69–115 

110TH CONGRESS EXEC. REPT. " ! SENATE 2d Session 110–18 

1992 PARTIAL REVISION AND 1995 REVISION OF THE 

RADIO REGULATIONS 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2008.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DODD, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany Treaty Docs. 107–17 and 108–28] 

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to which was referred the 

1992 Partial Revision of the Radio Regulations (Geneva, 1979), 

with appendices, signed by the United States at MalagaTorremolinos on March 3, 1992, as contained in the Final Acts of 

the World Administrative Radio Conference for Dealing with Frequency Allocations in Certain Parts of the Spectrum (WARC–92) 

(the ‘‘1992 Revision’’) (Treaty Doc. 107–17) and the 1995 Revision 

of the Radio Regulations, with appendices, signed by the United 

States at Geneva on November 17, 1995, as contained in the Final 

Acts of the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC–95) (the 

‘‘1995 Revision’’) (Treaty Doc. 108–28), having considered the same, 

reports favorably thereon subject to declarations and reservations, 

as indicated in the resolutions of advice and consent for each treaty, and recommends the Senate give its advice and consent to ratification thereof, as set forth in this report and the accompanying 

resolutions of advice and consent. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose ........................................................................................................... 1 

II. Background .................................................................................................... 2 

III. Major Provisions ............................................................................................ 3 

IV. Entry Into Force ............................................................................................ 6 

V. Implementing Legislation ............................................................................. 6 

VI. Committee Action .......................................................................................... 7 

VII. Committee Recommendation and Comments .............................................. 7 

VIII. Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification ....................................... 13 

I. PURPOSE

These two treaties are revisions of the Radio Regulations, which 

were negotiated at World Radiocommunication Conferences conVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:04 Sep 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\EXEC~1.REP\EX110-18.TXT sfrela2 PsN: MIKEB
2 

1The 1992 ITU Constitution and Convention, along with amendments to both instruments 

concluded in 1994, were submitted to the Senate by the President on September 13, 1996 (Treaty Doc. 104–34) and approved by the Senate on October 23, 1997. The Constitution and the Convention have since been amended and these amendments have been submitted to the Senate 

for advice and consent. See Treaty Docs. 108–5, 109–11, and 110–16. 

vened under the auspices of the International Telecommunication 

Union’s Radiocommunication Sector. The Radio Regulations generally manage the international radio-frequency spectrum and global satellite orbits with the primary objective of maximizing effective 

use of these resources while minimizing interference in the operation of radiocommunication systems. 

The 1992 Revision was primarily intended to identify bands of 

spectrum that could be allocated for what were at the time new 

technologies, such as mobile services operating through a satellite 

link, although the revision covers many other matters, such as 

rules for shipboard radio repair and telephone calls placed by passengers from airplanes. 

The 1995 Revision was primarily intended to simplify and 

streamline the Radio Regulations, allocate spectrum in order to 

permit global deployment of what were at the time new satellite 

technologies, such as Low Earth-Orbiting Satellites that support 

global satellite communication systems, and establish new regulatory provisions for both non-geostationary satellites operating in 

the same frequency bands as geostationary satellites and other 

space services that share spectrum with the space research and 

terrestrial services. 

II. BACKGROUND

The International Telecommunication Union (the ‘‘ITU’’), based 

in Geneva with a membership of 191 countries, is the principal 

international organization in the area of information and communication technologies, providing a forum for global cooperation and 

coordination and the promotion of more effective and efficient use 

of such technologies generally. The ITU was founded in 1865 and 

was originally called the ‘‘International Telegraph Union.’’ Today, 

some 140 years later, the fundamental objectives of the Organization remain the same, but the scope of the organization’s mandate 

is much broader to match the development of telecommunication 

technologies over the decades and now includes, for example, 

broadcasting, satellite sound broadcasting, mobile satellite services, 

and space services. 

In 1992, the ITU underwent a major reorganization, which was 

undertaken in response to significant changes and developments in 

the telecommunications area. There are now two treaties that provide the legal basis for the organization: the ITU Constitution and 

Convention. The United States is a party to both instruments.1 The 

ITU Constitution sets out overarching principles governing the 

ITU’s basic structure, purpose, and functions, while the Convention 

provides greater detail regarding the functional and procedural implementation of the broad structure set forth in the Constitution. 

