DRAFT IS-GPS-705A Comment Resolution Matrix - GPS.gov

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesLMCO Para: 3.3.1.9 range of ±14.3 degrees (±13.8 degrees pluspointing error for GPS III) from boresight, L5 Rationale: Space IPT (Soon Yi) has action to provideellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4 dB. Nominal angular range required independent of pointing error.values are listed in section 6.3.3.From: (N/A - new text)Final To: For the angular range of ±13.8 degreesfrom nadir, L5 ellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4dB. For Block IIIA the angular range of ±13.8degrees from nadir, L5 ellipticity shall be no worsethan 2.4 dB. Nominal values are listed in section6.3.3.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:replace “boresight” with “nadir” andremove pointing error. Changes made inreal time during ICWG. Concurrencereceived at ICWG. 20-aug-09: verified thatthis verbiage will be consistent with the 700document: text: "Terrestrial EIRP is relativeto a 13.8 o + SV pointing error 4.3 off-nadirangle. " 27-aug-09: after speaking w/ Dr.Munoz, it was decided to take out the "+ SVpointing error" all together. we'll need toinclude this into the 700...still need toupdate document.30 S. BrownLMCO29 S. BrownLMCOPage: 12Para: 3.3.1.7Page: 11Para: 3.3.1.6CCRationale: New text added to specifically addressthe L5 ellipticity for GPS III SVs. The reason thatthe angular range is different from the GPS II SVsis that the 14.3 degrees in the other requirementsallows for up to 0.5 degree pointing error. LMhistorical performance for IIR/IIR-M has beenmuch better than that with less that 0.1 degreepointing error. New text with a smaller angularrange value allows LM to take advantage of betterpointing error.Comment:From: (N/A - new text)Final To: Is: Table 3-IV. Received Minimum RFSignal Strength in Space Service VolumeRationale: Added table to reflect GPS III L5 signalstrengthComment:From: (N/A - new text)PO Resolution: A/CRationale: The title was changed to “Table 3-IV. SpaceService Volume (SSV) Received Minimum RF SignalStrength for GPS IIIA and Subsequent Satellites overthe Bandwidth Specified in 3.3.1.1” This is similar tolanguage used in IS-GPS-200.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: for ICWG discussion11/19/08: Comment accepted withmodification – changes made in real timeduring ICWG. Remove “and subsequent”and replace “IIIA” with “III.” 20-aug-09:also removed "GEO based antenna" intable title. 06-sept-09: verified that this isin section 3.3.1.6 and that the change is indoc.10/14/09: To beconsistent with the 200, ICC placed "andsubsequent" back into section.11/19/08: Part of action to determine ifthere is better language for “off axis powergain – Stakeholders concur. 12/05/08: Willincorporate language as proposed by4

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFinal To: Is: The Block III SV shall provide L5 signals Concurrence: Concurcommenter for this revision. 20-aug-09:with the following characteristic: the L5 off-axisICC verified that this text is accepted w/power gain relative power (referenced to peak Rationale:change barring the resolution totransmitted power) shall not decrease by more"monotonically decreasing." It was decidedthan 2 dB from the Edge-of-Earth (EOE) to nadir,to leave in "monotonically decreasing toand no more than 18 dB from EOE to 26 degreessync up with the 200. 10/11/09: see alsooff nadir; the power drop off between EOE andcomment #12 for resolution.±26 degrees shall be in a monotonicallydecreasing fashion.12 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 11Para: 3.3.1.6CRationale: New text added for GPS III-specificrequirementComment: Add the L5 off-axis power gain (e.g.,EOE to nadir; EOE to 20 degrees off nadir etc.)suggested text: added text: "The Block III SV shallprovide L5 signals with the followingcharacteristic: the L5 off-axis power gain shall notdecrease by more than 2 dB from the Edge-of-Earth (EOE) to nadir, and no more than 18 dBfrom EOE to 26 degrees off nadir; the power dropoff between EOE and ±26 degrees shall be in amonotonically decreasing fashion."PO Resolution: A/CRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:5/23/08: Updated document accordinglyand in real-time. Added row for block III for-157.0 dbWConcurrence: 11/19/08: See comment 29.20-aug-09 verified text is in document witha small change: "power gain" was changedto "relative power per D. Munoz'srecommendation.From: N/AFinal To: The Block III SV shall provide L5 signalswith the following characteristic: the L5 off-axisrelative power (referenced to peak transmittedpower) shall not decrease by more than 2 dBfrom the Edge-of-Earth (EOE) to nadir, and nomore than 18 dB from EOE to 26 degrees offnadir; the power drop off between EOE and ±26degrees shall be in a monotonically decreasingfashion.Rationale: Important signal characteristics.Similar information is provided in IS-GPS-200 forL1 and L2.3 M.A. Jeffris Page: C Comment: This section should be consistent with PO Resolution: A/C 5/23/08: Updated comment resolution,5

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesMITRE Para: 3.3.1.4 3.3.1.1.Rationale: Sentence will be revised to read: “In-bandFrom: Replace the sentence: “In-band spurious spurious transmissions, from the SV, shall be at leasttransmissions shall be at least 40 dB below the 40 dB below the unmodulated L5 carrier over theunmodulated L1 and L2 carriers over the allocated band specified in 3.3.1.1. In-band spurious24 MHz channel bandwidth.”transmissions are defined as transmissions within theband specFinal To: With“In-band spurious transmissions,from the SV, shall be at least or below -40 dBcbelow the unmodulated L5 carrier over the bandspecified in 3.3.1.1. In-band spurioustransmissions are defined as transmissions withinthe bands specified in 3.3.1.1 which are notexpressly components of the L5 waveform.”Concurrence: ConcurRationale:and made real-time change in doc. 20-aug-09: verified "band" is in doc. 10/01/09:Updated this section per ICWGconcurrence. Included text…"at or below"instead of "at least." Also removed the text"below the unmodulated L5 carrier."Updated the PO resolution to A/C.2 M.A. JeffrisMITREPage:Para: 3.3.1.2CRationale: References bandwidth to 3.3.1.1.Comment: Clarify wording and change numericalvalue to match 3.3.1.1. Suggested Change: Makechanges as indicated: “Correlation loss is definedas the difference between the SV signal powerreceived in a 24 MHz the bandwidth defined in3.3.1.1 and the signal power recovered in an idealcorrelation receiver of the same bandwidth, whichideally performs lossless correlation using anexact replica of the waveform with an ideal sharpcutofffilter whose bandwidth corresponds to thatin 3.3.1.1, and whose phase is linear over thatbandwidth.From: 3.3.1.2 Correlation Loss. Correlation loss isdefined as the difference between the SV powerreceived in a 24 MHz bandwidth and the signalpower recovered in an ideal correlation receiver.The worst case correlation loss occurs when the I5carrier is modulated by the sum of the I5-codeand the NAV data stream. For this case, thecorrelation loss apportionment shall be as follows:1. SV modulation and filter imperfections: 0.6 dB2. Ideal UE receiver waveform distortion (due toPO Resolution: A/CRationale: 5/23/08: This is included in the workinggroup with respect to the action item from the IS-GPS-800 review.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: New proposed change presentedat ICWG by Bakeman. There was somediscussion that the proposed change waswritten more like a factory test spec asopposed to a SIS spec. Action assigned toMike Deelo to set up meeting withappropriate stakeholders to reviseproposed change. Comment to remainopen. 20-aug-09: the proposed verbiagewas included and slightly varied. thissection is also under review with respect toAI #12. 10-sept-09: ICC has placedproposed wording from the corr. loss tigerteam as per AI #12. 10/01/09: This sectionwas under rigorous review and ultimatelythe consensus of the ICWG community wasto revert to wording similar to the IS-GPS-800.6

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes24 MHz filter): 0.4 dBFinal To: Correlation loss is defined as thedifference between the SV power received in thebandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 (excluding signalcombining loss) and the signal power recovered inan ideal correlation receiver of the samebandwidth using an exact replica of the waveformwithin an ideal sharp-cutoff filter bandwidthcentered at L5, whose bandwidth corresponds tothat specified in 3.3.1.1 and whose phase is linearover that bandwidth. The correlation lossapportionment due to SV modulation and filteringimperfections shall be 0.6 dB maximum.1 M.A. JeffrisMITREPage:Para: 3.3.1.1CRationale: “References bandwidth to 3.3.1.1Comment: Clarify wording in first paragraph.Suggested change: The total allowable correlationloss, which is a function of signal and receiverbandwidth, shall be:From: The L5 signal is contained within a 24 MHzband centered about the L5 nominal frequency.Final To: The requirements specified in thisdocument shall pertain to the signal containedwithin 24 MHz band centered about the L5nominal frequency.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Sentence will be revised to read: “Therequirements specified in this document shall pertainto the signal contained within 24 MHz band centeredabout the L5 nominal frequency.”Concurrence: ConcurRationale:06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that change is indocument.57 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 99Para: Table 20-XISRationale: Makes wording consistent with otherISs.Comment: Terms “totGGTO” and “WNotGGTO”are not defined in the CNAV message types.From: FROM “totGGFinal To: TO” and “WNotGGTO” TO “tGGTO” and“WNGGTO”PO Resolution: A/CRationale: need ICWG discussion.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: Discuss with Ed Powers.Determine if there has been any preferencewith Galileo. 30-jul-09: see comment #102from the 200 for resolution. 081909: thiswill be closed when AI #9 is complete. 10-sept-09: verified that AI is not closed.7

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: Correction56 Thomas NagleSPO Resolution: A/CGPCPage: 98Para:20.3.3.8.2Comment: In the equation, terms “totGGTO”,“WN”, and “WNotGGTO” are not defined in theCNAV message types.From: “totGGRationale: need ICWG discussion.Concurrence: Concur11/19/08: Discuss with Ed Powers.Determine if there has been any preferencewith Galileo. 30-jul-09: see comment #102from the 200 for resolution. 081909: thiswill be closed when AI #9 is complete.Final To: TO”, “WN”, and “WNotGGTO” TO“tGGTO”, “WNn”, and “WNGGTO”Rationale:55 Thomas NagleGPC54 Thomas NagleGPC53 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 96Para:20.3.3.7.4Page: 89Para:20.3.3.6.2Page: 77Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.3SSSRationale: Correction and consistency with IS-GPS-800.Comment: Correction to equations of quasi-Keplerian elements.From: ic = i0 + Δi and Ωc = Ω0 + ΔΩ equationsFinal To:Rationale: Correction.Comment: Term “WN” in the equation is notdefined in the CNAV message types.From: FROM “WN”Final To: TO “WNn”Rationale: Correction.Comment: There are errors in the “PR” equationsFrom: From “…+ SSVL5 - …”Final To: To “… + c SSVL5 - …” in the 2nd, and 4thequations of this section.Rationale: SSVL5 is the delay bias, therefore, needto convert to the range by multiplying with thespeed of light, c.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: need ICWG discussion.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: need ICWG discussion.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: need ICWG discussionConcurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: Stakeholders agree to proposedchange in order to make consistent with IS-GPS-200. 30-jul-09: accepted comment asis from recommendation. 06-sept-09:confirmed new equations is in documentsee also comment #21. duplicate11/19/08: Comment withdrawn.11/19/08: Action to GPSW/GPC todetermine where the equations andparameters should be located. Removethese equations and SSV discussion fromthis document. Provide a reference/pointerto the TBD location for this information.Stakeholders concur. Verify with SteveBrown that all appropriate sections havebeen removed. Contact POC for ICD-GPS-240. 30-jul-09: see comment #81, 80 in200 CRM. confirm that comment will be8

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Noteswithdrawn. 8/5/09: refer to RIL item fromTBMWG for SSV location resolution.8/13/09: refer to AI #50 for resolution. 10-sept-09: AI #50 was closed. The ICC willwork with comment originator to ensurethat this concern will be addressed with theappropriate document. This follows suitwith the 200 resolution.52 Thomas NagleSComment: There are errors in the “PR” equations PO Resolution: RejectGPC50 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 75Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.2Page: 68Para:20.3.3.2.4SFrom: From “…+ SSVL5 - …”Final To: To “… + c SSVL5 - …” in the 2nd, and 4thequations of this section.Rationale: SSVL5 is the delay bias, therefore, needto convert to the range by multiplying with thespeed of light, c.Comment: Paragraph 20.3.3.2.4 has a couple ofequations for URA_oc. The second one applies if t- t_op > 93,600 seconds.Rationale: need ICWG discussionConcurrence: concurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: need ICWG discussion11/19/08: Action to GPSW/GPC todetermine where the equations andparameters should be located. Removethese equations and SSV discussion fromthis document. Provide a reference/pointerto the TBD location for this information.Stakeholders concur. Verify with SteveBrown that all appropriate sections havebeen removed. Contact POC for ICD-GPS-240. 30-jul-09: see comment #81, 80 in200 CRM. confirm that comment will bewithdrawn. 83/608: refer to resolution ofcomments 81, 82. 8/5/09: refer to RIL itemfrom TBMWG for SSV location resolution.13-aug-09: GPC concurs with resolution andthis comment is being tracked by the ActionItem 50. 10-sept-09: AI #50 was closed.The ICC will work with comment originatorto ensure that this concern will beaddressed with the appropriate document.This follows suit with the 200 resolution.11/19/08: Comment withdrawnFrom: MUST SEE TEXTFinal To: The second equation is: URA_oc =URA_ocb + URA_oc1 * (t - t_op) + URA_oc2 * (t -t_op - 93,600)^2 The second equation shouldmost likely be: URA_oc = URA_ocb + URA_oc1 * (tConcurrence: ConcurRationale:9

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes- t_op - 93,600) + URA_oc2 * (t - t_op - 93,600)^2Recommendation: Recommend that theequation be checked and if necessary corrected asshown above.49 Thomas NagleGPC47 Thomas NagleGPC46 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 50Para: Figure20-8Page: 37, 38a,38bPara: App.I10.1Page: 14Para: 3.3.1.7.3SSSRationale: We believe the equation is incorrect.Comment: Incorrect label and bit number for thisparameter.From: FROM “t0GGTO 14 BITS”Final To: TO “tGGTO 16 BITS”Rationale: Consistency (with IS-GPS-800) andcorrect number of bits for this parameter.Comment: Remove Boeing Co. Letter of ExceptionFrom:Final To:Rationale: It has nothing to do with this IS and is acontractual matterComment: Normally, the group delay differentialincludes a bias component and a randomcomponent. It is unclear how “an additional 3.5nanoseconds (two sigma) accuracy degradationmay apply to the signal” applies.From: FROM “If this bias term is not applied to thesignal, an additional 3.5 nanoseconds (two-sigma)accuracy degradation may apply to the signal.”Final To: TO “If this bias term is not applied to thesignal, an additional 1.75 nanoseconds may applyto the absolute value of the mean differentialdelay with respect to the Earth-coverage signal.”Rationale: Clarity.PO Resolution: A/CRationale: need ICWG discussionConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Only the PCO can approve removal ofletters of exception.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: for discussion at ICWGConcurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: The figure should contain 16bits. Discuss terms with Ed Powers.Determine if there has been any preferencewith Galileo. The figure should contain 16bits. 30-jul-09: tied to comment #102 for200 CRM. Awaiting resolution. 13-aug-09:refer to AI #9 for resolution.10-sept-09:confirmed that the AI is still open, thuscomment must be deferred.11/19/08: Comment rejected at ICWG.Action assigned to GPC to provide morerationale for removal of the letter. 20-aug-09: AI# 52 has been assigned for resolution.10-sept-09: AI52 is closed. Letters cannotbe removed per PK.11/19/08: Action to GPSW/GPC todetermine where the equations andparameters should be located. Removethese equations and SSV discussion fromthis document. Provide a reference/pointerto the TBD location for this information.Stakeholders concur. Verify with SteveBrown that all appropriate sections havebeen removed. Contact POC for ICD-GPS-240. 073009: see also comment #81 fromthe 200 document for resolution. 13-aug-09: refer to AI #50 for resolution. 10-sept-09: AI #50 was closed. this comment mustbe rejected since RIL item will be opened ata later time. The ICC will work withcomment originator to ensure that this10

