[Senate Executive Report 110-18]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
110th Congress Exec. Rept.
SENATE
2d Session 110-18
======================================================================
1992 PARTIAL REVISION AND 1995 REVISION OF THE RADIO REGULATIONS
_______
September 11, 2008.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Dodd, from the Committee on Foreign Relations,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany Treaty Docs. 107-17 and 108-28]
The Committee on Foreign Relations, to which was referred
the 1992 Partial Revision of the Radio Regulations (Geneva,
1979), with appendices, signed by the United States at Malaga-
Torremolinos on March 3, 1992, as contained in the Final Acts
of the World Administrative Radio Conference for Dealing with
Frequency Allocations in Certain Parts of the Spectrum (WARC-
92) (the ``1992 Revision'') (Treaty Doc. 107-17) and the 1995
Revision of the Radio Regulations, with appendices, signed by
the United States at Geneva on November 17, 1995, as contained
in the Final Acts of the World Radiocommunication Conference
(WRC-95) (the ``1995 Revision'') (Treaty Doc. 108-28), having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon subject to
declarations and reservations, as indicated in the resolutions
of advice and consent for each treaty, and recommends the
Senate give its advice and consent to ratification thereof, as
set forth in this report and the accompanying resolutions of
advice and consent.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose..........................................................1
II. Background.......................................................2
III. Major Provisions.................................................3
IV. Entry Into Force.................................................6
V. Implementing Legislation.........................................6
VI. Committee Action.................................................7
VII. Committee Recommendation and Comments............................7
VIII.Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification................13
I. Purpose
These two treaties are revisions of the Radio Regulations,
which were negotiated at World Radiocommunication Conferences
convened under the auspices of the International
Telecommunication Union's Radiocommunication Sector. The Radio
Regulations generally manage the international radio-frequency
spectrum and global satellite orbits with the primary objective
of maximizing effective use of these resources while minimizing
interference in the operation of radiocommunication systems.
The 1992 Revision was primarily intended to identify bands
of spectrum that could be allocated for what were at the time
new technologies, such as mobile services operating through a
satellite link, although the revision covers many other
matters, such as rules for shipboard radio repair and telephone
calls placed by passengers from airplanes.
The 1995 Revision was primarily intended to simplify and
streamline the Radio Regulations, allocate spectrum in order to
permit global deployment of what were at the time new satellite
technologies, such as Low Earth-Orbiting Satellites that
support global satellite communication systems, and establish
new regulatory provisions for both non-geostationary satellites
operating in the same frequency bands as geostationary
satellites and other space services that share spectrum with
the space research and terrestrial services.
II. Background
The International Telecommunication Union (the ``ITU''),
based in Geneva with a membership of 191 countries, is the
principal international organization in the area of information
and communication technologies, providing a forum for global
cooperation and coordination and the promotion of more
effective and efficient use of such technologies generally. The
ITU was founded in 1865 and was originally called the
``International Telegraph Union.'' Today, some 140 years later,
the fundamental objectives of the Organization remain the same,
but the scope of the organization's mandate is much broader to
match the development of telecommunication technologies over
the decades and now includes, for example, broadcasting,
satellite sound broadcasting, mobile satellite services, and
space services.
