **5** of the Radio Regulations should be added, containing
appropriate transmitter power limits on future systems operating in the
36-37 GHz band for the fixed and mobile services.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ /1 MOD**

34.2-40 GHz

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Allocation to       |                       |                       |
| services**            |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Region 1**          | **Region 2**          | **Region 3**          |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **......**            |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **36-37** EARTH       |                       |                       |
| EXPLORATION-SATELLITE |                       |                       |
| (passive)             |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| FIXED                 |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| MOBILE                |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| SPACE RESEARCH        |                       |                       |
| (passive)             |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| 5.149 **ADD 5.AAA**   |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **......**            |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**USA/ /2 ADD**

**5.AAA** In the band 36-37 GHz, the power delivered to the antenna of a
station brought into use in the fixed or mobile services after
\[effective date of WRC-07 Final Acts\] shall not exceed --10 dBW.

**Reasons:** Passive sensor measurements in this band are currently
being used to determine rain, snow, ocean ice and water vapor properties
for use in numerical weather prediction models and other scientific
applications including studies the hydrological cycle or global water
circulation. Currently, this band is lightly used worldwide by the fixed
and mobile services. It is necessary to establish an appropriate
operational environment to protect the future use of Earth
exploration-satellite (passive) and space research (passive) services in
this band without imposing undue constraints on the fixed or mobile
services.

**Document WAC/121(04.10.06) -- *Draft Proposal No 2*:**

DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.2:** to consider allocations and regulatory issues
related to the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) service, space
research (passive) service and the meteorological-satellite service in
accordance with Resolutions **746** **(WRC 03)** and **742 (WRC 03)**;

**Background Information:** This proposal addresses ***resolves 2*** of
Resolutions **746** **(WRC‑03), "**consideration of the sharing
conditions between the EESS (passive) and the SRS (passive) on one hand
and the fixed and mobile services on the other hand in the band
10.6-10.68 GHz to determine appropriate sharing criteria" and
***resolves 3***, "...to consider the inclusion of such sharing criteria
within the Radio Regulations."

The frequency band 10.6-10.68 GHz is allocated to the Earth
exploration-satellite service (EESS) (passive), radio astronomy and
space research (passive) services on a primary basis. This band is also
allocated to the mobile (except aeronautical mobile) and the fixed
services on a primary basis, taking into account RR No. **5.482**, which
limits transmitter power and e.i.r.p. in these services in most
administrations. This band has been used for passive sensing of Earth
and its atmosphere for many years. It is an important resource for
remote sensing of rain, snow, sea state, ocean wind, and soil moisture
content and is often used in conjunction with a number of other passive
sensing bands to extract such data. A variety of scientific spacecraft
carry instruments that utilize this band. However, this band is also
extensively use by the fixed service.

Resolution **746** states in *considering h)* "that the EESS (passive)
operating in the band 10.6-10.68 GHz may experience harmful interference
from the emissions of systems of active services;" and in *recognizing
3)* "that the provisions given in No. **5.482** may not be sufficient to
ensure the protection of the EESS (passive) in the band 10.6-10.68 GHz."
On this basis, Resolution **746** called for studies of the sharing
conditions in this band. The ITU-R has undertaken studies that should
result in Recommendations on additional interference mitigation
measures. The studies supporting the Recommendations are to be
summarized in ITU-R Reports.

A contribution to ITU--R Working Party 7C from the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) provided evidence of interference detected by one
EESS (passive) instrument operating in the 10.6-10.68 GHz band.

Based on the results of the ITU-R studies and the apparent
ineffectiveness of the current constraints given in No. **5.482** in
protecting the EESS (passive) operations in the 10.6-10.68 GHz band, a
modification to No. **5.482**, urging administrations to further limit
the fixed and mobile service emissions in this band is proposed.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ /1 MOD**

+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **10-11.7 GHz**      |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Allocation to      |                      |                       |
| services**           |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Region 1**         | **Region 2**         | **Region 3**          |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **......**           |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **10.6-10.68** EARTH |                      |                       |
| E                    |                      |                       |
| XPLORATION-SATELLITE |                      |                       |
| (passive)            |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| FIXED                |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| MOBILE except        |                      |                       |
| aeronautical mobile  |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| RADIO ASTRONOMY      |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| SPACE RESEARCH       |                      |                       |
| (passive)            |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| Radiolocation        |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| 5.149 **MOD** 5.482  |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **.......**          |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+

**USA/ /2 MOD**

**5.482** In the band 10.6-10.68 GHz, stations of the fixed and mobile,
except aeronautical mobile, services shall be limited to a maximum
equivalent isotropically radiated power of 40 dBW and the power
delivered to the antenna shall not exceed --3 dBW. These limits may be
exceeded subject to agreement obtained under No. **9.21**. However, in
Saudi Arabia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, China,
the United Arab Emirates, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Iraq, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Moldova,
Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Qatar, the Syrian Arab Republic,
Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, the restrictions on the fixed and mobile,
except aeronautical mobile, services are not applicable. ~~(WRC-03)~~
[In order to protect the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) and space
research (passive) services, after \[effective date of WRC-07 Final
Acts\], administrations should limit the power delivered to the
transmitter antenna to a maximum of -10 dBW for new stations authorized
in the fixed service, and to a maximum of -17 dBW for new stations
authorized in the mobile service (except aeronautical mobile) operating
in the 10.6-10.68 GHz band.]{.underline}

## 

## Reasons: Passive sensor measurements in this band are currently being used for weather prediction and natural disaster prediction as well as for other scientific applications. Interference into operational passive sensors has been documented in the ITU-R, even with the current power and e.i.r.p. limits specified in RR No, 5.482. To limit the potential increase in interference and maintain the utility of this band for passive remote sensing, the transmit power levels of future stations in the fixed and mobile (except aeronautical mobile) services needs to be reduced to protect the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) and space research (passive) services.

**Document WAC/119(04.10.06):**

DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.3:** in accordance with Resolution **747 (WRC-03)**,
consider upgrading the radiolocation service to primary allocation
status in the bands 9 000-9 200 MHz and 9 300‑9 500 MHz, and extending
by up to 200 MHz the existing primary allocations to the Earth
exploration-satellite service (active) and the space research service
(active) in the band 9 500‑9 800 without placing undue constraint on the
services to which the bands are allocated;

**The 200 MHz extension of the primary EESS (active) and SRS (active)
allocations in the 9500-9800 MHz band**[^12]

**Background Information:** The band 9 500-9 800 MHz is allocated on a
primary basis to the Earth exploration-satellite (EESS) (active), space
research (SRS) (active), radiolocation and radionavigation services. In
order to satisfy requirements for increased resolution of global
environmental and land use monitoring and terrain mapping of planetary
surfaces, EESS (active) and the SRS (active) allocations require an
increase of 200 MHz.

The ITU-R studied the compatibility between EESS (active) and the
existing services in the two bands identified by Resolution **747
(WRC-03)** for consideration as extension bands.

Results of ITU-R tests and measurements indicate that representative
radiolocation and radionavigation radars do not suffer any performance
degradation due to any of the representative EESS (active) waveforms.
Results of various ITU-R compatibility studies combined with these test
and measurements indicate that sharing is feasible in the additional 200
MHz of spectrum between the EESS (active) and existing services in
either the 9 300-9 500 MHz band or the 9 800-10 000 MHz band. Since the
SRS (active) systems operate in the vicinity of planets and celestial
bodies other than the Earth, these systems need not show compatibility
with Earth-based systems.

The proposal provides for an extension of 200 MHz to the EESS (active)
and SRS (active). It extends the protection given in RR **5.476A** to
the radiolocation and radionavigation services in the existing
9 500-9 800 MHz band to this extension. Given that the extension is only
required for wideband systems that could not operate within the existing
allocation, the proposal restricts the use of the extension band to
wideband systems.

## Proposal

**USA/ /01 MOD**

8 500-10 000 MHz

+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Allocation to      |                      |                       |
| services**           |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **Region 1**         | **Region 2**         | **Region 3**          |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **.....**            |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **9 300-9 500**      |                      |                       |
| [EARTH               |                      |                       |
| E                    |                      |                       |
| XPLORATION-SATELLITE |                      |                       |
| (                    |                      |                       |
| active)]{.underline} |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| RADIONAVIGATION      |                      |                       |
| 5.476                |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| Radiolocation        |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| [SPACE RESEARCH      |                      |                       |
| (                    |                      |                       |
| active)]{.underline} |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| 5.427 5.474 5.475    |                      |                       |
| [MOD 5.476A ADD      |                      |                       |
| 5.XXX]{.underline}   |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **9 500-9 800**      |                      |                       |
| EARTH                |                      |                       |
| E                    |                      |                       |
| XPLORATION-SATELLITE |                      |                       |
| (active)             |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| RADIOLOCATION        |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| RADIONAVIGATION      |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| SPACE RESEARCH       |                      |                       |
| (active)             |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| [MOD]{.underline}    |                      |                       |
| 5.476A               |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| **9 800-10 000**     |                      |                       |
| RADIOLOCATION        |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| Fixed                |                      |                       |
|                      |                      |                       |
| 5.477 5.478 5.479    |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+

**Reasons**: Provides a worldwide contiguous primary allocation to meet
the requirements of EESS (active) and SRS (active) systems for global
environmental monitoring and surface terrain mapping.

**USA/ /02 MOD**

**5.476A** In the band 9 [3]{.underline}~~5~~00-9 800 MHz, stations in
the Earth exploration-satellite service (active) and space research
service (active) shall not cause harmful interference to, or constrain
the use and development of, stations of the radionavigation and
radiolocation services.     (WRC-~~97~~[07]{.underline})

**Reasons:** Extends the provisions of RR **5.476A** in the existing
9 500-9 800 MHz band to the 9 300-9 500 band.

**USA/ /03 ADD**

**5.XXX** The use of the band 9 300-9 500 MHz by Earth
exploration-satellite service (active) and space research service
(active) is limited to systems that cannot be accommodated within the
9 500-9 800 MHz band and that require bandwidths larger than 300 MHz.

**Reasons:** The extension is only required for wideband systems that
cannot operate within the existing 9 500 - 9 800 MHz allocation.

