1 / 25

First Regional Preparatory Group Meeting for ITU-R WRC-12

Agenda Item 1.7 WRC-12. First Regional Preparatory Group Meeting for ITU-R WRC-12. Yoshiyuki Mikuni Office of Aeronautical Satellite Systems Civil Aviation Bureau, JAPAN. Contents. Overview Historical Background Frequency Coordination on 1.6/1.5 GHz Considerations Activities

nate
Download Presentation

First Regional Preparatory Group Meeting for ITU-R WRC-12

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Agenda Item 1.7WRC-12 First Regional Preparatory Group Meeting for ITU-R WRC-12 Yoshiyuki Mikuni Office of Aeronautical Satellite Systems Civil Aviation Bureau, JAPAN

  2. Contents • Overview • Historical Background • Frequency Coordination on 1.6/1.5 GHz • Considerations • Activities • WP4C Activities • National Activities • Regional Activities • ICAO Activities • Preparatory works for the Conference

  3. Overview (1) Regulation, Resolution and Agenda Item Radio Regulations Footnote 5.357A • Compensation for Generic Allocation • Give priority to AMS(R)S • Adopted at WRC-97 • Strengthen 5.357A • Invite ITU-R to study the accommodation of AMS(R)S spectrum requirements • Adopted at WRC-2000 • Modified at WRC-07 Resolution 222 • Consider the study results of Res. 222 at WRC-12 • Take appropriate action • Adopted at WRC-07 Agenda Item 1.7

  4. Overview (2) • Footnote 5.357A of R.R. Key Points • At the frequency coordination, priority shall be given to accommodating the spectrum requirements of AMS(R)S • AMS(R)S shall have priority access and immediate availability, by pre-emption if necessary, over all other MSS • In the bands 1 545-1 555 MHz and 1 646.5-1 656.5 MHz 5.357A In applying the procedures of Section II of Article 9 to the mobile-satellite service in the bands 1 545-1 555 MHz and 1 646.5-1 656.5 MHz, priority shall be given to accommodating the spectrum requirements of the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service providing transmission of messages with priority 1 to 6 in Article 44. Aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service communications with priority 1 to 6 in Article 44 shall have priority access and immediate availability, by pre-emption if necessary, over all other mobile-satellite communications operating within a network. Mobile-satellite systems shall not cause unacceptable interference to, or claim protection from, aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service communications with priority 1 to 6 in Article 44. Account shall be taken of the priority of safety-related communications in the other mobile-satellite services. (The provisions of Resolution 222 (WRC-2000)* shall apply.) (WRC-2000)

  5. Overview (3) Resolution 222 (Rev. WRC-07) Key Points Resolves that administrations shall endure; 1 that spectrum needed for AMS(R)S is accommodated in frequency coordination in the bands where 5.357A applies 2 the use of latest technical advances 3 that MSS yield capacity to accommodate spectrum requirements for AMS(R)S Invites ITU-R i) to study the existing and future spectrum requirements of the AMS(R)S ii) to assess whether the long-term requirements of the AMS(R)S can be met within the bands 1,545-1555 MHz and 1646.5-1656.5 MHz iii) to complete studies to determine the feasibility and practicality of technical or regulatory means in order to ensure adequate access to spectrum to accommodate the AMS(R)S requirements iv) if the assessment indicates that these requirements cannot be met, to study existing MSS allocations or possible new allocations Invites ICAO and IATA to participate studies identified above

  6. Overview (4) Agenda Item 1.7 to consider the results of ITU‑R studies in accordance with Resolution 222 (Rev.WRC‑07) in order to ensure long-term spectrum availability and access to spectrum necessary to meet requirements for the aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service, and to take appropriate action on this subject, while retaining unchanged the generic allocation to the mobile-satellite service in the bands 1 525-1 559 MHz and 1 626.5-1 660.5 MHz • Key Points • Consider the results of the studies of Res.222 at WRC-12 • Take appropriate action on this subject • Retain unchanged the generic allocation to MSS • In the bands 1,525-1559 MHz and 1626.5-1660.5 MHz