In 1992, the ITU underwent a major reorganization, which
was undertaken in response to significant changes and
developments in the telecommunications area. There are now two
treaties that provide the legal basis for the organization: the
ITU Constitution and Convention. The United States is a party
to both instruments.\1\ The ITU Constitution sets out
overarching principles governing the ITU's basic structure,
purpose, and functions, while the Convention provides greater
detail regarding the functional and procedural implementation
of the broad structure set forth in the Constitution. Often,
the Constitution and Convention contain complementary
provisions. The Constitution and Convention establish within
the ITU a decision-making structure for three sectors, through
which the ITU carries out its work: the Radiocommunication
Sector, the Telecommunication Standardization Sector, and
Telecommunication Development Sector. The Radio Regulations,
which the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision amend, are
international agreements negotiated at World Radiocommunication
Conferences convened under the auspices of the ITU's
Radiocommunication Sector.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The 1992 ITU Constitution and Convention, along with amendments
to both instruments concluded in 1994, were submitted to the Senate by
the President on September 13, 1996 (Treaty Doc. 104-34) and approved
by the Senate on October 23, 1997. The Constitution and the Convention
have since been amended and these amendments have been submitted to the
Senate for advice and consent. See Treaty Docs. 108-5, 109-11, and 110-
16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Radiocommunication Conferences, which review and
revise the Radio Regulations, work on a consensus basis and are
generally convened every three to four years, as needed. The
final agenda for these conferences is established by the ITU
Council, which is the executive body of the ITU and is composed
of Member States elected by the Plenipotentiary Conference. The
United States currently has a seat on the Council. The 1992
Revision and the 1995 Revision were negotiated respectively at
the 1992 and 1995 World Radiocommunication Conferences. The
Letters of Submittal from the Secretary of State for these two
instruments indicate that the United States either achieved or
made progress towards its negotiating objectives at both
conferences.\2\ This progress is reflected particularly in
spectrum allocations that are generally favorable to U.S.
interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Treaty Doc. 107-17 at pp. VI and VII; Treaty Doc. 108-28 at
pp. IV and V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Major Provisions
Summaries of the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision may be
found in the relevant Letters of Submittal from the Secretary
of State to the President, which are reprinted in full in
Treaty Documents 107-17 and 108-28. A brief description of
certain key provisions in both instruments is set forth below.
A. 1992 REVISION
The 1992 World Radiocommunication Conference considered
revisions to the Radio Regulations that affected multiple
communication services, including High Frequency Broadcasting,
Broadcasting-Satellite Service Sound, Broadcasting-Satellite
Service-High Definition Television, Low Earth-Orbiting
Satellites, Terrestrial Mobile Service, and Mobile Satellite
Service. The Conference was convened primarily to identify
bands of spectrum that could be allocated for new and evolving
technologies at the time. When negotiating the 1992 Revision,
the United States was focused on increasing the amount of radio
spectrum available for use by the Voice of America for
international broadcasting, obtaining a spectrum allocation for
a new digital audio broadcasting service, and obtaining
frequency band allocations to support the U.S. National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space station, the
Lunar and Martian space exploration programs, and the next
generation of unmanned deep space exploration programs. The
United States achieved most of these objectives, but did not
obtain as much spectrum as it requested to support the Voice of
America.
High Frequency Allocations
High frequency spectrum allocations are particularly
important to the United States because they support the Voice
of America. The United States sought a considerable amount of
additional spectrum in this range in order to relieve
congestion in the existing HF broadcasting bands. The United
States was able to obtain an additional 790 kHz of spectrum,
which includes 200 kHz in the optimal HF broadcasting bands
between 7 and 10 MHz, where the United States has the greatest
need. Notwithstanding this additional allocation, the
reservation included in the proposed resolution of advice and
consent for the 1992 Revision would reserve the right of the
United States to take any necessary steps to meet its HF
broadcasting needs in bands used by other services.
Satellite Sound Broadcasting
According to the Secretary's Letter of Submittal for the
1992 Revision, the United States, along with several other
countries, proposed that spectrum be allocated for digital
audio (compact disc quality) broadcasting service from
satellites directly to receivers. There was, however, some
disagreement among delegations as to the frequency band that
should be allocated for this service. A majority of countries
selected the 1452-1492 MHz frequency band, while others,
including the United States, selected either the 2310-2360 MHz
or the 2635-2655 MHz frequency band for this service. The
conference adopted the allocations for all three frequency
bands.