**USA/ /04 SUP**

RESOLUTION 747 (WRC-03)

Possible upgrade of the radiolocation service to primary allocation
status\
in the frequency bands 9 000-9 200 MHz and 9 300-9 500 MHz, and\
possible extension of the existing primary allocations to the Earth\
exploration-satellite service (active) and the space research\
service (active) in the band 9 500-9 800 MHz

**Reasons:** As a consequence to the completion of agenda item 1.3 at
WRC-07, Resolution **747** can be suppressed.

**Document WAC/120(04.10.06):**

## DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.4**: to consider frequency-related matters for the
future development of IMT 2000 and systems beyond IMT 2000 taking into
account the results of ITU-R studies in accordance with Resolution **228
(Rev.WRC 03)**;

**Background Information**: Resolution **228 (WRC-03)** calls for
studies on frequency-related matters for the future development of
IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT-2000 (IMT-Advanced) as defined by ITU-R.
Resolves 2 under Resolution **228 (WRC-03)** invites the ITU R to
report, in time for WRC 07, on the results of studies on the spectrum
requirements and potential frequency ranges suitable for the future
development of IMT-2000 and systems beyond IMT 2000, taking into
account:

-   the evolving user needs, including the growth in demand for IMT 2000
    services;

-   the evolution of IMT-2000 and pre-IMT-2000 systems through advances
    in technology;

-   the bands currently identified for IMT-2000;

-   the time-frame in which spectrum would be needed;

-   the period for migration from existing to future systems;

-   the extensive use of frequencies below those identified for IMT-2000
    in No. **5.317A**.

WARC-92 identified the bands 1 885-2 025 MHz / 2 110-2 200 MHz and
WRC-2000 identified the bands 806-960 MHz (ITU-R Region 1: 862-960 MHz)
/ 1 710-1 885 MHz / 2 500-2 690 MHz for use on a worldwide basis by
administrations wishing to implement IMT-2000 systems. Resolutions **212
(WARC 92)**, **223 (WRC-2000)** and **224 (WRC-2000)** invite
administrations to make available the necessary portion of these
identified bands for IMT-2000 development, while recognizing that
administrations have the flexibility to use the bands for other
applications of services to which the bands are allocated and to
implement IMT-2000 in other mobile bands.

In order to identify additional spectrum to meet IMT-Advanced
requirement, compatibility with existing services in the bands of
interest must be demonstrated through ITU-R technical studies. However,
at this time such studies have not been completed.

The prioritized candidate bands for IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced systems
are between 400 MHz and 5 GHz (ITU-R Report \[IMT.CANDI\]) and are:

1.  410-430 MHz

2.  450-470 MHz

3.  470-862 MHz (portions already identified for Region 2 and some
    administrations by Resolution **224**)

4.  2 300-2 400 MHz (already identified for some administrations (U.S.)
    by Resolution **223**)

5.  2 700-2 900 MHz

6.  3 400-3 650 MHz

7.  3 650-4 200 MHz

8.  4 400-4 940 MHz

9.  4 940-5 000 MHz

Four of the bands identified as candidates, 410-430 MHz, 2 700-2 900
MHz, 3 400-3 650 MHz, and 4 400-4 940 MHz are considered in this
proposal. The remaining bands are 450-470 MHz, 470-698 MHz, 2 300-2 400
MHz, 3 650-4 200 and 4 940-5 000 MHz.[^13]

The band 410-430 MHz is used extensively by many administrations for
fixed and mobile communications systems, long-range surveillance
systems, as well as personnel location systems. Ground, shipborne, and
airborne radars, which are used for national security, utilize this
particular frequency band. Parts of the band are also used for extra
vehicular activity (EVA) communications by both the Shuttle and
International Space Station on a primary basis for the space research
service; and for transmitting hydrological and meteorological data.

In all three ITU-R Regions, the 2 700-2 900 MHz band is allocated to
aeronautical radionavigation. The radionavigation service is designated
as a safety service under RR No. **4.10** and harmful interference to it
cannot be accepted. By footnote No. **5.423**, ground-based
meteorological radars are authorized to operate on an equal primary
basis. Previous detailed analysis and sharing studies undertaken by
various ITU administrations and ongoing within the working parties have
shown that the utilization of the 2 700-2 900 MHz band by IMT systems is
not feasible.

The 3 400-3 650 MHz band is allocated to the radiolocation service on a
primary basis in ITU-R Regions 2 and 3. The band 3 400-3 600 MHz is
allocated to the radiolocation service on a secondary basis in ITU-R
Region 1 and the band 3 600-3 700 MHz band is allocated to the
radiolocation service on a secondary basis in ITU-R Regions 2 and 3. In
this frequency range, administrations have developed and deployed a
variety of mobile and transportable high power radar systems that
operate on land, on ships, and on aircraft. The shipborne radars are
principally used in coastal areas, but can be used during open ocean
transit also. The airborne radars are highly mobile and operate in many
areas of the world. A number of ongoing sharing studies submitted to the
ITU-R have indicated that sharing in the 3 400-3 700 MHz band between
the radiolocation service and IMT-Advanced systems operating in the
mobile service is not feasible due to significant levels of interference
into both the radar systems and IMT-Advanced devices.

The 4 400-4 940 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis to the fixed
service. The 4 400-4 800 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis to the
mobile service. The 4 500-4 800 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis
to the fixed satellite service, subject to Appendix **30B**. The
4 800-5 000 MHz band is allocated on a primary basis to the mobile
service, expect aeronautical mobile. The 4 990-5 000 MHz band is
allocated on a primary basis to the radio astronomy service. ITU-R
Working Party 8B successfully concluded studies under agenda item 1.5
that show aeronautical telemetry systems for flight test can share with
fixed and mobile systems in this band. Use of this band includes many
datalinks and a number of unmanned air systems networks. Troposcatter
radio terminals are deployed in this band to provide secure digital
long-haul radio trunking. Systems in this band include deployable
communications systems as well as fixed and mobile radio relay networks.

The band 4 400--5 000 MHz is designated by several administrations in
Europe and North America as a harmonised band to be used for defense
communications and thus is critical to these administrations' ability to
fulfill their peacekeeping obligations.

**Proposal**

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 1 [NOC]{.underline}**

410-460 MHz

**Reasons**: ITU-R studies have not shown compatibility between IMT
systems and the incumbent services in the 410-430 MHz band. Extensive
use of this band for national security and public safety purposes
preclude the use of this band for commercial wireless purposes.

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 2 [NOC]{.underline}**

2 700-4 800 MHz

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Allocation to     |                       |                       |
| > services**          |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Region 1**        | > **Region 2**        | > **Region 3**        |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **2 700-2 900**       |                       |                       |
| AERONAUTICAL          |                       |                       |
| RADIONAVIGATION 5.337 |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| Radiolocation         |                       |                       |
|                       |                       |                       |
| 5.423 5.424           |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| **.......**           |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

**Reasons**: ITU-R detailed analysis and sharing studies undertaken by
various ITU administrations and working parties have shown that the
utilization of the 2 700 - 2 900 MHz band by IMT-2000 and IMT-Advanced
systems is not feasible.

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 3 [NOC]{.underline}**

2 700-4 800 MHz

+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Allocation to    |                      |                       |
| > services**         |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **Region 1**       | > **Region 2**       | > **Region 3**        |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **.....**          |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **3 400-3 600**    | > **3 400-3 500**    |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > FIXED              | > FIXED              |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > FIXED-SATELLITE\   | > FIXED-SATELLITE    |                       |
| > (space-to-Earth)   | > (space-to-Earth)   |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > Mobile             | > Amateur            |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > Radiolocation      | > Mobile             |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > 5.431              | > Radiolocation      |                       |
| >                    | > 5.433              |                       |
| > **3 600-4 200**    | >                    |                       |
| >                    | > 5.282 5.432        |                       |
| > FIXED              | >                    |                       |
| >                    | > **3 500-3 700**    |                       |
| > FIXED-SATELLITE\   | >                    |                       |
| > (space-to-Earth)   | > FIXED              |                       |
| >                    | >                    |                       |
| > Mobile             | > FIXED-SATELLITE    |                       |
|                      | > (space-to-Earth)   |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > MOBILE except      |                       |
|                      | > aeronautical       |                       |
|                      | > mobile             |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > Radiolocation      |                       |
|                      | > 5.433              |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > 5.435              |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > **3 700-4 200**    |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > FIXED              |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > FIXED-SATELLITE    |                       |
|                      | > (space-to-Earth)   |                       |
|                      | >                    |                       |
|                      | > MOBILE except      |                       |
|                      | > aeronautical       |                       |
|                      | > mobile             |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+
| > **....**           |                      |                       |
+----------------------+----------------------+-----------------------+

**Reasons**: ITU-R studies have not shown compatibility between IMT
systems and the radiolocation service, nor between IMT systems and the
fixed or fixed satellite service in the 3 400-3 650 MHz band.

**ARTICLE 5**

**USA/ / 4 [NOC]{.underline}**

2 700- 4 800 MHz

+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| > **Allocation to    |                      |                      |
| > services**         |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| > **Region 1**       | > **Region 2**       | > **Region 3**       |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **...........**      |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **4 400-4 500**      |                      |                      |
| FIXED                |                      |                      |
|                      |                      |                      |
| MOBILE               |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **4 500-4 800**      |                      |                      |
| FIXED                |                      |                      |
|                      |                      |                      |
| FIXED-SATELLITE      |                      |                      |
| (space-to-Earth)     |                      |                      |
| 5.441                |                      |                      |
|                      |                      |                      |
| MOBILE               |                      |                      |
+----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+

4 800-5 570 MHz

**Reasons**: Studies have not shown the compatibility of IMT with the
radio relay and troposcatter networks operating within the fixed and
mobile services. This NOC proposal applies to Agenda Item 1.4 and the
identification of spectrum for IMT. The 4 500-4 940 MHz band is being
considered for aeronautical mobile telemetry for flight test
(air-to-ground) under Agenda Item 1.5.

**Document WAC/126(04.10.06):**

### DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 1.7**: to consider the results of ITU-R studies regarding
sharing between the mobile-satellite service and the space research
service (passive) in the band 1 668 - 1 668.4 MHz, and between the
mobile-satellite service and the mobile service in the band 1 668.4 -
1 675 MHz in accordance with Resolution **744 (WRC‑03)**;

**Background Information**: **(Issue A)** The band 1 668-1 668.4 MHz is
allocated to the space research (passive) service (SRS (passive)) and
the mobile-satellite service (MSS) (Earth-to-space). The space research
allocation may be used by space-based radio astronomy applications, as
part of Space Very Long Baseline Interferometry systems (S-VLBI). The
band 1 668-1 668.4 MHz is a part of the band, 1 660.5-1 668.4 MHz,
allocated to the SRS (passive). However S-VLBI spaceborne receivers
typically receive over a wider frequency band because a wider band is
desirable for increasing the sensitivity of systems and also to observe
highly red-shifted objects.