  7. Historical Background (1) • Prehistoric times • Until WARC-87(MOB), 1,545-1559 MHz and 1646.5-1660.5 MHz (14 MHz sub-bands in 34 MHz bands) were exclusively allocated to AMS(R)S • At WARC-87, AMS(R)S lost 4 MHz of exclusive allocation. To AMS(R)S in the bands 1,545-1555 MHz and 1646.5-1656.5 MHz (10 MHz sub-bands in 34 MHz bands) • AMS(R)S SARPs in 1995 1525 1559 1626.5 1660.5 Exclusive Exclusive 1545 1646.5 1660.5 1559 1525 1559 1626.5 1660.5 Exclusive Exclusive 1545 1555 1646.5 1656.5

  8. Historical Background (2) • Generic allocation and footnote 5.357A of R.R. • At WRC-97 ,AMS(R)S lost exclusive allocation (Generic allocation to MSS ) • Footnote 5.357A to compensate the effect of generic allocation • Resolution 222 • WRC-2000 adopted Res. 222 to strengthen 5.357A resolving that; • administrations shall ensure that • the spectrum needed for AMS(R)S • the MSS to yield capacity to accommodate AMS(R)S spectrum requirement • study for technical solution 1525 1559 1626.5 1660.5 5.357A 5.357A 1545 1555 1646.5 1656.5

  9. Historical Background (3) • Study for technical solution • Report ITU-R M.2073 in 2006 under resolves of Res. 222 concluded that; • prioritization and inter system real-time pre-emption is not practical nor effective (There is no technical solution at that time) • Adoption of Agenda Item 1.7 • WRC-07 adopted Agenda Item 1.7 for WRC-12

  10. Frequency Coordination on 1.6/1.5 GHz • Regions 1 & 3 multilateral frequency coordination • Given the fact that 1.6/1.5 GHz bands are so congested that it is difficult to coordinate bi-laterally, multilateral coordination forum has been established in Regions 1 & 3 • The Operator’s Review Meeting (the ORM) is held annually by the operators in Region 1 (Europe) and Region 3 (Asia/Pacific) • Participants on the ORM are Inmarsat(GB), Thuraya(UAE), ESA(France), VOLNA(Russia), ACeS(Indonesia), Optus(Australia), NAVISAT(Egypt), and MTSAT(Japan) • AMS(R)S operators in operation are Inmarsat and MTSAT. ESA and NAVISAT will be AMS(R)S operators in near future • Region 2 (Americas) also has similar forum

  11. Considerations • Controversial point on footnote 5.357A • 5.357A clearly states that the priority shall be given to AMS(R)S at frequency coordination, but there is no practical measure to prioritize the AMS(R)S • Argument between AMS(R)S and MSS • AMS(R)S states that no consideration has been made for the application of 5.357A at the frequency coordination on 1.6/1.5 GHz, thus spectrum requirements of one of the AMS(R)S operator has never been satisfied • MSS states that there is no issue on 5.357A because there has been no issue for one of the AMS(R)S operator at frequency coordination on 1.6/1.5 GHz. • MSS asserts that 5.357A works well and no modification is needed • Possible solution (for AMS(R)S) • Discrepancy in opinion between AMS(R)S and MSS is irresolvable. Compilation of different opinions into CPM report is inevitable, so we have to make wording of CPM report favorable to AMS(R)S as far as possible

  12. Activities WRC-12 ITU-R CPM BR APT ATU CEPT CITEL LAS RCC SG1 SG2 SG3 SG4 ICAO IATA IMO etc. Administrations Regional Groups APT: Asia & Pacific ATU: Africa CEPT: Europe CITEL: Americas LAS: Arab RCC: Commonwealth WP4C WG-F

  13. WP4C activities (1) • Discussions on Agenda Item 1.7 in WP4C • At first, discussions on Agenda Item 1.7 were held in the order of invites of Res. 222 • i) Establish the method to calculate existing and long-term spectrum requirements of AMS(R)S as ITU-R recommendation • ii) To assess if the spectrum requirements are within 10 MHz • iii) To complete studies of technical and regulatory measures • iv) If requirements are over 10 MHz, study other bands • As the deadline of CPM text in June 2010 nears, 4th WP4C decided to postpone the development of recommendation on estimation method and concentrate on CPM text • Assume the AMS(R)S spectrum requirements is within 10 MHz based on the estimation using the draft method • Complete studies of technical and regulatory measures • Finalize the recommendation on estimation method after the submission of CPM text

