The World Radio Conference 2003 preparation and other longer term targets

1. Space Frequency Coordination Group report to CEOS Plenary: The World Radio Conference 2003 preparation and other longer term targets Author : E. Marelli (ESA) CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

2. Contents • WRC-03 preparation status • Ultra Wide Band (UWB) devices, a new threat to microwave passive sensing? • Contribution expected from CEOS. • Note: SFCG-22 decided that the task of SFCG Rapporteur to CEOS will be allocated • each year to the Member Agency that is most conveniently located to attend the • CEOS plenary. This year ESA is taking the task; next year it will be NOAA and • so on. CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

3. 1 WRC-03 preparation status • WRC-03 will tale place in Geneva in June 2003. • The Conference Preparatory Meeting is currently taking place in Geneva. It will summarise the studies • results and will indicate the various possible solutions. • CEOS has already generated a resolution discussing the main issues of interest at WRC-03. • SFCG-22 (October 2002) has finalised a paper that summarises the commonly agreed position on all the • agenda items. A copy of the paper is annexed to this presentation for information to the CEOS delegates. • Most of the items of interest to SFCG and CEOS are on a path to a satisfactory solution. • But two items are still heavily debated and would benefit from political pressure by the CEOS delegates: • Protection and extension of the C-band allocation to active sensors (SAR, altimeters, scatterometers). • New allocation in P-band to active sensors (SAR). CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

4. 1.1 WRC-03: active sensors in C-band (A.I. 1.5) • This agenda item, among other elements, calls for • A new allocation to unlicensed high density mobile devices in part of the band already allocated • to active sensors (5250-5350 MHz) • 2. An extension of the C-bandallocation for active sensing (5250-5460 MHz ==> 5250-5570 MHz) • to cover high resolution SAR (Radarsat 3) and altimetry (Jason). • Studies have indicated that only mobile devices limited to indoor usage and to low power would be • compatible with our sensors (in particular SARs). CEPT (Europe) agrees with these conclusions and has • generated standards containing these limits. On the contrary, US and Canada have national standards that • allow outdoor usage and would like the ITU to allow it worldwide. A fierce fight is on-going. At stake is not • only the usage of these 100 MHz by future SAR missions, but also the possibility to use the archive data from • ERS, Radarsat 1, Envisat, etc.for interferometry,if the future sensors will have to shift to higher frequencies. • 2. The band extension is generically supported by all administrations, but parallel allocations to high power • outdoor mobile devices (similar to the ones proposed in the lower band) may render this extra band usable only • for altimeters over oceans. CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

5. 1.2 WRC-03: P-band SAR allocation • A.I. 1.38: Consider a possible allocation of up to 6 MHz to EESS(active) in the range 420-470 MHz. • Studies in the ITU have converged on the band 432-438 MHz as the most suitable. • ITU studies have resulted in the generation of a recommendation that would put some operational limits on • the P-band SARs to make them compatible with the other services, e.g. no operation in visibility of space • objects tracking radars (all North America excluded from operation), max pfd on the ground (-140 dBw/Hz/m2) • Europe, Canada, Brazil and some other administrations are supporting the allocation (probably secondary), • Other administrations in Asia still have not expressed their position, but the US position is still negative, • influenced by the DoD opposition to this allocation. • CEOS members, in particular US agencies, areinvited to lobby within their administrations, explaining the • importance of the P-band SAR applications for biomass monitoring, Antarctic ice studies, etc… CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

6. 2 Ultra WideBand devices (UWB) UWB are new mobile devices that emit relatively low power but on a very wide band (several GHz). They can be used for many applications: data communications, ground penetrating radars, security, car collision avoidance radars,etc… Most of them are planned to be implemented at frequencies below 10 GHz. Because of the presence of GPS/Galileo signals, the authorised UWB emissions are sufficiently low to protect the bands of interest for us. But the planned car radars have targeted the 24 GHz area and their emissions would cover the purely passive band 23.6-24 GHz, used for water vapour measurements by AMSU-A and similar sensors.This band is designated by ITU as free from any intentional microwave emission. In the US FCC has authorised the UWB deployment in this band without detailed studies. In Europe the CEPT has concluded that sharing is not feasible, since a market penetration > 8.3% of these devices would be sufficient to create interference to the passive sensors. Despite this, the European car industry is producing a strong lobbying effort with CEPT and the EC to have the authorisation to deploy these devices with an undefined promise of a future frequency shift. CEOS delegates are asked to inform their administrations about the importance of keeping the 24 GHz band clean, making also reference to the ITU regulations that forbid any intentional emission in this band and to the results of the CEPT compatibility studies. CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

7. 3 Long-term objectives • So far the information exchange between SFCG and CEOS has been mostly in one direction. • SFCG regularly presents to CEOS the status of the activities of interest for Earth Observation. • Beside looking after the short term issues, in particular those associated to the next WRC, SFCG needs also to analyse the future medium-, long-term needs of the Science community, in order to start the necessary preparatory studies and lobbying activities. • In identifying future needs for Earth Observation frequency bands, SFCG has relied until now only on its own members. Although some user representatives are also participating to SFCG (e.g. WMO, ITWG), it is felt that CEOS would be better placed to provide us a more comprehensive picture of the future user requirements. • Therefore SFCG would like to ask CEOS to provide a report showing, from the users perspective: • the priorities in the use of microwave bands in the future (active and passive sensing); • the additional bands that would be desirable to have allocated to our services in the future. CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002

8. Summary • In summary, these are the actions that SFCG would like to ask the CEOS delegates to take: • Lobby within their administrations for the protection of the active sensors in C-band (WRC-03 AI 1.5) • Lobby within their administrations for an allocation to active sensors (SAR) in P-band (WRC-03 AI 1.38) • Make aware their administrations of the importance of protecting the purely passive sensing bands from UWB devices • Provide SFCG with a document indicating the perceived priorities in the mid-, long-term for frequency bands to be used for passive and active sensing. CEOS Plenary 20-November-2002