1. 1 Improving the Radio Regulations, Prospective WRC (WRC-15) Agenda Items Per Hovstad, Principal Spectrum Engineer Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. E-mail: phovstad@asiasat.com ITU Workshop, Limassol April 2014

2. 2 Four steps in the righ direction ITU Workshop, Limassol April 2014 Improved due diligence procedures Elimination of API for satellite networks subject to coordination Reduction of "unecessary coordination" Balancing up- and downlink spectrum

3. Four steps in the right direction Does not solve all problems Does not solve all problems associated with; Equitable access Efficient spectrum usage Congestion of real operational satellites in the arc Commercial value of controlling access to orbit spectrum resources "Paper satellites" "Virtual satellites" However, they are steps in the right direction 3

4. Improved due diligence procedures 4

5. Purpose; to remove “virtual satellites” Purpose; to remove “virtual satellites” Resolution 49 Resolution 49 (Planned) date of launch No obligation to renew information when satellites are relocated or deorbited Improved due diligence procedures Improved due diligence procedures Information submitted after launch (exact date) Information submitted after launch (exact date) Requirement to renew information whenever changes occur Requirement to renew information whenever changes occur Specific ID of satellite, based upon submissions by administrations, to allow tracking of location of satellite in time and avoid same satellite recorded as operational in several locations simultaneously Specific ID of satellite, based upon submissions by administrations, to allow tracking of location of satellite in time and avoid same satellite recorded as operational in several locations simultaneously Resolution 552 Resolution 552 Attempt to improve procedures for BSS networks in 21.4-22 GHz band by WRC-12 5

6. Elimination of API for satellite networks subject to cordination 6

7. Geostationary satellite networks subject to coordination Geostationary satellite networks subject to coordination Advance Public Information was originally used as a “pre- coordination” to assess potential orbit location and other parameters of later coordination requests Advance Public Information was originally used as a “pre- coordination” to assess potential orbit location and other parameters of later coordination requests Over time, the API information has been reduced to a bare minimum enabling no pre-coordination Over time, the API information has been reduced to a bare minimum enabling no pre-coordination The API process is not suitable for an environment of commercial and competitive satellite operators The API process is not suitable for an environment of commercial and competitive satellite operators No advantages No advantages Disadvantages Disadvantages 7

8. API process 8 RR 9.1 API period of validity = 2 years Coordination request receivable = 1.5 years Coordination request not receivable = 6 months API gives no ITU filing priority Administration A Administration B Publication of plans Earliest possible date of filing priority Administration B can submit a coordination request for a network which is incompatible with Administration A and receive higher priority than Administration A APIs are not subject to filing fees Coordination request receiveable within +/- 6° of the location of the API APIs every 12° enables coordination requests to be submitted anywhere in GSO arc

9. Reduce "uneccessary" coordination 9

10. Congestion in the arc "Paper satellites" "Virtual satellites" Real operational satellites (every 2°-3° around the GSO arc) In particular in unplanned C- and Ku-band Well established and mature technology and applications Relatively homogeneous technical parameters have evolved 10

11. Large number of administrations and networks identifed as affected E.g. ASIASAT-105.3T 1802 networks identified 49 administrations All orbital separations (up to 157.8°) Coordination needs to be completed within 7 years of API, i.e. within ≤ 6.5 years of coordination request Force administrations to notify without completing coordination (RR 11.41) Need to avoid unneccessary coordination Need to avoid unneccessary coordination 11

12. In reality, first adjacent satellite networks on either side will completely dominate adjacent satellite interference Further away networks will have little impact Need to be able to live with first adjacent satellite network will limit operation Causing interference to others Receiving interference from others This will also allow compatibility with further away networks 12

13. RR 9.7Identification of coordination requirements Coordination arc RR 9.41Inclusion in coordination of networks outside the coordination arc ΔT/T = 6% Calculated from filed parameters RR 11.32A Determination of probability of harmful interference (in case of outstanding coordination requirements) C/I = C/N + 12.2 (ΔT/T = 6%) C/N calculated from filed parameters Current types of coordination triggers/protection criteria 13

14. What interfering level should trigger coordination? 14 (D1, D2 and D3 denote antenna sizes of 1.8, 2.4 and 3.5 m at 4 GHz and 0.45, 0.6 and 0.9 m at 12 GHz) Actual ΔT/T as a function of orbital separation for different antenna sizes 4 GHz 12 GHz ITU coordination trigger/protection criteria (ΔT/T = 6%) Practical adjacent satellite interference in real operation In practical operation, satellite networks operate with adjacent satellite interference corresponding to: C-band: ΔT/T > ~ 28% Ku-band:ΔT/T > ~ 55% Significant overprotection in ITU criteria: Unneccessary coordinationUnneccessary coordination Complicating coordinationComplicating coordination Complicating access to spectrum orbit resourcesComplicating access to spectrum orbit resources Leading to inefficient usage of spectrum orbit resourcesLeading to inefficient usage of spectrum orbit resources

