Consideration of Possible Frequency Plans for the

3G Expansion Spectrum, 2500 to 2690 MHz

A Consultation Document

October 2003

The Radiocommunications Agency is an Executive Agency of the Department of Trade and Industry.

The Agency's website is located at www.radio.gov.uk

THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK

CONTENTS

Glossary

1 Executive Summary

2 Responses to This Consultation

3 Publication of Responses

4 Ofcom

5 Background

6 Issues

7 Summary of Questions

Annex A: 3G/IMT-2000 Spectrum – Core and Expansion Band Allocation

Annex B: Fifth Mandate to CEPT on IMT-200/UMTS

Annex C: Spectrum Options

GLOSSARY

Within this document the following abbreviations are used:

2G Second generation3G Third generation3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project 3GPP RAN4 Subgroup of 3GPP responsible for the RF aspects of UTRANACLR Adjacent-channel leakage power ratio BS Base StationCEPT European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations DL Downlink (Forward Link)ECC Electronic Communications CommitteeERC European Radiocommunications CommitteeFDD Frequency Division DuplexGSM Global System for Mobile Communications IMD Intermodulation Distortion IMT-2000 International Mobile Telecommunications-2000ITU International Telecommunications Union ITU-R ITU Radiocommunications SectorMS Mobile StationMSS Mobile Satellite Service RF Radio Frequency RRM Radio Resource ManagementRx ReceiveTDD Time Division Duplex Tx TransmitUE User EquipmentUL Uplink (Reverse Link)UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications SystemUTRA Universal Terrestrial Radio Access UTRAN Universal Terrestrial Radio Access NetworkVDT Variable Duplex Transmission WARC World Administrative Radio ConferenceWCDMA Wideband Code Division Multiple AccessWRC World Radio Conference

Within this consultation the following terms are used:

‘core’ 3G spectrum This refers to original 3G spectrum identified for IMT-2000 by WARC-92, and includes the spectrum licensed to the 3G operators following an auction in April 2000.

3G expansion spectrum This refers to the 3G spectrum (2500 to 2690 MHz) identified for IMT-2000 by WRC-2000, and is the subject of this consultation.

For details of both the ‘core’ and expansion spectrum, please see Annex A.

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 In August 2003 the European Commission issued a mandate (Mandate 5 – See Annex B) to CEPT, to develop detailed spectrum arrangements for the 3G expansion spectrum (2500 to 2690 MHz). Within CEPT it is expected that the project team ECC PT1 will lead on developing a response to the mandate; PT1 has already identified a number of issues that need to be addressed, and plans to narrow down the list of frequency arrangement options at its next meeting in January 2004.

1.2 In the UK, the briefing group UK WP8F is the group normally consulted when formulating UK positions for ECC PT1 meetings. However, in this instance we feel that it is important to give all interested parties in the UK an opportunity to assess the issues and express a view on potential harmonised frequency options, in time for the UK administration to take these views into account when it develops a UK position for the January ECC PT1 meeting. We recognise that this consultation is rather specialised, but hope that we have provided enough information and references to enable those with an interest to provide an informed response.

1.3 We anticipate that, as the debate in Europe develops during 2004, further consultations may be required to ensure that the UK administration can reflect the widest possible UK interests when negotiating in Europe.

1.4 The 2500 to 2690 MHz band was identified at WRC-2000 for use by administrations wishing to implement IMT-2000. This spectrum is seen as future expansion spectrum to complement the existing ‘core’ 3G spectrum identified for IMT-2000 on a worldwide basis at WARC-921. In the UK, the core 3G spectrum was auctioned in April 2000; five licences were awarded2. Currently one operator, ‘3’, has rolled out services in the core 3G spectrum, and the other four operators (O2, Orange, T-Mobile and Vodafone) are expected to start offering 3G services during 2004.

1.5 Mandate 5 aims to harmonise the frequency usage within the 3G expansion spectrum, 2500 to 2690 MHz, for IMT-2000/UMTS systems in Europe. It requires CEPT to produce the following deliverables:

an interim report giving initial proposals or strategies, commenting on the progress of the work and highlighting any problems with the timing of the mandate on the basis of which the Commission might have to reassess the timing of the outstanding deliverables (by July 2004);

a final CEPT Report and adoption of an ECC Decision for public consultation (by November 2004); and

final approval of the ECC Decision by the ECC (by March 2005).

1.6 This consultation therefore asks a number of questions related to the future frequency usage of the 3G expansion spectrum, 2500 to 2690 MHz.