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesconcern will be addressed with theappropriate document. This follows suitwith the 200 resolution.45 Thomas NaglePage: 13 SComment: Missing Table 3-IV. Suggested change: PO Resolution: Accept11/19/08: Table was added. StakeholdersGPCPara: Table 3-please provide Table 3-IVConcur the comment is closed.IVRationale:From: N/AFinal To:Table 3-IV. Space Service Volume (SSV) ReceivedMinimum RF Signal Strength for GPS III Satellitesover the Bandwidth Specified in 3.3.1.1 – GEOBased AntennasSV Blocks SignalI5 Q5III and Subsequent -182.0 dBW -182.0 dBWConcurrence: concurRationale:44 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 13Para: 3.3.1.6.1SRationale: No table 3-IV.Comment: Please define the Space ServiceVolume users where the received signal levels inTable 3-IV apply, (LEO, MEO, or GEO?). SuggestedChange: Add a sentence to indicate the SSV usersare referred to users at GEO.From: N/AFinal To: included "– GEO Based Antennas" inTable 3-IV table.PO Resolution: A/CRationale: Values are for GEO. Added to Table 3-IVConcurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: Stakeholders concur. 8/6/09:please refer to comment #77 from 200CRM. 13-aug-09: This issue is also deferreduntil the appropriate location for the SSVequations has been determined. Refer to AI#50 for way forward. 10-sept-09: AI #50was closed. This comment does not pertainto AI #50 as a reference is included in table3-IV. ICC has confirmed change is indocument.41 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 11-OctPara: 3.3.1.3SRationale: Important info to validate receivedsignal levels.Comment: Carrier phase noise should be specifiedas suggested for IS-GPS-800 in telecons duringAugust 08. Suggested Change: Delete anyreference to tracking loop bandwidth and specifyphase noise single-sided spectral density (maybewith a figure). “The single-sideband phase noisespectral density of L-band carrier shall not exceed:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: for discussion at Public ICWG.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: Comment was accepted withsome modifications. The language of theproposed change will be modified andincorporated in the ICWG minutes forstakeholder review. 30-jul-09: there is anopen action item for the 200 document.13-aug-09: Refer to AI #12 for resolution.11

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes-30 dBc at Df =1 Hz decreasing 30 dB/decade untilit reaches Df = 10 Hz. From 10 Hz to 10,000 Hz itdecreases at 10 dB per decade reaching -90 dBc atDf = 10,000 Hz.”From: The phase noise spectral density of the unmodulatedcarrier shall be such that a phaselocked loop of 10 Hz one-sided noise bandwidthshall be able to track the carrier to an accuracy of0.1 radians root mean square (RMS). Seeadditional supporting material for phase noisecharacteristics in section 6.3.2.Final To: The phase noise spectral density of theunmodulated carrier shall not exceed themagnitude of a straight line (on a log-log plot)between -30 dBc/Hz at 1 Hz and -60 dBc/Hz at 10Hz, and another straight line between -60 dBc/Hzat 10 Hz and -80 dBc/Hz at 10 kHz. Spurs in thephase noise spectral density of the unmodulatedcarrier between 10 Hz and 10 kHz shall not exceed-40 dBc.10-sept-09: This AI #12 has been closed andthe new text is in the document.10/01/09: Changed language for thissection to Bud Bakeman proposal. C.Hegarty took on a action to review twodifferent alternatives in the requirementlocation of carrier phase noise. ICWGstakeholders agreed with option (b) of hispackage..i.e. -80 dBc/Hz at 10 kHz.40 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 10Para: 3.3.1.2SRationale: It is not appropriate to assume UserEquipment receiver implementation. IS shouldspecify the signal-in-space, not receiverperformance.Comment: Correlation Loss in this paragraph hashad a long-standing inconsistency: with this lossdefined as the difference between power receivedin 24 MHz bandwidth and that recovered from aperfect 24 MHz correlator, there should be noadditional loss due to “ideal receiver waveformdistortion”. Suggested Change: Change the lastsentence to read “For this case, the correlationloss due to SV modulation and filter imperfectionsshall be less than 0.6 dB”.From: Correlation loss is defined as the differencePO Resolution: A/CRationale: for discussion at Public ICWG.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: New proposed change presentedat ICWG by Bakeman. There was somediscussion that the proposed change waswritten more like a factory test spec asopposed to a SIS spec. Action assigned toMike Deelo to set up meeting withappropriate stakeholders to reviseproposed change. Comment to remainopen. 30-jul-09: Bud Bakeman has theaction with his proposed wording. 200 POCwill get language into documents (200). 13-aug-09: refer to AI #12 for resolution. 10-12

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesbetween the SV power received in a 24 MHzsept-09: This AI #12 has been closed andbandwidth and the signal power recovered in anthe new text is in the document. 10/01/09:ideal correlation receiver. The worst caseThis section was under rigourous reviewcorrelation loss occurs when the I5 carrier isand the ultimately the consensus of themodulated by the sum of the I5-code and the NAVICWG community was to revert to wordingdata stream. For this case, the correlation losssimilar to the IS-GPS-800.apportionment shall be as follows: 1. SVmodulation and filter imperfections: 0.6 dB 2.Ideal UE receiver waveform distortion (due to 24MHz filter): 0.4 dBFinal To: Correlation loss is defined as thedifference between the SV power received in thebandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 (excluding signalcombining loss) and the signal power recovered inan ideal correlation receiver of the samebandwidth using an exact replica of the waveformwithin an ideal sharp-cutoff filter bandwidthcentered at L5, whose bandwidth corresponds tothat specified in 3.3.1.1 and whose phase is linearover that bandwidth. The correlation lossapportionment due to SV modulation and filteringimperfections shall be 0.6 dB maximum.37 Thomas NagleGPCPage:Para:SRationale: CorrectnessComment: Suggested Change: Add completedetail which will allow receivers to be designeddeveloped and produced that can be properlyoperational utilizing all available PRN codesdocumented through 63From:PO Resolution: DeferRationale: At the May 08 ICWG, Aerospace presentedsolution for the comment. Will be presented at Nov08 ICWG.Concurrence: Concur11/19/08: Action assigned to Karl Kovach.See Action item #8 against IS-GPS-200. 30-jul-09: 200 POC contacted Karl forproposed text and he will provide someshortly. 13-aug-09: refer to AI #18 forresolution. 10-sept-09: verified that this AIfor PRN expansion is still open.Final To:Rationale:36 Thomas NagleGPCPage: TitlePagesSRationale:Comment: Title pages of document shouldindicate a unique draft version number or date ofPO Resolution: Accept11/19/08: Action assigned to review olderPIRNs – Thomas Davis. 06-sept-09: ICC has13

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesPara:this redline version. This draft version needs to be Rationale: Documents are differentiated by date in confirmed that the 'draft' document has aclearly identifiable from other draft version that the filename, however, the date does not appear in latest revision date in the filename.might exist now or the near future. Is: Add the filename when posted on the GPSW website. Forunique draft version number or date.future drafts, will add the draft date to the header asRecommend identifying it as IS-GPS-705 draft IRN- follows:705-004 with a draft version date, but specificidentifier is not important as long as it is unique Concurrence: ConcurFrom: No draft version number or date.Rationale:Final To: Filename: IS-GPS-705_06-sept-09( orequivalent)28 S. BrownLMCOPage: 11Para: 3.3.1.5SRationale: Not having a unique identifier for thisversion can lead to confusion between versionsfor all except the person in control of the latestversion. This appears to be a draft of thedocument including proposed IRN-705-004.Comment:From: Referring to the phase of the I5 carrierwhen I5i(t) equals zero as the "zero phase angle",the I5 and Q5-code generator output shall controlthe respective signal phases in the followingmanner: when I5i(t) equals one, a 180-degreephase reversal of the I5-carrier occurs; whenQ5i(t) equals one, the Q5 carrier advances 90degrees; when the Q5i(t) equals zero, the Q5carrier shall be retarded 90 degrees (such thatwhen Q5i(t) changes state, a 180-degree phasereversal of the Q5 carrier occurs). The resultantnominal composite transmitted signal phases as afunction of the binary state of the modulatingsignals are as shown in Table 3-II.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: The “was” and “Is” appear to be reversed.06-sept-09: ICC confirms reversal.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: Comment is deferred – will berevisited when documents are placed inDOORS. 20-aug-09: ICC to look atwhether the 705 already has the "shall" inthe paragraph. From the redlined copy, italready has a shall in it. 06-sept-09: ICC hasconfirmed that "shall be retarded 90degrees" is in both the IRN003 version andthe latest redlined version. ICC to confirmwith comment originator that comment isto be withdrawn.Final To: Is: Referring to the phase of the I5 carrierwhen I5i(t) equals zero as the "zero phase angle",the I5 and Q5-code generator output shall controlthe respective signal phases in the following14

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesmanner: when I5i(t) equals one, a 180-degreephase reversal of the I5-carrier occurs; whenQ5i(t) equals one, the Q5 carrier advances 90degrees; when the Q5i(t) equals zero, the Q5carrier will be retarded 90 degrees (such thatwhen Q5i(t) changes state, a 180-degree phasereversal of the Q5 carrier occurs). The resultantnominal composite transmitted signal phases as afunction of the binary state of the modulatingsignals are as shown in Table 3-II.27 S. BrownLMCOPage: 9Para: 3.2.2SRationale: Changed a will to a shall to have arequirement; to facilitate requirementsverification.Comment: Move Code Phase Assignments fromChapter 6 to Chapter 3From: 3.2.2 NAV Data. The L5 CNAV data, D5(t),includes SV ephemerides, system time, SV clockbehavior data, status messages and timeinformation, etc. The 50 bps data is coded in arate 1/2 convolution coder. The resulting 100symbols per second (sps) symbol stream ismodulo-2 added to the I5-code only; the resultantbit-train is used to modulate the L5 in-phase (I)carrier. The content and characteristics of the L5CNAV data, D5(t), are given in Appendix II of thisdocument. In general, the data content is verysimilar to that modulated on the L2 C channel ofthe SV. The L5 quadraphase (Q5) carrier has nodata.PO Resolution: DeferRationale: See CRM comments #11 and #12.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:11/19/08: See disposition of comment #158in IS-GPS-800 CRM: Karl Kovach providedapproach at ICWG and has action toproduce language for IS. 20-aug-09: this isalso in line with comment 45 from the 20CRM. There is an open AI for Karl Kovach.See AI #16 for resolution. 10-sept-09:verified that this AI for PRN expansion is stillopen.Final To:25 Dr. Pam NealSE&IPage:Para: 3.2.1.2SRationale: Move to account for PRN expansionbeyond 32 operational PRNs. Change made inresponse to SDR-80 and SDR-81 action items.Comment: Clarify wording to avoid confusion andmake document consistent with IS-GPS-200.PO Resolution: A/C11/19/08: Changes made in real time duringICWG – replace “NAV” with “navigation” –15

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: Changed wording as follows: “The NSI5 andNSQ5 codes, used to protect the user from receivinganomalous NAV signals (reference paragraph 3.2.1),are not for …”This wording is more consistent withsection 3.2.1.From: The NSI5 and NSQ5 codes, used to protectthe user from a malfunction in the SV’s referencefrequency generation system (referenceparagraph 3.2.1), are not for utilization by theuser and, therefore, are not defined in thisdocument.Concurrence: ConcurStakeholders concur. 06-sept-09:confirmed that the change is in document.10/01/09: made a real-time change toreplace the word "receiving" to "tracking"and "data" to "signals" per ICWGstakeholder consensus.Final To: Is: The NDI5 and NSQ5 codes, used toprotect the user from receiving trackinganomalous NAV data signals, are not forutilization by the user and, therefore, are notdefined in this document.Rationale:24 Thomas NagleGPC23 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 91Para: 20.3.3.9Page: 90Para:20.3.3.8.2Rationale: This statement was changed in IS-GPS-200 to reflect the fact that the cause ofanomalous NAV signals is not limited to amalfunction in the SV’s reference frequencygeneration system.S Comment: Correction bits for message type 36.suggested change: TO “The requisite bits shalloccupy bits 39 through 270 of message type 15and bits 128 through 271 of message type 36.”SFrom: 270Final To: 274Rationale:Comment: Equation correction. 20.3.3.8.2 GPSand GNSS Time. The GPS/GNSS-time relationshipis given by, tGNSS = tE – (A0GGTO + A1GGTO (tE –totGGTO + 604800 (WN – WNotGGTO) + A2GGTO(tE – totGGTO + 604800 (WN – WNotGGTO))2)Suggested Change: Add “)” in front of “+ A2GGTO”From: N/AFinal To: ")" in front of “+ A2GGTO”PO Resolution: A/CRationale: 5/23/08: comment with correction toreplace 270 with 274. Same as previous commentfrom 200 review.Concurrence: concurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: 5/23/08: Comment deferred and anaction has been assigned to SE&I to confirmcorrection.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:30-jul-09: see comment #34 from 200 CRM.Accepted w/ comment. 20-aug-09: verifiedaccept w/ comment ---changed to "274."06/20/08: The change was verified to becorrect and was added to the document20-aug-09 verified change is in document.16

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes21 Thomas NagleGPC20 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 88Para:20.3.3.7.4Page: 65Para:20.3.3.2.4SSRationale: Equation correction.Comment: Correction to equations of quasi-Keplerian elements.From: ic = i0 + Δi and Ωc = Ω0 + ΔΩ equationsFinal To:Rationale: CorrectionComment: Paragraph 20.3.3.2.4 has a couple ofequations for URA_oc. The second one applies if t- t_op > 93,600 seconds. The second equation is:URA_oc = URA_ocb + URA_oc1 * (t - t_op) +URA_oc2 * (t - t_op - 93,600)^2 The secondequation should most likely be: URA_oc =URA_ocb + URA_oc1 * (t - t_op - 93,600) +URA_oc2 * (t - t_op - 93,600)^2From: MUST SEE TEXTPO Resolution: AcceptRationale: 5/23/08: Comment deferred and anaction has been assigned to SE&I to confirmcorrection.Concurrence: concurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: 5/23/08: Comment deferred and anaction has been assigned to SE&I to confirmcorrection.Concurrence: concurRationale:11/19/08: Stakeholders agree to proposedchange in order to make consistent with IS-GPS-200. 30-jul-09: accepted comment asis from recommendation. 06-sept-09:confirmed new equations is in documentsee also comment 55. duplicate30-jul-09: see comment #98 from the 200CRM. Comment withdrawn from that CRMFinal To: Recommendation: Recommend that theequation be checked and if necessary corrected asshown above.18 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 55Para:20.3.3.1.1.1SRationale: We believe the equation is incorrect.Comment: Symbols, WN and WNe, are not inmessage type 10. Suggested Change: Delete“(WN)” and “(WNe)”.From: These 13 bits are comprised of 10 LSBs(WN) that represent the 10 MSBs of the 29-bit Z-count as qualified in paragraph 20.3.3.3.1.1 of IS-GPS-200, and 3 MSBs (WNe) which are three extrabits to extend the range of transmission weeknumber from 10 bits to 13 bits.PO Resolution: A/CRationale: 5/23/08: comment. Will incorporate intodocument.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:06/20/08: Changes added to document. 13-Aug-09: deleted the entire sentence withWN and Wne. GPC concursFinal To: sentence deleted17