Mobile Satellite Services
The United States made a number of proposals to support a
range of what was then new technology for mobile radio services
using satellites. These include low Earth orbit satellite (LEO)
systems for data services using frequencies below 1 GHz and LEO
systems operating above 1 GHz to support a full range of
telecommunication services, including voice and wideband data
services. Although not all of the U.S. proposals were accepted,
as the Letter of Submittal from the Secretary of State
indicates, the United States was ``reasonably satisfied with
what it did obtain.''\3\ The executive branch has recommended
the inclusion of a statement in the Senate's Resolution of
advice and consent for the 1992 Revision, which would address
any remaining concerns regarding allocations in this area and
the committee has included that statement in the draft
resolution provided in Section VIII of this report. This
statement, which is a reservation, would reserve the right of
the United States to take any necessary steps to meet U.S.
mobile-satellite needs in the 1-3 GHz band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Letter of Submittal from the Secretary of State, Treaty
Doc. 107-17 at pp. VI-VII.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Space Services
The 1992 Revision allocates frequency bands to support
several space services. For example, allocations were made for
NASA projects, including communications for the space station,
a moon colony and a manned mission to Mars. The 1992 Revision
allocates frequencies to ensure reliable, interference-free
communications for extra vehicular activity of astronauts
working outside space vehicles on tasks such as constructing
space platforms or satellite rescue and repair. Pursuant to a
U.S. proposal, the 1992 Revision allocates spectrum to support
a U.S. data relay satellite system intended to facilitate the
establishment of a multinational Mission-to-Planet-Earth
program that will provide data on Earth resources and improve
our understanding of meteorological and climatological change.
Finally, NASA will be able to achieve greater data rates and
better resolution images of solar objects as a result of
expanded allocations for space research and new spectrum for
the next generation of unmanned deep space exploratory
programs.
B. 1995 REVISION
The 1995 World Radio Conference continued some of the work
of reviewing spectrum allocations begun at the 1992 conference,
but also notably included a substantial effort to make the
Radio Regulations a more streamlined and cohesive document. In
the end, the 1995 Revision, among other things, allocates
spectrum for new global mobile-satellite services, provides new
regulatory provisions for non-geostationary satellites
operating in the same frequency bands as geostationary
satellites, allocates spectrum for other new space services
that share spectrum with the space research and terrestrial
services, and structurally simplifies the Radio Regulations.
When negotiating the 1995 Revision, the United States was
focused on achieving an allocation of sufficient feeder link
spectrum for Mobile-Satellite Systems (MSS), an expanded
allocation of spectrum for MSS below 1 GHz, an adjustment to
the global MSS allocation in the 2 GHz band, and an expanded
allocation of spectrum for the non-geostationary fixed
satellites (NGSO FSS). The United States was mostly successful
in attaining its objectives.
Mobile-Satellite Services (MSS)
The 1992 Revision allocated spectrum in the vicinity of 1.6
and 2.4 GHz for MSS. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission
licensed three non-geostationary satellite orbit (NGSO) MSS
systems to operate in these bands and had additional
applications pending. The 1995 Revision made a considerable
amount of feeder link spectrum available for U.S. systems,
which permits the global deployment of what were at the time
new satellite technologies.
Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit-Mobile Satellite Services
The 1992 Revision allocated 3.45 MHz of spectrum for Non-
Geostationary Satellite Orbit-Mobile Satellite Services (NGSO-
MSS) operating below 1 GHz. This proved insufficient to
accommodate existing MSS systems of the United States and other
countries. As a result, the United States proposed expanding
the allocation and ultimately a worldwide allocation was
obtained in the 1995 Revision of two bands, 455-456 and 459-460
MHz, although the power flux density limit in the 148-149.9 MHz
band worldwide allocation was removed. This allocation resulted
in a smaller increase in spectrum for NGSO-MSS systems below 1
GHz than the United States proposed, but an increase
nevertheless. The 1995 Revision also provided a new regional
MSS spectrum allocation in the band 2010-2025 MHz for the
Americas.
Regulatory Allocations
New regulatory measures were adopted to allow Geostationary
Orbit and Non-Geostationary Orbit Fixed-Satellite Service
systems to equitably share the same frequency bands.
Space Sciences
With new space services being added to frequency bands
already used by space research and terrestrial services, it was
necessary to establish power limits for satellites and earth
stations to ensure that these new services provide adequate
protection to existing services operating in the bands. Of
particular importance to the United States was protection it
obtained in the 1995 Revision for fixed and mobile services in
the 2025-52110 MHz band. Additional protection was also
obtained for space-based sensors and spaceborne precipitation
radars used by NASA.