1.7 In parallel with this consultation, RA is also consulting on ‘Use of the 2010 to 2025 MHz Band for the Provision of 3G Telecommunications Services’. There may be scenarios for the use of the 3G expansion spectrum that could incorporate external pairings with the terrestrial core 3G spectrum, including the 2010 to 2025 MHz band. Your attention is drawn to this related consultation for information.

1 See ITU Radio Regulations No. 5.388.2 See the 3G Auction information memorandum, published on 1 November 1999 and available at www.spectrumauctions.gov.uk/3gindex.htm, for details of the award process.

1.8 RA would be grateful for written comments on the above, and particularly for answers to the specific questions raised in Section 6 of this consultation document.

2 RESPONSES TO THIS CONSULTATION

2.1 Responses to this consultation should arrive no later than 5 December 2003, and should be sent to:

Martin FentonPublic Wireless Networks UnitRadiocommunications AgencyWyndham House189 Marsh WallLondonE14 9SX

or electronically to Martin.Fenton@ra.gsi.gov.uk.

2.2 If you require further information about this consultation, please contact either Martin.Fenton@ra.gsi.gov.uk (tel: 020 7211 0248) or Robert.Cooper@ra.gsi.gov.uk (tel: 020 7211 0590).

2.3 This consultation document is being published on the RA website, www.radio.gov.uk.

2.4 Any comments or complaints about the conduct of this consultation should be addressed to:

Julia FraserInformation and Publicity ManagerRadiocommuncations AgencyWyndham House189 Marsh WallLondon E14 9SX

or electronically to Julia.Fraser@ra.gsi.gov.uk.

3 PUBLICATION OF RESPONSES

3.1 Respondents to this consultation should note that, in the interests of open government:

unless confidentiality is expressly requested, individual responses will be placed in the public domain in printed or electronic form, together with the names and contact details of authors. Respondents are requested to make it very clear if they wish to keep some or all of their response confidential;

unconditional permission to publish responses will be assumed unless the author expressly states otherwise;

any copyright attached to responses will be assumed to have been relinquished unless it is expressly reserved; and

where applicable, any information provided will be covered by the Data Protection Act 1998.

4 OFCOM

4.1 By the end of this year, RA and all responsibility for regulating the radio spectrum and communications services will become part of Ofcom – the new converged regulator for the communications sector.

4.2 Powers will formally vest to Ofcom on 29 December 2003. It is anticipated that any actions resulting from this consultation that fall after this date will be carried forward by Ofcom.

4.3 Please see the Ofcom transitional website at www.Ofcom.org.uk for more details on Ofcom’s role and responsibilities.

5 BACKGROUND

5.1 Since its introduction two decades ago, cellular radio has grown dramatically. The first UK analogue networks were introduced in 1985 and achieved their one millionth subscriber in 1990. In 1991 the first digital networks based on GSM technology began commercial operation in the UK. By the end of the decade – by which time analogue systems had virtually been phased out – the number of subscribers to the four GSM operators (BT Cellnet, One2One, Orange and Vodafone) had risen to approximately 25 million. Currently in the UK there are approximately 50 million GSM subscribers (84% penetration), split between the current GSM operators (O2, Orange, T-Mobile and Vodafone).

5.2 In April 2000, frequencies within the terrestrial ‘core’ 3G spectrum (1900 to 1980 MHz and 2110 to 2170 MHz) were auctioned in the UK. Five 3G licences were awarded: four to the incumbent GSM operators and one to a new entrant (now called ‘3’). ‘3’ started offering services in March 2003 and the other 3G licencees are expected to launch services during 2004.

5.3 At the time the 3G licences were being awarded, it was acknowledged that additional spectrum would be needed to cater for future growth in 3G services. On the basis of detailed modelling of future demand for 3G services, the ITU decided at WRC-2000 to identify the 2500 to 2690 MHz band for IMT-2000. WRC-2000 also identified the current 2G/GSM frequency bands as suitable for IMT-2000, to facilitate future migration from 2G to 3G.

5.4 In March 2001, the European Commission issued Mandate 4 to CEPT, to facilitate a co-ordinated implementation of 3G mobile communications operating in the additional frequency bands identified by WRC-2000 for IMT-2000 systems. In response to this mandate the ECC adopted Decision(02)06, which decided:

to designate the 2500 to 2690 MHz band to UMTS/IMT-2000 systems;

that the 2500 to 2690 MHz band should be made available for use by UMTS/IMT-2000 systems by 1 January 2008, subject to market demand and national licensing schemes;

to designate the 2520 to 2670 MHz band for use by terrestrial UMTS/IMT-2000 systems; and

that the detailed spectrum arrangements for the 2500 to 2690 MHz band, as well as the utilisation of the bands 2500 to 2520 MHz / 2670 to 2690 MHz, should be decided in an additional ECC Decision by the end of 2004.