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes17 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 55Para:20.3.3.1.1SRationale: Correction.Comment: ICD does not define the Integrity StatusFlag. Suggested Change: Add text to paragraph20.3.3.1.1 to describe the Integrity Status Flag asshown in the attached draft PIRN-705-XXX(ISF).From: N/AFinal To: The CNAV message will containinformation that allows users to operate whenintegrity is assured. This is accomplished using anintegrity assured URA value in conjunction with anintegrity status flag. The URA value is the RSS ofURAoe and URAoc; URA is integrity assured to theenhanced level only when the integrity status flagis “1”.Bit 272 of Message Type 10 is the Integrity StatusFlag (ISF). A "0" in bit position 272 indicates thatthe conveying signal is provided with the legacylevel of integrity assurance. That is, theprobability that the instantaneous URE of theconveying signal exceeds 4.42 times the upperbound value of the current broadcast URAindexvalue, for more than 5.2 seconds, without anaccompanying alert, is less than 1 x 10-5 per hour.A "1" in bit-position 272 indicates that theconveying signal is provided with an enhancedlevel of integrity assurance. That is, theprobability that the instantaneous URE of theconveying signal exceeds 5.73 times the upperbound value of the current broadcast URAindexvalue, for more than 5.2 seconds, without anaccompanying alert, is less than 1 x 10-8 per hour.The probability associated with the nominal andlower bound values of the current broadcast URAindex are not defined.In this context, an "alert" is defined as anyindication or characteristic in the conveying signal,PO Resolution: A/CRationale: 5/23/08 comment and will incorporate intodocument. However, a working group will be createdto discuss further.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:06/20/08: Changes added to document. 06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that the additionaltext for ISF is in the document. 10-sept-09:this proposed text from the PIRN has minordifferences as shown in the "To" field of thiscomment. Stakeholders concur. changedPO resolution to A/C 10/14/09: Alsoadditional text was added to synchronizewith the 800 document. The new textadded from the 10/1/09 ICWG is in blue. Itis also noted that the URA "value" wasreplaced with URA "index" on twooccurances in the second paragraph startingwith the text "Bit 272 of Message Type 10 isthe Integrity..."18

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesas specified elsewhere in this document, whichsignifies that the conveying signal may be invalidand should not be used, such as, not Operational-Healthy, Non-Standard Code, parity error, etc. Inthis context, the term URA refers to thecomposite URA, calculated as the root-sumsquaredof the individual URA components in theconveying signal.16 Thomas NagleGPC14 Thomas NagleGPC8 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 41Para: Fig. 20-1Page: 35dPara: Table 6-II(sheet 4 of 6)Page:Para:SSRationale: The Integrity Status Flag is anauthenticated requirement specified in SS-SYS-800, SS-CS-800, and SS-SS-800. Failure to includethe ISF in this ICD before the next OCX RFP willresult in cost impact to the OCX program.Comment: ICD does not define the Integrity StatusFlag. Suggested Change: Add text to paragraph20.3.3.1.1 to describe the Integrity Status Flag asshown in the attached draft PIRN-705-XXX(ISF).From: N/AFinal To: See Figure 20-1Rationale: The Integrity Status Flag is anauthenticated requirement specified in SS-SYS-800, SS-CS-800, and SS-SS-800. Failure to includethe ISF in this ICD before the next OCX RFP willresult in cost impact to the OCX program.Comment: Incorrect “XB code Advance” for I5 PRN153.19PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: 5/23/08 comment and will incorporate intodocument. However, a working group will be createdto discuss further.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: Reject06/20/08: Changes added to document. 06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that the figureadditions for ISF is in the document.5/23/08: Resolved in a previous comment.Comment withdrawnRationale:From: For I5 PRN 153, change FROM “7912”Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: TO “4912”Rationale:Rationale: Correction.S Comment: PO Resolution: Reject 5/23/2008 Comment Withdrawn

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFrom:Rationale:Final To: Suggested Change: Add complete detailwhich will allow receivers to be designeddeveloped and produced that can be properlyoperational utilizing all available PRN codesdocumented through 63Concurrence: ConcurRationale:7 Thomas NagleGPC61 KawakamiGPD60 KawakamiGPDPage: GenPara:Page: 33Para: 6.1Page: 101Para: 20.3.4.3SAARationale:Comment:From:Final To: Suggested Change: Remove all tablesdocumenting PRN codes and develop a newdocument for all PRN codes (Example attached)Rationale: the title of the interface document isSpace Segment to user. Many of the documentedcodes are not part of from the space segment andwhen doing this make sure all text is identical forall signals unless there is some uniquerequirement that must be met.Comment: Requested Change: add WGS 84 to theacronym listFrom: N/AFinal To: WGS 84 - World Geodetic System 1984Rationale: correctnessComment: Requested Change: change “WGS-84”to “WGS 84”From: WGS-84Final To: WGS 84Rationale: correctnessPO Resolution: DeferRationale:Concurrence:Rationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:5/23/08: reference action #10 from the 800review yesterday. 13-aug-09: deferredcomment. Need to speak with Tom Stanseland Karl Kovach for resolution.. 25-aug-09:get resolution rationale from the 200 CRMunder a similar comment. 10-sept-09: Itwas decided by K. Kovach that referencingthe public website was not a viable solution06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that change is indocument.06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that change is indocument. Confirmed that the rest of thedocument is consistent.20

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes58 KawakamiPage: 14 APO Resolution: DeferGPDPara: 3.3.1.7.351 Thomas NagleGPC48 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 73Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.1Page: 40Para: 20.3.3AAComment: using both “degrees” and “˚”Requested Change: decide which one will be usedand then consistently use it throughout thedocumentFrom:Final To: Requested Change: decide which onewill be used and then consistently use itthroughout the documentRationale: consistencyComment: Please define the term “SSVL5”From: N/AFinal To: Suggested Change: Add a sentence todefine “SSVL5 is the Space Service Volume delaybias for the L5 frequency.”Rationale: ClarityComment: Editorial commentFrom: From “…(UDRA) may be worse thanindicated in the respective message types, and theSV should be used at the user’s own risk.Rationale: For the port to DOORS, we are convertingsymbols to words as much as possible. However insome cases like equations, will likely leave thesymbols as is – will try and be as consistent aspossible, but must also be pragmatic in the approach.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: need ICWG discussionConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: Concur06-sept-09: ICC certainly agrees withprinciple. this action will be deferred untilthe next revision when the document willbe placed into DOORS of which a number ofadministrative issues will be resolved.11/19/08: Action to GPSW/GPC todetermine where the equations andparameters should be located. Removethese equations and SSV discussion fromthis document. Provide a reference/pointerto the TBD location for this information.Stakeholders concur. Verify with SteveBrown that all appropriate sections havebeen removed. Contact POC for ICD-GPS-240. 8/5/09: refer to RIL item fromTBMWG for SSV location resolution. 13-aug-09: refer to AI #50 to determine thetimeframe at which comment can beresolved. 10-sept-09: AI #50 was closed.The ICC will work with comment originatorto ensure that this concern will beaddressed with the appropriate document.This follows suit with the 200 resolution.06-sept-09: ICC confirmed deletion.Final To: TO “…(UDRA) may be worse thanindicated in the respective message types.”Rationale:21

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: “The SV should be used at the user’sown risk” is not needed here.42 Thomas NaglePage: 11 AComment: Commonly expressed as “L5 signal”, PO Resolution: Accept06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that change is inGPCPara: 3.3.1.4instead of “L5 waveform”.document.From: FROM “In-band spurious transmissions aredefined as transmissions within the band specifiedin 3.3.1.1 which are not expressly components ofthe L5 waveform.Final To: TO “In-band spurious transmissions aredefined as transmissions within the band specifiedin 3.3.1.1 which are not expressly components ofthe L5 signal.”Rationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:39 Thomas NagleGPC38 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 3Para: 2.1Page: 1Para: 1.2AARationale: ClarityComment: Change GP-03-001 dated 14 November2003 to GP-03-001A, dated 20 April 2006.From: GP-03-001 , 14 November 2003Final To: to GP-03-001A, current issueRationale: Current VersionComment: go to section 1.2 Approval andChanges. Suggested Change: Add the word“obtaining” before “approval” on the firstsentence of the first paragraph.From:Final To: “obtaining” and "coordiantion"PO Resolution: A/CRationale: Remove date. Most current revisionappliesConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: Changed to “approval coordination”.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:13-Aug-09: ICC noted that the update wasto remove the date all together and put in"current issue." in the document. ICC alsonoted however, that this is different thanthat of the resolution of the 700. need tosync up…discussion to follow at the ICWG inSept.13-Aug-09: ICC updated document andconfirmed “obtaining” and "coordination"are in the doc.32 S. BrownLMCOPage: 16Para: 3.3.2.1ARationale: Rationale is the ICC does not haveapproval authorityComment: Hoffman spelled incorrectlyFrom: From HoffmanPO Resolution: DeferRationale:06-sept-09: ICC will defer this admincorrection to the next revision when thedocument will be placed into DOORS. ICChas noted the misspelling in the figure 3-322

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFinal To: Is: HofmanConcurrence: Concurwhich is a picture, thus making it difficultfor correction. The figure needs to beRationale: Spelling incorrectRationale:converted to an OLE object for ease ofupdating. This can be deferred when thedocument goes into DOORS.22 Thomas NagleAComment: Editorial comment – the dot of UDRA is PO Resolution: AcceptGPCin wrong place.19 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 89Para:20.3.3.7.5Page: 59Para: Table 20-IAFrom: UDRA (dot over the R)Final To: UDRA dot over the D)Rationale: Correction.Comment: Editorial comment. Under the“Parameter” column, add the parameter symbolsand move the parameter descriptions to the nextcolumns.From:Final To: WNn Week Number URAoeINDEX SV AccuracyRationale: 5/23/08: comment and correcteddocument real-time.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: 5/23/08: Will incorporate into document.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:06-sept-09: ICC tried to place the dot backover the "D". Because of the difficulties inresolution of MS Word, the placement maynot be perfect. This change will beaddressed in the next revision as well sincethe document will be placed in DOORS afterthis revision.11 Jun 08: Changes added to document.5/23/08 Will incorporate into document.06-sept-09: ICC verified noted changeswere in document as well s new Titledescriptions "parameter" and "parameterdescription" were placed in document.Updated PO resolution to A/C.15 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 40Para: 20.3.3ARationale: Clarity and consistency.Comment: Editorial commentFrom: From “… (UDRA) may be worse thanindicated in the respective message types, and theSV should be used at the user’s own risk.”PO Resolution: RejectRationale:Concurrence: Concur5/23/2008 Withdrawn comment. Thecomment #48 of this CRM is the same.Final To: TO “… (UDRA) may be worse thanindicated in the respective message types.”Rationale:11 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 1Para: 2(Section 1.2)3-6ARationale: “The SV should be used at the user’sown risk” is not needed here.Comment: The sentence states “The JointProgram Office (JPO) administers approvals underthe auspices of the Configuration Control Board(CCB), which is governed by the appropriate JPOPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:5/23/08: Will update documentaccordingly. 06-sept-09: ICC confirmedthere is no JPO reference. Replaced "JPO"with "GPS Wing" on front cover. Page as23

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesOperating Instruction (OI).” JPO has beenConcurrence: Concurwell as sections 1.2 and 10.1renamed GPS Wing.Rationale:From:Final To: Recommendation: Replace JPO with GPSWing throughout the document.10 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 1Para: 2(Section 1.2)1-3ARationale: ClarificationComment: The first sentence states “ARINCEngineering Services , LLC has been designatedthe Interface Control Contractor (ICC), and isresponsible for the basic preparation, approval,distribution, retention, and Interface ControlWorking Group (ICWG) coordination of the IS inaccordance with GP-03-001. SAIC is now the ICC.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:5/23/08: Will update documentaccordingly. 06-sept-09: ICC confirmedthat the change is in the document.From: ARINC Engineering Services , LLCFinal To: SAIC9 Thomas NagleGPC6 Thomas DavisSE&IPage:Para: 1.2Page: N/APara: N/AAARationale: Clarification.Comment: Suggested Change: Eliminate the word“approval” from the first sentence.From: "approval"Final To:Rationale: Rationale is the ICC does not haveapproval authorityComment: Remove reference to GPS JointProgram OfficeFrom: Change wording as follows: “Navstar GPSJoint Program Office” & ”JPO”PO Resolution: RejectRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: Concur5/23/08: Reference action #10 from the800 review yesterday. 13-Aug-09: thiscomment is OBE based on the resolution tocomment #38 from this 705 worksheet.06-sept-09: ICC confirmed there is no JPOreference. Replaced "JPO" with "GPS Wing"on front cover. Page.Final To: To “Navstar GPS Wing (GPSW)” &“GPSW”Rationale:24

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes5 Thomas DavisSE&IPage: 1Para: 1.2ARationale: The term is no longer used for the GPSprogram.Comment: Remove references to previous ICCFrom: Change wording as follows: “ARINCEngineering Services, LLC has been designated.”Final To: To “Applications InternationalCorporation (SAIC) has been designated…”PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: EN revision.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:EN Recommendation: Remove allreferences to a specific contractor. Changeto “The Interface Control Contractor (ICC)designated by the government isresponsible for….” same as comment #10.4 Thomas DavisSE&IPage: 35dPara:Paragraph6.3.4 Table 6-II(sheet 4 of 6)ARationale: The SE&I is the new ICC for thisdocument.Comment: Incorrect Value in Table 6-II. Replacethe XB Code Advance – Chips for PRN 153’s I5value: “7912”From: Replace “7912”PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: Concur06-sept-09: confirmed that change is indocument. Stakeholders to proved ICWGconcurrence.Final To: With “4912”Rationale:62 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 3Para: Sec 2 2.1GP-03-001ARationale: The current value will produce anerroneous ranging code value.Comment:From: Change date from 14 Nov 2003PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Duplicate of comment #39.(05/21/09)Final To: To 20 Apr 2006Concurrence: Concur63 Thomas NagleGPCPage:Para: 3.3.1.2CRationale: UpdateComment: Recommend modifying therequirement for correlation loss. SuggestedChange: Change to: “3.3.1.2 Correlation Loss.suggested chaneg: Correlation loss is defined asthe difference between the signal power receivedin the bandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 and the signalpower recovered in an ideal correlation receiverof the same bandwidth which ideally performslossless correlation using an exact replica of theRationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: This has been mentioned in previouscomments. Currently, new language is beingproduced and should be available for review prior tothe forthcoming ICWG.Concurrence: Concur(05/21/09): 8/6/09: the correlation losstiger team will determine the way forwardregarding this comment. 13-aug-09: referto AI #12 for resolution. 10-sept-09: ICChas placed the language per the corr. Losstiger team. 10/01/09: This section wasunder rigourous review and the ultimatelythe consensus of the ICWG community wasto revert to wording similar to the IS-GPS-25

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Noteswaveform with an ideal sharp-cutoff whose Rationale: 800.bandwidth corresponds to that in 3.3.1.1, andwhose phase is linear over that bandwidth. Thecorrelation loss apportionment to the SV shall beas follows:1 SV modulation and filter imperfections: 0.6 dBFrom: Original Text: “3.3.1.2 Correlation Loss.Correlation loss is defined as the differencebetween the signal power received in thebandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 and the signal powerrecovered in an ideal correlation receiver of thesame bandwidth which ideally performs losslesscorrelation using an exact replica of the waveformwith an ideal sharp-cutoff whose bandwidthcorresponds to that in 3.3.1.1, and whose phase islinear over that bandwidth. The worst casecorrelation loss occurs when the I5 carrier ismodulated by the sum of the I5-code and the NAVdata stream. For this case, the correlation lossapportionment shall be as follows:1 SV modulation and filter imperfections: 0.6 dB2 Ideal UE receiver waveform distortion (due to 24MHz filter): 0.4 dB”Final To: Correlation loss is defined as thedifference between the SV power received in thebandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 (excluding signalcombining loss) and the signal power recovered inan ideal correlation receiver of the samebandwidth using an exact replica of the waveformwithin an ideal sharp-cutoff filter bandwidthcentered at L5, whose bandwidth corresponds tothat specified in 3.3.1.1 and whose phase is linearover that bandwidth. The correlation lossapportionment due to SV modulation and filteringimperfections shall be 0.6 dB maximum.26

