1. Preserving Access to Satellite Services in C-band… and Addressing the IMT Challenge Annette M. Purves Satellite Spectrum Initiative GVF

2. Why Should I Care about C-band? C-band is the ‘Lifeblood’ for Critical Services! Corporate Networks Peace Keeping Disaster Relief Wireless Extension Telemedicine Internet Connectivity Maritime Communications Distance Education C-band ` TV Contribution and Distribution Critical Aeronautical and Meteorological Information

3. What Is at Stake? Spectrum for Your Satellite Services!  In 2007, proponents of International Mobile Telecommunications (“IMT”) systems requested 1280-1720 MHz of spectrum by the year 2020 [Source: Report ITU-R M.2078]  By 2015, the IMT industry is seeking another 163 to 1075 MHz of additional spectrum – often totaling more than 2000 MHz  Sharing studies have been conducted between IMT and incumbent services for candidate bands –These studies show that sharing is NOT FEASIBLE.

4.  WRC-15 Agenda Item 1.1 will consider additional spectrum generally for IMT and other mobile broadband applications –C-band is on the menu! C-band earth stations IMT station grid The aggregate effect of all interfering terrestrial stations is a significant interference to C-band receive earth stations What Interference Are We Talking about? Terrestrial Interference!

5. Where Are the C-band Earth Stations? Extensive Distribution! Source: Comsearch Nationwide issue where geographic separation is NOT possible! 5000 earth stations registered… Enabling valuable services to millions of individuals. Another 2000 estimated but not registered...

6. How Does This Affect My Country? Interference Affects Everyone! Interference into C-band receive earth stations can completely overpower the satellite’s signal at the receiver  3 forms of interference: –Co-frequency interference –Out-of-band emissions –LNA and LNB overdrive  How does the ITU and WRC-15 come into this? –The studies and preparatory work that is being undertaken at present will impact the views and decisions of national administrations when they make the final decision: C-band or IMT?

7. What Are Industry’s Concerns?  Renewed efforts to identify the 3400–4200 MHz band (  ) for IMT –2007 studies demonstrated incompatibility between FSS and IMT –Interference from IMT transmissions into FSS receive stations –Large separations between IMT stations and FSS earth stations –No technology developments that change the compatibility analysis –ITU studies conducted to date are reinforcing the 2007 results!  New efforts to identify the 5850–6725 MHz band (  ) for IMT –ITU is conducting sharing studies for this band –Current studies show excessive interference into satellites, even from indoor IMT systems –Receiving IMT stations are susceptible to interference from transmitting FSS earth stations

8. Exclusion Zone Sample Example of exclusion zone with a radius of 20 km around an earth station in Singapore

9. The WRC-15 Process Regional Preparatory Meetings Asia-Pacific Telecommunity (APT) African Telecommunications Union (ATU) European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT / ECC) Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL) Regional Commonwealth in the field of communications (RCC -Russian States) Arab Spectrum Management Group (ASMG) Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM) ITU Study Groups and their working parties provide draft texts to the CPM report. Drafts of CPM text due August 15, 2014 Final Meeting March 23-April 2, 2015Final Meeting March 23-April 2, 2015 Inputs Coordinated Common Proposals from the Regions Member State Proposals Director’s Report CPM Report (April 2015)CPM Report (April 2015) WRC-15 November 2-27, 2015November 2-27, 2015 3+ weeks of negotiations Regional groups meet daily to coordinate positions Outputs: Final Acts; Radio Regulations Working Party 5D - Agenda Item 1.1 Considering sources of additional spectrum for mobile services – including reallocation of Satellite spectrum Produces Liaison Statements Sharing parameters and protection criteria for IMT systems Suitable Frequency Ranges Future Spectrum Requirements Estimate Joint Task Group 4-5-6-7 Reviews Statements, Shared Studies and Spectrum Requirements Drafts CPM Text by July 2014 Submits Draft CPM Text to CPM Chapter Rapporteur (August 2014)Submits Draft CPM Text to CPM Chapter Rapporteur (August 2014)

10. ITU and Regional Preparatory Proceedings Leading to WRC-15 World Radiocummunication Conference (WRC-15) November 2-27, 2015 Regional Groups Jul 2013 Jan 2014 Jan 2015 Nov 2015 CITEL CEPT ASMG ATU APT RCC PCC.II Nov ‘13 PCC.II May‘14 PCC.II Oct 14 PCC.II May‘15 CPG PTD Sep ‘13 CPG Sept‘13 CPG PTD May ‘14 CPG PTD Sept ‘15 CPG & CPG PTD Sep ‘14 CPG & CPG PTD Jan‘15 WG WRC-15 Nov ‘13 WG WRC-15 Apr ‘14 WG WRC-15 Nov ‘13 WG WRC-15 Apr ‘13 ARPM Oct ‘13 ARPM Jan‘14 ARPM May ‘14 ARPM Jan‘15 ARPM Sep ‘15 APG Jul ‘13 APG Jun ‘14 APG Dec ‘14 APG Sep ‘15 WG WRC-15 Apr ‘14 WG WRC-15 Jan ‘15 WG WRC-15 Sep‘15 Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM) Final Meeting 23 March-2 April, 2015 Working Party 5D Joint Task Group 4-5-6-7 WP5D TG JTG WP5D Submits CPM Text August ‘14

11. ITU and Regional Preparatory Proceedings Leading to WRC-15

12. ITU and Regional Preparatory Proceedings Leading to WRC-15 – cont.

13. What are the Implications for the Pacific Islands?  Critical dependency on C-Band for communications and for economic existence and quality of life  Disaster mitigation and relief  Submarine cables, where available, only serve a single landing point. There are many islands  C-band provides a complementary backbone role for future mobile applications (e.g., 4G in Kiribati)  Ku- and Ka-bands are heavily affected by rain fade and cannot substitute for C-band  Wrong decisions at WRC-15 would be crippling

14. What Can I Do? Get Involved!  Participate in the local and international preparatory processes leading to WRC-15 –JTG 4-5-6-7 preparations and contributions –APT preparations and contributions –Assist other countries through common proposals Follow through all the way to WRC-15!

15. What Are the Key Messages?  C-band services provide critical infrastructure today and will continue to do so in the future  C-band cannot be “replaced” with Ku- and Ka-bands  While sharing with point-to-point fixed services is possible, sharing with nomadic/mobile point-to-area services is NOT!  Other frequency bands are much better suited for IMT  Terrestrial wireless services should first utilize assigned frequency bands before pursuing bands extensively used by existing services  Significant investment in satellites and ground infrastructure has been made and would be stranded –Once satellites are in space (15-18 years), the frequencies on the satellite CANNOT be changed!

16. Thank You! More questions? Let us know! The satellite industry stands ready to provide more material and background information. David Hartshorn (david.hartshorn@gvf.org)david.hartshorn@gvf.org Annette Purves (annette.purves@intelsat.com)annette.purves@intelsat.com