5.5 Following CEPT’s response to Mandate 4, the European Commission issued Mandate 5 in August 2003. This aims to harmonise the frequency usage within the 2500 to 2690 MHz band for IMT-2000/UMTS systems in Europe, and requires CEPT to produce the following deliverables:

an interim report giving initial proposals or strategies, commenting on the progress of the work and highlighting any problems with the timing of the mandate on the basis of which the Commission might have to reassess the timing of the outstanding deliverables (by July 2004);

a final CEPT Report and adoption of an ECC Decision for public consultation (by November 2004); and

final approval of the ECC Decision by the ECC (by March 2005).

5.6 There may be scenarios for the use of the 3G expansion spectrum that could incorporate external pairings with UTRA TDD bands in the terrestrial core 3G spectrum, including the 2010 to 2025 MHz band. In parallel to this consultation, RA is also consulting on ‘Use of the 2010 to 2025 MHz Band for the Provision of 3G Telecommunications Services’. You may wish to consider the broader context of the parallel consultation when preparing your response to this consultation.

5.7 Within CEPT it is expected that the project team ECC PT1 will lead on developing a response to the mandate; ECC PT1 has already identified a number of issues that need to be addressed, and plans to narrow down the list of frequency arrangement options at its next meeting in January 2004.

5.8 In the UK, the briefing group UK WP8F is the group normally consulted when formulating UK positions for ECC PT1 meetings. However, in this instance we feel that it is important to give all interested parties in the UK an opportunity to assess the issues and express a view on potential harmonised frequency options, in time for the UK administration to take these views into account when it develops a UK position for the January ECC PT1 meeting. We recognise that this consultation is rather specialised, but hope that sufficient information and references are provided to enable those with an interest to provide an informed response.

5.9 We anticipate that, as the debate in Europe develops during 2004, further consultations may be required to ensure that the UK administration can reflect the widest possible UK interests when negotiating in Europe.

6 ISSUES

6.1 A number of issues need to be considered when developing detailed spectrum arrangements for the 3G expansion spectrum. These can be split into a number of topics, e.g. satellite/terrestrial use, international (worldwide harmonisation), applications and markets, and technical issues. These topics are discussed in more detail below.

6.2 At WRC-2000 the sub-bands 2500 to 2520 MHz and 2670 to 2900 MHz were allocated to the MSS and identified for administrations wishing to implement the satellite component of IMT-20003. However, it was also concluded that (depending on market developments) it may be possible in the longer term for these sub-bands to be used by the terrestrial component of IMT-2000.

6.3 Studies within ITU-R and CEPT have shown that co-frequency sharing between the satellite and terrestrial component of IMT-2000 in these sub-bands is not feasible in the same geographical region. The need within Europe for the use of the 2500 to 2520 MHz and 2670 to 2900 MHz sub-bands by the satellite component of IMT-2000 needs to be carefully considered

Question 1 Should the 2500 to 2520 MHz and 2670 to 2690 MHz sub-bands be designated for the satellite or terrestrial component of IMT-2000 within Europe?

6.4 A number of developments in other regions could affect European frequency arrangements for the 3G expansion spectrum – for instance:

allocations in Japan and Korea to BSS Sound in the 2605 to 2655 MHz band; and

an FCC decision on a national allocation to Mobile as well as Fixed Service in the 2500 to 2690 MHz band (which can be used for advanced wireless systems, including IMT-2000), and discussions about a national band plan that would facilitate introduction of mobile systems in this band.

Question 2 How much emphasis should Europe place on frequency arrangements that could be partially implemented on a global basis?

6.5 When considering European frequency arrangements, it is important to consider whether it is practical for the deployment in a particular country to differ from that of its neighbours. This would affect issues such as cross-border co-ordination.

Question 3 Is it practical for the deployment in a particular country to differ from that of its neighbours?

6.6 An idea of the potential applications and markets that could take advantage of the 3G expansion spectrum would be advantageous. This is especially important when estimating the anticipated traffic characteristics/assumptions that should be made on aspects such as asymmetry characteristics, and whether more spectrum is required in the ‘downlink’ direction than in the ‘uplink’ direction.

