1. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 1 ESF WORKSHOP “ACTIVE PROTECTION OF PASSIVE SERVICES” Planned Implementation of Automotive Short-Range Radars in the Frequency Band 23.6 - 24.0 GHz Robert Wolf Frequency Manager EUMETSAT

2. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 2 Protection of Passive Services ITU Radio regulations Footnote 5.340: ”All emissions are prohibited in the following bands: …….23.6 - 24 GHz ……. This footnote was created to protect passive from active services noting the vulnerability of passive measurements

3. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 3 Implementation of SRR in the band 23.6 -24 GHz (2001) Group of car manufacturers and suppliers of parts organise themselves in SARA SARA plans to implement SRR´s in cars SARA recognised the availability of an integrated circuit for SRR operating around 24 GHz SARA approached European Commission for licensing ETSI developed draft standard EC issued mandate to ECC ECC tasked WG SE to consider the compatibility issues

4. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 4 Implementation of SRR in the band 23.6 -24 GHz (2001-2002) SE 24 tasked to study SRR compatibility with allocated services (EESS passive, RAS,FS) Scientific Community was informed and participated in SE24 USA issued “ FCC Report and Order” allowing SRRs around 24 GHz (February 2002) Study on impact of SRRs to passive measurements edited by CNES,ESA, EUMETSAT and presented to SE24 Discussions with SARA in SE24 - update of study

5. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 5 Implementation of SRR in the band 23.6 -24 GHz (2001-2002) SE24 concluded SRR (assuming use of US power levels) cannot share the band 23.6 -24 GHz without limitations –Only < 10% of cars may be equipped with SRR –implementation must be stopped before new generation of satellites will be introduced –automatic switch off must be implemented to protect radio astronomy stations –frequency band for final implementation must be assigned (79 GHz was found suitable)

6. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 6 Implementation of SRR in the band 23.6 -24 GHz (2002-2004) Further discussions in SE24 - modifications to studies including scattering models and new antenna parameter SE24 forwards sharing report to SE (approved May 2003) On this basis ECC tasked WG FM to develop ECC draft decision FM mandates Short Range Maintenance Group to draft decision for SRRs and agrees on –permanent band for SRRs around 79 GHz –interim implementation of SRRs in band 23.6 - 24 GHz –maximum of 7 % of cars with SRR –end date 2013 -automatic switch off facilities mandatory

7. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 7 Interaction between ECC and EC (2004) ECC agreed FM inputs and introduced small modifications ECC forwarded draft decision to EC RSCom in EC is responsible for further actions RSCom decisions still outstanding Efforts in RSCom meeting to change ECC recommendations (higher penetration rate, longer duration, switch off facility only after 2 years) Protests from ECC administrations present at RSCom meeting

8. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 8 Problems Science Community has no influence in RSCom and further EC processes Observers need to be invited by EC Science community comes very late into process For the first time there will be an active use in a band protected by FN 5.340 This could become a model for future applications

9. ESF Workshop - Active Protection of Passive Radio Services Cagliari 28-30 October 2004 Page 9 Outlook Exchange of information between the various groups in the Scientific Community appears very good Scientific Community is closely involved in ECC work by observer status but How can the Science Community improve their status in EC bodies and influence decisions?