IV. Entry Into Force
The 1992 Revision\4\ and the 1995 Revision\5\ will each
enter into force for the United States on the date the United
States deposits its instrument of ratification with the
Secretary-General of the ITU for each revision, respectively.
The committee notes, however, that the resolutions adopted at
the time of the 1992 Revision provide for the provisional
application of certain provisions of the 1992 Revision\6\ and
Article S59 of the 1995 Revision provides for the provisional
application of the 1995 Revision as of June 1, 1998, with the
exception of certain provisions, which applied provisionally as
of January 1, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\In accordance with Article 54(2) of the ITU's 1994 Constitution
(Treaty Doc. 104-34), which is the most recent version of the ITU's
Constitution and Convention approved by the Senate and ratified by the
United States, ratification of the Constitution and the Convention also
constitutes consent to be bound by revisions of the Radio Regulations
adopted by competent world conferences prior to the date of signature
of the Constitution and Convention on December 22, 1992, which would
therefore include the 1992 Revision signed on March 3, 1992. The United
States, however, made a statement upon signature and again upon
ratification of the 1994 Constitution and Convention that its signature
and ratification shall not be deemed to constitute U.S. consent to be
bound by revisions to the Radio Regulations adopted prior to the date
of signature of the Constitution and Convention. As a result, the 1992
Revision has not yet entered into force for the United States.
\5\ Article 54(5) of the ITU's 1994 Constitution (Treaty Doc. 104-
34), which is the most recent version of the ITU's Constitution and
Convention approved by the Senate and ratified by the United States,
provides that with respect to revisions of the Radio Regulations
adopted subsequent to the date of signature of the Constitution and
Convention on December 22, 1992 and signed by a Party to the ITU's 1994
Constitution and Convention, that Party would be deemed to have
consented to the revision thirty-six months from the date specified in
the revision for the commencement of provisional application, unless
that Party had previously notified the Secretary-General of the ITU of
its consent to be bound to the revision or had informed the Secretary-
General that it does not does not consent to be bound by the revision.
Article 54(5) would apply to the 1995 Revision for the United States,
which was adopted subsequent to the date of signature of the
Constitution and Convention of December 22, 1992, and signed by the
United States on November 17, 1995; however, the United States made a
statement upon signature and again upon ratification of the 1994
Constitution and Convention that its signature and ratification shall
not be deemed to constitute U.S. consent to be bound by revisions to
the Radio Regulations adopted subsequent to the date of signature of
the Constitution and Convention, without specific notification to the
ITU by the United States of its consent to be bound. As a result, the
1995 Revision has not yet entered into force for the United States.
\6\ See, e.g., Resolution 338.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Implementing Legislation
The 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision do not require
additional implementing legislation. The Federal Communications
Commission (the ``FCC'') and the National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (the ``NTIA'') have broad
authority over their respective spheres of telecommunication
regulation and would be responsible for implementing these
revisions.
The FCC has authority over non-governmental
telecommunications and implementation would be authorized by
the Communications Act of 1934.\7\ In particular, 47 U.S.C.
Sec. 303(r) provides that the Commission shall make ``such
rules and regulations and prescribe such restrictions and
conditions, not inconsistent with law, as may be necessary to
carry out the provisions of this chapter, or any international
radio or wire communications treaty or convention, or
regulations annexed thereto, including any treaty or convention
insofar as it relates to the use of radio, to which the United
States is or may hereafter become a party.'' This provision is
applicable to the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision, and
would remain applicable to the revisions upon their entry into
force for the United States. The NTIA has authority over
governmental telecommunications and implementation of the
revisions would be authorized by the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration Organization
Act.\8\ In particular, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 902(b)(2)(A) and (K)
authorize the NTIA to assign frequencies and establish policies
concerning spectrum use by radio stations that belong to the
United States. Upon entry into force, the 1992 Revision and the
1995 Revision would be binding on the United States. The FCC
and the NTIA would be responsible for implementing and ensuring
U.S. compliance with the provisions of the 1992 Revision and
the 1995 Revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\47 U.S.C. Sec. 151 et seq.