Often, the Constitution and Convention contain complementary 

provisions. The Constitution and Convention establish within the 

ITU a decision-making structure for three sectors, through which 

the ITU carries out its work: the Radiocommunication Sector, the 

Telecommunication Standardization Sector, and TelecommuniVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:04 Sep 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\EXEC~1.REP\EX110-18.TXT sfrela2 PsN: MIKEB
3 

2 See Treaty Doc. 107–17 at pp. VI and VII; Treaty Doc. 108–28 at pp. IV and V. 

cation Development Sector. The Radio Regulations, which the 1992 

Revision and the 1995 Revision amend, are international agreements negotiated at World Radiocommunication Conferences convened under the auspices of the ITU’s Radiocommunication Sector. 

World Radiocommunication Conferences, which review and revise 

the Radio Regulations, work on a consensus basis and are generally convened every three to four years, as needed. The final 

agenda for these conferences is established by the ITU Council, 

which is the executive body of the ITU and is composed of Member 

States elected by the Plenipotentiary Conference. The United 

States currently has a seat on the Council. The 1992 Revision and 

the 1995 Revision were negotiated respectively at the 1992 and 

1995 World Radiocommunication Conferences. The Letters of Submittal from the Secretary of State for these two instruments indicate that the United States either achieved or made progress towards its negotiating objectives at both conferences.2 This progress 

is reflected particularly in spectrum allocations that are generally 

favorable to U.S. interests. 

III. MAJOR PROVISIONS

Summaries of the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision may be 

found in the relevant Letters of Submittal from the Secretary of 

State to the President, which are reprinted in full in Treaty Documents 107–17 and 108–28. A brief description of certain key provisions in both instruments is set forth below. 

A. 1992 REVISION

The 1992 World Radiocommunication Conference considered revisions to the Radio Regulations that affected multiple communication services, including High Frequency Broadcasting, Broadcasting-Satellite Service Sound, Broadcasting-Satellite Service-High 

Definition Television, Low Earth-Orbiting Satellites, Terrestrial 

Mobile Service, and Mobile Satellite Service. The Conference was 

convened primarily to identify bands of spectrum that could be allocated for new and evolving technologies at the time. When negotiating the 1992 Revision, the United States was focused on increasing the amount of radio spectrum available for use by the Voice of 

America for international broadcasting, obtaining a spectrum allocation for a new digital audio broadcasting service, and obtaining 

frequency band allocations to support the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space station, the Lunar 

and Martian space exploration programs, and the next generation 

of unmanned deep space exploration programs. The United States 

achieved most of these objectives, but did not obtain as much spectrum as it requested to support the Voice of America. 

High Frequency Allocations 

High frequency spectrum allocations are particularly important 

to the United States because they support the Voice of America. 

The United States sought a considerable amount of additional spectrum in this range in order to relieve congestion in the existing HF 

broadcasting bands. The United States was able to obtain an additional 790 kHz of spectrum, which includes 200 kHz in the optimal 

4 

3 See Letter of Submittal from the Secretary of State, Treaty Doc. 107–17 at pp. VI–VII. 

HF broadcasting bands between 7 and 10 MHz, where the United 

States has the greatest need. Notwithstanding this additional allocation, the reservation included in the proposed resolution of advice 

and consent for the 1992 Revision would reserve the right of the 

United States to take any necessary steps to meet its HF broadcasting needs in bands used by other services. 

Satellite Sound Broadcasting 

According to the Secretary’s Letter of Submittal for the 1992 Revision, the United States, along with several other countries, proposed that spectrum be allocated for digital audio (compact disc 

quality) broadcasting service from satellites directly to receivers. 

There was, however, some disagreement among delegations as to 

the frequency band that should be allocated for this service. A majority of countries selected the 1452–1492 MHz frequency band, 

while others, including the United States, selected either the 2310– 

2360 MHz or the 2635–2655 MHz frequency band for this service. 

The conference adopted the allocations for all three frequency 

bands. 