15. WRC-12 reduced the size of the coordination arc by 2° for unplanned C- and Ku-band. However: Inclusion under RR 9.41 increases 1854 networks requested included between 01.01.2013 and February 2014 33 networks requested included on average per coordination request (20 before 01.01.2013) Criteria under RR 9.41 and RR 11.32A are based upon filed parameters Filings can be designed with parameters that are artificially sensitive to interference, triggering coordination and unduly blocking access for other networks 15

16. Give adequate protection to satellites with a reasonable range of technical parameters inside and outside the coordination arc No additional protection for networks with parameters outside this range Avoid overprotection stemming from unrealistic parameters contained in filings Protection criteria not based upon parameters contained in individual filings Has already been implemented in Appendix 30 and for BSS in 21.4- 22 GHz band (pfd masks) Requires fairly stable technology and relatively homogeneous parameters 16

17. Required representative parameters and their possible values to determine pfd masks/values 17 ΔT/T20% Downlink f (GHz)412 Range of antenna diameters (m) 1.2 – 180.45 – 11 T s (K)95125 Antenna efficiency (%) 70 Uplink f (GHz)614 Space station G/T (dB/K) ≤ 0≤ 11

18. 18 4 GHz Maximum uplink pfd at GSO (dBW/m 2 ∙ Hz): 6 GHz-198.8 (-204 for ΔT/T = 6%) 14 GHz-202.8 (-208 for ΔT/T = 6%) Example of downlink pfd masks to obtain ΔT/T = 20% 12 GHz

19. Pfd downlink masks and uplink values: Defined protection inside and outside coordination arc Independent of filed parameters Artificial parameters will not unduly block coordination of other networks No need to define allowable range for parameters to be contained in a filing Could be introduced at RR 9.7, 9.41 and/or 11.32A Proposed introduced only at RR 11.32A 19

20. WRC-15, Agenda Item 9.1, Issue 9.1.2 20 The issue of types of coordination trigger / protection criteria was considered by WRC-12 together with proposals to reduce the size of the coordination ard (Agenda Item 7, Issue 2A) WRC-12 reduced the size of the coordination arc for C- and Ku-band, but decided to further study this issue under WRC-15 Agenda Item 9.1, Issue 9.1.2 (Resolution 756 (WRC-12), resolves 1)

21. Resolution 756 21 resolves to invite ITU ‑ R 1to carry out studies to examine the effectiveness and appropriateness of the current criterion (ΔT/T > 6%) used in the application of No. 9.41 and consider any other possible alternatives (including the alternatives outlined in Annexes 1 and 2 to this Resolution), as appropriate, for the bands referred to in recognizing e); 2to study whether additional reductions in the coordination arcs in RR Appendix 5 (Rev.WRC ‑ 12) are appropriate for the 6/4 GHz and 14/10/11/12 GHz frequency bands, and whether it is appropriate to reduce the coordination arc in the 30/20 GHz band,

22. Resolution 756 Two separate issues: Size of coordination arc (resolves 2) Types of protection criteria/coordination trigger (resolves 1) 22

23. Balancing up- and downlink spectrum 23

24. 24 BW down = BW up Amount of spectrum for up- and downlink should match Due to satellite antenna design, waveguide and OMTs etc., it is normally most efficient to have up- and downlink in frequency bands in the vicinity of each other Uplink Downlink frequency change Commercial communication satellites normally use "bent-pipe" technology:

25. Example 1: Current ITU-R Region 3 table of allocations, Ku-band 25 12.7513.013.25 10.710.9511.211.4511.7 12.2 12.75 13.7514.0 14.5 14.817.318.1 Uplink Downlink 12.5 17.7 FSS (unplanned/planned) BSS (unplanned/planned) and uplinks limited to only feederlinks for BSSUplinkDownlink 1250 MHz 1250 MHz 1550 MHz 1550 MHz 1100 MHz 1100 MHz 750 MHz 750 MHz 300 MHz of downlink capacity cannot be efficiently used due to lack of uplink capacity 350 (600) MHz of uplink capacity cannot be efficiently used due to lack of downlink capacity

26. Example 2: Current ITU-R Region 1 table of allocations, Ka-band 26 Uplink Downlink 24.65 25.25 27.5 31 17.3 21.221.4 22 26 FSS (unplanned) BSS (unplanned) and uplinks limited to only feederlinks for BSSUplinkDownlink 3500 MHz 3500 MHz 3900 MHz 3900 MHz 600 MHz 600 MHz 400 MHz of downlink capacity cannot be efficiently used due to lack of uplink capacity Up until corrected by WRC-12, no uplink assignments existed

27. To facilitate efficient spectrum usage, up- and downlink spectrum should be balanced To facilitate efficient spectrum usage, up- and downlink spectrum should be balanced WRC-15 Agenda Item 1.6.2 is addressing spectrum imbalance in Ku-band for unplanned FSS in Regions 2 and 3. WRC-15 Agenda Item 1.6.2 is addressing spectrum imbalance in Ku-band for unplanned FSS in Regions 2 and 3. 27

28. 28 Thank you! Per Hovstad, Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. Ltd. e-mail:phovstad@asiasat.com ITU Seminar, Almaty September 2011