\8\47 U.S.C. Sec. 901 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Committee Action
The committee held a public hearing on these treaties on
July 10, 2008. Testimony was received from Mr. Richard C.
Beaird, Senior Deputy U.S. Coordinator for International
Communications and Information Policy at the Department of
State. A transcript of this hearing can be found in Annex II to
Executive Report 110-15.
On July 29, 2008, the committee considered the 1992
Revision and the 1995 Revision and ordered them favorably
reported by voice vote, with a quorum present and without
objection.
VII. Committee Recommendation and Comments
The Committee on Foreign Relations believes that the ITU's
work in support of radio spectrum management is important to
advancing U.S. public diplomacy, economic, national security,
and scientific interests. One of the key advantages achieved
through the 1992 Revision was an increase in the amount of
radio spectrum available for use by the Voice of America for
international broadcasting, which plays a key role in U.S.
public diplomacy efforts through broadcasts around the globe,
including to closed societies. Moreover, the U.S.
telecommunications industry is highly dependent upon the ITU
for radio spectrum management, an area that is also vitally
important to U.S. defense, intelligence, and aeronautics
agencies. Both the 1992 Revision and the 1995 Revision allocate
additional spectrum for new technologies that are of importance
to the U.S. telecommunications industry. According to the
Telecommunications Industry Association (the ``TIA''), the
worldwide telecommunications market is expected to grow at a
9.2 percent compound annual growth rate from 2008 to 2011 and
U.S. companies expect to take full advantage of this growth.\9\
The United States is among the leading providers and consumers
of telecommunications goods and services. In fact, the U.S.
telecommunications industry's revenue totaled $1 trillion in
2007.\10\ The 1992 Revision also provided frequency band
allocations to support the NASA space station, Lunar and
Martian space exploration programs, as well as the next
generation of unmanned deep space exploratory programs.
Accordingly, the committee urges the Senate to act promptly to
give advice and consent to ratification of the 1992 Revision
and 1995 Revision, as set forth in this report and the
accompanying resolution of advice and consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\According to the TIA, worldwide telecommunications revenue
totaled $3.5 trillion in 2007, up 11.2 percent from 2006. See TIA
Telecommunications Market Review and Forecast at 3 (2008).
\10\Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A FUTURE RADIO REGULATION REVISIONS
In the course of reviewing the 1992 Revision and the 1995
Revision, the committee has given consideration to whether
future revisions to the Radio Regulations will require the
advice and consent of the Senate. Revisions to the Radio
Regulations are technical implementing instruments anticipated
in the ITU Constitution, which are expected to regulate the
international use of telecommunications and are subject to the
provisions of the Constitution and the Convention.\11\ Given
the nature of these instruments, the committee believes that in
the future, revisions to the Radio Regulations will not, in the
normal course, require the advice and consent of the Senate.
Thus, in the future, the committee does not expect the
Executive to submit for advice and consent revisions to the
Radio Regulations. If there is any question, however, as to
whether a revision goes beyond the current mandate of the Radio
Regulations as anticipated in the ITU Constitution, the
committee expects the executive branch to consult with the
committee in a timely manner in order to determine whether
advice and consent is necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\See Articles 4 and 54 of the ITU Constitution, Treaty Doc. 104-
34 at pp. 24 and 60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. RESOLUTIONS
The committee has included in proposed resolutions for the
two revisions various statements, which are discussed below.
I. DECLARATIONS AND RESERVATIONS TO THE 1992 REVISION
The proposed resolution of advice and consent for the 1992
Revision includes three declarations and reservations, which
were made by the United States when signing the 1992 Final Acts
and are intended to be included in the instrument of
ratification, along with a declaration that is not intended to
be included in the instrument of ratification.