Mobile Satellite Services 

The United States made a number of proposals to support a 

range of what was then new technology for mobile radio services 

using satellites. These include low Earth orbit satellite (LEO) systems for data services using frequencies below 1 GHz and LEO systems operating above 1 GHz to support a full range of telecommunication services, including voice and wideband data services. Although not all of the U.S. proposals were accepted, as the 

Letter of Submittal from the Secretary of State indicates, the 

United States was ‘‘reasonably satisfied with what it did obtain.’’ 3

The executive branch has recommended the inclusion of a statement in the Senate’s Resolution of advice and consent for the 1992 

Revision, which would address any remaining concerns regarding 

allocations in this area and the committee has included that statement in the draft resolution provided in Section VIII of this report. 

This statement, which is a reservation, would reserve the right of 

the United States to take any necessary steps to meet U.S. mobilesatellite needs in the 1–3 GHz band. 

Space Services 

The 1992 Revision allocates frequency bands to support several 

space services. For example, allocations were made for NASA 

projects, including communications for the space station, a moon 

colony and a manned mission to Mars. The 1992 Revision allocates 

frequencies to ensure reliable, interference-free communications for 

extra vehicular activity of astronauts working outside space vehicles on tasks such as constructing space platforms or satellite rescue and repair. Pursuant to a U.S. proposal, the 1992 Revision allocates spectrum to support a U.S. data relay satellite system intended to facilitate the establishment of a multinational Missionto-Planet-Earth program that will provide data on Earth resources 

and improve our understanding of meteorological and climatological change. Finally, NASA will be able to achieve greater data 

5 

rates and better resolution images of solar objects as a result of expanded allocations for space research and new spectrum for the 

next generation of unmanned deep space exploratory programs. 

B. 1995 REVISION

The 1995 World Radio Conference continued some of the work of 

reviewing spectrum allocations begun at the 1992 conference, but 

also notably included a substantial effort to make the Radio Regulations a more streamlined and cohesive document. In the end, the 

1995 Revision, among other things, allocates spectrum for new 

global mobile-satellite services, provides new regulatory provisions 

for non-geostationary satellites operating in the same frequency 

bands as geostationary satellites, allocates spectrum for other new 

space services that share spectrum with the space research and 

terrestrial services, and structurally simplifies the Radio Regulations. When negotiating the 1995 Revision, the United States was 

focused on achieving an allocation of sufficient feeder link spectrum 

for Mobile-Satellite Systems (MSS), an expanded allocation of spectrum for MSS below 1 GHz, an adjustment to the global MSS allocation in the 2 GHz band, and an expanded allocation of spectrum 

for the non-geostationary fixed satellites (NGSO FSS). The United 

States was mostly successful in attaining its objectives. 

Mobile-Satellite Services (MSS) 

The 1992 Revision allocated spectrum in the vicinity of 1.6 and 

2.4 GHz for MSS. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission 

licensed three non-geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) MSS systems to operate in these bands and had additional applications 

pending. The 1995 Revision made a considerable amount of feeder 

link spectrum available for U.S. systems, which permits the global 

deployment of what were at the time new satellite technologies. 

Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit-Mobile Satellite Services 

The 1992 Revision allocated 3.45 MHz of spectrum for Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit-Mobile Satellite Services (NGSO-MSS) 

operating below 1 GHz. This proved insufficient to accommodate 

existing MSS systems of the United States and other countries. As 

a result, the United States proposed expanding the allocation and 

ultimately a worldwide allocation was obtained in the 1995 Revision of two bands, 455–456 and 459–460 MHz, although the power 

flux density limit in the 148–149.9 MHz band worldwide allocation 

was removed. This allocation resulted in a smaller increase in spectrum for NGSO-MSS systems below 1 GHz than the United States 

proposed, but an increase nevertheless. The 1995 Revision also provided a new regional MSS spectrum allocation in the band 2010– 

2025 MHz for the Americas. 

Regulatory Allocations 

New regulatory measures were adopted to allow Geostationary 

Orbit and Non-Geostationary Orbit Fixed-Satellite Service systems 

to equitably share the same frequency bands. 