3 See Resolution 225 (WRC-2000), ‘Use of additional frequency bands for the satellite component of IMT-2000’, available at www.itu.int/newsarchive/wrc2000/IMT-2000/Res-COM5-26.html.

Question 4 What could the spectrum potentially be used for in terms of applications, target markets etc?

Question 5 What are the anticipated traffic characteristics/assumptions that should be made on aspects such as asymmetry characteristics and whether more spectrum is required in the ‘downlink’ direction than in the ‘uplink’ direction?

6.7 There may be scenarios for the use of the 3G expansion spectrum that could incorporate external pairings in the terrestrial core 3G spectrum. For instance, if little or no demand develops for use of the UTRA TDD bands in the core 3G spectrum, they could be used to create an FDD pairing with parts of the 3G expansion spectrum.

Question 6 Should the core 3G spectrum – both the licensed and the unlicensed (self-provided) bands – be considered for potential pairings with the 2500 to 2690 MHz band, or should they be treated separately?

6.8 How flexible can the frequency arrangements within the expansion band be made? Do the boundaries between the different ‘elements’ within the 3G expansion spectrum need to be fixed, apart from the position of the minimum duplex separation band and the duplex direction? For example, does the boundary between FDD and TDD/downlink-only need to be fixed?

Question 7 Do the boundaries between the different ‘elements’ within the expansion spectrum need to be fixed, apart from the position of the minimum duplex separation band and the duplex direction? For example, does the boundary between FDD and TDD/downlink-only need to be fixed?

6.9 When deciding frequency arrangements in Europe, it is important to know their implications for roaming. Building a terminal that has to support complex scenarios (i.e. FDD, TDD and downlink only, plus support for the core 3G spectrum) could be very challenging.

Question 8 Will all terminals need to support all scenarios for roaming (i.e. FDD, TDD and downlink only including support for the core 3G spectrum)?

6.10 It is difficult to predict now and in 2004 what the market situation will be in 2008. Obviously, decisions on the details of the 2500 to 2690 MHz band plan would benefit from as much experience as possible of the core 3G spectrum networks and markets. Some assumptions must be made if the band plan is to be determined in 2004, four years before its availability in 2008. Some idea of the potential asymmetry of the traffic would enable informed decisions to be made. Decisions must be made early enough for equipment to be manufactured by 2008, but this requirement must be balanced against the need to seek global harmonisation and to gain as much experience as possible with core 3G spectrum developments.

Question 9 What are your views on the timing of the mandate deliverables, particularly for the final CEPT Report and the ECC Decision?

6.11 Various scenarios for the use of the 3G expansion spectrum have been developed and discussed within ITU-R WP8F and 3GPP. See Annex C for details of the proposed spectrum options.

6.12 At this early stage in the development of 3G networks and markets, it may or may not yet be possible to decide definitively on a single frequency arrangement option for the 3G expansion spectrum. However, it should be possible to start narrowing down the proposed options.

Question 10 What frequency arrangements would you like to see in the 2500 to 2690 MHz band? Alternatively, what options should be retained for consideration and on what basis?

7 SUMMARY OF QUESTIONS

Question 1 Should the 2500 to 2520 MHz and 2670 to 2690 MHz sub-bands be designated for the satellite or terrestrial component of IMT-2000 within Europe?

Response: The bands 2500-2520 MHz and 2670 – 2690 MHz should be designated for terrestrial use.

Question 2 How much emphasis should Europe place on frequency arrangements that could be partially implemented on a global basis?

Response: Harmonisation with North America is desirable (most other regions already have common spectrum allocations)

Question 3 Is it practical for the deployment in a particular country to differ from that of its neighbours?

Response: Yes, under a limited set of circumstances. Suitable emissions limits and boundary signal levels will need to be agreed.

Question 4 What could the spectrum potentially be used for in terms of applications, target markets etc?

Response: Terrestrial (primarily) mobile services in Dense Urban/ Urban/ Sub-Urban areas

Question 5 What are the anticipated traffic characteristics/assumptions that should be made on aspects such as asymmetry characteristics and whether more spectrum is required in the ‘downlink’ direction than in the ‘uplink’ direction?

Response: With only limited experience of 3G services and their mass market appeal we believe it is too early to determine any ‘right’ degree of asymmetry. It is also too early to be sure asymmetry will need to be flexible.

It is also the case that asymmetrical traffic can be carried efficiently in symmetrical spectrum (for example HSDPA evolution in 3GPP increases downlink peak data rate and capacity).