First Declaration and Reservation (No. 67):
1. In the view of the United States of America, this
Conference failed to make adequate provision for the HF needs
of the broadcasting service, particularly below 10 MHz, despite
an earnest effort to do so. The IFRB's Report to the Conference
shows that broadcasters' requirements far outnumber the
channels available in the bands between 6 and 11 MHz (where
spectrum is urgently needed) and that planning will not work
effectively without additional and adequate HF spectrum.
Therefore, the United States of America reserves the right to
take the necessary steps to meet the HF needs of its
broadcasting service.
2. The United States of America, while welcoming the
cessation by some administrations of willful harmful
interference to HF broadcasting, remains concerned that the
United States' broadcasting service continues to be subject to
willful harmful interference in contravention of Article 35 of
the Convention. Such interference is incompatible with the
rational and equitable use of these bands. The United States of
America declares that as long as any such interference exists,
it reserves the right with respect to such interference to take
necessary and appropriate actions to protect its broadcasting
interests. In doing so, it will respect, to the maximum extent
possible, the rights of administrations operating in accordance
with the Convention and the Radio Regulations.
3. The United States of America declares that, in view of
the fact that the Conference has unduly restricted allocations
for mobile-satellite services in the bands of 1530--1559 MHz
and 1631.5--1660.5 MHz, it will utilize these bands in the way
most appropriate to satisfy its particular mobile-satellite
service requirements recognizing the priority of AMSS(R) and
maritime safety communications.
4. In the view of the United States of America, this
Conference has unduly delayed the availability of sufficient
spectrum for the mobile-satellite service in the range of 1--3
GHz on an international and regional basis. Therefore, the
United States of America reserves its right to take any
necessary steps to meet the needs of the mobile-satellite
service in this band.
5. With regard to Resolution 46 (WARC-92), the United
States of America understands that nothing in the fourth
preambular paragraph and any reference to the Resolution in the
Radio Regulations shall be interpreted to constitute any
recognition of new rights of Members of the Union beyond those
specified in the International Telecommunication Convention and
the Administrative Regulations in force. In particular, sub-
paragraph b) shall not be interpreted to constitute a
recognition of claims of sovereignty over any part of outer
space. Such claims, in violation of international law, cannot
be recognized by this Conference.
6. The United States of America understands that nothing in
Resolution 70 (WARC-92) shall alter the category of any
allocation made at this Conference and that any studies by
organs of the Union on this matter shall be conducted and
implemented in accordance with the International
Telecommunication Convention and the Administrative
Regulations.
This proposed statement addresses concerns regarding
decisions of the conference that failed to make adequate
provision for certain U.S. spectrum needs, did not protect
certain U.S. broadcasting services from willful harmful
interference, or could be construed to create new rights for
ITU Members.
Second Declaration and Reservation (No. 79):
Referring to statements relating to the frequency range
below 3 GHz concerning mobile-satellite services, it is
necessary to highlight an oversight in drafting and reading
texts which could lead to a new and unnecessary burden of
coordination between geostationary space stations and
terrestrial services in certain frequency bands. Accordingly,
the above Administrations will not accept any commitments for
this form of coordination arising from omission of the term
``non-geostationary'' in the text of certain footnotes, e.g.
Footnote Nos. 726x and 7xx, to the Table of Frequency
Allocation in Article 8. This reservation is made on behalf of
all national and international organizations for whose
frequency assignments the two countries are the notifying
Administrations.
This proposed statement was made by both the United States
and the United Kingdom when signing the 1992 Final Acts and
concerns mobile-satellite services provided in the frequency
band below 3 GHz. The reservation reflects U.S. concerns that
certain provisions of the 1992 Revision could lead to an
unnecessary burden of requiring coordination between
geostationary space stations and terrestrial services. In
brief, both the United States and the United Kingdom refuse to
accept any additional commitments for coordination.
Third Declaration and Reservation (No. 80):
1. With reference to Statement No. 52 of the Administration
of Cuba, the United States of America notes that the United
States presence in Guantanamo is by virtue of a treaty in
force; the United States reserves the right to meet its
radiocommunication requirements there as it has in the past.
