Decisions and Consultation 2500 2690 MHz RABC Quarterly

Decisions and Consultation 2500 – 2690 MHz RABC Quarterly Meetings March 1, 2011

Overview of the 2500 MHz decision/consultation paper Part A – Decisions – Band plan – – – Returned spectrum Alternate incumbent mapping proposals non-FDD systems in paired blocks TDD systems in unpaired blocks Restricted bands 2595/2596 MHz boundary • Part B – Consultation – Spectrum packaging for auction • • Block sizes Tier sizes – Competition issues • • Spectrum cap & set-asides Services in rural areas – Mapping of incumbents – – – Regions A, B and C Interim MCS licence Other incumbents 1

Decisions - Band Plan Consultation on U. S. band plan vs. ITU band plan Decision: Adopt ITU band plan 2

Decisions – Returned spectrum Considered proposals to require 2 x 40 MHz of returned spectrum Considered proposals to allow incumbents to choose which portion of the spectrum to return Decision: Maintain 2 x 30 MHz of returned spectrum in the bands 2540 -2570 MHz and 2660 -2690 MHz 3

Decisions – Non-FDD systems in the paired blocks Non-FDD systems are permitted to continue to operate but are subject to displacement. Min notification period: – 2 years in Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut – 6 months in all other areas New or expansion of existing non-FDD systems permitted on an exceptional basis 4

Decisions – Operation in the unpaired block Voluntary agreements between operators in the unpaired blocks The Department will not impose synchronization requirement In the event that agreements cannot be reached, the Department may impose guardbands between operators 5

Decisions – Operation in the restricted bands The restricted bands (2570 -2575 MHz and 2615 -2620 MHz) will form part of the unpaired block No protection, no interference with respect to FDD operations in the paired blocks 6

Decisions – 2596 MHz boundary Requests to modify 2596 MHz to 2595 MHz to align with the ITU band plan Decision: the 2596 MHz boundary between MCS/MDS is amended to 2595 MHz 7

Mapping of incumbents The Department consulted on: a) Method to re-organize the frequency blocks for use by incumbents: – Voluntary agreements – Direct assignment by the Department b) Physical migration date 8

Decisions – Region A Areas where the MDS spectrum has not been licensed Decisions: – Direct re-assignment of spectrum blocks – Incumbents (2520 -2570 MHz and 2595 -2596 MHz) are permitted to continue to operate but subject to displacement: – Minimum notification of 2 years in Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut – Minimum notification of 6 months in all other areas 9

Decisions – Region B Areas where both the MCS and MDS spectrum have been licensed Decisions: – Voluntary exchange of spectrum holdings between incumbents; however, the Department will mandate band plan if incumbents cannot come to an agreement – Incumbents (2540 -2570 MHz and 2660 -2690 MHz) are permitted to continue to operate but subject to displacement: – Minimum notification of 6 months in all areas Voluntary exchange between incumbents In the event that agreements cannot be reached 10

Decisions – Region C Manitoba Decisions: – Direct re-assignment of spectrum blocks – Incumbent (2620 -2640 MHz) is permitted to continue to operate but subject to displacement: – Minimum notification of 6 months in all other areas 11

Decisions – Interim MCS licence In the returned spectrum bands within each specific geographic area, incumbents will be issued interim MCS licences, renewable on an annual basis Cannot expand beyond current operation No mobile services permitted 12

Decisions – Other incumbents Fixed systems in Alberta, British Columbia and Quebec Permitted to continue to operate subject to displacement – minimum 2 year notification period 13

Part B – Consultation Spectrum packaging – Size; combinations/arrangements; tier size(s)? Region A Region B Region C 14

Consultation Which mechanisms would be appropriate in the 2500 MHz band to promote competition in the wireless services market, if needed? Should there be a spectrum cap? Should there be a set-aside? Other mechanisms? How to further the deployment of BRS in rural and/or remote areas? 15

Comments/reply comments Comments due April 9, 2011 Reply comments due May 9, 2011 16

17