The potential for interference from mobile earth stations (MES)
operating in the MSS to the S-VLBI systems has been studied by the
ITU-R, in accordance with Resolution **744**. The studies concluded that
to ensure protection of future SRS (passive) systems operating in highly
elliptical orbits, with an apogee of 150 000 km and higher, the power
density of MESs operating in the GSO MSS networks should not exceed to
-- 12.5 dBW/4 kHz in any part of the frequency band 1 668-1 668.4 MHz.

**(Issue B)** The band 1 668.4-1 675 MHz is allocated to the MSS in the
Earth-to-space direction. There are two potential interference
scenarios: 1) interference from transmitting stations in the mobile
service to receiving space stations in the mobile satellite service; and
2) interference from transmitting mobile earth stations to receiving
mobile stations. Regulatory provisions relating to scenario 2 were dealt
with at WRC-03 by the inclusion of a coordination mechanism and
appropriate parameters in Appendix **7** of the Radio Regulations.
However, there are currently no regulatory provisions which address
potential interference from systems in the mobile service to MSS systems
in the band 1 668.4-1 675 MHz. Therefore, the ITU sharing studies have
been focused on scenario 1. No proposals are included herein concerning
this issue.

**Proposal**:

USA/ /1 ADD

**5.379\[F\]** In order to protect the space research service (passive)
in the band 1 668-1 668.4 MHz the maximum emission power density of any
mobile earth station in a mobile-satellite service network in the
geostationary satellite orbit network operating in this band, shall not
exceed -12.5 dBW/4 kHz in any part of the frequency band 1 668-1 668.4
MHz.

**Reasons**: To ensure the protection of and future S-VLBI systems
operating in the SRS (passive).

**USA/ /2 MOD**

**5.379D** For sharing of the band 1 668-1 675 MHz between the
mobile-satellite service and the fixed, [and]{.underline} mobile ~~and
space research (passive)~~ services, Resolution **744 (WRC‑03)** shall
apply.     (WRC-03)

**Reasons**: Studies under Res. **744** have concluded with regard to
the SRS (passive).

USA/ /3 MOD

RESOLUTION 744 (WRC-~~03~~[07]{.underline})

Sharing between the mobile-satellite service (Earth-to-space) ~~and the
space research (passive) service in the band 1 668-1 668.4 MHz~~ and
between ~~and the space\
research (passive) service in the band 1 668-1 668.4 MHz and between~~\
the mobile-satellite service (Earth-to-space) and the fixed and\
mobile services in the band 1 668.4-1 675 MHz

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
200[7]{.underline}~~2003~~),

Considering

a\) that [WRC-03]{.underline} ~~this conference~~ made a global
allocation to the mobile-satellite service (MSS) (Earth-to-space) in the
band 1 668-1 675 MHz and a global allocation to the MSS (space-to-Earth)
in the band 1 518-1 525 MHz;

b\) that due to sharing conditions between MSS (space-to-Earth) and the
aeronautical mobile service for telemetry in the band 1 518-1 525 MHz
(see No. **5.348B**), MSS operation in the United States of America is
unlikely to be feasible;

c\) that the above constraints on the MSS in the band 1 518-1 525 MHz
therefore limit the possible use of the band 1 668-1 675 MHz by the MSS
in the United States of America;

d\) that the band 1 660.5-1 668.4 MHz is allocated to the space research
(passive) service;

~~e) that in the band 1 668-1 68.4 MHz, mobile earth stations and space
research (passive) stations are subject to coordination under
**No.9.11A**;~~

~~[f]{.underline}~~e) that the band 1 670-1 675 MHz is currently planned
for use in the United States of America for the fixed and mobile
services,

considering further

a\) that the band 1 668.4-1 675 MHz is allocated to the fixed and mobile
services;

b\) that No. **5.380** identifies the band 1 670-1 675 MHz for
aeronautical public correspondence systems but that no such systems
exist;

resolves

that, in the band 1 670-1 675 MHz, stations in the MSS shall not claim
protection from fixed and mobile stations operating within the United
States of America,

**Reasons**: Studies called for in this resolution have been completed.

**Document WAC/116(04.10.06):**

DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**WRC-07 Agenda Item 1.8 (Res. 122 (Rev.WRC-03) only**[^14]**):** *to
consider the results of ITU-R studies on technical sharing and
regulatory provisions for the application of high altitude platform
stations operating in the bands 27.5-28.35 GHz and 31‑31.3 GHz in
response to Resolution **145** **(WRC‑03),** and for high altitude
platform stations operating in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz
in response to Resolution **122 (Rev.WRC‑03)**;*

**ISSUE**: Matters related to the use of the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and
47.9-48.2 GHz by high altitude platform stations (HAPS) in the fixed
service and by systems and networks in the fixed-satellite service
(FSS).

##### Resolution 122 (Rev. WRC-03)

\"Use of the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz by high altitude
platform stations (HAPS) in the fixed service and by other services\"

**Background Information**:

The ITU has been considering the implications of HAPS in the fixed
service in the 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz band since 1997, when
WRC-97 first made provision for the operation of HAPS within the fixed
service. Studies have been ongoing under versions of Resolution 122
since WRC-97.

Resolution **122 (Rev. WRC-2000)** indicated that sharing studies remain
to be completed between the fixed-satellite service (FSS) and HAPS
operations in the FS. Pending the completion of studies, Resolution
**122 (Rev. WRC-2000)** instructed the Radiocommunication Bureau "that
from 22 November 1997, and pending review of the sharing studies in
*considering j)* and review of the notification process by WRC-99, the
Bureau shall accept notices in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz
only for high altitude platform stations in the FS and for feeder links
for the broadcasting-satellite service (BSS), shall continue to process
notices for FSS networks (except for feeder links for the
broadcasting-satellite service) for which complete information for
advance publication has been received prior to 27 October 1997, and
shall inform the notifying administrations accordingly***.\"*** ~~In
other words~~[Therefore]{.underline}, [the Bureau has not
accepted]{.underline} notices received after 22 November~~,~~ 1997 from
non-BSS feeder link FSS networks in the 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz
bands ~~have not been accepted~~.

Resolution **122 (Rev. WRC-03)** extended the restriction on processing
of notices for FSS networks other than those providing service
exclusively within Region 2. It also instructed the Bureau to maintain,
until a date to be decided by a future WRC, notices concerning HAPS that
were received by the Bureau prior to 22 November 1997 and provisionally
recorded in the Master International Frequency Register. This is a
substantial exception to No. **11.26**, which provides that "\[n\]otices
relating to assignments for high altitude platform stations in the fixed
service in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz shall reach the
Bureau not earlier than five years before the assignments are brought
into use."

The studies regarding HAPS in the 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz bands
have been completed and the results are contained in Recommendation
ITU-R SF.1481. This recommendation makes clear that co-frequency
operations between HAPS in the fixed service and FSS networks and
systems are feasible in the 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz bands, even
while noting that "there may be a need to develop the maximum allowable
power flux-density at satellites on the GSO due to aggregate
interference caused by ground user terminals of high altitude platform
networks." The revision to Resolution **122** that was approved at
WRC-03 confirms that co-existence between HAPS in the FS and the FSS at
47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz is feasible, as administrations were
encouraged to facilitate interservice coordination.

In the WRC-03 revision of Resolution **122**, the ITU-R was invited to
study power limitations on HAPS ground stations to facilitate sharing
with space station receivers, regulatory provisions to address
deployment of HAPS in the FS near country borders, and technical sharing
criteria between HAPS in the FS and both radio astronomy and FSS systems
(taking into account the operational environments and the requirements
of FSS systems). With the exception of interference to and from FSS
spacecraft, and border area coordination matters in the FS, the
deployment of HAPS is a national issue. The issue of interference
between the FSS satellite and HAPS networks can be addressed through
coordination using Articles **9** and **11** of the Radio Regulations.
As a result, Resolution **122** can be suppressed, provided that
reference to the use of Article **9** for HAPS is included in [a new
resolution that is referenced in No. **5.552A** of]{.underline} the
Radio Regulations. The Bureau should be instructed to retain all notices
concerning HAPS that are maintained in the MIFR only by virtue of
*instructs the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau* 1 of
Resolution **122 (Rev. WRC-03)** only until 1 January 2010, unless the
notifying administration earlier informs the Bureau that the notified
assignments have been brought into use.

**Proposal**:

#### USA/1.8/

**SUP**

RESOLUTION 122 (Rev.WRC-03)

Use of the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz by high altitude
platform stations (HAPS) in the fixed service and by other services

**Reasons**: Studies called for in relation to HAPS at 47 GHz have been
completed. The Resolution **122** application of the provisions of
Article 9 is proposed for incorporation into the Radio Regulations (see
**USA/1.8/3** below).

#### USA/1.8/2

#### MOD

**5.552A** The allocation to the fixed service in the bands 47.2-47.5
GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz is designated for use by high altitude platform
stations. The use of the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz by high
altitude platforms in the fixed service is subject to the provisions of
Resolution **VBANDHAPS (WRC-07)** ~~[No. **9.22**.]{.underline}
Resolution **122 (WRC-97)**.~~ [All notices for high altitude platform
stations in these bands that were filed with the Bureau prior to 22
November 1997 shall be canceled as of 1 January 2010 unless the
notifying administration informs the Bureau before this date that the
notified assignments have been brought into use.]{.underline}

**Reasons**: Consequential to the suppression of Resolution **122.**
While studies have been completed, HAPS systems still need to be subject
to the provisions of Article **9** to ensure coordination with the FSS
at 47 GHz. Nos. **9.17** and **9.18**, which apply for the coordination
of terrestrial stations, including HAPS, with earth stations, are
currently applicable without having to be called out in a footnote to
Article 5 of the Radio Regulations. [Resolution **VBANDHAPS
**]{.underline}~~No. **9.22 **~~is a new [resolution]{.underline}
~~provision~~ (see **USA/1.8/3** below) that is intended to address the
previously unaddressed coordination case of transmitting HAPS
ground-based stations with receiving space station of the FSS, when the
HAPS ground station appears in the coverage area of a satellite network.
The final sentence of the provision is needed because Resolution 122
(Rev. WRC-03) instructs the BR to maintain HAPS notices received prior
to 22 November 1997 "until a date to be decided by a future WRC."