2. With reference to Statement No. 60 of Belarus, the
Russian Federation, and Ukraine, the United States of America
notes that the other former Republics of the former USSR
referred to in that Statement are independent States, not
Members of the Union at this time, whose rights and obligations
cannot be asserted by the Members that filed that Statement.
This proposed statement responds to two statements, one by
Cuba and the other by several states of the former USSR. Cuba's
statement concerns the use of radio frequencies by the United
States at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo, Cuba. The other
statement, made by Belarus, Russia, and the Ukraine, simply
notes that the other former Republics of the former USSR
referred to in their statement, which include the Republic of
Azerbaijan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of
Kazakhstan, the Republic of Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of
Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan, were
not Members of the Union at the time and their rights and
obligations cannot be asserted by Belarus, Russia, and the
Ukraine.
Final Declaration:
This Treaty is not self-executing.
This proposed declaration states that the 1992 Revision is
not self-executing. The Senate has rarely included statements
regarding the self-executing nature of treaties in resolutions
of advice and consent, but in light of the recent Supreme Court
decision, Medellin v. Texas, 128 S.Ct. 1346 (2008), the
committee has determined that a clear statement in the
resolution is warranted. A further discussion of the
committee's views on this matter can be found in Section VIII
of Executive Report 110-12.
II. DECLARATIONS AND RESERVATIONS TO THE 1995 REVISION
The proposed resolution of advice and consent for the 1995
Revision includes four declarations and reservations, which
were made by the United States when signing the 1995 Final Acts
and are intended to be included in the instrument of
ratification, along with a declaration that is not intended to
be included in the instrument of ratification.
First Declaration and Reservation (No. 67(3)):
The United States of America declares that, in view of the
fact that the Conference has unduly restricted allocations for
mobile-satellite services in the bands of 1525--1559 MHz and
1626.5--1660.5 MHz, it will utilize these bands in the way most
appropriate to satisfy its particular mobile-satellite service
requirements recognizing the priority of AMSS(R) and maritime
safety communications.
This proposed statement addresses concerns regarding
decisions of the conference that failed to make adequate
provision for U.S. mobile satellite services.
Second Declaration and Reservation (No. 68):
Referring to the frequency range below 3 GHz concerning
mobile-satellite services, it is necessary to note that
proposals were put forward at this Conference to revise No.
726D (S5.354) to the Table of Frequency Allocations in Article
8 in order to avoid additional and unnecessary burdens of
coordination between geostationary and non-geostationary
mobile-satellite networks in the bands 1525--1559 MHz and
1626.5--1660.5 MHz. There was insufficient time to consider
these proposals at this Conference. Accordingly, the above
administrations will not accept any additional commitments for
coordination arising from No. 726D (S5.354). This reservation
is made on behalf of all national and international
organizations for whose frequency assignments the two countries
are the notifying administrations.
This proposed statement was made by both the United States
and the United Kingdom when signing the 1995 Final Acts and
concerns the coordination between geostationary and non-
geostationary mobile-satellite networks in certain frequency
bands below 3 GHz. The reservation reflects U.S. concerns that
certain provisions of the 1995 Revision could lead to an
unnecessary burden of requiring coordination between
geostationary space stations and terrestrial services. In
brief, both the United States and the United Kingdom refuse to
accept any additional commitments for coordination.
Third Declaration and Reservation (No. 78):
The delegations of the above-mentioned countries referring
to the Declaration made by the Republic of Colombia (No. 16),
inasmuch as this statement refers to the Bogota Declaration of
3 December 1976 by equatorial countries and to the claims of
those countries to exercise sovereign rights over segments of
the geostationary orbit, and any similar statements, consider
the claims in question cannot be recognized by this Conference.
Further, the above-mentioned delegations wish to affirm or
reaffirm the Declarations made on behalf of a number of the
above-mentioned Administrations in this regard when signing the
Final Acts of the World Administrative Radio Conference
(Geneva, 1979), and the World Administrative Radio Conference
on the Use of the Geostationary-Satellite Orbit and the
Planning of Space Services Utilizing It (first and second
sessions, Geneva, 1985 and 1988), the Plenipotentiary
Conference of the International Telecommunication Union (Nice,
1989), in the Final Protocol of the International
Telecommunication Convention (Nairobi, 1982) and the Final Acts
of the Additional Plenipotentiary Conference (Geneva, 1992), as
if these Declarations were here repeated in full.