Question 6 Should the core 3G spectrum – both the licensed and the unlicensed (self-provided) bands – be considered for potential pairings with the 2500 to 2690 MHz band, or should they be treated separately?

Response: It is appropriate to consider the re-pairing of spectrum in the future, but not at present since it is not yet clear if, how and when the present licensed spectrum will be used (especially 1900 – 1920 MHz).

Question 7 Do the boundaries between the different ‘elements’ within the expansion spectrum need to be fixed, apart from the position of the minimum duplex separation band and the duplex direction? For example, does the boundary between FDD and TDD/downlink-only need to be fixed?

Response: A fixed boundary between FDD and TDD is highly desirable. Under no circumstances should a TDD system of 1 operator be permitted to operate in adjacent spectrum to an FDD allocation of another operator in the same geographical region/ area. Interference issues arising from uncoordinated FDD/TDD boundaries are severe.

Question 8 Will all terminals need to support all scenarios for roaming (i.e. FDD, TDD and downlink only) including support for the core 3G spectrum?

Response: No. There will likely be different terminals adapted to differing market and user needs.

Question 9 What are your views on the timing of the mandate deliverables, particularly for the final CEPT Report and the ECC Decision?

Response: Nortel Networks has no view.

Question 10 What frequency arrangements would you like to see in the 2500 to 2690 MHz band? Alternatively, what options should be retained for consideration and on what basis.

Response:

1) There should not be any allocation to MSS in the band.

2) There should be an allocation of 60+60 MHz to paired FDD spectrum.

2a) The band from 2500 to 2560 MHz (nominal) should be allocated for FDD Uplink only

2b) The band from 2630 to 2690 MHz (nominal) should be allocated for FDD Downlink only.

3) The remaining nominally 70 MHz of spectrum from 2560 to 2630 MHz should remain ‘to be decided’ in a second round. This second round of the decision making process should occur no sooner than the end of 2006 by which time initial 3G experiences will give operators working knowledge of the degree of asymmetry and degree of flexibility required in future allocations.

Nortel Networks would be pleased to answer any questions the RA may have arising from this response. Please contact (NAME) to discuss by telephone or arrange a meeting.

ANNEX A: 3G/IMT-2000 Spectrum – Core and Expansion Band Allocation

A1. ‘Core’ 3G Spectrum Allocation

UT

RA

TD

D

UT

RA

FD

D U

L

IMT

-200

0 M

SS

UL

TD

D S

P

UT

RA

FD

D D

L

IMT

-200

0 M

SS

DL

1900

1920

1980

2010

2025

2110

2170

2200

MH

z

SP = Self-provided applications

Frequency range (MHz) Service in the UK

1900 to 1920 UTRA TDD

1920 to 1980 UTRA FDD uplink

1980 to 2010 IMT-2000 Mobile Satellite Service uplink

2010 to 2025 Self-provided TDD applications

2110 to 2170 UTRA FDD downlink

2170 to 2200 IMT-2000 Mobile Satellite Service downlink

A2. 3G Expansion Spectrum

Terrestrial UMTS / IMT-2000

IMT-2000 MSS

Terrestrial UMTS / IMT-2000IMT-2000 MSS

2500 2520 2670 2690MHz

Frequency range (MHz) Service

2500 to 2520 IMT-2000 MSS/Terrestrial

2520 to 2670 IMT-2000 Terrestrial

2570 to 2690 IMT-2000 MSS/Terrestrial

ANNEX B: FIFTH MANDATE TO CEPT ON IMT-2000/UMTS (MANDATE 5)

1. Title

Mandate to CEPT to harmonise the frequency usage within the additional frequency band of 2500-2690 MHz to be made available for IMT-2000/UMTS systems in Europe (Mandate 5).

2. Purpose

To mandate CEPT to develop and adopt the measures necessary to ensure a harmonised and efficient use of the frequency band 2500-2690 MHz for IMT-2000/UMTS.

3. Justification

Pursuant to Article 4 of the Radio Spectrum Decision4, the Commission may issue mandates to the CEPT for the development of technical implementing measures with a view to ensuring harmonised conditions for the availability and efficient use of radio spectrum; such mandates shall set the task to be performed and the timetable therefor.

In Europe the frequency band 2500-2690 MHz is foreseen as additional spectrum for IMT-2000/UMTS. In order to ensure harmonised conditions and efficient use of the above-mentioned spectrum, it is necessary to investigate and decide on detailed spectrum usage parameters as well as whether or not and to which extent the satellite component of IMT-2000 could use parts of this additional spectrum.