  14. WP4C activities (2) • AMS(R)S Position in WP4C • Practical measure to give priority to AMS(R)S is needed • Preliminary estimation shows that the long-term global spectrum requirement for AMS(R)S is less than 10 MHz • You do not need to consider the new allocation for AMS(R)S • The spectrum for AMS(R)S should be assigned based on a long-term requirements (AMS(R)S operators should not be in the position that worries about next year’s assignment) • Now: The frequency coordination of the1.6/1.5 GHz bands is conducted in yearly- and equally-basis (not stable for AMS(R)S) • The spectrum for AMS(R)S should be assigned on a global basis • Now: The frequency coordination of the1.6/1.5 GHz bands is conducted on a regional basis • Now: There are discrepancies in results among regions

  15. WP4C activities (3) • Draft CPM text favorable to AMS(R)S in WP4C • (excerpt from Annex 14 of 4C/338: Chairman’s Report of 4th WP4C) • Method B – New ITU-R Resolution, or a modified ITU-R Resolution 222 which implements additional procedures for the provision of RR No. 5.357A • Advantages • –[this method is an efficient use of the bands 1 525-1 559 MHz and 1 626.5-1 660.5 MHz by AMS(R)S;] [Editor’s note: more explanation regarding this advantage is necessary as its intent is not clear.] • –priority access to AMS(R)S communications is ensured, and generic MSS networks are able to share with AMS(R)S networks. • –[this method would not result in placing undue constraints to the existing systems.] [Editor’s note: to be assessed to the next meeting] • –[this method would result in efficient use of spectrum] [Editor’s note: to be assessed to the next meeting] • Disadvantages • –[additional worldwide administrative meetings need to be held.] • –[implementation of priority access for AMS(R)S in the 1.5/1.6 GHz band would result in placing undue constraints to the existing systems.] [Editor’s note: to be assessed to the next meeting] • –[this method would result in inefficient use of spectrum] [Editor’s note: to be assessed to the next meeting]

  16. WP4C activities (4) • MSS Position in WP4C • There is no issue on the spectrum allocation for AMS(R)S because there has been no issue for one of the AMS(R)S operator at frequency coordination on 1.6/1.5 GHz • AMS(R)S should go out of the bands 1.6/1.5 GHz regardless of whether the spectrum requirement is less than 10 MHz or not • The existence of AMS(R)S is undue constraints to MSS in the bands 1.6/1.5 GHz

  17. WP4C activities (5) • Draft CPM text favorable to MSS in WP4C • (excerpt from Annex 14 of 4C/338: Chairman’s Report of 4th WP4C) • Method A – No Change to the regulatory provisions of the Radio Regulations • Advantages • –based on recent studies the spectrum requirements for AMS(R)S up to the year 2025 can be accommodated in the frequencies bands according to RR No. 5.357A; • –the generic allocation to the mobile-satellite service in the bands 1 525-1 559 MHz and 1 626.5-1 660.5 MHz remains unchanged, [ensuring the flexible and efficient use of them]; • –[no undue constraints are placed on the existing systems operating in the bands 1 525‑1 559 MHz and 1 626.5-1 660.5 MHz;] • –the coordination process in these bands between operators at regular annual multilateral coordination meetings, based on the capacity-planning approach, proves [some] effectiveness over the last 10 years for accommodating AMS(R)S spectrum requirements; • –[There are no amendments to the RR Article 9 provisions for satellite coordination.] • –[no dissatisfaction with the coordination outcome for an AMS(R)S network has been raised to the level of the notifying Administrations resulting in an administration invoking the priority provision of RR No 5.357A. Some administrations are of the view that the existing regulatory procedures are adequate to ensure that the spectrum requirements of AMS(R)S systems can be satisfied.] • Disadvantages • –[since no additional procedures will be included in the Radio Regulations, the problems that have led to the adoption of A.I. 1.7 will not be solved.] • –[Meeting the AMS(R)S needs in these bands means existing (non AMS(R)S) MSS operations in the bands 1 545-1 555 MHz and 1 646.5-1 656.5 MHz may have to yield spectrum causing a reduction in the quality of service for some users] [Editor’s note: more contributions are needed to explain it.]