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: The interface specification should notspecify loss in a user receiver. The suggestedchange text provides the user with as muchinformation as required and makes no assumptionregarding the user implementation.64 Thomas NaglePage: 12 CPO Resolution: A/CGPCPara: 3.3.1.3Comment: Recommend modifying therequirement for Carrier Phase Noise. SuggestedChange: Change to: “3.3.1.3 Carrier Phase Noise.The one-sided phase noise spectral density of theunmodulated carrier shall not exceed themagnitude of a straight line (on a log-log plot)between -30 dBc/Hz at 1 Hz offset and -70 dBc/Hzat 10 kHz offset from the carrier frequency. ”Withthis change, we suggest removing Section 6.3.2.From: The phase noise spectral density of the unmodulatedcarrier shall be such that a phaselocked loop of 10 Hz one-sided noise bandwidthshall be able to track the carrier to an accuracy of0.1 radians root mean square (RMS). Seeadditional supporting material for phase noisecharacteristics in section 6.3.2.Final To: The phase noise spectral density of theunmodulated carrier shall not exceed themagnitude of a straight line (on a log-log plot)between -30 dBc/Hz at 1 Hz and -60 dBc/Hz at 10Hz, and another straight line between -60 dBc/Hzat 10 Hz and -80 dBc/Hz at 10 kHz. Spurs in thephase noise spectral density of the unmodulatedcarrier between 10 Hz and 10 kHz shall not exceed-40 dBc.Rationale: This has been mentioned in previouscomments. Currently, new language is beingproduced and should be available for review prior tothe forthcoming ICWG.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/21/09): 8/6/09: the correlation losstiger team will determine the way forwardregarding this comment. 13-aug-09: referto AI #12 for resolution. 10-sept-09: This AI#12 has been closed and the new text is inthe document. 10/01/09: Changedlanguage for this section to Bud Bakemanproposal. C. Hegarty took on a action toreview two different alternatives in therequirement location of carrier phase noise.ICWG stakeholders agreed with option (b)of his package..i.e. -80 dBc/Hz at 10 kHz.see comment #41 of this CRM for details onthe study.65 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 13Para: 3.3.1.5CRationale: Correction: The suggested change textprovides the user with as much information asrequired and makes no assumption regarding theuser implementation.Comment: Phase continuity is not specified in theinterface specification. SuggestedPO Resolution: RejectGPC Comment (5/09): GPC rejects absenceof PO’s recognition of GPC’s follow-on27

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesChange: Insert the following paragraph after Rationale: Karl Kovach has developed some continuityparagraph 3.3.1.5 Phase Continuity While a language to replace 3.3.1.5. Need to discuss thesatellite is broadcasting standard I5 code and implementation at the next ICWG.standard Q5 code signals, there shall be nodiscontinuities that exceed 10 degrees (TBR) as Concurrence: Concurmeasured over any interval up to and including 10seconds, in the respective I5 or Q5 carrier phase Rationale:other than those attributable to the binary stateof the modulating signals.From: Request GPS Wing formally commenceTechnical Interface Meetings (TIMs) withparticipation by government only stakeholdersand their direct support government contractorsto support the evolution of language for this topic,and where it and any associations are or would benoted throughout this and other GPS Wingprescribed interface specifications (IS), systemspecifications (SS), and performance standarddocuments. TIMs should commence prior to thenext GPS Wing ERB meeting on this IS, while anyfinal proposed language intended forimplementation into this IS continue to bedeferred until the next or succeeding ICWG whereconcurrence by both federal and non-federalstakeholders in attendance or otherwiserepresented can be secured.Final To: Suggested Change: Insert the followingparagraph after paragraph 3.3.1.5 PhaseContinuity While a satellite is broadcastingstandard I5 code and standard Q5 code signals,there shall be no discontinuities that exceed 10degrees (TBR) as measured over any interval up toand including 10 seconds, in the respective I5 orQ5 carrier phase other than those attributable tothe binary state of the modulating signals.Rationale: Most precision GPS positioning, velocity28comment submitted for this review cycle inMarch 2009. First, request for the Civil’s tobe involved in TIMs with Karl Kovach tocoordinate, facilitate and lastly expedite aninterface specification/language that couldbe satisfactory for presentation andapproval by next ICWG attendees.Secondly, suggestion change(s) andrationale remain in effect as the Civil’srepeated response on this issue. 8/6/09:see comment 74, 124, 125 from 200 CRMfor resolution. need to touch base with KarlKovach for proposed language. 10-sept-09:If there is Phase "discontinuity," that is afailure that would fall under section3.2.5.2.3.2 Severe Signal Deformation of theSS-SS-800. There is nothing in thedocument that would allow a SV contractorto have a phase discontinuity that isn'tconsidered a failure. placing a requirementin there for "continuity" may give the SVcontractor the impression that phasediscontinuities are allowed. In the otherpublic SIS documents, phase continuity is inthere becuase we are concerned with theinteraction between two different signalson the same carrier.

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesdetermination and timing systems as well asapplications using carrier phase require phasecontinuity.66 Thomas NaglePage: 15 SPO Resolution: RejectGPCPara: 3.3.1.6.1Comment: Specify the SSV users (GSO, MEO, orLEO). There is no worst polarization orientationfor circularly polarized user receiving antenna.Suggested Change: From “The minimum receivedpower is measured at the output of a 0 dBi righthandcircularly polarized user receiving antenna atworst polarization orientation at the off-nadirangle of 26.0 degrees.” TO “The minimumeffective received signal power is measured at theoutput of a 0 dBi ideal right-hand circularlypolarized (i.e., 0 dB ellipticity) user receivingantenna (in geosynchronous orbit) at 26.0 degreesoff nadir and using 0 dB atmospheric loss.”From: Space Service Volume (SSV) Received SignalPower Levels. The SV shall provide I5 and Q5navigation signal strength at end-of-life (EOL),worst-case in order to meet the SSV minimumlevels specified in Table 3-IV. The minimumreceived power is measured at the output of a 0dBi right-hand circularly polarized user receivingantenna at worst polarization orientation at theoff-nadir angle of 26.0 degrees. The receivedsignal levels are observed within the in-bandallocation defined in paragraph 3.3.1.1.Final To: Space Service Volume (SSV) ReceivedSignal Power Levels. The SV shall provide worstcaseI5 and Q5 navigation signal strength at endof-life(EOL), in order to meet the SSV minimumlevels specified in Table 3-IV. The minimumreceived power is measured at the output of a 0dBi right-hand circularly polarized (i.e. 0 dB axialratio) user receiving antenna at normalorientation at the off-nadir angle of 26.0 degrees.The received signal levels are observed within the29Rationale: Will need ICWG concurrence.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:GPC rejects PO’s Resolution. GPC providedoriginal text, “Was” and “Is”. (05/21/09)13-aug-09: this comment is based upon theresolution of AI#50 to determine timeframewhen comment will be resolved. 10-sept-09: AI #50 is closed and this comment isnot based upon its resolution. the text wasupdated real-time during the Govt. TIM. toalign with the 200. ICC has changed POresolution to Accept with change.10/14/09: ICC placed the appropriatenewly ICWG agreed up one verbiage: " (i.e.0 dB axial ratio)" as blue text in the 'To'language

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesin-band allocation defined in paragraph 3.3.1.1.67 Thomas NagleGPC68 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 15Para: 3.3.1.7.1Page: 15Para: 3.3.1.7.2SSRationale: Specify orbital users as well ascorrection to user polarization orientation.Comment: Specify the group delay uncertainty forblock III SVs.Suggested Change:Add “For Block III SVs, the effective uncertainty ofthe group delay shall not exceed 1.0 nanoseconds(two sigma). The uncertainty requirement shallbe valid for signal measurement/averaging timesof 10 milliseconds to 1 day.”From: 3.3.1.7.1 Group Delay Uncertainty. Theeffective uncertainty of the group delays shall notexceed 3.0 nanoseconds (two sigma).Final To: 3.3.1.7.1 Group Delay Uncertainty. Theeffective uncertainty of the group delays shall notexceed 3.0 nanoseconds (95% probability).Rationale: Use group delay uncertainty for blockIII SVs from IS-GPS-800A.Comment: Specify the group delay differential forblock III SVs. Suggested change: TO “For a givennavigation payload redundancy configuration, theabsolute value of the mean differential delay shallnot exceed 30.0 nanoseconds. The random plusnon-random variations about the mean shall notexceed 3.0 nanoseconds (two-sigma). For Block IIISVs, the absolute value of the mean differentialdelay shall not exceed 15.0 nanoseconds. Therandom variations about the mean shall notexceed 1.0 nanoseconds (two-sigma). Therandom variation requirement shall be valid forsignal measurement/averaging times of 10milliseconds to 1 day.”PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Will add to topics for discussion at theICWG; be prepared to provide rationale for tighteningthe requirement.Concurrence:Rationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: Rationale is insufficient for a change thatmay impact cost of the SV.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/21/09): 8/6/09: ICC to get with Dr.Munoz for way forward. Analysis neededfor relationship between the SS-SS-800 docand ICD/IS's. 13-aug-09: this has beenpotentially accepted for the 705 document.A discussion will occur to determine if thereare users who have this need. this is aMITRE request. refer to AI#24 for wayforward. 27-aug-09: 200 ICC willcoordinate with the PSICA working group toattain rationale for the potentialcost/schedule impacts. 10sept-09: AI 24 isstill open this is still under review for the1ns.10/01/09: ICWG (AJ and Chris H) concurredwith leaving at 3.0 ns. Awaiting GPCconcurrence. 10/14/09: also confirmedthat the "(95% probability)" was replacedwith "(two Sigma)" . This was due to theconsensus of the ICWG that 95 % providesthe user with more data points that 2sigma.(05/11/09) GPC rejects PO resolution on thebasis that this information already existsinternal to the GPS-IIIA contractor. GPCthus recommends incorporation ofinformation from the GPS-IIIA LockheedMartin Navigation Payload PDR for theMean Differential Group Delay between anytwo RF chains. 8/6/09: GPU will go back tocomment originator to determine if there isan actual need for the tighter requirement.25-aug-09: this comment for the 200 CRM(#134) was withdrawn. ICC to follow suit.need GPC final concurrence. 10-sept-09:Comment #134 is withdrawn, thus this30

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFrom: From “For a given navigation payloadredundancy configuration, the absolute value ofthe mean differential delay shall not exceed 30.0nanoseconds. The random variations about themean shall not exceed 3.0 nanoseconds (twosigma).”Final To: The group delay differential between theradiated L1 and L5 signals (i.e. L1 P(Y) and L5 I5;and L1 P(Y) and L5 Q5) is specified as consisting ofrandom plus bias components. The meandifferential is defined as the bias component andwill be either positive or negative. For a givennavigation payload redundancy configuration, theabsolute value of the mean differential delay shallnot exceed 30.0 nanoseconds. The random plusnon-random variations about the mean shall notexceed 3.0 nanoseconds (95% probability), whenincluding consideration of the temperature andantenna effects during a vehicle orbitalrevolution.. L1 and L2 group delay differential isdescribed in 3.3.1.7.2 of IS-GPS-200. Correctionsfor the bias components of the group delaydifferential are provided to the users in the NAVmessage using parameters designated as TGD(reference paragraph 20.3.3.3.3.2 of IS-GPS-200)and Inter-Signal Correction (ISC) (referenceparagraph 20.3.3.3.1.2).comment will be withdrawn.10/01/09: This section has been modifiedreal-time at ICWG to be in synch with IS-GPS-200 10/14/09: The comment was notaccepted, however, ICC changed the POresolution to A/C since this section wasunder review at the last 10/1/09 ICWG.updated CRM69 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 16Para: 3.3.1.7.3SRationale: Tighten the specs for Block III SVs.Comment: Please provide the values for the SSVgroup delay differential.From: N/AFinal To: Suggested Change: Please provide thevalues.PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Per stakeholder agreement, values were tobe placed outside of this document. See Action Item# 22 for IS-GPS-800.Concurrence: ConcurGPC Rejects PO’s Resolution, againrequesting these values be provided in thisdocument. (05/21/09): 8/6/09: seecomment 135 from the 200 CRM forresolution. See AI #50 for resolution. 10-sept-09: AI #50 was closed. this commentmust be deferred since RIL item will beopened at a later time. changed the31

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: Requirement. Rationale: resolution to defer since this will bereviewed at a later time. 10-sept-09: thiscomment is OBE since this information willbe placed in a separate document. ICC tocoordinate with comment originator toensure this comment will not be lost.70 Thomas NaglePage: 16 SPO Resolution: A/CGPCPara: 3.3.1.7.3Comment: Section 3.3.1.7.3 is a brief descriptionof the space service volume group delaydifferential. It is listed as TBD, waiting for thevalues by the Block III Space Contractor. IS-GPS-200E (3.3.1.7.3) has the same requirement whileIS-GPS-800A (3.2.1.8.3) contains the samerequirement with one exception. IS-GPS-800Amakes reference of Block IIIA instead of Block III.Suggested Change: Change “Block IIIA” to “BlockIII” in 800A or modify 200E and 705A to reflect“Block IIIA” instead of “Block III”. In addition,resolve the TBDs.From: Space Service Volume Group DelayDifferential. The group delay differential betweenthe radiated L5 signal with respect to the EarthCoverage signal for users of the Space ServiceVolume is given by the Block III Space Contractor(TBD). The details are provided in TBD.Final To: Space Service Volume Group DelayDifferential. The group delay differential betweenthe radiated L5 signal with respect to the EarthCoverage signal for users of the Space ServiceVolume are provided in TBDRationale: Will change IS-GPS-800 to read “GPSIII”.See Action Item # 22 for IS-GPS-800 (in reference toTBDs).Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/21/09): 8/6/09: see comment #136from the 200 CRM for resolution. Vimal hasthe action to go to Capt Roach for direction.10-sept-09: ICC has synced up with the 200for proposed verbiage in this section.71 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 16Para: 3.3.1.8SRationale: Consistency and completion.Comment: Please provide the further clarificationof “On the L5 channel the chip transitions of thetwo modulating signals (i.e., that containing theI5-code and that containing the Q5-code) shall besuch that the average time difference betweenthe transitions does not exceed 10.0 nanosecondsPO Resolution: A/CRationale: Please provide more information on thechanges.Concurrence: concur(05/11/09) GPC withdraws comment. 10-sept-09: after further review, this commenthas been addressed by the Corr. Loss tigerteam. Changed PO resolution to accept.10/01/09: Updated section in real-time atICWG to synch up with IS-GPS-200 agreed32