#### USA/1.8/3

**[ADD]{.underline}~~MOD~~**

[RESOLUTION VBANDHAPS (WRC-07)]{.underline}

[Additional coordination mechanism resulting from high altitude platform
stations (HAPS) in the fixed service in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and
47.9-48.2 GHz by and by other services]{.underline}

[The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva (or elsewhere),
2007),]{.underline}

[considering]{.underline}

[*a)* that the band 47.2-50.2 GHz is allocated to the fixed, mobile and
fixed-satellite services on a co-primary basis;]{.underline}

[*b)* that WRC‑97 made provision for operation of HAPS, also known as
stratospheric repeaters, within the fixed service in the bands
47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz;]{.underline}

[*c)* that Recommendation ITU‑R F.1500 contains the characteristics of
systems in the fixed service using HAPS;]{.underline}

[*d)* that while the decision to deploy HAPS can be taken on a national
basis, such deployment may affect neighboring administrations,
particularly in small countries;]{.underline}

[*e)* that ITU‑R has completed studies dealing with sharing between
systems using HAPS in the fixed service and other types of systems in
the fixed service in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and
47.9-48.2 GHz;]{.underline}

*[recognizing]{.underline}*

[*a)* that the procedures of Article **9** have been applied on a
provisional basis from the end of WRC-97 through the end of WRC-07 for
coordination between satellite systems and systems using HAPS in the
bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz;]{.underline}

[*b)* that with the suppression of Resolution **122 (Rev.WRC-03)** as of
the end of WRC-07, there is a need to provide coordination provisions
between satellite systems and systems using HAPS in the bands
47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz in cases not presently covered under the
procedures of Article **9**;]{.underline}

[*c)* that Nos. **9.17** and **9.18** apply for the coordination of
terrestrial stations, including HAPS, with earth stations, and vice
versa;]{.underline}

[d) that the coordination scenario involving a transmitting station in
the fixed service which is part of a high altitude platform network as
defined by No. **1.66A,** and other administrations with frequency
assignments for existing or planned space stations in any frequency band
in which the high altitude platform station network is to operate, is
not presently addressed in Section **II** of Article **9**,]{.underline}

[resolves]{.underline}

[1 to encourage administrations to facilitate coordination between
systems in the fixed service using HAPS operating in the bands
47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2 GHz and systems of the co‑primary satellite
services in the same bands;]{.underline}

[2 that, before an administration notifies to the Bureau or brings into
use a frequency assignment in the bands 47.2-47.5 GHz and/or 47.9-48.2
GHz for a transmitting station in the fixed service which is part of a
high altitude platform network as defined by No. **1.66A,** it shall
request and effect coordination with other administrations with
frequency assignments for existing or planned space stations in any
frequency band in which the high altitude platform station network is to
operate;]{.underline}

[3 that any administration requesting coordination pursuant to *resolves
2* above shall send its request to the Bureau, together with the
appropriate information listed in Appendix **4** to the Radio
Regulations;]{.underline}

[4 that any administration having received a request for coordination
made under *resolves 2* above shall promptly examine the matter with
regard to interference which may be caused to its own assignments, using
relevant ITU-R Recommendations for guidance on interference calculation
methods and criteria;]{.underline}

[5 that if, following its action under *resolves 4* above, the
administration with which coordination was sought under *resolves 2*
does not agree to the request for coordination, it shall, within four
months of the date of publication of the BR IFIC under No. **9.38**,
inform the requesting administration of its disagreement, and shall
provide information concerning its own assignments upon which that
disagreement is based, including suggestions as it is able to offer with
a view to satisfactory resolution of the matter, to the requesting
administration with a copy to the Bureau;]{.underline}

[6 that an administration having received a request for coordination
made under *resolves 2* above, but having not responded in the manner
provided in *resolves 5* above, shall be regarded as
unaffected;]{.underline}

[7 that Nos. **9.53** through **9.55** and Nos. **9.58** and **9.59**
shall apply or be applied, as appropriate, to coordinations initiated
pursuant to this resolution,]{.underline}

[instructs the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau]{.underline}

[1 to treat complete coordination information provided to it under
*resolves 3* above in the manner in which No. **9.34** directs the
Bureau to treat complete information sent under No. **9.30** or No.
**9.32**;]{.underline}

[2 to apply No. **9.40A** if the information provided to it under
*resolves 3* above is found to be incomplete.]{.underline}

**[Reasons:]{.underline}**

[Incorporates into a new resolution the coordination provisions in
Article 9 that are not already applicable by operation of regulation to
HAPS stations in the fixed service in the 47.2-47.5 GHz and 47.9-48.2
GHz bands.]{.underline}

~~**9.22** Not used. *q)* for a transmitting station which is part of a
high altitude platform station network as defined by **1.66A** of the
Radio Regulations, for which the requirement to coordinate is included
in a footnote to the Table of Frequency Allocations referring to this
provision, in respect of a space station in any frequency band allocated
with equal primary rights to the space service of the existing or
planned space station and to the terrestrial service in which the high
altitude platform station network is to operate.~~

~~**Reasons**: Addresses a coordination scenario for HAPS stations.~~

~~USA/1.8/4~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~**9.5B.1** The only terrestrial stations to be taken into account are
those for which the requirement to coordinate is under Nos. **9.11**,
**9.11A**, and **9.21[, ]{.underline}**[and **9.22**]{.underline}.~~

~~**Reasons**: Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above).~~

~~USA/1.8/5~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~**9.30** Requests for coordination made under Nos. **9.7** to
**9.14**, and **9.21** [and **9.22**]{.underline} shall be sent by the
requesting administration to the Bureau, together with the appropriate
information listed in Appendix **4** to these Regulations.~~

~~**Reasons**: Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above) there is a need to determine what happens to the
coordination information.~~

~~USA/1.8/6~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~**9.36.1** The list of administrations identified by the Bureau under
Nos. **9.11** to **9.14**, and **9.21** [and]{.underline} **9.22** is
only for information purposes, to help administrations comply with this
procedure.~~

~~**Reasons**: Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above), the identification of affected administrations by
the BR in the case of a HAPS network will be for information only.~~

~~USA/1.8/7~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~**9.50** An administration having received a request for coordination
under Nos. **9.7** to **9.21[9.22]{.underline}**, or having been
included in the procedure following action under No. **9.41**, shall
promptly examine the matter with regard to interference which may be
caused to or, in certain cases, by its own assignments^20^, identified
in accordance with Appendix **5**^21^.~~

~~**Reasons**: Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above), the affected administrations must examine the HAPS
information.~~

~~USA/1.8/8~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~**9.52C** For coordination requests under Nos. **9.11** to
**9.14**[,]{.underline} and **9.21** [and **9.22**]{.underline}, an
administration not responding under No. **9.52** within the same
four‑month period shall be regarded as unaffected and, in the cases of
Nos. **9.11** to **9.14**, the provisions of Nos. **9.48** and **9.49**
shall apply.~~

~~**Reasons**: Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above), the affected administrations must examine the HAPS
information.~~

~~USA/1.8/9~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~**9.53A** Upon expiry of the deadline for comments in respect of a
coordination request under Nos. **9.11** to **9.14**[,]{.underline} and
**9.21** [and **9.22**]{.underline}, the Bureau shall, according to its
records, publish a Special Section, indicating the list of
administrations having submitted their disagreement or other comments
within the regulatory deadline.     (WRC‑2000)~~

~~**Reasons**: Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above), the BR will publish those administrations that
have objected to the HAPS network.~~

~~USA/1.8/10~~

**~~MOD~~**

~~APPENDIX 5~~

~~TABLE 5-1     (WRC‑2003)~~

**~~Technical conditions for coordination\
(see Article 9)~~**

  ----------------------- -------------- --------------- ------------------------- ---------------- -------------
  ~~Reference\            ~~Case~~       ~~Frequency     ~~Threshold/condition~~   ~~Calculation\   ~~Remarks~~
  of\                                    bands\                                    method~~         
  Article 9~~                            (and Region) of                                            
                                         the service\                                               
                                         for which                                                  
                                         coordination\                                              
                                         is sought~~                                                

  ~~No.                   ~~a            ~~Frequency     ~~Bandwidth overlap~~     ~~Check using    
  **[9.22]{.underline}\   transmitting   bands for which                           assigned         
  **HAPS/GSO, non-GSO~~   station which  a footnote                                frequencies and  
                          is part of a   refers to No.                             bandwidths~~     
                          high altitude  **9.22**~~                                                 
                          platform                                                                  
                          station                                                                   
                          network as                                                                
                          defined by                                                                
                          **1.66A** of                                                              
                          the Radio                                                                 
                          Regulations,                                                              
                          for which the                                                             
                          requirement to                                                            
                          coordinate is                                                             
                          included in a                                                             
                          footnote to                                                               
                          the Table of                                                              
                          Frequency                                                                 
                          Allocations                                                               
                          referring to                                                              
                          No. **9.22**,                                                             
                          in respect of                                                             
                          a space                                                                   
                          station.~~                                                                

                                                                                                    
  ----------------------- -------------- --------------- ------------------------- ---------------- -------------

~~**Reasons:** Consequential to the addition of No. **9.22** (see
**USA/1.8/3** above), Table 5-1 needs to be updated to take No. **9.22**
into account.~~

**Document WAC/117(04.10.06) -- *Draft Proposal No. 1*:**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 1.12**: to consider possible changes in response to
Resolution **86** (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002) of the Plenipotentiary
Conference: "Advance publication, coordination, notification and
recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to satellite
networks" in accordance with Resolution **86 (WRC-03)**;

**Background Information**: This proposal addresses the need to modify
No. **9.14** (Applies to space-to-Earth only). Resolution **86
(Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)** requested that WRC-03 and subsequent
Conferences review the regulatory procedures associated with the advance
publication, coordination, notification and recording of frequency
assignments pertaining to satellite network. WRC-03 identified in
Resolution **86 (WRC‑03)** the scope and the criteria to be used for the
implementation of Resolution **86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)**. *Resolves 1*
of Resolution **86 (WRC-03)** specifically states that WRC-07 should
"consider any proposals which deal with deficiencies in the advance
publication, coordination, notification and recording procedures of the
Radio Regulations (RR) for space services which have either been
identified by the Board and included in the Rules of Procedure or which
have been identified by administrations or by the Bureau as
appropriate."

The current Rule of Procedure under Article **9** for No. **9.14** in
paragraph 2.4a) is as follows:

*a)* No. **9.14** applies to space-to-Earth frequency allocations only,
i.e. coordination of a transmitting space station in respect of
receiving terrestrial stations when the threshold value is exceeded. In
the absence of threshold value, the provisions of No. **9.50.1** could
apply (see also Appendix **5**). For the Earth-to-space frequency
allocations, the Board is of the opinion that no coordination is
required between the involved space and terrestrial services, which both
are considered on an equal basis.