  18. WP4C activities (6) • Possible outcome of WP4C (draft CPM text) • Two extreme methods (shown in WP4C activities (3) and (5))and some intermediate methods are on the floor • Assign AMS(R)S spectrum before MSS (favorable to AMS(R)S) • Establish a global-basis frequency coordination scheme for AMS(R)S and assign spectrums for AMS(R)S operators • Submit the above result to regional MSS frequency coordination meetings (e.g. Operators Review Meeting in Regions 1 & 3) and assign spectrums for MSS operators while avoiding AMS(R)S allocations • Measures to be stipulated in footnote and/or recommendation and/or resolution • No change at all (favorable to MSS) • Leave the application of 5.357A (give priority to AMS(R)S) to regional MSS frequency coordination meetings • No change to footnote and resolution

  19. WP4C activities (7) • Draft CPM text and debates on it • WP’s outputs are draft CPM text on Agenda Items • Draft CPM text consists of the list of proposed measures with advantages and disadvantages on each measure • AMS(R)S and MSS debate on draft CPM text to impair the opponent’s measure • Both parties try to hit opponent’s sensitive points to lessen the likelihood of adoption at WRC • The debate remains as far apart as ever • Our aim is to keep the texts favorable to AMS(R)S as far as possible in draft CPM text • There are two WP4C meetings (March and June 2010) left before the deadline of CPM text (June 2010)

  20. National Activities • Discussion in Japan • Mobile Satellite Committee has been established • Preparation for WRC-12 • Development of Japan’s position on Agenda Items • MSS operators in Japan generally oppose to Agenda Item 1.7 stemmed from fear of losing spectrum • We actively discuss with MSS operators to gain their understanding • The objection largely is based on ignorance, so it is needed to explain how small our requirements will be compared with MSS’s requirements and have upper limit

  21. Regional Activities • Discussions in Regional Groups • APT • APG 2011-2 was held in June 2009 • Generally support the study conducted in WP4C in its Preliminary Views • support studies for estimation method • support studies for regulatory provisions to ensure long-term spectrum availability and access for AMS(R)S • support additional allocations, if the requirements can not be satisfied without placing undue constraints on MSS • The comment was raised that 5.357A and Res. 222 give sufficient priority to AMS(R)S • APG 2011-3 (2012-3?) will be held in March 2010 • Other Regional Groups (ATU, CEPT, CITEL, LAS and RCC) are also discussing this issue

  22. ICAO Activities • Development of ICAO Position • WG-F • WG-F is the focal point on all aspects related to the development of the ICAO Position • In June 2009, Council approved the ICAO Position • ICAO to present the ICAO Position to Regional Groups • The ICAO Position would be updated at WG-F • JCAB supports the ICAO Position for Agenda Item 1.7

  23. Preparatory works for the Conference(1) ICAO’s role in the preparation Proposals Regional Groups Give advice ICAO Proposals WRC-12 Administrations Position ICAO Position ITU-BR SG4 Give advice Reports CPM WP4C • ICAO is allowed to participate in Regional Groups and ITU-R SGs, but not allowed to speak up (only give advice of aviation matter to the administrations) • ICAO only has status of observer at the Conference

  24. Preparatory works for the Conference(2) Importance of participation to preparatory works • ICAO’s influence is limited to; • one position, but not strong enough as administrations • give guidance of aviation matter to administrations in ITU-R SGs and Regional Groups • National and Regional Proposals • one administration has one proposal and one regional group has one proposal to each Agenda Item • Reports of Study Groups in ITU-R • study results of Agenda items are contributed to WRC as CPM text Aviation communities are encouraged to participate in national, regional and SG activities to obtain favorable positions, views and reports

  25. Thank you Questions and comments to: Yoshiyuki Mikuni (Mr.) mikuni-y2bd@mlit.go.jp

More Related