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes(two-sigma).” It was raised at the GPS IIIA NPEPDR. Suggested Change: Please clarify.Rationale:From: 3.3.1.8 Signal Coherence. L5 transmittedsignals for a particular SV shall be coherentlyderived from the same onboard frequencystandard. All PRN signals shall be clockedcoherently with the P(Y)-code signal transitions.On the L5 channel the chip transitions of the twomodulating signals (i.e., that containing the I5-code and that containing the Q5-code) shall besuch that the average time difference betweenthe transitions does not exceed 10.0 nanoseconds(two-sigma).Final To: All transmitted signals for a particular SVshall be coherently derived from the same onboardfrequency standard. On the L5 channel, thechip transitions of the two modulating signals. L5land L5Q, shall be such that the average timedifference between them, and between each andthe transitions of L5P(Y) and CA, do not exceed 10nanoseconds. The variable time difference shallnot exceed 1 nanosecond (2 sigma95%probability), when including consideration of th etemperature and antenna effect changes during avehicle orbital revolution. Corrections for the biascomponents of the group delay differentail asprovided to the users using parametersdesignated as ISCs (reference paragraph20.3.3.3.1.2.)upon language. Included the 95%probability verbiage as discussed perstakeholders. Text in blue is the newlyICWG agreed upon text.72 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 16Para: 3.3.1.9SRationale: Need requirement clarification fromICWG.Comment: Section 3.3.1.9 Signal Polarization nowstates “The transmitted signal shall be righthandedcircularly polarized (RHCP). For theangular range of ±14.3 degrees from boresight, L5ellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4dB. For BlockPO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Since there are requirements that affectthe IIF space contractor, we cannot remove thesentence.(05/11/09) GPC rejects PO resolution citingthe document should be configured for agiven satellite.8/6/09: Dr.Munoz recommends that we place someverbiage into the SS-SS-800 spec. ICC33

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesIIIA the angular range of ±13.8 degrees from nadir,L5 ellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4 dB. Concurrence: ConcurNominal values are listed in section 6.3.3.Suggested Change: Remove the second sentence Rationale:which states “For the angular range of ±14.3degrees from boresight, L5 ellipticity shall be noworse than 2.4dB.”From: The transmitted signal shall be right-handcircularly polarized (RHCP). For the angular rangeof 14.3 degrees from boresight, L5 ellipticity shallbe no worse than 2.4 dB. For Block IIIA theangular range of ±13.8 degrees from nadir, L5ellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4 dB. Nominalvalues are listed in section 6.3.3.Final To: The transmitted signal shall be right-handcircularly polarized (RHCP). For the angular rangeof ±13.8 degrees from nadir, L5 ellipticity shall beno worse than 2.4 dB. Nominal values are listed insection 6.3.3.recommends including verbiage similar tothe 700 document "±13.8 degrees pluspointing error for GPS III". ICC to requestclarification to GPU. Action item to GPU.13-aug-09: refer to AI #30 for resolution.25-aug-09: deleted "+SV pointing error" indocument. Updated document percommenter's proposed verbiage. changedresolution to Accept.73 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 25Para: 3.3.4SRationale: CorrectnessComment: Tighten the accuracy of the requisitedata for relating GPS time to UTC for block III SVs.From: “The L5 CNAV data contains the requisitedata for relating GPS time to UTC. The accuracy ofthis data during the transmission interval will besuch that it relates GPS time to UTC (USNO) towithin 90.0 nanoseconds (one sigma).”Final To: “The L5 CNAV data contains the requisitedata for relating GPS time to UTC. The accuracy ofthis data during the transmission interval shall besuch that it relates GPS time to UTC (USNO) towithin 90.0 nanoseconds (one sigma). For Block IIISVs, the accuracy of this data during thetransmission interval shall be such that it shallPO Resolution: RejectRationale: The previous ICWG discussions were onlyagainst the IS-GPS-800. This will be a topic ofdiscussion at ICWG.Concurrence:Rationale:(05/21/09): 8/6/09: ICC to take action todetermine if this requirement is in the SYS-800 doc. 13-aug-09: refer to AI #26 forresolution. 10-sept-09: ICC has confirmedthat AI#26 is still open, thus the commentmust be deferred.10/01/09: Changed to reject. 1.5 ns is onlyrequired once OCX comes on-line.Concurred to by Chris H. Awaitingconcurrence from GPC.34

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesrelate GPS time to UTC(USNO) to within 1.5nanoseconds (RMS over 30 days)”74 Thomas NagleGPC75 Thomas NagleGPC76 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 35Para: 6.2.1Page: 46 - 51Para: Sec 10Appendix 1Page: n/aPara: newASCRationale: Requirement for block III SVs from IS-GPS-800A.Comment: Changes to definition of URA proposedfor IS-GPS-200 would be incorporated byreference into IS-GPS-705, since paragraph 6.2.1of IS-GPS-705 simply references paragraph 6.2.1of IS GPS-200.From: 6.2.1 User Range Accuracy. See paragraph6.2.1 of IS-GPS-200.Final To: 6.2.1 User Range Accuracy. See Section6.2.1 of IS-GPS-200.Rationale:Comment: Delete Section 10 Appendix 1. Lettersof Exception.From:Final To:Rationale: Letter of Exceptions are of acontractual nature and not part of an interfacespecification.Comment:From: (none)Final To: Suggested Change: Add new paragraph20.3.1.1, as follows: IS: The pseudorange-relatedparameters provided in this navigation messageare defined at zero age of data assuming that theUE is making pseudorange measurements using asignal correlation function with the followingcharacteristics: an early-late discriminator (TBR),PO Resolution: A/CRationale: Please clarify proposed change andresubmitConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Only the PCO can approve removal ofletters of exception.Concurrence: concurRationale:PO Resolution: DeferRationale: The OCX assumptions do not belong in thedocument. However, will add as a placeholder until abetter document is identified pending ICWG approval.Concurrence: concurRationale:GPC Rejects PO’s Resolution, based on therejection this is actually a deferral andneeds to remain an open issue untilresolved. (05/21/09): 8/6/09: ICC to placea pointer to the 200 document to refer tothose definitions. 10-sept-09: ICC confirmsthat this suffices in documentsynchronization with the 200 reference.10/14/09: updated the document thatreflects the 10/1/09 ICWG approvedchanges. Updated "paragraph" with"Section."(05/11/09) GPC rejects PO resolution andagain refers to the rationale provided forthis comment. 8/6/09: will move forwardwith non-concur. Wing's assessment isdifferent than that of reviewer. See alsothe AI tracker...see action #52. initialassessment is that we cannot remove dueto contracts.(05/11/09) GPC notes that PO resolution isactually a rejection of GPC’s comment, andwill be worked again at a later date andwithin a different document. GPC thusrecommends the PO to reject our comment,while GPC in advance of this recommendedaction would accept this resolution change.35

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesa correlator spacing equivalent to one P-code-chip(1/10.23 microseconds) (TBR) and a 20.46 MHzbandwidth (TBR). User receivers with differentcorrelation characteristics may experienceadditional small pseudorange errors, due to smallnominal signal distortions and frequencydispersion, which may alter the shape of thecorrelation signal peak from the ideal. It is theresponsibility of the user to account for theseadditional errors and for any impact it may haveon his specific application.77 Thomas NagleGPCPage: 108Para: Table 20-XI, and20.3.3.8.2(equation)SRationale: This is consistent with the assumptionsand definition of URE in the GPS III -800 series ofspecifications. At this time, the Control Segmentis not required to account for multiple UEcorrelation characteristics or provide multiple setsof data, therefore, the navigation message mustbe provided relative to a standard correlationcharacteristic and a single set of data.Comment: Parameters “totGGTO” and“WNotGGTO” are not defined in message type 35of Figure 20-8.From:Final To: Suggested Change: Either made changein 20.3.3.8.2 and table 20-XI to match theparameters of Figure 20-8 or to change theparameters in Figure 20-8 to match parameters in20.3.3.8.2 and table 20-XI.PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Duplicate of comments #57 & #56 withinthis CRM.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/21/09):78 Thomas NagleGPCPage: GenPara: Add newparagraph(20.3.1.1) thatdescribes theOCXCRationale: Correct parameters.Comment: There is no document identifying therequirements redundantly repeated in200/705/800 documents.From:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Duplicate of the original comment #104made by GPA in the IS-GPS-200 CRM.Concurrence: Non-concurGPC rejects PO Resolution as referencedduplicate comment has not been answeredat this time, thus this comment remains ineffect. (05/21/09) 08-13-09: this is outsideof SE&I's scope and would requireadditional funding…SE&I stands by36

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesassumptionsFinal To: Provide a document of some kindrejection.regarding UEidentifying common/redundant requirements in Rationale:correlation200/705/800 so that reviewers know what thecharacteristicsPOC is intending to manage as commonused to makepseudorangeRationale: Previous comments to removemeasurementsredundancies by having 705 and 800 simply referand ato 200 have been rejected or deferred. As long asdisclaimer thatthe redundancies exist, the POC and reviewersUE usingnow have the additional burden of crosscheckingdifferent200/705/800 to make sure the redundantly statedcorrelationrequirements don’t diverge or contradict eachcharacteristicsother. Particularly in the case of Army review, themayprimary interest is 200. However, since 705 andexperience800 contain information redundant of 200 thatsmallthe Army cares about, all three documents haveadditionalto be reviewed. A document identifying theUser Rangeredundant areas would focus the Army review (aswell as other military reviewers) to the sectionsthey really care about.” There was also asimilar/related comment submitted against thebaseline 800 which was deferred. SuggestedChange: These documents should be pulled fromthe CCB agenda until the sections in all threedocuments containing redundant requirementsare identified. The document identifying theredundancies is essential in performing the reviewand providing comments. Rationale: It’s criticalthat changes to IS-GPS-200 originate in the IS-GPS-200 ICWG process, and not first initiated as part ofa change to 705 or 800. The only way to ensurethis does not happen is to modify the wording in705 and 800 to refer to 200 to the maximumextent possible. Assuming the POCs for thesedocuments understands where all theredundancies are, putting something togethershould be a relatively minor task, and would beused by reviewers to identify the sections thatshould be referring back to 200. If the POCs do37

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesnot know where all the redundancies are, theyshould not be putting forth any proposedinterface changes until they identify where all theredundancies are.79 M DashPage: Gen CPO Resolution: RejectGPAPara:Comment: There is no document identifying therequirements redundantly repeated in200/705/800 documents.From:Final To: Provide a document of some kindidentifying common/redundant requirements in200/705/800 so that reviewers know what thePOC is intending to manage as common Rationale:Previous comments to remove redundancies byhaving 705 and 800 simply refer to 200 have beenrejected or deferred. As long as the redundanciesexist, the POC and reviewers now have theadditional burden of crosschecking 200/705/800to make sure the redundantly statedrequirements don’t diverge or contradict eachother. Particularly in the case of Army review, theprimary interest is 200. However, since 705 and800 contain information redundant of 200 thatthe Army cares about, all three documents haveto be reviewed. A document identifying theredundant areas would focus the Army review (aswell as other military reviewers) to the sectionsthey really care about.” There was also asimilar/related comment submitted against thebaseline 800 which was deferred.Rationale: Duplicate of the original comment #78made by GPC.Concurrence: Non-concurRationale:GPC rejects PO Resolution as referencedduplicate comment has not been answeredat this time, thus this comment remains ineffect. (05/21/09) 08-13-09: this is outsideof SE&I's scope and would requireadditional funding…SE&I stands byrejection.0 GPA Page:Para:CRationale: There was also a similar/relatedcomment submitted against the baseline 800which was deferred.Comment:From:PO Resolution: RejectRationale:GPC rejects PO Resolution as referencedduplicate comment has not been answeredat this time, thus this comment remains ineffect. (05/21/09) 08-13-09: this is outside38

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFinal To: These documents should be pulled from Concurrence: Non-concurof SE&I's scope and would requirethe CCB agenda until the sections in all threeadditional funding…SE&I stands bydocuments containing redundant requirements Rationale:rejection.are identified. The document identifying theredundancies is essential in performing the reviewand providing comments.80 KawakamiGPDPage: 35aPara: 6.3.4CRationale: It’s critical that changes to IS-GPS-200originate in the IS-GPS-200 ICWG process, and notfirst initiated as part of a change to 705 or 800.The only way to ensure this does not happen is tomodify the wording in 705 and 800 to refer to 200to the maximum extent possible. Assuming thePOCs for these documents understands where allthe redundancies are, putting something togethershould be a relatively minor task, and would beused by reviewers to identify the sections thatshould be referring back to 200. If the POCs donot know where all the redundancies are, theyshould not be putting forth any proposedinterface changes until they identify where all theredundancies are.Comment: The description of the additional PRNsequences is not consistent between IS-GPS-200,IS-GPS-705 and IS-GPS-800. When the previousversion of IS-GPS-800 was approved, the ICCassured that all three of the public ISs wouldcontain the same description. The ICC alsodecided that the additional PRN values would notbe moved to a separate document and that theISs would not point to a common document thatwould contain the official description of theadditional PRN sequences.PO Resolution: DeferRationale: Duplicate of comment #59Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(04/30/09) 11/19/08: Comment is in work.Action to Mike Munoz. Will remain open.20-aug-09: the resolution resides within AI#16 10-sept-09: this is also based on thePRN expansion AI for Karl Kovach. ChangedPO resolution to deferFrom: 6.3.4 Additional PRN Sequences. Among allunique L5-code sequences that could begenerated using different initial states asdescribed in Section 3.2.1.1, 74 sequences (37 I5and 37 Q5) are selected and assigned in Table 3-I.39

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesAn additional 346 sequences (173 I5 and 173 Q5)are selected and assigned with PRN numbers inthe below Table 6-II. Any assignment of an L5 PRNnumber and its code sequence for any additionalSV and/or other L5 signal applications, such asSatellite Based Augmentation System (SBAS)satellite signals, will be selected from thesequences of Table 6-II.Final To: Requested Change: decide whichdescription will be used and then consistently useit. Additionally, recommend consultation with M.Dash (GPA) for discussions from previous CCB andICWG meetings pertaining to additional PRNsequences.81 KawakamiGPDPage: 93Para: 20.3.3.5CRationale:Comment: Confirm with John Berg (Aerospace)that ECEF to ECI equations, values anddescriptions are correct and reflect what will beimplemented by GPSIII and OCX. There is ongoingwork within multiple groups that will requireCNAV and MNAV messages to be updated toreflect the international standards regarding thereference frame, polar motion, etc.From:Final To: Requested Change:PO Resolution: DeferRationale: Commenter must provide information thatproves that the equations are incorrect and provideWas/Is suggested language. If there is concern, thena separate meeting (e.g. – TIM) should be created toaddress concern.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:04/30/09: PO Resolution Update - Accept.The ICC POC clarified the comment with theoriginator and the Reviewer’s Concurrence:Concur (04/30/09) 06-sept-09: ICCconfirmed that there will be new ECEF toECI equations placed into the document,however those equations will not be readyto be placed into the document untilDecember. ICC moves to Defer thecomment.82 CharltonMITREPage: 3Para: 2.2Rationale:A Comment: line 2From:Final To: Suggested Change: “Navigation”capitalized here while it was not in para 2.1.Make consistent.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC confirmed that"navigation" was capitalized. ICC also notedthat it was capitalized in the previousrevision.40

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: consistency83 CharltonPage: 6 A Comment: line 1PO Resolution: Accept(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updated line 5MITREPara: 3.1in the paragraph for consistency.From: 3.1 Interface Definition.Rationale:Final To: Suggested Change: “Navigation”capitalized here while it was not in para 2.1.Make consistent.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:84 CharltonMITREPage: 8Para: 3.2.1.1Rationale: consistencyA Comment: line 2From:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC confirmed thatthe admin change in in document.85 CharltonMITREPage: 8Para: 3.2.1.1Final To: Suggested Change: eliminate extra spacefollowing comma after “length”Rationale: grammarA Comment: line 7From:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC confirmed thatthe admin change in in document.86 CharltonMITREPage: 9Para: 3.2.1.2AFinal To: Suggested Change: use either “SV-ID” or“SV ID” throughout documentRationale: consistencyComment: line 2 Suggested Change: Here“navigation” is spelled out whereas it isabbreviated as “NAV” in para 3.2.1. Makeconsistent.From: navigationFinal To: NAVConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: NAV refers to the message.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC confirmed thatthe general reference for navigation signalsare lower case.87 CharltonMITREPage: 12Para: 3.3.1.1ARationale: consistencyComment: line 1 Suggested Change: Add theword “the” between “within” and “24 MHz.”Should read “… signal contained with the 24 MHzPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09)41