Space Sciences 

With new space services being added to frequency bands already 

used by space research and terrestrial services, it was necessary to 

6 

4 In accordance with Article 54(2) of the ITU’s 1994 Constitution (Treaty Doc. 104–34), which 

is the most recent version of the ITU’s Constitution and Convention approved by the Senate 

and ratified by the United States, ratification of the Constitution and the Convention also constitutes consent to be bound by revisions of the Radio Regulations adopted by competent world 

conferences prior to the date of signature of the Constitution and Convention on December 22, 

1992, which would therefore include the 1992 Revision signed on March 3, 1992. The United 

States, however, made a statement upon signature and again upon ratification of the 1994 Constitution and Convention that its signature and ratification shall not be deemed to constitute 

U.S. consent to be bound by revisions to the Radio Regulations adopted prior to the date of signature of the Constitution and Convention. As a result, the 1992 Revision has not yet entered 

into force for the United States. 5 Article 54(5) of the ITU’s 1994 Constitution (Treaty Doc. 104–34), which is the most recent 

version of the ITU’s Constitution and Convention approved by the Senate and ratified by the 

United States, provides that with respect to revisions of the Radio Regulations adopted subsequent to the date of signature of the Constitution and Convention on December 22, 1992 and 

signed by a Party to the ITU’s 1994 Constitution and Convention, that Party would be deemed 

to have consented to the revision thirty-six months from the date specified in the revision for 

the commencement of provisional application, unless that Party had previously notified the Secretary-General of the ITU of its consent to be bound to the revision or had informed the Secretary-General that it does not does not consent to be bound by the revision. Article 54(5) would 

apply to the 1995 Revision for the United States, which was adopted subsequent to the date 

of signature of the Constitution and Convention of December 22, 1992, and signed by the United 

States on November 17, 1995; however, the United States made a statement upon signature and 

again upon ratification of the 1994 Constitution and Convention that its signature and ratification shall not be deemed to constitute U.S. consent to be bound by revisions to the Radio Regulations adopted subsequent to the date of signature of the Constitution and Convention, without 

specific notification to the ITU by the United States of its consent to be bound. As a result, the 

1995 Revision has not yet entered into force for the United States. 6 See, e.g., Resolution 338. 7 47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. 

establish power limits for satellites and earth stations to ensure 

that these new services provide adequate protection to existing 

services operating in the bands. Of particular importance to the 

United States was protection it obtained in the 1995 Revision for 

fixed and mobile services in the 2025–52110 MHz band. Additional 

protection was also obtained for space-based sensors and spaceborne precipitation radars used by NASA. 

IV. ENTRY INTO FORCE

The 1992 Revision4 and the 1995 Revision5 will each enter into 

force for the United States on the date the United States deposits 

its instrument of ratification with the Secretary-General of the ITU 

for each revision, respectively. The committee notes, however, that 

the resolutions adopted at the time of the 1992 Revision provide for 

the provisional application of certain provisions of the 1992 Revision6 and Article S59 of the 1995 Revision provides for the provisional application of the 1995 Revision as of June 1, 1998, with the 

exception of certain provisions, which applied provisionally as of 

January 1, 1997. 

V. IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION

The 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision do not require additional implementing legislation. The Federal Communications Commission (the ‘‘FCC’’) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (the ‘‘NTIA’’) have broad authority over 

their respective spheres of telecommunication regulation and would 

be responsible for implementing these revisions. 

The FCC has authority over non-governmental telecommunications and implementation would be authorized by the Communications Act of 1934.7 In particular, 47 U.S.C. § 303(r) provides 

that the Commission shall make ‘‘such rules and regulations and 

prescribe such restrictions and conditions, not inconsistent with 

7 

8 47 U.S.C. § 901 et seq. 9 According to the TIA, worldwide telecommunications revenue totaled $3.5 trillion in 2007, 

up 11.2 percent from 2006. See TIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS MARKET REVIEW AND FORECAST at 

3 (2008). 

law, as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter, or any international radio or wire communications treaty or 

convention, or regulations annexed thereto, including any treaty or 

convention insofar as it relates to the use of radio, to which the 

United States is or may hereafter become a party.’’ This provision 

is applicable to the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision, and 

would remain applicable to the revisions upon their entry into force 

for the United States. The NTIA has authority over governmental 

telecommunications and implementation of the revisions would be 

authorized by the National Telecommunications and Information 

Administration Organization Act.8 In particular, 47 U.S.C. 