4. Background

Pursuant to the UMTS Decision5, and after consulting the Member States at the Licensing Committee, the Commission issued on 9 March 2001 a fourth Mandate to CEPT to harmonise frequency usage in order to facilitate a co-ordinated implementation in the Community of third generation mobile and wireless communication systems operating in additional frequency bands as identified by WRC-2000 for IMT-2000 systems.

Mandate 4 asked CEPT to undertake all necessary steps to assess the need for additional frequency bands under different usage scenarios and based on detailed studies reflecting the views of all parties concerned. The work to be done by CEPT took into account the prospective development of the 3G market and considered both the terrestrial and the satellite component of IMT-2000 systems.

CEPT delivered a Report and an ECC Decision in line with the scope and tasks given under Mandate 4. The key points included in the adopted ECC Decision, ECC/DEC/(02)06, are:

Designation of the whole band 2500-2690MHz to IMT-2000/UMTS systems.

Making the whole band 2500-2690MHz available for use by IMT-2000/UMTS systems by 1 January 2008, subject to market demand and national licensing schemes.

Designation of the frequency band 2520–2670 MHz for use by terrestrial IMT-2000/UMTS systems.

4 Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community, OJ L 108 of 24.4.2002, p.1.5 Decision 128/199/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the co-ordinated introduction of a third generation mobile and wireless communications system (UMTS) in the Community of 14 December 1998.

Detailed channelling arrangements for the whole band 2500–2690MHz as well as the utilisation of the bands 2500–2520MHz / 2670–2690MHz shall be decided in an additional ECC Decision to be adopted by the end of 2004.

Following the delivery of the report and the ECC Decision by CEPT the Licensing Committee adopted the deliverables through a written procedure which was opened on 5 December 2002 and ended on 19 December 2002. Licensing Committee members unanimously agreed on the following statement: “The Committee welcomes the results of the work done by the CEPT pursuant to Mandate 4 and accepts the ECC Decision ECC/DEC/(02)06 of 15 November 2002 on the designation of the frequency band 2500-2690 MHz for UMTS/IMT-2000. The Committee invites the EU Member States to commit to the implementation of such ECC Decision in due time.”

5. Order and Schedule

Considering that the band 2500-2690 MHz is to be made available by 1 January 2008 and that the ECC Decision that was agreed under the 4 th Mandate to CEPT foresees a second ECC Decision dealing with the channelling arrangements for the band 2500-2690 MHz by the end of 2004;

CEPT is mandated to develop channelling arrangements for the band 2500-2690 MHz taking into account and commenting on at least the following issues;

Availability of the bands 2500-2520 / 2670-2690 MHz for the use by the IMT-2000 satellite component and/or terrestrial component;

The impact of BSS sound at 2605-2655 MHz (and possibly other services in the band 2500-2690 MHz) on IMT-2000/UMTS services;

The impact of technological advances such as variable duplex spacing or other developments that may facilitate flexible channelling arrangements as well as technology neutrality, noting that these technologies must be commercially available by 2008;

The desirability to take utmost account of making regulation technologically neutral, and

Efficient and harmonised use of spectrum.

These issues are to be addressed in a CEPT Report which would be the basis for a following ECC Decision concerning channelling arrangements.

The deliverables of this Mandate are an interim and final report, as well as an ECC Decision on IMT-2000/UMTS channelling arrangements with the following delivery dates.

July 2004: Submission of an interim report to the RSC giving initial proposals or strategies, commenting on the progress of the work and highlighting any problems with the timing of the mandate on the basis of which the Commission with the support of the RSC might have to reassess the timing of the outstanding deliverables.

November 2004: Submission of the final CEPT report to the RSC and adoption of the ECC Decision for public consultation;

March 2005: Final approval of the ECC Decision by the ECC.

The result of this mandate can be made applicable in the European Community pursuant to Article 4 of the Radio Spectrum Decision.

In implementing this mandate, the CEPT shall, where relevant, take the utmost account of Community law applicable.

Annex C: SPECTRUM OPTIONS

Summary of 3GPP ‘Feasibility study considering the viable deployment of UTRA in additional and diverse spectrum arrangements (Release 6)’, 3GPP TR 25.889,v2.0.0.

Different scenarios for 2500 to 2690 MHz (the 2.5 GHz band)

ITU WP8F has defined different scenarios for the frequency arrangements at 2500 to 2690 MHz (the 2.5 GHz band). These scenarios include operation of FDD DL only, paired FDD UL/DL, TDD and combinations of these. Several different scenarios are possible, of which seven are shown in Figure C.1 below [C1].