Also, No. **9.14** should be limited to the space-to-Earth frequency
allocations. To clarify that this is the case the following modification
is proposed:

**Proposal** (Modification No. **9.14** (Applies space-to-Earth only):

USA/ /01 MOD

**9.14** *i)* for a [transmitting]{.underline} space station of a
satellite network for which the requirement to coordinate is included in
a footnote to the Table of Frequency Allocations referring to this
provision or to No. **9.11A** in respect of [receiving]{.underline}
stations of terrestrial services where the threshold value is
exceeded;     (WRC-0[7]{.underline}~~3~~)

**Reasons:** To incorporate the Rule of Procedure on No. **9.14** which
specifies that No. **9.14** applies in the space-to-Earth direction
only.

**Document WAC/117(04.10.06) -- *Draft Proposal No. 2*:**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 1.12**: to consider possible changes in response to
Resolution **86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)** of the Plenipotentiary
Conference: "Advance publication, coordination, notification and
recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to satellite
networks" in accordance with Resolution **86 (WRC-03)**;

**Background Information**: This proposal addresses the need to modify
Appendix **5**, Paragraph 1. Resolution **86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)**
requested that WRC-03 and subsequent Conferences review the regulatory
procedures associated with the advance publication, coordination,
notification and recording of frequency assignments pertaining to
satellite network. WRC-03 identified in Resolution **86 (WRC‑03)** the
scope and the criteria to be used for the implementation of Resolution
**86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002)**. *Resolves 1* of Resolution **86
(WRC-03)** specifically states that WRC-07 should "consider any
proposals which deal with deficiencies in the advance publication,
coordination, notification and recording procedures of the Radio
Regulations (RR) for space services which have either been identified by
the Board and included in the Rules of Procedure or which have been
identified by administrations or by the Bureau as appropriate."

APPENDIX 5 (Rev.WRC‑03), [Identification of administrations with which
coordination is to be effected or agreement sought under the provisions
of Article 9]{.underline}, paragraph 1 reads as follows :

> 1 For the purpose of effecting coordination under Article **9**,
> except in the case under No. **9.21**, and for identifying the
> administrations with which coordination is to be effected, the
> frequency assignments to be taken into account are those in the same
> frequency band as the planned assignment, pertaining to the same
> service or to another service to which the band is allocated with
> equal rights or a higher category[^15] of allocation, which might
> affect or be affected, as appropriate, and which are:........

The purpose of this proposal is to consider the phrase, "to which the
band is allocated with equal rights or a higher category". The Radio
Regulations are very clear that in some situations coordination is
limited to services with equal rights:

1.  No. **9.15** states, "...in respect of terrestrial stations in
    frequency bands allocated with equal rights to space and terrestrial
    services."

2.  No. **9.17** states, "...allocated with equal rights to space and
    terrestrial services....".

3.  No. **9.17A** states, ".....in frequency bands allocated with equal
    rights to space radiocommunication services in both directions of
    transmission..."

No. **9.11A** applies "the provisions of Nos. **9.12** to **9.16**" and
the Rule of Procedure (RoP) on No. **9.11A** specifies that the
procedure of No. **9.11A** is applicable to, "...satellite services
having allocations with equal rights...". Additionally, while no text in
the RR or in the RoP on No. **9.7** specifically state so,
administrations responsible for a geostationary-satellite networks
should not have to coordinate if they are not allocated on an equal
basis. Based on the current principle of "allocated with equal rights or
a higher category of allocation," new GSO networks allocated on a
secondary basis have to coordinate under this provision with the GSO
networks allocated on a primary basis that are ahead of them, BUT not
with the GSO networks behind them in the process

While it may appear that coordination between primary and secondary
services may provide for an opportunity for them to agree on ways the
secondary service can operate compatibly with the primary service, there
is no incentive for a secondary service to coordinate with a primary
service, as no reciprocity is allowed and the provisions of Nos.
**5.28** to **5.31** apply regardless of the result of the coordination
procedure. Any such discussions could take place on a bilateral basis
between the administrations, including during the Advance Publication
process or when the secondary GSO network coordination special section
is published for coordination with other networks allocated on a
secondary basis.

To clarify that Nos. **9.7** and **9.11A** to **9.19** applies only to
assignments in bands allocated with equal rights; the following
modification is proposed to footnote 1 of §1 of Appendix **5**:

Proposal - Modification Appendix 5 (Paragraph 1)

USA/ / 1 MOD

APPENDIX 5 (Rev.WRC‑03)

Identification of administrations with which coordination is to be
effected or\
agreement sought under the provisions of Article 9

1.  For the purpose of effecting coordination under Article **9**,
    except in the case under No. **9.21**, and for identifying the
    administrations with which coordination is to be effected, the
    frequency assignments to be taken into account are those in the same
    frequency band as the planned assignment, pertaining to the same
    service or to another service to which the band is allocated with
    equal rights or a higher category^1^ of allocation, which might
    affect or be affected, as appropriate, and which are:........

^1^ The coordination [procedures]{.underline} ~~between an earth station
and terrestrial stations~~ under Nos. [**9.7** and **9.11A**
to]{.underline} ~~**9.15**, **9.16**, **9.17**, **9.18** and~~
**9.19**~~, or between earth stations operating in opposite directions
of transmission under **9.17A**,~~ appl[y]{.underline}~~ies~~ only to
assignments in bands allocated with equal rights.

**Reasons:** To clarify that Nos. **9.7** and **9.11A** to **9.19**
applies only between assignments in bands allocated with equal rights.

**Document WAC/118(04.10.06:**

## DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE

**Agenda Item 4:** in accordance with Resolution **95 (Rev.WRC‑03)**, to
review the Resolutions and Recommendations of previous conferences with
a view to their possible revision, replacement or abrogation;

**Background Information:** In accordance with Resolution 95 (Rev.
WRC-03), the WRC Resolutions and Recommendations should be reviewed at
each conference.

*resolves*

1 to review the Resolutions and Recommendations of previous conferences
that are related to the agenda of the Conference with a view to their
possible revision, replacement or abrogation and to take appropriate
action;

2 to review the Resolutions and Recommendations of previous conferences
that are not related to any agenda item of the Conference with a view
to:

-- abrogating those Resolutions and Recommendations that have served
their purpose or have become no longer necessary;

-- reviewing the need for those Resolutions and Recommendations, or
parts thereof, requesting ITU-R studies on which no progress has been
made during the last two periods between conferences;

-- updating and modifying Resolutions and Recommendations, or parts
thereof that have become out of date, and to correct obvious omissions,
inconsistencies, ambiguities or editorial errors and effect any
necessary alignment;

The proposals in this document represent the review of Resolutions and
Recommendations that can be suppressed, with appropriate reasons
provided for each. In the case where an item is proposed for suppression
as a consequential action to the proposal for a specific agenda item,
those proposals are included in the proposal for the agenda item and not
repeated here in the proposal under agenda item 4.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ / 1 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 21 (Rev.WRC-03)~~

~~Implementation of changes in frequency allocations\
between 5 900 kHz and 19 020 kHz~~

**Reasons:** The date of implementation for this Resolution was
1 April 2007 and as a consequence this Resolution should be suppressed.

**USA/ / 2 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 51 (Rev.WRC-2000)~~

~~Transitional arrangements relating to the advance publication\
and coordination of satellite networks~~

**Reasons:** Transitional period has expired.

**USA/ / 3 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 56 (Rev.WRC-03)~~

~~Modification of the procedures and requirements\
for advance publication~~

**Reasons:** Radio Regulations edition of 2004 was effective after 1
January 2005, and therefore Res. **56** is no longer required.

**USA/ / 4 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 57 (WRC-2000)~~[^16]

~~Modification of bringing into use and administrative due diligence\
requirements as a consequence of allocation\
changes above 71 GHz~~

**Reasons:** The bringing into use date of 3 June 2007 has been passed.

**USA/ / 5 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 87 (WRC-03)~~

~~Date of entry into force of certain provisions of the Radio
Regulations\
relating to the non-payment of cost‑recovery fees~~

**Reasons:** No longer required since the BR requirement to give 60 day
notice based on the 1 August 2003 implementation date on non-payment of
cost recovery fees has passed.

**USA/ / 6 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 88 (WRC‑03)~~

~~Rationalization of Articles 9 and 11 of the Radio Regulations~~

**Reasons:** No studies submitted to WRC-07. Res. 88 is no longer
needed.

**USA/ / 7 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 96 (WRC-03)~~

~~Provisional application of certain provisions of the Radio
Regulations\
as revised by WRC-03 and abrogation of certain\
Resolutions and Recommendations~~

**Reasons:** The date of implementation has passed and as a consequence
this Resolution should be suppressed.

**USA/ / 8 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 124 (Rev.WRC-2000)~~

~~Protection of the fixed service in the frequency band 8 025-8 400 MHz\
sharing with geostationary-satellite systems of the Earth\
exploration-satellite service (space-to-Earth)~~

**Reasons:** Consequential suppression based on change in footnote
5.462A at WRC-03 to include values contained in Recommendation ITU-R
F.1502.

**USA/ / 9 MOD**

**5.462A** In Regions 1 and 3 (except for Japan), in the band
8 025-8 400 MHz, the Earth exploration-satellite service using
geostationary satellites shall not produce a power flux-density in
excess of the following ~~provisional~~ values for angles of arrival (θ)
[under free-space propagation conditions]{.underline}, without the
consent of the affected administration:

−~~174~~[135]{.underline} dB(W/m^2^) in a ~~4~~[1]{.underline}
~~k~~[M]{.underline}Hz band for  0° ≤ θ \<    5º

--~~174~~[135]{.underline} + 0.5 (θ -- 5) dB(W/m^2^) in a
~~4~~[1]{.underline} ~~k~~[M]{.underline}Hz band for  5º ≤ θ \< 25º

--~~164~~[125]{.underline} dB(W/m^2^) in a ~~4~~[1]{.underline}
~~k~~[M]{.underline}Hz band for  25º ≤ θ ≤ 90º

~~These values are subject to study under Resolution **124
(WRC-97)**~~[^17]~~.     (WRC-97)~~

**Reasons:** Consequential Modification based on Suppression of
Resolution 124 (Rev. WRC-2000) which resolved "to invite a future
competent world radiocommunication conference to review No. **5.462A**,
taking into account Recommendation ITU‑R F.1502, and to take appropriate
action." The above modification to No. **5.462A** implements the results
given in the *recommends* of Recommendation ITU-R F.1502.