§ 902(b)(2)(A) and (K) authorize the NTIA to assign frequencies and 

establish policies concerning spectrum use by radio stations that 

belong to the United States. Upon entry into force, the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision would be binding on the United States. 

The FCC and the NTIA would be responsible for implementing and 

ensuring U.S. compliance with the provisions of the 1992 Revision 

and the 1995 Revision. 

VI. COMMITTEE ACTION

The committee held a public hearing on these treaties on July 

10, 2008. Testimony was received from Mr. Richard C. Beaird, Senior Deputy U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and 

Information Policy at the Department of State. A transcript of this 

hearing can be found in Annex II to Executive Report 110–15. 

On July 29, 2008, the committee considered the 1992 Revision 

and the 1995 Revision and ordered them favorably reported by 

voice vote, with a quorum present and without objection. 

VII. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND COMMENTS

The Committee on Foreign Relations believes that the ITU’s 

work in support of radio spectrum management is important to advancing U.S. public diplomacy, economic, national security, and scientific interests. One of the key advantages achieved through the 

1992 Revision was an increase in the amount of radio spectrum 

available for use by the Voice of America for international broadcasting, which plays a key role in U.S. public diplomacy efforts 

through broadcasts around the globe, including to closed societies. 

Moreover, the U.S. telecommunications industry is highly dependent upon the ITU for radio spectrum management, an area that is 

also vitally important to U.S. defense, intelligence, and aeronautics 

agencies. Both the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision allocate 

additional spectrum for new technologies that are of importance to 

the U.S. telecommunications industry. According to the Telecommunications Industry Association (the ‘‘TIA’’), the worldwide 

telecommunications market is expected to grow at a 9.2 percent 

compound annual growth rate from 2008 to 2011 and U.S. companies expect to take full advantage of this growth.9 The United 

States is among the leading providers and consumers of telecommunications goods and services. In fact, the U.S. telecommuniVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:04 Sep 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\EXEC~1.REP\EX110-18.TXT sfrela2 PsN: MIKEB
8 

10 Ibid. 11See Articles 4 and 54 of the ITU Constitution, Treaty Doc. 104–34 at pp. 24 and 60. 

cations industry’s revenue totaled $1 trillion in 2007.10 The 1992 

Revision also provided frequency band allocations to support the 

NASA space station, Lunar and Martian space exploration programs, as well as the next generation of unmanned deep space exploratory programs. Accordingly, the committee urges the Senate to 

act promptly to give advice and consent to ratification of the 1992 

Revision and 1995 Revision, as set forth in this report and the accompanying resolution of advice and consent. 

A FUTURE RADIO REGULATION REVISIONS

In the course of reviewing the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision, the committee has given consideration to whether future revisions to the Radio Regulations will require the advice and consent 

of the Senate. Revisions to the Radio Regulations are technical implementing instruments anticipated in the ITU Constitution, which 

are expected to regulate the international use of telecommunications and are subject to the provisions of the Constitution and 

the Convention.11 Given the nature of these instruments, the committee believes that in the future, revisions to the Radio Regulations will not, in the normal course, require the advice and consent 

of the Senate. Thus, in the future, the committee does not expect 

the Executive to submit for advice and consent revisions to the 

Radio Regulations. If there is any question, however, as to whether 

a revision goes beyond the current mandate of the Radio Regulations as anticipated in the ITU Constitution, the committee expects 

the executive branch to consult with the committee in a timely 

manner in order to determine whether advice and consent is necessary. 

B. RESOLUTIONS

The committee has included in proposed resolutions for the two 

revisions various statements, which are discussed below. 

I. DECLARATIONS AND RESERVATIONS TO THE 1992 REVISION

The proposed resolution of advice and consent for the 1992 Revision includes three declarations and reservations, which were made 

by the United States when signing the 1992 Final Acts and are intended to be included in the instrument of ratification, along with 

a declaration that is not intended to be included in the instrument 

of ratification. 

First Declaration and Reservation (No. 67): 

1. In the view of the United States of America, this Conference 

failed to make adequate provision for the HF needs of the broadcasting service, particularly below 10 MHz, despite an earnest effort to do so. The IFRB’s Report to the Conference shows that 

broadcasters’ requirements far outnumber the channels available 

in the bands between 6 and 11 MHz (where spectrum is urgently 

needed) and that planning will not work effectively without additional and adequate HF spectrum. Therefore, the United States of 

America reserves the right to take the necessary steps to meet the 

HF needs of its broadcasting service. 