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesband …”Concurrence: ConcurFrom: 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan. The L5 signal iscontained within a 24 MHz band centered about Rationale:the L5 nominal frequency. The carrier frequenciesfor the L1, L2 and L5 signals shall be coherentlyderived from a common frequency source withinthe SV. The nominal frequency of this source -- asit appears to an observer on the ground -- is 10.23MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock rates --as they would appear to an observer located inthe SV -- are offset to compensate for relativisticeffects. The clock rates are offset by Δ f/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the I5 andQ5-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δ f= -4.5674E-3 Hz. This is equal to 10.22999999543MHz. The nominal carrier frequency (f0) -- as itappears to an observer on the ground – shall be1176.45 MHz, or 115 times 10.23 MHz.Final To: Suggested Change: Add the word “the”between “within” and “24 MHz.” Should read “…signal contained with the 24 MHz band …”88 CharltonMITREPage: 13Para: 3.3.1.5Rationale: readabilityA Comment: line 4From: 3.3.1.5 Phase Quadrature. ..."zero phaseangle",Final To: Suggested Change: Move comma toinside closing quotation markPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.89 CharltonMITREPage: 13Para: 3.3.1.6Rationale: grammarA Comment: line 1From: 3.3.1.6 Signal Power Levels. The SV shallprovide I5 and Q5 navigation signal strength atend-of-life (EOL), worst-case in order to meet thePO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Will provide alternative language.Concurrence: Concur(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.42

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesminimum levels…Rationale:Final To: Change wording to “The SV shall provideworst-case I5 and Q5 navigation signal strength atEOL in order to meet the minimum levels …”90 CharltonMITRE91 CharltonMITREPage: 14Para: Table 3-IVPage: 15Para: 3.3.1.6.1AARationale: awkward wording, readabilityComment: Table 3-IVFrom: …Final To: Suggested Change: Move table so that itappears after first mention in text, not before.Rationale: Here Table 3-IV appears before firstmention in para 3.3.1.6.1 on page 15.Comment: lineFrom: 3.3.1.6.1PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Similar charts/tables are grouped together.Will make changes if the charts/tables are notgrouped. Low priority.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Will provide alternative language.(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: Moved table to endof section 3.3.1.6.1. updated TOC as well(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument. 10/11/09: please refer tocomment #66 of this CRM for resolution.Final To: Suggested Change: Change wording to“The SV shall provide worst-case I5 and Q5navigation signal strength at EOL in order to meetthe SSV minimum levels …”Concurrence: ConcurRationale:92 CharltonMITREPage: 15Para: 3.3.1.7Rationale: awkward wording, readabilityA Comment: line 3From: 3.3.1.7 Equipment Group Delay. ... the userssince it is included in the clock correctionparameters relayed in the NAV data, and istherefore accounted for by the user computationsof system time (reference paragraphs 20.3.3.2.3,20.3.3.3.2.3 and 20.3.3.3.2.4).PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.Final To: Suggested Change: delete “the” before“users”Rationale: readability43

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes93 CharltonPage: 15 A Comment: line 2 Suggested change: put in a ")" PO Resolution: Reject(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC left documentMITREPara: 3.3.1.7.2as it stands. ")" after Q5 refers to the (i.e. …From: N/ARationale:Final To: "("Concurrence: Concur94 CharltonMITREPage: 16Para: 3.3.1.7.3Rationale: grammarA Comment: line 1From: 3.3.1.7.3Rationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: The current language is a placeholder only.(05/05/09)95 CharltonMITREPage: 16Para: 3.3.1.7.3Final To: Suggested Change: replace “between theradiated” with “for the radiated”Rationale: readabilityA Comment: line 3From: 3.3.1.7.3Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Correct as is.(05/05/09)Final To: Suggested Change: use “Space Vehicle”or “Space Segment” instead of currently used“Space”Concurrence: ConcurRationale:96 CharltonMITRE97 CharltonMITREPage: 16Para: 3.3.1.7.3Page: 16Para: 3.3.2AARationale: readabilityComment: line 3 Suggested Change: replace“TBDs” with actual data if availableFrom: TBDsFinal To: actual dataRationale: completenessComment: line 1 Suggested Change: Delete“extra” hyphen after I5.From: I5-Final To: I5-codesPO Resolution: DeferRationale: TBDs have not been resolved.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09)(05/05/09) Will add “code” after hyphen.06-sept-09: added codes after hyphen.44

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: consistency – Previously hyphen onlyused when followed by the word “code.”98 CharltonPage: 16 AComment: line 5 Suggested Change: delete the PO Resolution: Accept(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updatedMITREPara: 3.3.2word “symbols”document.Rationale:From: "symbols"Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: N/A99 CharltonMITREPage: 9Para: 3.2.2ARationale: readability – word “symbols” isredundant since the acronym “sps” stands forsymbols per secondComment: line 2 Suggested Change: replace“coded” and “coder” with more standardized“encoded” and “encoder”Rationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: coder and codedConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: “encoded” and “encoder”Rationale:100 CharltonMITREPage: 23Para: 3.3.3.1.1ARationale: consistency - “Encoded” and “encoder”are the more commonly used terms. “Encoded”and “encoder” are used in paragraphs 3.3.2 and3.3.3.1.Comment: line 10 Suggested Change: replace“contains” with “contain”From: ...The navigation message is FEC encoded ina continuous process independent of messageboundaries (i.e. at the beginning of each newmessage, the encoder registers illustrated inFigure 3-7 contains the last six bits of the previousmessage).PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.Final To: contain101 CharltonMITREPage: 33Para: 6.1ARationale: grammarComment: terms Suggested Change: define “dBi”either in acronyms or at first use in documentPO Resolution: AcceptAccept 05/01/09 Will add to the Acronymlist Concur (05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC45

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: These are standard engineering terms. updated document with new acronym.From: N/AConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: dBi Decibels with respect to isotropicantennaRationale:102 CharltonMITRE103 CharltonMITRE104 CharltonMITRE105 CharltonMITREPage: 34Para: 6.1Page: 35Para: 6.2.2.2.1Page: 35Para: 6.2.2.2.2Page: 35Para: 6.2.2.2.3AAAARationale: consistency – “dBW” is defined, but“dBi” is notComment: line 3 Suggested Change: removeextraneous blank lineFrom: ReturnFinal To: n/aRationale: consistencyComment: line 1 Suggested Change: add hyphento specification title – should read “IS-GPS-200”From: N/AFinal To: -Rationale: consistencyComment: line 1 Suggested Change: eliminateextra space following the period after “SVs”From: N/AFinal To: deleted " "Rationale: grammarComment: line 1 Suggested Change: add periodat end of lineFrom: n/aFinal To: added "."PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument. It was noted that comment#154 of this CRM deleted the entiresentence.(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.46

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: grammar106 CharltonPage: 35 APO Resolution: AcceptMITREPara: 6.2.2.2.6Comment: line 1 Suggested Change: add theword “planned” – should read “This planned blockof operational SVs will …”Rationale:(05/05/09) 06-sept-09: ICC updateddocument per comment #169 comment.From: The block of operational planned…Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: This planned block of operational SVsRationale:107 CharltonMITREPage: 36Para: 6.3.1 -6.3.2ARationale: readabilityComment: none Suggested Change: removeextraneous “white space” at bottom of page 36and fix crowding at top of page 37PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: section breakConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: N/ARationale:108 CharltonMITREPage: 39Para: noneARationale: format/readabilityComment: blank page Suggested Change:remove blank page or mark as “intentionally leftblank”PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Blank page does not appear for ICC POC.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC confirmedthere was no blank page when viewing thedoc in "final" state.From: blank pageConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: N/ARationale:109 CharltonMITRE110 CharltonMITREPage: 46Para: 10.1Page: 46-51Para: App 10AARationale: format/consistencyComment: line 2 Suggested Change: put periodinside closing quotation markFrom: N/A and "GPS JPO"Final To: "." and "GPSW"Rationale: grammarComment: Figure titles all bumped to followingpages. Suggested Change: correct formattingerror to insure figure titles appear belowPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: ICC POC does not see these(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument. Also confirmed there was anadditional change from "GPS JPO" to"GPSW" in the section.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC confirmed thatthe figures titles will be at the bottom ofeach figure…there are 2 of them.47

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesrespective figuresissues.05/05/09: Accept with comment. The ICC POCwill ensure the final PDF version does not contain theFrom:error.Final To: Suggested Change: correct formattingerror to insure figure titles appear belowrespective figuresConcurrence: ConcurRationale:111 CharltonMITREPage: 49Para: noneARationale: readabilityComment: blank page Suggested Change:remove blank page or mark as “intentionally leftblank”PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Blank page does not appear for ICC POC.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC confirmedthere was no blank page when viewing thedoc in "final" state.From:Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: Suggested Change: remove blank pageor mark as “intentionally left blank”Rationale:112 CharltonMITREPage: 65Para:20.3.3.1.1ARationale: format/consistencyComment: line 3 Suggested Change: add commaand change “provide” to “provides” – should read“Message type 10, in conjunction with messagetype 11, provides …”From: …type10 …type 11, provideFinal To: …type10, …type 11, providesPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.113 CharltonMITRE114 CharltonMITREPage: 65Para:20.3.3.1.1Page: 65Para:AARationale: readabilityComment: line 4 Suggested Change: change“consist” to “consists”From: consistFinal To: consistsRationale: readabilityComment: line 17 (3rd para, line 2) “toe” usedhere, but not defined until page 72 – should bePO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: Accept(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.48

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes20.3.3.1.1 defined at first useRationale:From: N/AConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: (toe =Ephemeris data reference time ofweek)Rationale:115 CharltonMITRE116 CharltonMITREPage: 65Para:20.3.3.1.1Page: 65Para:20.3.3.1.1ARationale: “toe” used here, but not defined untilpage 72 – should be defined at first useComment: line 17 (3rd para, line 2) SuggestedChange: change “assure” to “insure”From: assureFinal To: insureRationale: word usageA Comment: para 5, line 4From:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Correct as is.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC concurred withoriginal resolution.117 CharltonMITREPage: 71Para: noneAFinal To: Suggested Change: change “squared” to“square”Rationale: word usage/readabilityComment: blank pageFrom:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Blank page does not appear for ICC POC.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC concurred withoriginal resolution.118 CharltonMITREPage: 73Para: noneAFinal To: Suggested Change: remove blank pageor mark as “intentionally left blank”Rationale: format/consistencyComment: blank pageFrom:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Blank page does not appear for ICC POC.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC concurred withoriginal resolution.Final To: Suggested Change: remove blank pageor mark as “intentionally left blank”Concurrence: Concur49

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale:Rationale: format/consistency119 CharltonAPO Resolution: AcceptMITREPage: 76Para:20.3.3.2.1Comment: para 2, line 3 Suggested Change:reword as “ … any message of type 30 to 39 willprovide …”Rationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: any message type 30’s (i.e. 30-39)Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: any message of type 30 to 39Rationale:120 CharltonMITRE121 CharltonMITRE122 CharltonMITRE123 CharltonMITREPage: 81Para:20.3.3.3.1.1Page: 81Para:20.3.3.3.1.2Page: 83Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.1Page: 83Para:AAAARationale: readabilityComment: line 3 Suggested Change: change “bitlength” to “bit lengths”From: bit lengthFinal To: bit lengthsRationale: consistency with wording in paragraph20.3.3.3.1.3 and elsewhereComment: line 4 Suggested Change: change “bitlength” to “bit lengths”From: bit lengthFinal To: bit lengthsRationale: consistency with wording in paragraph20.3.3.3.1.3 and elsewhereComment: 2nd para Suggested Change: deletecomma after “Where”From: ","Final To: N/ARationale: readabilityComment: 3rd para Suggested Change: deletecomma after “where”PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: Accept(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.50

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes20.3.3.3.1.2.1Rationale:From: ","Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: N/ARationale:Rationale: readability124 CharltonAComment: line 1 Suggested Change: remove PO Resolution: AcceptMITREhyphen from “L1-C/A”125 CharltonMITRE126 CharltonMITREPage: 84Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.2Page: 84Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.2Page: 85Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.3AAFrom: L1-C/AFinal To: L1 C/ARationale: consistency - no hyphen used in similarwording elsewhere in documentComment: next to last line Suggested Change:change period at end of line to a commaFrom: "."Final To: ","Rationale: grammarComment: inconsistent definition of symbols inequationsFrom:Final To: Suggested Change: Either definesymbols for first equation, or tie two equationstogether with an “and” and define symbols ascurrently done. Remove period at end of linedefining speed of light. Replace period at end ofsect to last line with a comma. Add period at endof last line.Rationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: Correct as is.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC concurred withoriginal resolution.127 CharltonMITREPage: 85Para:Rationale: consistency, readability and grammarA Comment: line 3 Suggested Change: define Tiono PO Resolution: Accept (05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.51

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes20.3.3.3.1.3 From: N/ARationale:128 CharltonMITRE129 CharltonMITREPage: 86Para: nonePage: 87Para:20.3.3.3.1.4AAFinal To: (Tiono=Ionospheric correctionparameter)Rationale: This quantity is not defined anywherein this document and should be defined at firstuse.Comment: extraneous white space on pageSuggested Change: delete extra white spaceFrom: " "Final To: N/ARationale: formatComment: figure title bumped to next pageFrom: " "Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.Final To: N/AConcurrence: Concur130 CharltonMITRE131 CharltonMITREPage: 88Para:20.3.3.4.5Page: 90Para: noneAARationale: formatComment: “Midi” not definedFrom:Final To: Suggested Change: define “Midi” eitherin acronym list or at first use in documentRationale: readabilityComment: extraneous white space on pageSuggested Change: delete extra white spaceFrom: " "Final To: N/ARationale: formatRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC agrees withprinciple, however, in the interest of time itis not prudent to place it in the documentnow. This item will be addressed when thedocument goes into DOORS, i.e. nextrevision.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.52

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes132 CharltonAComment: line 1 Suggested Change: make PO Resolution: AcceptMITRE“types” singular or change “contains” to “contain”133 CharltonMITRE134 CharltonMITRE135 CharltonMITRE136 CharltonMITREPage: 90Para:20.3.3.4.6.1Page: 90Para:20.3.3.4.6.1Page: 90Para:20.3.3.4.6.1Page: 93Para:20.3.3.5.1Page: 98Para:20.3.3.6.2AAAAFrom: containsFinal To: containRationale: grammar/readabilityComment: line 2 Suggested Change: delete “of”in “of 31”From: ofFinal To: N/ARationale: readabilityComment: line 5 Suggested Change: change“range” to “ranges”From: rangeFinal To: rangesRationale: consistency with rest of documentComment: line 4 Suggested Change: change“range” to “ranges”From: rangeFinal To: rangesRationale: consistency with rest of documentComment: line 4 Suggested Change: change“using” to “to use”From: usingFinal To: to use53Rationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: readability137 CharltonAComment: “tutc” not defined Suggested Change: PO Resolution: RejectMITREdefine “tutc” in acronyms or at first usePage: 98Para:20.3.3.6.2From: N/ARationale: As stated in the sentence the definition oftUTC can be found in IS-GPS-200.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.138 CharltonMITRE139 CharltonMITREPage: 100Para: 20.3.3.7Page: 100Para:20.3.3.7.1AAFinal To: (tUTC= Coordinated Universal Timedefined by the USNO)Rationale: readabilityComment: line 2 Suggested Change: change“types 34” to “type 34”From: typesFinal To: typeRationale: readabilityComment: 2nd para, line 4 Suggested Change:change “range” to “ranges” to be consistent withusage elsewhere in documentConcurrence:Rationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: rangeConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: rangesRationale:140 CharltonMITRE141 CharltonMITREPage: 100Para:20.3.3.7.2Page: 100Para:20.3.3.7.2AARationale: consistencyComment: line 4 Suggested Change: change“enables” to “enable”From: enablesFinal To: enableRationale: readabilityComment: line 7 Suggested Change: change“data pair” to “data pairs”From: Users must utilize CDC and EDC data pair ofPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument…also put in "the" twice.54