**USA/ / 10 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 136 (Rev.WRC-03)~~

~~Frequency sharing in the range 37.5-50.2 GHz between geostationary\
fixed-satellite service networks and non-geostationary\
fixed-satellite service systems~~

**Reasons:** Consequential to proposal for suppression of WRC-10 future
agenda item 2.5

**USA/ / 11 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 144 (WRC-03)~~

~~Special requirements of geographically small or narrow countries\
operating earth stations in the fixed-satellite service\
in the band 13.75-14 GHz~~

**Reasons:** Work has been completed on this item in WP 4A.

**USA/ / 12 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 405~~

~~Relating to the use of frequencies of the aeronautical mobile (R)
service~~[^18]

**Reasons:** This resolution has not been updated since WARC-79 and is
accepted practice for aeronautical mobile (R) service and is no longer
needed.

**USA/ / 13 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 527 (WARC-92)~~

~~Terrestrial VHF digital sound broadcasting~~[^19]

**Reasons:** Consequential suppression based on RRC-06.

**USA/ / 14 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 528 (Rev.WRC-03)~~

~~Introduction of the broadcasting-satellite service (sound) systems and
complementary terrestrial broadcasting in the bands allocated to\
these services within the range 1-3 GHz~~

**Reasons:** Consequential suppression. This resolution was intended for
implementation at WRC-97 and no additional studies have been performed.

**USA/ / 15 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 728 (Rev.WRC-2000)~~

~~Studies relating to consideration of allocations in the broadcasting\
band 470-862 MHz to non-geostationary mobile-satellite services~~

**Reasons:**

**USA/ / 16 SUP**

~~RESOLUTION 734 (Rev.WRC-03)~~

~~Feasibility of use of high altitude platform stations in the fixed and
mobile services in the frequency bands above 3 GHz allocated
exclusively\
for terrestrial radiocommunication~~

**Reasons:** No studies have been carried out and no additional bands
need to be identified for use by HAPS.

**USA/ / 17 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 14 (Mob-87)~~

~~Identification and location of special vessels, such as\
medical transports, by means of standard\
maritime radar transponders~~

**Reasons:** This issue has not been progressed since MOB-87 and is no
longer needed.

**USA/ / 18 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 36 (WRC-97)~~

~~Role of international monitoring in reducing apparent congestion in\
the use of orbit and spectrum resources~~

**Reasons:** Such monitoring capabilities as are feasible have been
implemented and this is no longer required.

**USA/ / 19 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 520 (WARC-92)~~

~~Elimination of HF broadcasting on frequencies outside the HF bands
allocated to the broadcasting service~~

**Reasons:** Article 12 coordination procedures limit HF broadcasting on
frequencies outside the HF bands allocated to the broadcasting service
as much as is feasible.

**USA/ / 20 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 604 (Rev.Mob-87)~~

~~Future use and characteristics of emergency position-indicating\
radiobeacons (EPIRBs)~~[^20]~~,~~ [^21]

**Reasons:** This recommendation was provided to ICAO and IMO following
MOB-87 and has not been updated since. Practical steps have already been
taking in ICAO and IMO to address EPIRBs and this recommendation is no
longer required.

**USA/ / 21 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 606 (Mob-87)~~

~~The possibility of reducing the band 4 200-4 400 MHz used by\
radio altimeters in the aeronautical radionavigation service~~[^22]

**Reasons:** This recommendation has not been updated since MOB-87 and
is no longer required.

**USA/ / 22 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 707~~

~~Relating to the use of the frequency band 32-33 GHz shared between\
the inter-satellite service and the radionavigation service~~[^23]

**USA/ / 23 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 722 (WRC‑03)~~

~~Review of technical, operational and frequency issues\
for terrestrial wireless interactive multimedia\
applications on a global basis~~

**Reasons:** The work on terrestrial wireless interactive multimedia is
being accomplished under systems beyond IMT-2000 and a separate
recommendation is no longer required. The issues addressed by the
recommendation are already part of the work under WRC-07 Agenda Item
1.4.

**USA/ / 24 SUP**

~~RECOMMENDATION 723 (WRC-03)~~

~~Spectrum usage and operational characteristics\
of electronic news gathering systems~~

**Reasons:** Appropriate reports/recommendations have been developed on
electronic news gathering and this recommendation is no longer required.

**Document WAC/122(04.10.06:**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 7.2:** to recommend to the Council items for inclusion in
the agenda of the next WRC, and to give its views on the preliminary
agenda for the subsequent conference and on possible agenda items for
future conferences, taking into account Resolution **802 (WRC-03)**;

**Background Information:** There is an increasing interest in the
ability to accurately measure the currents and waves in coastal waters
and to maintain awareness of ships for security purposes. Operational
systems are currently limited in their ability to provide data meeting
current accuracy and resolution requirements. As a result, the global
oceanography community is planning for the implementation of coastal sea
surface monitoring radar networks. The benefits to society for improved
measurement of coastal currents and sea state include a better
understanding of issues like coastal pollution, fisheries management,
search and rescue, beach erosion, maritime navigation and sediment
transport. Coastal radar measurements of the sea surface provide support
to meteorological operations through the collection of sea state and
dominant ocean wave data. In addition, HF coastal radar technology has
applications in global maritime domain awareness by allowing the long
range sensing of surface vessels. This will benefit the global safety
and security of shipping and ports.

HF radar technology has been used on an experimental basis for more than
30 years to conduct measurements of coastal sea conditions. This
experimental use has allowed the development of radar technology for
such a purpose, and provided insight into the areas of the radio
spectrum where coastal sea surface radar operation would be most
suitable in terms of both compatibility with other users and
effectiveness of the ocean measurements. The need for additional data to
mitigate the effects of disasters including tsunamis, understand climate
change, and ensure safe maritime travel has led to the consideration of
operational use of coastal sea surface monitoring radar networks on a
global basis.

The change from experimental status to an operational network supporting
maritime safety and security, disaster management, meteorological and
oceanographic operations creates the need for radiolocation allocations
in which the systems can operate.

The fact that a number of these radars have operated on an experimental
basis for more than 30 years is an indicator that radiolocation
allocations for such an application may have little or no effect on
incumbent users of the bands in 3 to 30 MHz range. Operators of the
experimental radars have even studied ways to make the most efficient
use of the spectrum by timing operations of a number of radars in a
geographic area, using GPS signals, so that many radars can share a
single frequency. The work ongoing within Working Party 8B directly
supports the objectives of this proposed agenda item, making it possible
for all necessary studies to be complete in time for the 2010 World
Radiocommunication Conference.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ / 1 MOD**

RESOLUTION 803 (WRC-~~03~~[07]{.underline})

~~Preliminary~~ [A]{.underline}~~a~~genda for the 2010 World
Radiocommunication Conference

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
200~~3~~[7]{.underline}),

**USA/ /2 ADD**

**2.XC** to consider the creation of radiolocation allocations in the
frequency range 3 to 30 MHz, taking into account the results of ITU-R
studies and recognizing the need to protect existing systems in the
band, in accordance with Resolution **SCSS (WRC-07)**.

**Reasons:** Allocating sufficient radiolocation spectrum, on a primary
basis, will provide adequate spectrum in which to conduct coastal sea
surface radar operations on a global, operational basis.

**USA/ /3 ADD**

RESOLUTION SCSS (WRC-07)

Allocation of Radiolocation Spectrum in the Range 3 to 30 MHz to Support
Coastal Sea Surface Radar Operations

The World Rdiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2007),

*considering*

a\) that there is increasing interest, on a global basis, in the
operation of coastal sea surface radars for measurement of coastal sea
surface conditions to support environmental, oceanographic,
meteorological, climatological, maritime and disaster mitigation
operations;

b\) that HF coastal radar technology has applications in global maritime
domain awareness by allowing the long range sensing of surface vessels.
This will benefit the global safety and security of shipping and ports;

c\) that operation of coastal sea surface radars provides benefits to
society through environmental protection, public health protection,
improved meteorological operations, increased coastal and maritime
safety, and enhancement of national economies;

d\) that coastal sea surface radars have been operated on an
experimental basis around the world, providing an understanding of
spectrum needs and spectrum sharing considerations as well as an
understanding of the benefits these systems provide;

e\) that for global use of sea surface radar systems on an operational
basis, there is a need for several segments of spectrum allocated to the
radiolocation service in the 3 to 30 MHz range;

f\) that between 3 and 30 MHz, no radiolocation allocations exist that
are usable for global sea surface radar operations;

g\) that performance and data requirements dictate the regions of
spectrum that can be used by sea surface radar systems,

*recognizing*

1\) that coastal sea surface radars have been operated on an
experimental basis with few compatibility problems with existing
allocated services;

2\) that developers of the experimental systems have implemented
techniques to make the most efficient use of the spectrum;

3\) that ITU-R Working Party 8B has approved a Question on the study of
the most appropriate frequency bands for operation of coastal sea
surface radars considering both radar system requirements and the
protection of existing services,

*resolves*

1\) to invite the ITU-R to conduct sharing analyses between the
radiolocation service and incumbent services in the bands suitable for
operation of coastal sea surface radar systems;

2\) to recommend that WRC-10 review the results of the studies under
*resolves* 1 and consider the creation of radiolocation allocations in
frequency ranges suitable for operation of coastal sea surface radars
and where sharing studies show little or no impact to existing services,

*invites administrations*

to contribute to the sharing studies between the radiolocation service
and possibly affected incumbent services,

*invites the ITU-R*

to complete the necessary studies, as a matter of urgency, prior to
WRC-10,

*instructs the Secretary-General*

to bring this Resolution to the attention of the International Maritime
Organization (IMO), World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and other
international and regional organizations concerned.

**Reasons:** Provide guidance for the required studies and invites
administration participation.

**Document WAC/123(04.10.06:**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 7.2** 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, taking into account Resolution **802 (WRC‑03)**;

**Background Information:** The 37-38 GHz band is allocated to the
fixed, space research (space-to-Earth) and the mobile services on a
primary basis, and the 37.5-38 GHz portion of this band is also
allocated to the fixed satellite service (space-to-Earth) on a primary
basis. In addition, No. **5.547** **(MOD WRC-2000)** identifies the
37-40 GHz band as being available for high-density applications in the
fixed service (HDFS).

Space research earth station receivers are being implemented in the
37-38 GHz band to support manned missions, for both near Earth and deep
space distances, and use of the wider bandwidth available in the 37-38
GHz band will be required to support the increasing data requirements of
planned manned missions.

Aeronautical mobile stations are capable of causing unacceptable levels
of interference whenever they are within line-of-sight of a receiver in
the space research and Earth exploration satellite services. Preliminary
calculations within WP 7B have shown that aeronautical mobile
transmissions could cause unacceptable levels of interference for
significant periods of time. In particular, space research service Earth
station receivers operating in the 37-38 GHz band have very low
thresholds for which the ITU-R has already established both deep space
and non-deep space protection criteria Recommendations. Exceeding the
protection criteria of the space research service for an extended period
of time could jeopardize the success of a manned or scientific space
mission.