9 

2. The United States of America, while welcoming the cessation 

by some administrations of willful harmful interference to HF 

broadcasting, remains concerned that the United States’ broadcasting service continues to be subject to willful harmful interference in contravention of Article 35 of the Convention. Such interference is incompatible with the rational and equitable use of 

these bands. The United States of America declares that as long as 

any such interference exists, it reserves the right with respect to 

such interference to take necessary and appropriate actions to protect its broadcasting interests. In doing so, it will respect, to the 

maximum extent possible, the rights of administrations operating 

in accordance with the Convention and the Radio Regulations. 

3. The United States of America declares that, in view of the fact 

that the Conference has unduly restricted allocations for mobilesatellite services in the bands of 1530—1559 MHz and 1631.5— 

1660.5 MHz, it will utilize these bands in the way most appropriate 

to satisfy its particular mobile-satellite service requirements recognizing the priority of AMSS(R) and maritime safety communications. 

4. In the view of the United States of America, this Conference 

has unduly delayed the availability of sufficient spectrum for the 

mobile-satellite service in the range of 1—3 GHz on an international and regional basis. Therefore, the United States of America reserves its right to take any necessary steps to meet the needs 

of the mobile-satellite service in this band. 

5. With regard to Resolution 46 (WARC-92), the United States of 

America understands that nothing in the fourth preambular paragraph and any reference to the Resolution in the Radio Regulations 

shall be interpreted to constitute any recognition of new rights of 

Members of the Union beyond those specified in the International 

Telecommunication Convention and the Administrative Regulations 

in force. In particular, sub-paragraph b) shall not be interpreted to 

constitute a recognition of claims of sovereignty over any part of 

outer space. Such claims, in violation of international law, cannot 

be recognized by this Conference. 

6. The United States of America understands that nothing in 

Resolution 70 (WARC-92) shall alter the category of any allocation 

made at this Conference and that any studies by organs of the 

Union on this matter shall be conducted and implemented in accordance with the International Telecommunication Convention 

and the Administrative Regulations. 

This proposed statement addresses concerns regarding decisions 

of the conference that failed to make adequate provision for certain 

U.S. spectrum needs, did not protect certain U.S. broadcasting services from willful harmful interference, or could be construed to create new rights for ITU Members. 

Second Declaration and Reservation (No. 79): 

Referring to statements relating to the frequency range below 3 

GHz concerning mobile-satellite services, it is necessary to highlight an oversight in drafting and reading texts which could lead 

to a new and unnecessary burden of coordination between geostationary space stations and terrestrial services in certain frequency bands. Accordingly, the above Administrations will not acVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:04 Sep 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\EXEC~1.REP\EX110-18.TXT sfrela2 PsN: MIKEB
10 

cept any commitments for this form of coordination arising from 

omission of the term ‘‘non-geostationary’’ in the text of certain footnotes, e.g. Footnote Nos. 726x and 7xx, to the Table of Frequency 

Allocation in Article 8. This reservation is made on behalf of all national and international organizations for whose frequency assignments the two countries are the notifying Administrations. 

This proposed statement was made by both the United States and 

the United Kingdom when signing the 1992 Final Acts and concerns 

mobile-satellite services provided in the frequency band below 3 

GHz. The reservation reflects U.S. concerns that certain provisions 

of the 1992 Revision could lead to an unnecessary burden of requiring coordination between geostationary space stations and terrestrial services. In brief, both the United States and the United Kingdom refuse to accept any additional commitments for coordination. 

Third Declaration and Reservation (No. 80): 

1. With reference to Statement No. 52 of the Administration of 

Cuba, the United States of America notes that the United States 

presence in Guantanamo is by virtue of a treaty in force; the 

United States reserves the right to meet its radiocommunication 

requirements there as it has in the past. 

2. With reference to Statement No. 60 of Belarus, the Russian 

Federation, and Ukraine, the United States of America notes that 

the other former Republics of the former USSR referred to in that 

Statement are independent States, not Members of the Union at 

this time, whose rights and obligations cannot be asserted by the 

Members that filed that Statement. 