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notessame top-D and of same tOD.Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: Users must utilize CDC and EDC datapairs of the same top-D and of the same tOD.Rationale:142 CharltonMITRE143 CharltonMITRE144 CharltonMITREPage: 100Para:20.3.3.7.2Page: 101Para: nonePage: 103Para: noneAAARationale: readabilityComment: line 7 Suggested Change: define “top-D” here at first useFrom: N/AFinal To: (top-D =DC data predict time of week)Rationale: acronym should be defined at first use– currently not defined until next paragraphComment: figure title bumped to next pageFrom:Final To: Suggested Change: change format sofigure title appears below respective figureRationale: formatComment: extraneous white space on pageSuggested Change: delete extraneous whitespace on pagePO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: A/CRationale: ICC POC does not have the issueConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.05/05/09: Accept with comment. The ICCPOC will ensure the final PDF version doesnot contain the error. Concur (05/05/09)09-sept-09: ICC notes this issue will goaway when the document goes into DOORS,at the next revision.(05/05/09) 09-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: " "Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: N/ARationale:145 CharltonMITREPage: 103Para:20.3.3.7.3ARationale: formatComment: definition of equation symbolsFrom:Final To: Suggested Change: define all equationsymbols here if not defined elsewherePO Resolution: RejectRationale: Not all symbols need to be defined at firstuse.Concurrence: Concur05/01/09: The symbols are defined in Table20-V and Table 20-X.Concur (05/05/09) ) 09-sept-09: ICCagreed with resolution.55

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesRationale: all symbols should be defined in Rationale:acronyms or at point of first use in document146 CharltonPage: 104 APO Resolution: AcceptMITREPara: noneComment: extraneous white space on pageSuggested Change: delete extraneous whitespace on pageRationale:(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: " "Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: N/ARationale:147 CharltonMITRE148 CharltonMITRE149 CharltonMITREPage: 106Para:20.3.3.7.5Page: 107Para:20.3.3.8.1Page: 107Para:20.3.3.8.1AAARationale: formatComment: line 4 Suggested Change: change“has” to “have”From: hasFinal To: haveRationale: readabilityComment: line 3 Suggested Change: hyphenate“GPS like” to read “GPS-like”From: GPS likeFinal To: GPS-likeRationale: readabilityComment: line 10 Suggested Change: change toread “… scale factors … the ranges …” aselsewhere in documentPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.From: rangeConcurrence: ConcurFinal To: rangesRationale:150 Tom ThedeGPLPage: 6Para: Fig 3-1SRationale: consistencyComment: Need to delete all references to Block IISVsPO Resolution: AcceptRationale: The change will be made upon(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.56

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFrom: Block II/IIAconfirmation that all Block II satellites are in disposalorbits without any chance of becoming reactivated.Final To: Block IIThis change will be downgraded to Administrativesince it does not change the technical baseline.Rationale: Block II characteristics are irrelevant tothis documentConcurrence: Concur151 Tom ThedeGPL152 Tom ThedeGPL153 Tom ThedeGPLPage: 33Para: 6.1Page: 34Para: 6.1Page: 35Para: 6.2.2.2AASComment: Missing acronyms Suggested Change:Add “GPSW” to list of acronymsFrom:Final To: GPSWGlobal Positioning Systems WingRationale: Acronym used in document and notlistedComment: Missing acronyms Suggested Change:Add “SSV” to list of acronymsFrom:Final To: SSVSpace Service VolumeRationale: Acronym used in document and notlistedComment: Block IIFrom: N/AFinal To: N/ARationale: Block II characteristics are irrelevant tothis documentRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: ConcurConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: ConcurConcurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: The change will be made uponconfirmation that all Block II satellites are in disposalorbits without any chance of becoming reactivated.This change will be downgraded to Administrativesince it does not change the technical baseline.Concurrence: Concur(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.154 Tom ThedeGPLPage: 35Para: 6.2.2.2.1SComment: Need to delete all references to Block IISVs Suggested Change: Change second sentenceRationale:PO Resolution: Accept(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.57

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesto read, “These satellites are not operational andhave all been placed in disposal orbits.”155 Martin/Wang/Yi/BakemanAerospacePage: 10Para: 3.3.1.2SFrom: 6.2.2.2.1 Block II SVs. See paragraph6.2.2.2.2 of IS-GPS-200. These satellites do notbroadcast the L5 signal.Final To: N/ARationale: Block II characteristics are irrelevant tothis documentComment:From: Correlation loss is defined as the differencebetween the signal power received in thebandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 and the signal powerrecovered in an ideal correlation receiver of thesame bandwidth which ideally performs losslesscorrelation using an exact replica of the waveformwith an ideal sharp-cutoff whose bandwidthcorresponds to that in 3.3.1.1, and whose phase islinear over that bandwidth.Final To: Is: (Revert to original language)Rationale: The change will be made uponconfirmation that all Block II satellites are in disposalorbits without any chance of becoming reactivated.This change will be downgraded to Administrativesince it does not change the technical baseline.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: RejectRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/13/09) 10-sept-09: refer to MikeDeelo's power point presentation. Updateddoc. Per presentation. There is proposedwording from the corr. Loss tiger team thathas been vetted.156 Martin/Wang/YiAerospacePage: 12Para: 3.3.1.6.1SRationale: CRM disposition: section wording toremain open. Awaiting output of working groupfor wording.Comment:From: Table 3-IV. Space Service Volume (SSV)Received Minimum RF Signal Strength for GPS IIISatellites over the Bandwidth Specified in 3.3.1.1Final To: Is: Table 3-IV. Space Service VolumeMinimum Received L5 Signal Power - GEO BasedAntennasPO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Conflicting comments; need to resolve atICWG.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/13/09) Accept. Further clarification ofthe orbit is required to conform withcurrent GPS space segment requirements.10-sept-09: ICC included the reference tothe GEO Based antennasRationale: CRM disposition: minimum power58

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Noteslevels apply to GEO orbits.157 Martin/Wang/YiPage: 14 SComment:PO Resolution: RejectAerospacePara: 3.3.1.7.3From: The group delay differential between theradiated L5 signal with respect to the EarthCoverage signal for users of the Space ServiceVolume is given by the Block III Space Contractor(TBD). The details are provided in TBD.Final To: Is: (Remove)Rationale: Currently this is a placeholder until the TBDhas been resolved.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/13/09) Accept. Consistency in neededamong the civil specs.158 Martin/Wang/YiAerospacePage: 14Para: 3.3.1.9SRationale: CRM disposition: section should beremoved from this document.Comment:From: The transmitted signal shall be right-handcircularly polarized (RHCP). For the angular rangeof ±14.3 degrees from boresight, L5 ellipticity shallbe no worse than 2.4 dB. For Block IIIA theangular range of ±13.8 degrees from nadir, L5ellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4 dB.Final To: Is: The transmitted signal shall be righthandcircularly polarized (RHCP). For the angularrange of ±14.3 degrees from boresight, L5ellipticity shall be no worse than 2.4 dB. For BlockIIIA the angular range of ±13.8 degrees (pluspointing error) from nadir, L5 ellipticity shall be noworse than 2.4 dB. Pointing error is described inparagraph 3.2.8.1.1.3 of SS-SS-800.PO Resolution: RejectRationale: The contractor has to meet therequirement inclusive of any pointing errorintroduced by their design.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/13/09) Accept159 C. ChuiAerospacePage: 10Para: 3.3.1.2SRationale: ClairityComment: (1) In the definition of correction loss,it states that the receiver “ideally performslossless correlation”. If that is the case, why a 0.4dB loss is allocated to the correlation receiver? (2)It appears that there are words missing ormisplaced in the 4 lines that define CorrelationLoss Suggested Change: The vehicle payloadPO Resolution: A/CRationale: Language is currently being reworked.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:05/01/09: Concur to defer the resolution tothe next ICWG. 10-sept-09: ICC has placedthe language per the corr. Loss tiger team.10/01/09: This section was under rigourousreview and the ultimately the consensus ofthe ICWG community was to revert towording similar to the IS-GPS-800.59

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notescorrelation loss considered here is the totalallowable, associated with the L1 and L2 30.69MHz bandwidth RF signals transmitted by thepayload, for L1P(Y), L2 P(Y), CA and L2C, due tofiltering in the payload (e.g., multiplexers), plus alimited allowance (approximately 0.2 dB) for anyloss due to unexpected signal distortion caused byother payload electronics. This correlation losscan be demonstrated by comparing the codecorrelation powers from the payload signal withthose from a linear unfiltered signal generatorwhich emulates the payload signal formation andis free of correlation that is not an expected resultof signal combining. This comparison requiresequal RF power in a 30.69 MHz bandwidth fromboth the payload and waveform generator, andthe use of a correlating receiver with anapproximate ideal filter. The difference incorrelation power from this comparison is thedefined payload correlation loss.The total allowable correlation loss, which is afunction of signal and receiver bandwidth, shallbe:For L5: 0.6 dB (With a 30.69 MHz BW Rcvr)0.4 dB (With a 24 MHz BW Rcvr)From: 3.3.1.2 Correlation Loss. Correlation loss isdefined as the difference between the SV powerreceived in a 24 MHz bandwidth and the signalpower recovered in an ideal correlation receiver.The worst case correlation loss occurs when the I5carrier is modulated by the sum of the I5-codeand the NAV data stream. For this case, thecorrelation loss apportionment shall be as follows:1. SV modulation and filter imperfections: 0.6 dB2. Ideal UE receiver waveform distortion (due to24 MHz filter): 0.4 dBFinal To: Correlation loss is defined as thedifference between the SV power received in the60

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesbandwidth defined in 3.3.1.1 (excluding signalcombining loss) and the signal power recovered inan ideal correlation receiver of the samebandwidth using an exact replica of the waveformwithin an ideal sharp-cutoff filter bandwidthcentered at L5, whose bandwidth corresponds tothat specified in 3.3.1.1 and whose phase is linearover that bandwidth. The correlation lossapportionment due to SV modulation and filteringimperfections shall be 0.6 dB maximum.160 C. ChuiAerospacePage: 12Para: Table 3-IIICRationale: Solve the problems stated in Comments(1) and (2)Comment: The Block IIIA I5 and Q5 powers givenin Table 3-III agree with the numbers given inTable 3-XI of SS-SS-800C numerically. However,the received powers listed in Table 3-XI of SS-SS-800C are “effective received signal powers” whichare “referenced to a receiver whose correlationoutputs are calibrated against an RF signalwithout combining loss”. To approve SS-SS-800Clast August, an agreement was reached at thattime that the next update of IS-GPS-705 wouldprovide a detailed definition of the referencereceiver, which is not provided in the currentupdate. Suggested Change: Based on the latestinput, it appears that the L5 signals will not begenerated using a majority combining scheme.The need to use a reference receiver to define thereceived L5 signal powers requires a discussionand resolution by the L5 ICWG and Space SegmentTeam.From:PO Resolution: RejectRationale: ICC POC is unaware of any agreements.Please provide details and resubmit.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:04/28/09: Accept with comment. Thereference for the minimum powerspecifications in SS-SS-800 and the IS-GPS-200 need to be consistent. 05/01/09:Accept the 04/28/09 PO resolution with thefollowing condition: Provide the definitionof the Reference Receiver and establish aclear relationship between the “effective”received powers of I5 and Q5 given in Table3-XI of SS-SS-800C and the received powersat the output of the reference receivingantenna within the bandwidth described inTable 3-III. 20-aug-09: it was decided thatthe details of the "reference receiver" willnot go in this icd, thus the comment mustbe rejected. Commenter concurs withresolution. This also inline with the 200CRM resolution.ICC to continue to workwith B. Chiu to collaborate with LM inattaining his needed info.Final To:Rationale: Make sure the -157 dBW given in IS-61

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesGPS-705 is consistent with the intent andcapability of SS-SS-800C.161 C. ChuiPO Resolution: RejectAerospace162 C. ChuiAerospacePage: 12Para: Table 3-IVPage: GeneralPara: GeneralC Comment: The I5 and Q5 powers given in Table 3-IV agree with the numbers given in Table 3-XII ofSS-SS-800C numerically. However, the receivedpowers listed in Table 3-XII of SS-SS-800C are“effective received signal powers” which are“referenced to a receiver whose correlationoutputs are calibrated against an RF signalwithout combining loss”. Suggested Change:“Suggested Change” stated in Comment No. 2applies.CFrom:Final To:Rationale: See Comment No. 6Comment: To approve SS-SS-800C last August, anagreement was reached that the next IS-GPS-705update would provide a bandpass characteristicsof the antenna coupler used by the SVs forshaping the transmitted power spectral density ofL5. Such bandpass specification is not includedhere.From:Final To: Suggested Change: Add the SVfilter/bandpass specification that will incur nomore than 0.6 dB loss due to waveform distortionintroduced by the filtering.Rationale: User equipment developers need suchspecifications to optimize the RF designs and62Rationale: Need to specify comment #2 and #6.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: ICC POC is unaware of any agreements.Please provide details and resubmit.1/05/10: 0.6 dB is now in the "correlation loss"section.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:04/28/09: Accept with comment. Thereference for the minimum powerspecifications in SS-SS-800 and the IS-GPS-200 need to be consistent. 05/01/09:Accept the 04/28/09 PO resolution with thefollowing condition: Provide the definitionof the Reference Receiver and establish aclear relationship between the “effective”received powers of I5 and Q5 given in Table3-XII of SS-SS-800C and the received powersat the output of the reference receivingantenna within the bandwidth described inTable 3-IV. 20-aug-09: it was decided thatthe details of the "reference receiver" willnot go in this icd, thus the comment mustbe rejected. Commenter concurs withresolution. This also inline with the 200CRM resolution.ICC to continue to workwith B. Chiu to collaborate with LM inattaining his needed info.04/28/09: Defer. Commenter wantedflatness and phase linearity requirementsadded to interface document. Will forwardto Space IPT for final resolution. GPSW hasprovided the current 3 MUE carddevelopment teams the GPS IIF and IIR-Mfilter data to allow them to optimize theirdesign and determine the additionalwaveform distortion and additionalcorrelation loss caused by the MUE cardfrontend. Following is copied from avendor’s letter that requested for triplexercharacteristics: “… actual triplexer outputdata …This will be used in our cascadedfilter analysis of the space, channel loss, andreceiver components to finalize the errorbudgets for CDR for implementation loss