Figure C.1: ITU WP8F scenarios for the 2500 to 2690 MHz band

Technical aspects related to implementing some of the 2.5 GHz band scenarios

3GPP RAN4 has conducted a feasibility study on the applicability of UTRA FDD and TDD in the new IMT-2000 bands, with a focus on the 2.5 GHz band [C2]. The study covered implementation aspects and specification impacts, and considered the following 2.5 GHz band scenarios: FDD DL only Paired FDD UL and FDD DL Paired FDD UL and FDD DL with additional FDD DL only TDD only

Please note that the feasibility study focused on exclusive use of the 2.5 GHz band by either UTRA FDD or UTRA TDD. It did not consider co-existence between UTRA FDD and UTRA TDD.

The following sections briefly describe each of these four scenarios.

FDD DL only

In this scenario, the whole 2.5 GHz band is used for downlink capacity extension by providing additional DL carriers into a FDD system (see Figure C.2). Additional DL carriers are paired with existing UL carrier(s) in the core 3G spectrum.

Figure C.2: FDD DL only at 2.5 GHz

Introduction of additional 2.5 GHz DL carriers into a core-band WCDMA network requires that only 2.5 GHz FDD transmitters are added to cell sites. It is also possible to have the 2.5 GHz DL coverage area (for various service bit rates) similar to the coverage of the associated core band DL, although the total path loss (including radio propagation and cable losses) at 2.5GHz is about 3 dB higher than in the core band. This is because in a typical WCDMA macrocell, the network dimensioning is done so that the DL becomes interference-limited rather than coverage-limited (while the UL is coverage-limited).

Pairing the 2.5 GHz DL-only band with a core-band WCDMA system requires additional RRM solutions, e.g. to balance load between different DL carriers and to avoid uplink interference in sparse 2.5 GHz cell deployments.

VDT functionality is needed in terminals that will operate over several band pairings (UL in core band + DL in core band/2.5 GHz band).

Adding the 2.5 GHz Rx band in the terminal leaves the core Tx band untouched, so the complete transmitter can be re-used. Figure C.3 shows an example of an implementation where it is possible to select between the receiver bands. Separate antennas (not shown in Figure C.3) may be needed for 2 GHz and 2.5 GHz band operation, owing to large frequency separation between the bands.

Figure C.3: Example of user equipment using the combination of the core band (band I) UL/DL and the 2.5 GHz band additional DL [C2]

The complexity of the terminal also depends on whether it is required to use simultaneously or alternatively a 2.5 GHz DL carrier with a core-band DL carrier. In the latter case, the implementation is much simpler since only one baseband Rx chain is needed.

Paired FDD UL and FDD DL

In this scenario, both FDD UL and FDD DL carriers are located in the 2.5 GHz band. This scenario is, therefore, in principle just a new frequency-band variant of basic UTRA FDD. By using VDT, the width of the UL and DL bands can be equal, or one of them can be wider depending on the traffic requirements – see Figure C.4.

Band 2 500 - 2690 MHz

MHz 2500 2690

Block A

Alt B FDD UL

FDD DL

B

Figure C.4: Paired FDD UL and FDD DL

This scenario can provide additional UL/DL spectrum to support new as well as existing operators. It can also provide symmetric and asymmetric capacity, depending on how the 2.5 GHz band is divided between UL and DL. A duplex gap is needed between frequency blocks A and B.

To achieve widespread terminal roaming and low-cost manufacture of terminals and base stations, one of the most important requirements is the fixed and uniform partitioning A/B of the 2.5 GHz band across all markets (e.g. the same partitioning across CEPT countries as well as other countries utilising the 2.5 GHz band). If this is done on a global basis, it will reduce the design requirements for duplexing and linearity of the Rx/Tx chains, and will thus lead to a economy of scale that benefits the entire wireless industry.

Selecting the size of the minimum duplex gap between frequency blocks A and B involves a trade-off between duplexer complexity and minimising the amount of spectrum not usable for FDD. The requirements for the minimum duplexing gap are dominated by terminal implementation.

From the point of view of terminal implementation, protection of the user’s own receiver from his/her own transmitter sets the requirements for the duplex filter performance and the width of the duplex gap at the block adjacency AB that is necessary to produce sufficient attenuation to the user’s own transmission and spurious emissions in the DL band. A benchmark of the duplexer performance can be taken from the PCS1900 band (1850 to 1910 MHz paired with 1930 to 1990 MHz) requirements; extrapolating these into the 2.5 GHz band by considering the fraction of frequency indicates that the minimum duplex gap needs to be of the order of 30 MHz.