This proposed statement responds to two statements, one by Cuba 

and the other by several states of the former USSR. Cuba’s statement concerns the use of radio frequencies by the United States at 

the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo, Cuba. The other statement, 

made by Belarus, Russia, and the Ukraine, simply notes that the 

other former Republics of the former USSR referred to in their statement, which include the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, the 

Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, and 

Turkmenistan, were not Members of the Union at the time and their 

rights and obligations cannot be asserted by Belarus, Russia, and 

the Ukraine. 

Final Declaration: 

This Treaty is not self-executing. 

This proposed declaration states that the 1992 Revision is not 

self-executing. The Senate has rarely included statements regarding 

the self-executing nature of treaties in resolutions of advice and consent, but in light of the recent Supreme Court decision, Medellı ́n v. 

Texas, 128 S.Ct. 1346 (2008), the committee has determined that a 

clear statement in the resolution is warranted. A further discussion 

of the committee’s views on this matter can be found in Section VIII 

of Executive Report 110–12. 

II. DECLARATIONS AND RESERVATIONS TO THE 1995 REVISION

The proposed resolution of advice and consent for the 1995 Revision includes four declarations and reservations, which were made 

11 

by the United States when signing the 1995 Final Acts and are intended to be included in the instrument of ratification, along with 

a declaration that is not intended to be included in the instrument 

of ratification. 

First Declaration and Reservation (No. 67(3)): 

The United States of America declares that, in view of the fact 

that the Conference has unduly restricted allocations for mobilesatellite services in the bands of 1525—1559 MHz and 1626.5— 

1660.5 MHz, it will utilize these bands in the way most appropriate 

to satisfy its particular mobile-satellite service requirements recognizing the priority of AMSS(R) and maritime safety communications. 

This proposed statement addresses concerns regarding decisions 

of the conference that failed to make adequate provision for U.S. 

mobile satellite services. 

Second Declaration and Reservation (No. 68): 

Referring to the frequency range below 3 GHz concerning mobilesatellite services, it is necessary to note that proposals were put 

forward at this Conference to revise No. 726D (S5.354) to the Table 

of Frequency Allocations in Article 8 in order to avoid additional 

and unnecessary burdens of coordination between geostationary 

and non-geostationary mobile-satellite networks in the bands 

1525—1559 MHz and 1626.5—1660.5 MHz. There was insufficient 

time to consider these proposals at this Conference. Accordingly, 

the above administrations will not accept any additional commitments for coordination arising from No. 726D (S5.354). This reservation is made on behalf of all national and international organizations for whose frequency assignments the two countries are the 

notifying administrations. 

This proposed statement was made by both the United States and 

the United Kingdom when signing the 1995 Final Acts and concerns 

the coordination between geostationary and non-geostationary mobile-satellite networks in certain frequency bands below 3 GHz. The 

reservation reflects U.S. concerns that certain provisions of the 1995 

Revision could lead to an unnecessary burden of requiring coordination between geostationary space stations and terrestrial services. In 

brief, both the United States and the United Kingdom refuse to accept any additional commitments for coordination. 

Third Declaration and Reservation (No. 78): 

The delegations of the above-mentioned countries referring to the 

Declaration made by the Republic of Colombia (No. 16), inasmuch 

as this statement refers to the Bogota Declaration of 3 December 

1976 by equatorial countries and to the claims of those countries 

to exercise sovereign rights over segments of the geostationary 

orbit, and any similar statements, consider the claims in question 

cannot be recognized by this Conference. Further, the above-mentioned delegations wish to affirm or reaffirm the Declarations made 

on behalf of a number of the above-mentioned Administrations in 

this regard when signing the Final Acts of the World Administrative Radio Conference (Geneva, 1979), and the World Administrative Radio Conference on the Use of the Geostationary-Satellite 

Orbit and the Planning of Space Services Utilizing It (first and secVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:04 Sep 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\EXEC~1.REP\EX110-18.TXT sfrela2 PsN: MIKEB
12 

ond sessions, Geneva, 1985 and 1988), the Plenipotentiary Conference of the International Telecommunication Union (Nice, 1989), 

in the Final Protocol of the International Telecommunication Convention (Nairobi, 1982) and the Final Acts of the Additional Plenipotentiary Conference (Geneva, 1992), as if these Declarations were 

here repeated in full. 