The above-mentioned delegations also wish to state that
reference in Article 44 of the Constitution to the
``geographical situation of particular countries'' does not
imply a recognition of claim to any preferential rights to the
geostationary-satellite orbit.
This proposed statement was made by the United States and
14 other countries when signing the 1995 Final Acts. The
statement responds to a statement made by Colombia regarding
the use of the geostationary satellite orbit and makes it clear
that the claims made in Colombia's statement to exercise
sovereign rights over segments of the geostationary orbit, and
any similar statements, cannot be recognized by this
Conference. Moreover, the proposed statement makes clear that
the reference in Article 44 of the ITU Constitution to the
``geographical situation of particular countries'' does not
imply a recognition of claim to any preferential rights to the
geostationary-satellite orbit.
Fourth Declaration and Reservation (No. 82):
With respect to Declarations 39, 50, 54, 59 and 64, the
interpretation of the United States of America on the basis of
which the majority of delegations to this Conference supported
the United States of America and Indonesian proposals which
resulted in Resolution 118 (WRC-95) is as follows:
Any satellite system, GSO or non-GSO, communicated or
notified to the Bureau before 18 November 1995 has a
status derived from the date of notification or
communication of information required for coordination
or notification, as the case may be.
As of 18 November 1995, Resolution 46 applies to all
these systems and they shall be coordinated one system
with respect to another system in order of receipt of
the information described above.
With respect to the applicability of No. 2613 as
agreed in committee 4, No. 2613 is of an operational
character and No. 2613 and Resolution 46 are mutually
exclusive.
The United States of America reiterates and
incorporates by reference all declarations or
reservations made at prior world radicommunication
conferences and in particular with regard to
Declaration 60 of this Conference.
This proposed statement responds to several declarations
made by various delegations and incorporates by reference
previous reservations and declarations made by the United
States.
Final Declaration:
This Treaty is not self-executing.
This proposed declaration states that the 1992 Revision is
not self-executing. The Senate has rarely included statements
regarding the self-executing nature of treaties in resolutions
of advice and consent, but in light of the recent Supreme Court
decision, Medellin v. Texas, 128 S.Ct. 1346 (2008), the
committee has determined that a clear statement in the
resolution is warranted. A further discussion of the
committee's views on this matter can be found in Section VIII
of Executive Report 110-12.
VIII. Resolutions of Advice and Consent to Ratification
1992 PARTIAL REVISION OF THE RADIO REGULATIONS
Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring
therein),
SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS AND
DECLARATIONS.
The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the
1992 Partial Revision of the Radio Regulations (Geneva, 1979),
with appendices, signed by the United States at Malaga-
Torremolinos on March 3, 1992, as contained in the Final Acts
of the World Administrative Radio Conference for Dealing with
Frequency Allocations in Certain Parts of the Spectrum (WARC-
92) (the ``1992 Final Acts'') (Treaty Doc. 107-17), subject to
declarations and reservations Nos. 67, 79, and 80 of the 1992
Final Acts and the declaration of section 2.
SECTION 2. DECLARATION
The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is
subject to the following declaration:
This Treaty is not self-executing.
1995 REVISION OF THE RADIO REGULATIONS
Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring
therein),
SECTION 1. SENATE ADVICE AND CONSENT SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS AND
DECLARATIONS.
The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of the
1995 Revision of the Radio Regulations, with appendices, signed
by the United States at Geneva on November 17, 1995, as
contained in the Final Acts of the World Radiocommunication
Conference (WRC-95) (the ``1995 Final Acts'') (Treaty Doc. 108-
28), subject to declarations and reservations Nos. 67(3), 68,
78, and 82 of the 1995 Final Acts and the declaration of
section 2.
SECTION 2. DECLARATION
The advice and consent of the Senate under section 1 is
subject to the following declaration:
This Treaty is not self-executing.