The UL operation in portion A of the 2.5 GHz band will suffer from approximately 3 dB more path loss than core-band operation, with a corresponding reduction of coverage; the impact on the DL coverage/capacity in portion B will be negligible. Increased path loss in UL could be compensated for with approximately 3 dB higher transmitter output power at the terminal, e.g. using power class 3 (24 dBm) terminal instead of power class 4 (21 dBm) terminal. However, this would increase the terminal’s power consumption compared to core-band UL operation.

Paired FDD UL and FDD DL with additional FDD DL only

In this scenario, UTRA FDD is operated in a ‘sandwiched’ manner: FDD UL carriers located in portion A are paired with DL carriers in portion D, thereby enclosing FDD carriers in portions B+C (which are assumed to be paired with FDD UL carriers in the core band). Thus, two distinct frequency arrangements exist for FDD operation within the new 2.5 GHz band; these are referred to here as ‘FDD internal’ and ‘FDD external’ respectively (see Figure C.5).

Band 2 500 - 2690 MHz

MHz 2500 2690

Block A B C D

Alt C FDD UL (internal)

FDD DL (external ) FDD DL (internal )

Figure C.5: Paired FDD UL and FDD DL with additional FDD DL only

The FDD internal frequency arrangement is very similar to scenario 2 (paired FDD UL and FDD DL). It can provide additional UL/DL spectrum to support new as well as existing operators. It can also provide symmetric and asymmetric capacity in the 2.5 GHz band, depending on the sizes of blocks A and D.

The FDD external frequency arrangement is similar to scenario 1 (FDD DL only). Blocks B and C are used for DL capacity extension for existing core-band WCDMA systems.

Frequency block AB border creates a new interference scenario, which has not been addressed in existing 3GPP specifications. BS-BS interference can occur between two BS’s where one is transmitting in the FDD external band while the other is receiving the FDD internal band. This interference could occur especially if the BS’s are co-located. Similarly, MS-MS interference due to closely located terminals has to be considered where one is transmitting in the FDD internal band and the other is receiving the FDD external band. Furthermore, third-order nonlinearities in terminal Rx can cause intermodulation products that fall into victim terminal Rx band. To avoid BS-BS and MS-MS interference degradations, a guard band is needed between blocks A and B.

The requirements for the guard band between blocks A and B are dominated by terminal implementation. From the point of view of the terminal duplex filter’s feasibility, a guard band of the order of 30 MHz is needed between blocks A and B to meet terminal radio performance requirements (spurious emissions, blocking, IMD) comparable to UTRA FDD core-band requirements. A smaller guard band may be possible if the terminal requirements are relaxed.

To achieve widespread terminal roaming and low-cost manufacture of terminals and base stations, the partitioning A/B+C/D of the 2.5 GHz band should be fixed and uniform across all markets.

Propagation loss at 2.5 GHz is higher than in the core band, and therefore uplink coverage will be smaller with current 3GPP terminal power classes.

TDD only

In this scenario, the whole 2.5 GHz band is allocated to TDD – see Figure C.6.

Figure C.6: TDD only

UTRA TDD allows frequencies to be allocated autonomously for new operators who do not have frequency blocks in the core band.

Compared with UTRA TDD operation in the core band, TDD operation at 2.5 GHz will entail [C2]:

higher propagation loss;

larger potential bandwidth (up to 190 MHz) available for TDD, increasing the potential for interference (particularly for mechanisms related to spurious emissions and blocking); and

the possibility for prospective TDD operators within the 2.5GHz band to deploy multiple TDD carriers - this will have a positive impact on the potential for escaping interference but a negative impact on the equipment (BS,UE) feasibility regarding the projected RF requirements (e.g. ACLR, spurious emissions).

References

[C1] ITU, ‘Preliminary draft revision of recommendation ITU-R M.1036-1: Frequency arrangements for implementation of the terrestrial component of IMT-2000 in the bands 806-960 MHz, 1710-2025 MHz, 2110-2200 MHz and 25600-2690 MHz’, ITU-R 8F/TEMP/290-E

[C2] 3GPP, ‘Feasibility study considering the viable deployment of UTRA in additional and diverse spectrum arrangements (Release 6)’, 3GPP TR 25.889,v2.0.0