Presently, the Table of Frequency Allocations has already excluded
aeronautical mobiles in several frequency bands in which the mobile
service is co-allocated on a primary basis with the space research
service downlinks. These include 2.29-2.3 GHz (space research deep
space), 8.4-8.5 GHz (space research deep space and non-deep space),
22.21-22.5 GHz and 31.5-31.8 GHz (Earth exploration-satellite and space
research passive). Based on current information, to date there are no
aeronautical mobile systems operating in the 37-38 GHz band, nor are any
planned. Considering the planned developments of manned space research
service missions in the 37-38 GHz band, now might be the appropriate
time to consider the exclusion of aeronautical mobile stations from this
band as well.

**Proposal:**

USA/ / 1 MOD

RESOLUTION 803 (WRC-~~03~~[07]{.underline})

~~Preliminary~~ [A]{.underline}~~a~~genda for the 2010 World
Radiocommunication Conference

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
200~~3~~[7]{.underline}),

USA/ / 2 add

**2.XD** to consider modifying the primary mobile service allocation in
the 37-38 GHz band to exclude aeronautical mobile stations, or to take
such other regulatory action as needed to protect the other primary
services in the band from interference from the aeronautical mobile
service, taking into account the results of ITU-R studies and Resolution
USA02.

**Reasons**: Planned manned space research missions require access to
the wider bandwidth available in this band. Aeronautical mobile stations
are capable of causing unacceptable interference when they are within
line-of-sight of a receiver operating in the space research service and
such interference levels may exist for extended periods, so jeopardizing
manned or scientific mission success. Excluding aeronautical mobile
systems in the 37-38 GHz band may be necessary to protect the other
primary services in the band from harmful interference.

USA/ /3 ADD

RESOLUTION USA02 (WRC-07)

Protection of Primary Services in the Band 37-38 GHz

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2007),

considering

a\) that the band 37-38 GHz is allocated on a primary basis to the
fixed, mobile, and, space research (space-to-Earth) services, and the
37.5-38 GHz portion of this band is also allocated on a primary basis to
the fixed-satellite service (space-to-Earth);

b\) that space research earth station receivers are being implemented in
the 37-38 GHz band to support both manned and unmanned missions, for
both near Earth and deep space distances, and use of the wider bandwidth
available in the 37-38 GHz band is required to support the increased
data requirements of planned manned and scientific missions;

c\) that an aeronautical mobile station can cause unacceptable
interference to receivers in the space research service whenever it is
within line-of-sight of the receiver, as indicated in Recommendation
ITU-R SA.1016;

d\) that interference from the emissions of an aeronautical mobile
station to a space research service earth station receiver may
significantly exceed the permissible interference levels for extended
periods of time, thus jeopardizing the success of a space mission;

recognizing

1\) that the Table of Frequency Allocations already excludes the
operation of aeronautical mobile stations in 2.29-2.3 GHz, 8.4-8.5 GHz,
22.21-22.5 GHz and 31.5-31.8 GHz where the mobile service is
co-allocated on a primary basis with the space research service
(space-to-Earth);

2\) that RR. No. **5.547** indicates that the 37-38 GHz band is
available for high density applications in the fixed service;

and noting

that aeronautical mobile service systems are currently not deployed nor
planned in the 37-38 GHz band;

*resolves*

1 to invite ITU-R to conduct appropriate studies involving the
aeronautical mobile service, the space research service, and the other
affected services in the band 37-38 GHz to determine the compatibility
of the aeronautical mobile service with these other services;

2 to recommend that WRC-10 review the results of the studies under
*resolves* 1 and consider the inclusion of any appropriate compatibility
criteria within the Radio Regulations or appropriate modifications to
the Table of Frequency Allocations, based on proposals from
administrations;

*invites administrations*

to contribute to the compatibility studies between the aeronautical
mobile service and the other services in the 37-38 GHz band;

*invites ITU-R*

to complete the necessary studies, as a matter of urgency, taking into
account the present use of the 37-38 GHz band, with a view to
presenting, at the appropriate time, the technical information likely to
be required as a basis for the work of the Conference.

**Reasons:** This resolution provides guidance on the ITU-R studies
required in support of the proposed WRC-10 Agenda Item.

**Document WAC/124(04.10.06:**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 7.2**: to recommend to the Council items for inclusion in
the agenda of the next WRC, and to give its views on the preliminary
agenda for the subsequent conference and on possible agenda items for
future conferences, taking into account Resolution **802 (WRC-03)**;

*Revision of Appendix 17 of the Radio Regulations to Accommodate
Advanced Maritime HF Data Services*

**Background Information:** Ships have traditionally made extensive use
of the HF bands for long distance safety and general communications
using Morse telegraphy, radiotelex and speech. The introduction of the
Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) removed the
dependence on Morse telegraphy and introduced a standard radiotelex
system, known as Narrow Band Direct Printing (NBDP), as a carriage
requirement in SOLAS chapter IV together with the option of using
Inmarsat satellite services (which do not operate in the Polar Regions
-- Sea Area A4).

NBDP is a rather technically limited system and is little supported by
coast stations around the world. At WRC-03, Appendix **17** was modified
by the addition of a new footnote (p) which permitted initial testing
and possible future introduction in certain bands of new digital
technologies. These new digital technologies are becoming widely used.
Studies performed in 2004 reported that a typical HF data communication
system had grown threefold over the previous five years to 5,000 ships
and that the kilobit usage per ship per day had also tripled over the
same period. One such system is currently using three hundred - 3 kHz
duplex channels, 75% of which are Appendix **17** frequencies and the
remaining 25% which are outside Appendix **17** and are shared
frequencies. These shared frequencies are found in the gap of Appendix
**17** frequencies between 8 and 12 MHz.

Resolution **351 (WRC-03)** resolves that there should be interoperable
technologies implemented under Appendix **17** and the ITU-R is
preparing recommendations on technical standards with assistance of IMO.
Resolution **351 (WRC-03)** also resolves that necessary changes be
considered for Appendix **17** to accommodate new HF services which are
replacing Morse telegraphy, NBDP and speech, according to IMO COMSAR
10/16 Annex 7, Report to the Maritime Safety Committee, dated 27 March
2006.

IMO COMSAR 9 has concluded that NBDP is little used for general
communications; however, it is still required for shore transmission of
Maritime Safety Information (MSI) in Sea Area A4; that there was a
requirement for ships to transmit weather observations and position
reports in Sea Area A4 for which NBDP could be used (although other
technologies could also be possible) and that due to the more robust
propagation of NBDP compared to voice, NDBP could not immediately be
discontinued in Sea Area A4 as a distress follow up communication.
COMSAR 9 therefore concluded that the frequencies for GMDSS that are
designated within Appendix **15** concerning NBDP should be retained for
the foreseeable future.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ /1 MOD**

**RESOLUTION 803 (WRC-~~03~~[07]{.underline})**

**~~Preliminary~~ Agenda for the 2010 World Radiocommunication
Conference**

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
200~~3~~[7]{.underline}),

**USA/ /2 ADD**

**2.XE** to consider the revision of Appendix **17** of the Radio
Regulations, within the existing spectrum limits of Appendix **17**, to
accommodate advanced maritime HF data services in accordance with
Resolution** 351** **(WRC-07)**.

**Reasons:** Meet international maritime shipping need for advanced
globally interoperable HF data services to enhance maritime efficiency
and safety. This need is of particular importance in Sea Area A4 (Polar
Regions). The implementation of advanced HF data systems will meet the
IMO requirement for a Narrowband Direct Printing (NBDP) replacement
standard.

**USA/ /3 MOD**

RESOLUTION 351 (WRC-07)

Review of the frequency and channel arrangements in the MF and\
HF bands allocated to the maritime mobile service with a view to\
improving efficiency by considering the use of new digital\
technology by the maritime mobile service

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
~~2003~~[2007]{.underline}),

considering

*a)* that the agenda of this Conference included consideration of the
use of new digital technology in the maritime mobile service (MMS) in
the MF and HF bands;

*b)* that the introduction of new digital technology in the MMS shall
not disrupt the distress and safety communications in the MF and HF
bands including those established by the International Convention for
the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, as amended;

*c)* that changes made in Appendix **17** should not prejudice the
future use of these frequencies or the capabilities of systems or new
applications required for use by the MMS;

*d)* that the need to use new digital technologies in the MMS is growing
rapidly;

*e)* that the use of new digital technology on HF and MF frequencies
allocated to the MMS will make it possible to better respond to the
emerging demand for new services;

*f)* that the HF bands allocated to the MMS for A1A Morse telegraphy and
narrow-band direct-printing are significantly under-utilized at present;

[*g)* that the International Maritime Organization (IMO) supports
replacing general communication narrow-band-direct-printing (NBDP) with
new HF data exchange technology capable of working Forward Error
Correction NBDP;]{.underline}

[*h)* that the IMO supports the frequencies of Appendix **15,**
concerning NBDP, be retained for the foreseeable future]{.underline};

*~~g~~[j]{.underline})* that the ITU Radiocommunication Sector is
conducting ongoing studies to improve the efficient use of these bands,

noting

[a)]{.underline} that different digital technologies have already been
developed and are in use in the MF and HF bands in several
radiocommunication services~~,~~[;]{.underline}

[b) that new maritime HF data transfer protocols have already been
developed to replace general narrow-band-direct-printing communications
using Appendix **17** frequencies,]{.underline}

~~noting also~~

~~that this conference has modified Appendix **17** to permit the use of
various channels or bands identified in the MF and HF bands for the
introduction of new digital technology,~~

resolves

1 that, in order to provide full worldwide interoperability of equipment
on ships, there should be one technology, or more than one interoperable
worldwide technology, implemented under Appendix **17**;

2 that, ~~as soon as the ITU‑R studies are completed, a future competent
conference~~ [WRC-10]{.underline} should consider necessary changes to
Appendix **17** to enable the use of new technology by the MMS,

invites ITU-R

to finalize studies currently ongoing:

-- to identify future requirements of the MMS;

-- to identify the technical characteristics necessary to facilitate use
of digital systems in the MF and HF bands allocated to the MMS, taking
into account any relevant ITU‑R Recommendations;

-- to identify the digital system(s) to be used in the MF/HF bands by
the MMS;

-- to identify any necessary modifications to the frequency table
contained within Appendix **17**;

-- to propose a timetable for the introduction of new digital
technologies and any consequential changes to Appendix **17**;

-- to recommend how digital technologies can be introduced while
ensuring compliance with distress and safety requirements,

instructs the Secretary-General

to bring this Resolution to the attention of the International Maritime
Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization, the
International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse
Authorities and the Comité International Radio-Maritime.

