We wrote a year ago (Via Satellite July 2009) about efforts by the Radiocommunication Bureau (BR) of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to remove unused frequency assignments and networks from the ITU’s books and free up more of these scarce resources for other satellite operators. At the time, the BR urged ITU member states to review satellites recorded in the Master International Frequency Register (MIFR), and the BR was warning that it would take up the task of reviewing actual satellite operations.

The BR recently followed up on its warning. In a report to the 53rd meeting of the ITU’s Radio Regulations Board in March in Geneva, the BR reported that it is now enforcing the removal of unused frequency assignments from the MIFR.

Based on rule 13.6 of the International Radio Regulations, the BR started consultations about operation of 41 different satellite networks. The countries and intergovernmental satellite organizations involved immediately cleaned up the records for eight of these networks that were in regular use. Six other networks were suspended — a process that allows a country to hold onto a satellite slot for up to two years if a satellite for some other reason is out of service. (Those countries really should have notified the BR about the suspension themselves under RR 11.49.)

As evidence that the BR’s efforts were worthwhile, 12 networks were suppressed in whole or part after this review at the request of the countries involved. The BR itself canceled 11 satellites in the MIFR because it received no response from the countries. Clarifications were still pending in late May for another four.

This is a good sign, but the BR admits that more efforts could be needed. The MIFR apparently covers about 450 different satellite orbital slots. The BR says, however, that most “real-time satellite tracking databases” show only about 380 to 400 satellites in operation. Where are the remaining 50 to 70 satellites? The BR says that as many as 10 percent to 15 percent of geostationary “positions with satellite networks recorded in the MIFR and confirmed as having been brought into use might … not be in regular operation.”

The BR is not giving up on its efforts. It reported to the Radio Regulations Board that 94 satellite networks from 17 different countries might not actually match up with MIFR records. The BR recognizes that there could be some uncertainties with this assessment and will be contacting the countries involved to get further information.

The Radio Regulations Board’s March meeting covered some contentious issues, including Iranian interference to Eutelsat satellites, tricky rule interpretations and even consideration of a comprehensive review of the rules of procedure. Nevertheless, neither the meeting agenda nor the summary of its decisions makes the least mention of this BR activity.

Instead, the Radio Regulations Board reviewed a related activity that could have similar impact on MIFR accuracy, looking at a report on possible changes to the satellite notification, coordination and registration procedures under a “Resolution 80” that has been knocking around for more than a decade. That resolution covers review of the RR 13.6 that the BR relied on to review whether satellites in the MIFR were real. According to the summary minutes, issues to be reviewed include what is “reliable information” that a satellite assignment has not been brought into use, how many reminders to send to a country, even the meaning of the term “brought into regular operation.” The review also could focus on how the BR cancels a network already in the MIFR and what the Radio Regulations Board does to confirm that action.

The Radio Regulations Board says it plans to submit a report on these issues for the next World Radiocommunication Conference in early 2012 (WRC-12). This report would go under WRC-12 agenda item 8.1.3, which is a placeholder for considering Resolution 80. Thus, as proactive as the BR might be under current rules to maintain the MIFR, there could be new interpretations and new approaches after WRC-12. The Radio Regulations Board asks for more input on this topic and wants the BR to send whatever it can as soon as possible. If non-existent satellites are to be cancelled right and left, then the industry should get its 2 cents worth to the BR as well.

Gerry Oberst is a partner in the Hogan & Hartson Brussels office.