The above-mentioned delegations also wish to state that reference in Article 44 of the Constitution to the ‘‘geographical situation of particular countries’’ does not imply a recognition of claim 

to any preferential rights to the geostationary-satellite orbit. 

This proposed statement was made by the United States and 14 

other countries when signing the 1995 Final Acts. The statement responds to a statement made by Colombia regarding the use of the 

geostationary satellite orbit and makes it clear that the claims made 

in Colombia’s statement to exercise sovereign rights over segments 

of the geostationary orbit, and any similar statements, cannot be 

recognized by this Conference. Moreover, the proposed statement 

makes clear that the reference in Article 44 of the ITU Constitution 

to the ‘‘geographical situation of particular countries’’ does not 

imply a recognition of claim to any preferential rights to the geostationary-satellite orbit. 

Fourth Declaration and Reservation (No. 82): 

With respect to Declarations 39, 50, 54, 59 and 64, the interpretation of the United States of America on the basis of which the 

majority of delegations to this Conference supported the United 

States of America and Indonesian proposals which resulted in Resolution 118 (WRC–95) is as follows: 

Any satellite system, GSO or non-GSO, communicated or notified to the Bureau before 18 November 1995 has a status derived from the date of notification or communication of information required for coordination or notification, as the case 

may be. 

As of 18 November 1995, Resolution 46 applies to all these 

systems and they shall be coordinated one system with respect 

to another system in order of receipt of the information described above. 

With respect to the applicability of No. 2613 as agreed in 

committee 4, No. 2613 is of an operational character and No. 

2613 and Resolution 46 are mutually exclusive. 

The United States of America reiterates and incorporates by 

reference all declarations or reservations made at prior world 

radicommunication conferences and in particular with regard 

to Declaration 60 of this Conference. 

This proposed statement responds to several declarations made by 

various delegations and incorporates by reference previous reservations and declarations made by the United States. 

Final Declaration: 

This Treaty is not self-executing. 

This proposed declaration states that the 1992 Revision is not 

self-executing. The Senate has rarely included statements regarding 

the self-executing nature of treaties in resolutions of advice and conVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:04 Sep 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\EXEC~1.REP\EX110-18.TXT sfrela2 PsN: MIKEB
13 

sent, but in light of the recent Supreme Court decision, Medellı ́n v. 

Texas, 128 S.Ct. 1346 (2008), the committee has determined that a 

clear statement in the resolution is warranted. A further discussion 

of the committee’s views on this matter can be found in Section VIII 

of Executive Report 110-12. 

VIII. RESOLUTIONS OF ADVICE AND CONSENT TO RATIFICATION

1992 PARTIAL REVISION OF THE RADIO REGULATIONS

Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein), 

SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS. 

The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the 1992 

Partial Revision of the Radio Regulations (Geneva, 1979), with appendices, signed by the United States at Malaga-Torremolinos on 

March 3, 1992, as contained in the Final Acts of the World Administrative Radio Conference for Dealing with Frequency Allocations 

in Certain Parts of the Spectrum (WARC–92) (the ‘‘1992 Final 

Acts’’) (Treaty Doc. 107–17), subject to declarations and reservations Nos. 67, 79, and 80 of the 1992 Final Acts and the declaration 

of section 2. 

SECTION 2. DECLARATION 

The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is subject 

to the following declaration: 

This Treaty is not self-executing. 

1995 REVISION OF THE RADIO REGULATIONS

Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein), 

SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS AND DECLARATIONS. 

The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the 1995 

Revision of the Radio Regulations, with appendices, signed by the 

United States at Geneva on November 17, 1995, as contained in 

the Final Acts of the World Radiocommunication Conference 

(WRC–95) (the ‘‘1995 Final Acts’’) (Treaty Doc. 108–28), subject to 

declarations and reservations Nos. 67(3), 68, 78, and 82 of the 1995 

Final Acts and the declaration of section 2. 

14 

SECTION 2. DECLARATION 

The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is subject 

to the following declaration: 

This Treaty is not self-executing. 

Æ