**Document WAC/125(04.10.06:**

**DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR THE WORK OF THE CONFERENCE**

**Agenda Item 7.2:** to recommend to the Council items for inclusion in
the agenda of the next WRC, and to give its views on the preliminary
agenda for the subsequent conference and on possible agenda items for
future conferences, taking into account Resolution **802 (WRC-03)**;

*Enhanced Maritime Ship and Port Security*

**Background Information:** There is a growing global requirement for
application of wireless technology to enhanced security of ships and
ports. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) recognized this
need by its adoption of the Code on International Ship and Port Facility
Security (ISPS), implemented as treaty by amendment to the Safety of
Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention, with the understanding "that the
establishment of such measures will further enhance and positively
contribute towards the international efforts to ensure maritime security
and to prevent and suppress acts threatening the security in the
maritime transport sector", and invited contracting governments "to
establish, as they may consider necessary, and to disseminate, as they
deem fit, appropriate measures to enhance the security of ships and of
port facilities"[^24]. The IMO Sub-Committee on Radiocommunications and
Search and Rescue[^25] (COMSAR) has actively supported terrestrial and
satellite communication and data exchange systems to enhance maritime
safety and port security. IMO's Maritime Safety Committee (MSC 81)
approved new provisions in Chapter V (Safety of Navigation) of SOLAS for
Long Range Identification and Tracking following the adoption of the
ISPS Code which also introduced a requirement for a Ship Security Alert
System (SSAS). COMSAR 10 noted that integration of satellite and
terrestrial technologies enhance vessel and personal safety. As a
result, additional channels may be required for Automatic Identification
(AIS) purposes which, with the existing AIS channels, may require
protection and also authorization to operate in the mobile satellite
service.

There is a need for improved identification, tracking, and surveillance
of international shipping and its cargo. Some administrations as well as
the International Standards Organization (ISO) are studying the spectrum
and standardization requirements for electronic seals used on freight
containers to provide a more secure international transportation system.
[^26]

IMO has also addressed measures to enhance maritime security and has
drafted performance standards and functional requirements and adopted
SOLAS Convention carriage requirements for the Long-Range Identification
and Tracking of Ships (LRIT) and the Ship Security Alerting System
(SSAS), noting that the integration of satellite and terrestrial
technologies enhance vessel and personal safety. The implementation of
communication systems in the VHF/UHF, MF/HF, and Satellite spectrum will
enable the LRIT and SSAS functions. Changes to the Radio Regulations,
and in particular the spectrum allocation table, are expected to be
necessary in order to ensure enhanced safety and security of ships and
ports.

**Proposal:**

**USA/ /1 MOD**

**RESOLUTION 803 (WRC-~~03~~[07]{.underline})**

**~~Preliminary~~ Agenda for the 2010 World Radiocommunication
Conference**

The World Radiocommunication Conference (Geneva,
200~~3~~[7]{.underline}),

**USA/ /2 ADD**

**2.XF** to consider spectrum requirements and possible additional
spectrum allocations to support enhanced ship and port security in
accordance with Resolution **Enhanced Port and Ship Security**
**(WRC-07)**.

**Reasons:** Meet international maritime shipping need for ship and
cargo identification, tracking, and surveillance, and ship and port
facility security.

**USA/ /3 ADD**

**RESOLUTION \[Enhanced Port and Port Security\] (WRC-07)**

**Consideration of spectrum allocations for use by maritime ship and
port security systems**

The World Rdiocommunication Conference (Geneva, 2007),

*considering*

*a)* that there is increasing need, on a global basis, to enhance ship
and cargo identification, tracking, and surveillance as well as ship and
port security;

*b)* that IMO adoption of the International Ship and Port Facility
Security (ISPS) Code, specifically Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)
Convention Chapter XI-2 on special measures to enhance maritime security
requires long range spectrum dependent systems;

*c)* that the introduction of the shipborne universal Automatic
Identification System (AIS) (ITU-R Rec. M.1371 series) offers potential
enhancements to ship safety and port security;

*d)* that studies within ITU-R WP 8B indicate that additional AIS
channels in the mobile satellite service may be required to enhance
global ship tracking capabilities;

*e)* that advanced maritime HF data systems may be used to deliver
security alerts and safety information to global regions not under
satellite coverage,

noting

*a)* that Resolution **342 (Rev. WRC-2000)** has considered new
technologies to provide improved efficiency in the use of the bands in
**Appendix 18** by stations in the maritime mobile service;

*b)* that Resolution **351 (WRC-03)** has reviewed the frequencies and
channelling arrangements in the MF and HF bands, of **Appendix 17**,
with a view to improving efficiency by considering the use of new
digital technology,

recognizing

*a)* that there is a global requirement to enhance ship and port
security via spectrum dependent systems;

*b)* that existing and future technologies for Ship Security and
Alerting Systems (SSAS) will require long range communications links and
networks between mobile ships and shorebased stations;

*c)* that due to the importance of these radio links in ensuring the
safe and secure operation of international shipping and commerce, they
must be resilient to interference;

*d)* that studies will be required to provide a basis for considering
regulatory changes, including additional allocations and
recommendations, designed to accommodate spectrum requirements of ship
and port security, consistent with the protection of incumbent services,

resolves

1 that WRC-10 consider the spectrum requirements for the operation of
ship and port security systems;

2 that WRC-10 consider additional allocations to the maritime mobile
and/or maritime mobile-satellite service to support the requirements
identified in *resolves* 1, with a view towards using existing maritime
mobile allocations where practicable, particularly where international
interoperability is required,

*further resolves to invite the ITU-R*

1 to conduct, as a matter of urgency, studies to determine the spectrum
requirements and potential frequency bands suitable to support ship
safety and port security systems;

2 that the studies referred to in *further resolves* 1 should include
sharing and compatibility studies with services already having
allocations in potential spectrum for ship safety and port security
systems,

*further invites*

all members of the Radiocommunications Sector, the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Association of Marine
Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) to contribute to
these studies,

*instructs the Secretary-General*

to bring this Resolution to the attention of the International Maritime
Organization (IMO), the International Association of Marine Aids to
Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) and other international and
regional organizations concerned.

![](media/image4.wmf){width="6.944444444444445e-4in"
height="6.944444444444445e-4in"}

**- FCC -**

[^1]: The WRC-07 Advisory Committee was established by the FCC in
    January 2004 to assist the FCC in developing proposals for WRC-07.
    Since its inception, the WRC-07 Advisory Committee has developed and
    submitted recommendations and preliminary views for Commission
    consideration. *See, e.g., The FCC's Advisory Committee for the 2007
    World Radiocommunication Conference Proposes Preliminary Views on
    WRC-07 Issues*, Public Notice, DA 04-1698 (rel. June 14, 2004)
    (Int'l Bur. 2004).

[^2]: These documents are available through the FCC's WRC-07 website at:
    <http://www.fcc.gov/wrc-07>.

[^3]: IMO CONFERENCE OF CONTRACTING GOVERNMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL
    CONVENTION FOR THE SAFETY OF LIFE AT SEA, 1974,
    SOLAS/CONF.5/5/Rev.1, SOLAS chapter XI has been amended to include
    special measures for maritime security (XI-1 and XI-2)

[^4]: IMO COMSAR 10/16, Report to the Maritime Safety Committee, dated
    27 March 2006.

[^5]: International Organization for Standardization Technical Committee
    104 -- Freight Containers (ISO TC 104) letter to ITU-R dated 21 May,
    2003.

[^6]: Attachment 1 contains a map showing all transmit-receive and
    receive only earth stations currently in the FCC database.

[^7]: Although there are only 49 grandfathered sites, BWA transmitters
    must be coordinated within a 150 km radius around each of these
    sites. Many of the grandfathered sites are in close proximity,
    resulting in a significant overlap of the 150 km coordination zones
    (see Attachment 1)

[^8]:

[^9]: ^9^

[^10]: ^11^ **9.5B.1** The only terrestrial stations to be taken into
    account are those for which the requirement to coordinate is under
    Nos. **9.11**, **9.11A** and **9.21**.

[^11]: ^1^ The coordination between an earth station and terrestrial
    stations under Nos. **9.15**, **9.16**, **9.17**, **9.18** and
    **9.19**, or between earth stations operating in opposite directions
    of transmission under **9.17A**, applies only to assignments in
    bands allocated with equal rights.

[^12]: The United States has previously submitted a proposal to CITEL
    concerning the radiolocation part of this agenda item covering some
    of the same frequency bands as this proposal. This proposal is in
    addition to that earlier proposal.

[^13]: The United States has not identified any additional bands that
    might be suitable.

[^14]: NTIA counter proposal to WAC 065 contained in FCC Public Notice
    DA-05-2481A1.

[^15]: ^1^ The coordination between an earth station and terrestrial
    stations under Nos. **9.15**, **9.16**, **9.17**, **9.18** and
    **9.19**, or between earth stations operating in opposite directions
    of transmission under **9.17A**, applies only to assignments in
    bands allocated with equal rights.

[^16]: ^\*^ WRC‑03 reviewed this Resolution and decided to suppress
    *resolves *6.

[^17]: ^\*^ *Note by the Secretariat:*  This Resolution was revised by
    WRC-2000.

[^18]: ^1^ WRC-97 made editorial amendments to this Resolution.

[^19]: ^1^

[^20]: ^1^ ~~For the purpose of this Recommendation, references to
    EPIRBs include references to satellite EPIRBs as appropriate.~~

[^21]: ^2^ ~~WRC-97 made editorial amendments to this Recommendation.~~

[^22]: ^1^ ~~WRC-97 made editorial amendments to this Recommendation.~~

[^23]: ^1^ ~~WRC-97 made editorial amendments to this Recommendation.~~

[^24]: IMO CONFERENCE OF CONTRACTING GOVERNMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL
    CONVENTION FOR THE SAFETY OF LIFE AT SEA, 1974,
    SOLAS/CONF.5/5/Rev.1, SOLAS chapter XI has been amended to include
    special measures for maritime security (XI-1 and XI-2)

[^25]: IMO COMSAR 10/16, Report to the Maritime Safety Committee, dated
    27 March 2006.

[^26]: International Organization for Standardization Technical
    Committee 104 -- Freight Containers (ISO TC 104) letter to ITU-R
    dated 21 May, 2003.