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesverify the TRD performance requirements.and for pseudorange bias” The Commenteraccepts “Defer” as stated in the 04/28/09PO resolution under the condition that thePO will not accept a negative Space IPT’sresolution unless the GPSW is willing toaccept the risks created by not adding thefiltering specification in this ICD. 20-aug-09:this is being worked by Rom and Bob Chiu,what kind of information is proprietary. thisis an ongoing action. an AI has beenassigned to Rom--AI #53. 10-sept-09:Action #53 is still open. comment isdeferred.10/01/09: Changed to reject. Notappropriate for an interface document. Willprovide information Mr. Chui needsdirectly. Awaiting concurrance from C. Chui.163 Rhonda SlatteryPage: General APO Resolution: RejectAerospacePara: General164 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: Fig 3-1SComment: Why are there so many changes wherethe language shows up as French or Portugeseunder track changes?From:Final To: Suggested Change: Figure out whatyou’re doing that’s causing this and either stopdoing it or accept changes that are irreleventRationale: Confusion among reviewersComment: Figure should be updated to includeeither GPS III or IIIA SVs, with future left in for SVsnot defined in the ICDRationale: This is how the MS Word document wasreceived from the previous ICC.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:05/05/09: Accept with comment. Thecommenter should double-check that theyare reviewing the latest draft version.Latest version does not appear to haveforeign language issues on the ICC POC’scomputer. 13-Aug-09: ICC has confirmedthis issue is present with this document aswell as others he has worked on. ICC will,however, will reject updating thedocument since we will place it in DOORSafter this revision.25-aug-09\:ICC need to update doc. 10-sept-09: ICC updated figure to includeBlock III reference and future SVsFrom:Final To: Suggested Change:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:Rationale: If the SV is defined in this update of theICD then it is not future, it deserves it’s own block165 Rhonda Slattery Page: S Comment: What is the purpose of this new IIIA PO Resolution: Reject 05/05/09: Defer. Need to verify that the63

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesAerospace Para: 3.3.1.6 paragraph? You have specific requirements forpower. What does it add to say it’s monotonically Rationale: The sentence lets the user know there willdecreasing?be no antenna nulls between the specified angles.From: 3.3.1.6 Signal Power Levels. The SV shallprovide I5 and Q5 navigation signal strength atend-of-life (EOL), worst-case in order to meet theminimum levels specified in Table 3-III. Theminimum received power is measured at theoutput of a 3 dBi linearly polarized user receivingantenna (located near ground) at worst normalorientation, when the SV is above a 5-degreeelevation angle. The received signal levels areobserved within the in-band allocation defined inparagraph 3.3.1.1. Additional related data isprovided as supporting material in paragraph6.3.1.Final To: Suggested Change: Delete or justifyConcurrence: ConcurRationale:ICWG stakeholders need to know that therewill be no antenna nulls between thespecified angles. Concurrence: I’m willingto live with it, but having a specified powerout to 26 degrees says the same thing, so itis duplicative. 20-aug-09: commenterconcurs with resolution.166 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para:3.3.1.7.1-2CRationale: Deletion of less-useful dataComment: The values of these parameters areupdated in SS-SS-800 to a tighter value.From: The group delay differential between theradiated L5 signal with respect to the EarthCoverage signal for users of the Space ServiceVolume is given by the Block III Space Contractor(TBD). The details are provided in TBD.Final To: Suggested Change: Add SS-SS-800 valuefor IIIA.PO Resolution: RejectRationale: These requirements do not exist in the SS-SS-800.Concurrence:Rationale: The requirements do exist in both the SSand CS specifications. They are the requirements forthe errors between two signals.If you don’t understand the comment,please call the commenter for clarificationbefore rejecting. 20-aug-09: PSICA workinggroup to take on action. AI #8 from the list.10-sept-09: this item is still under review.Item is deferred until ICWG.10/01/09: ICWG skateholders decided tochange the PO resolution to reject. 705 is arequirements document for IIF as well as III.167 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: 3.3.1.7.3SRationale: Consistent baseline and accurate userknowledge.Comment: Why is the space contractor for IIIATBD? Suggested Change: Remove 1st TBD orclarify where it appliesPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:10-sept-09: updated document and got ridof 1st TBD.64

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFrom: The group delay differential between the Concurrence: Concurradiated L5 signal with respect to the EarthCoverage signal for users of the Space Service Rationale:Volume is given by the Block III Space Contractor(TBD). The details are provided in TBD.Final To: The group delay differential between theradiated L5 signal with respect to the EarthCoverage signal for users of the Space Service areprovided in TBD.168 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: 3.3.1.9SRationale: The Space contractor is Lockheed, notTBDComment: Why is IIIA different from IIF? Are youleaving pointing error in IIF but not IIIA? In IS-200,all were changed to 13.8. See comments to 200.Suggested Change: See comments to 200 andmake this consistent one way or the other.From: 3.3.1.9 Signal Polarization. The transmittedsignal shall be right-hand circularly polarized(RHCP). For the angular range of ±14.3 degreesfrom boresight, L5 ellipticity shall be no worsethan 2.4 dB. Nominal values are listed in section6.3.3.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: IIF is under contract for the originallanguage.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:Don’t understand response. IIF is oncontract for IS-GPS-200 language also, butthat was changed. 10-sept-09: ICCfollowed 200 resolution. See also comment#72 from this CRM.Final To: The transmitted signal shall be right-handcircularly polarized (RHCP). For the angular rangeof ±13.8 degrees from nadir, L5 ellipticity shall beno worse than 2.4 dB. Nominal values are listed insection 6.3.3.169 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: 6.2.2.2.6SRationale: Clarity of requirement and consistencyacross the baseline.Comment: Why not reference 200 like theprevious paragraphs? Suggested Change: Eitheradd reference or copy data from 200. See alsocomments there before copying.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: as administrativeConcurrence: Concur(05/05/09) 10-sept-09: ICC updateddocument.65

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFrom: The block of operational SVs will be termed"Block III" SVs. The Block III operational SVs will Rationale:broadcast the L5 signalFinal To: See paragraph 6.2.3.2.6 of IS-GPS-200.The III operational SVs do broadcast the L5 signal.170 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: 6.3.2SRationale: Consistent definitions across ICDsComment: Need a IIIA version of this Add a IIIAversion of this or TBD placeholderFrom: N/AFinal To: A plot of a typical GPS Block III phasenoise spectral density will be added whenavailable.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: GPSIII hardware hasn’t been built yet.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:Understand your response, but you haveadded TBDs elsewhere for information thatdoesn’t exist yet. Why not add themthroughout? Or delete them elsewhere?10-sept-09: ICC added a sentence to showthat a plot will be added later.171 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: 6.3.3SRationale: Consistent vision across all SVsComment: Where is the GPS III version of this.Should it go out to space service volume angles?Suggested Change: Add IIIA version or TBDplaceholderFrom: N/AFinal To: A table of a typical GPS Block III ellipticitywill be added when available.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: GPSIII hardware hasn’t been built yet.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:05/05/09: Defer. Will need to waitUnderstand your response, but you haveadded TBDs elsewhere for information thatdoesn’t exist yet. Why not add themthroughout? Or delete them elsewhere?10-sept-0: a sentence has been added toshow that a table will be added later.172 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para: 6.3.4and Section 3Rationale: Consistency between specification andICD and complete definition of the Block IIIrequirements.C Comment: To meet the IIIA and OCX Block 1 and 2specifications, you need at least 40 broadcastPRNs. These need to be defined for the user inthis updatePO Resolution: DeferRationale: Need to determine where the 40 broadcastPRNs requirement came from.If you want to define all 63, which areneeded by a later effectivity, that’s fine too.25-aug-09: refer to AI #16 for resolution.From:Concurrence: ConcurFinal To: Suggested Change: Add 8 more PRNs toRationale: It comes from the CS 800 spec.66

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesSection 3173 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para:20.3.3.1.1.4and 20.3.3.2.4CRationale: Current definition of UDRA does notcover all the IIIA and OCX errors.Comment: Where do errors that do not fall cleanlyinto clock or ephemeris get added to UDRA (e.g.,ISC errors, and all the other components of theURE)? Suggested Change: Clarify what errors areincluded in clock and ephemeris UDRA to showusers that all errors are covered as described inthe 800 specifications.From: N/AFinal To: Text in section 20.3.3.2.4: Clock-relatedURA (URAoc) accounts for signal-in-spacecontributions to user range error that include, butare not limited to, the following: the net effect ofclock parameter and code phase error in thetransmitted signal for single-frequency users whocorrect the code phase as described in Section20.3.3.3.1.1.1, as well as the net effect of clockparameter, code phase, and intersignal correctionerror for dual-frequency L1/L2 and L1/L5 userswho correct for group delay and ionosphericeffects as described in Section 20.3.3.3.1.2.2.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale: Will forward to the space IPT forresolution.Concurrence: ConcurRationale: This is in the requirement set for OCX block1, as well as GPS III SS. We need to know this datatoday, and it’s not just a SV problem25-Aug-09: 200 POC to provide verbiageconsistent with the 200. 10-sept-09: ICChas reviewed the 200 and did not see anychanges associated with this comment. ICCwill keep this as a defer and ensure this willbe discussed at the ICWG.10/01/09: Changed to accept. Includeddefinitions in the 20.3.3.2.4 section.10/14/09: Updated this Comment's "To"language to reflect the true nature of theICWG approved change.174 Rhonda SlatteryAerospacePage:Para:20.3.3.5.1.1CRationale: Complete update for IIIA and OCXComment: Coordinate transformations in the userequipment are using the technical note 21conventions. OCX and all SVs are switching to thetechnical note 32 conventions. SuggestedChange: At least insert a note to inform users thatthis is coming. Preferably, incorporate both setsof equations along with the note and a definedswitchover notice.From: N/APO Resolution: AcceptRationale: The commenter is encouraged to presentthe coordinate transformations at the Public ICWG.Concurrence: ConcurRationale:05/05/09: Accept with comment. Willincorporate suggested change uponfinalization of technical note 32conventions. Concurrence: Non-concur.This is in the requirement set for OCX block1. Even without the technical details, thedata contained in the ICD is incorrect andneeds to be fixed. 20-aug-09: 200 ICC toprovide a note that the tech note 21 willchange. 10-sept-09: ICC has placed the 200verbiage in this document.67

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence NotesFinal To: The equations described in this sectionare based on (International Earth Rotation andReference Systems Service) IERS Technical Note21. However, these equations will be updated toa new Technical Note in the next revision.175 Chris Sedgwick2SOPSPage: 5Para: Figure 3-1SRationale:Comment: Remove references to Block II satellitesin the figure and any other reference in the IS.Last Blk II (SVN 15) disposed 6 Apr 07.From: 6.2.2.2 Operational SVs. The operationalsatellites are designated Block II, Block IIA...6.2.2.2.1 Block II SVs. See paragraph 6.2.2.2.1 ofISGPS-200. There satellites do not broadcast theL5 signal.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:The change will be made upon confirmationthat all Block II satellites are in disposalorbits without any chance of becomingreactivated. 50 SW Concur, 1 May 09. 10-sept-09: removed all references to Block IISVs.Final To: 6.2.2.2 Operational SVs. The operationalsatellites are designated Block II, Block IIA…N/A176 john buckleySE&I177 john buckleySE&IPage:Para: 3.3.1.6.1Page:Para: 3.3.1.6Rationale:S Comment: added "normal" to text to match 200document.SFrom: " "Final To: "normal"Rationale: document synchronization.Comment: see 200 for the potential change insection 3.3.1.6 with respect to the clarification tochange "power gain" to "antenna gain." there isan open action item 18From: off-axis power gainFinal To: off-axis relative power (referenced tomeak transmitted power)PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:10/14/09: this change was incorporatedduring the Commentor TIM review on7/30/09.10/14/09: this change was incorporatedduring the Commentor TIM review on8/27/09.68

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes178 john buckleySE&IPage:Para:SRationale:Comment: The definition the NAV message needsto be reviwed throughout the document. In someinstances, the "NAV" reference should be "CNAV"since we are dealing with the L5 signal. An ActionItem from the 1-Oct-09 ICWG was also generated.PO Resolution: DeferRationale:Concurrence: ConcurFrom: NAVRationale:Final To: CNAV179 john buckleySE&IPage:Para:ARationale:Comment: Various formatting changes will takeplace to properly place this document intoDOORS.PO Resolution: DeferRationale:From:Concurrence: ConcurFinal To:Rationale:180 john buckleySE&I181 john buckleySE&IPage:Para: 3.1Page:Para:20.3.3.1.1.4and 20.3.3.2.4ASRationale:Comment: added verbiage to match the ICWGoonsensus. This supports GPS III ProposalsFrom: "planned future Block III SVs"Final To: "subsequent Blocks of SVs"Rationale:Comment: After 10/01/09 ICWG discussion, thestakeholders agreed that a statement for the userto use the "upper Bound of the URA value shouldbe written in document.From: N/AFinal To: Integrity properties of the URA arespecified with respect to the upper bound valuesPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:69

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notesof the URA index (see 20.3.3.1.1)182 john buckleySE&I183 john buckleySE&I184 john buckleySE&I185 john buckleySE&IPage:Para: 6.2.2.2.2- 6.2.2.2.6Page:Para: 6.3.1Page:Para:20.3.3.1.1 and20.3.3.1.3Page:Para:20.3.3.2.1AAASRationale:Comment: Updated the section #'ing for the IS-GPS-200 document.From:Final To:Rationale:Comment: document was updated on 3/6/08 andhas been ICWG approvedFrom: "due to"Final To: "resultant of"Rationale:Comment: verfied there was a previously ICWGapproved change in the document from 9/24/08From: N/AFinal To: (Block IIF) or SV (Block IIIA)Rationale:Comment: from ICWG discussion, it was decidedto change the "shall" stamement in the firstparagraph to read as a staement of current asbuiltconfiguration.From: The clock parameters in a data set shall bevalid during the interval of time in which they aretransmitted and shall remain valid for anadditional period of time after transmission of thenext data set has started.PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:PO Resolution: AcceptRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:Final To: The parameters are applicable during the70

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notestime in which they are transmitted. Beyond thattime they are still applicable, however, the mostrecent data set should be used since the accuracydegrades over time.186 john buckleySE&IPage:Para: 3.3.4SRationale:Comment: ICC has confirmed that there is no shallstatement (i.e. requirement) for the informationin the 2nd paragraph starting with " The L5 CNAVdata contains the requisite data for relating GPStime…" This comment was brought up (by GPC)and rejected earlier(see comment #73 of thisCRM), however, ICC believes that it should berevisited. need to synch up with the IS-200From: “The L5 CNAV data contains the requisitedata for relating GPS time to UTC. The accuracy ofthis data during the transmission interval will besuch that it relates GPS time to UTC (USNO) towithin 90.0 nanoseconds (one sigma).”PO Resolution: DeferRationale:Concurrence: ConcurRationale:(05/21/09): 8/6/09: ICC to take action todetermine if this requirement is in the SYS-800 doc. 13-aug-09: refer to AI #26 forresolution. 10-sept-09: ICC has confirmedthat AI#26 is still open, thus the commentmust be deferred.10/01/09: Changed to reject. 1.5 ns is onlyrequired once OCX comes on-line.Concurred to by Chris H. Awaitingconcurrence from GPC.Final To: “The L5 CNAV data contains the requisitedata for relating GPS time to UTC. The accuracy ofthis data during the transmission interval shall besuch that it relates GPS time to UTC (USNO) towithin 90.0 nanoseconds (one sigma).186 john buckleySE&IPage: 15Para: 3.3.1.7.1Rationale:S Comment: Updated documentat the 10/01/09ICWG real-time to accomoate for the 95%probablilty upadate from the 2 sigmaPO Resolution: AcceptRationale:From: 3.3.1.7.1 Group Delay Uncertainty. Theeffective uncertainty of the group delays shall notexceed 3.0 nanoseconds (two sigma).Concurrence: ConcurRationale:Final To: 3.3.1.7.1 Group Delay Uncertainty. Theeffective uncertainty of the group delays shall notexceed 3.0 nanoseconds (95% probability).71

IS-GPS-705 CRMCID Originator/Org. Page/Para Importance Comment PO Resolution & Concurrence Notes187 v. gopalSE&IPage: 98Para:20.3.3.3.1.2.3SRationale:Comment: Remove the reference to autonav.From:PO Resolution: DeferRationale:Final To:Concurrence: ConcurRationale: Autonav is a capability that is not beingutlized by the GPSW. Furthermore, there shouldbe no need to describe Autonav in SIS interfaceRationale:72