3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503240
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Ericsson
Title:	On uplink capacity enhancements for NR-NTN
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion
In the previous sections we made the following observations: 
Observation 1	When UE multiplexes A-CSI on PUSCH with repetition Type A, the A-CSI is multiplexed on the first PUSCH repetition only. This would break the orthogonality of PUSCH with OCC.
Observation 2	When PUSCH overlaps with PUCCH with repetitions of the same priority index, PUCCH is transmitted and overlapping PUSCH repetitions are dropped according to legacy rules. In case of PUSCH with OCC, the second bullet of the agreement from RAN1#120bis is applicable.
Observation 3	When PUSCH overlaps with PUCCH with repetitions of different priority index, either the PUSCH or the PUCCH is dropped, depending on the priority indices, scenario and configuration according to legacy rules. In case of PUSCH with OCC, either the second bullet or Note 1 of the agreement from RAN1#120bis is applicable.
Observation 4	Inter-OCC group frequency hopping provides substantial gain on NLoS channels.
Observation 5	In the specifications, the same or a similar frequency hopping description as for DMRS bundling can be reused for OCC to limit specification impact.
Observation 6	The frequency hopping needs to be coordinated between different UEs on different time-frequency resources to avoid collisions. If the frequency hopping interval varies dynamically with the OCC length, the coordination will be very complicated.
Observation 7	The consequence of phase continuity and power consistency not being maintained is more severe for OCC PUSCH than for DMRS bundling, since a phase shifted (or power shifted) transmission will, in general, not be orthogonal to transmissions of the other OCC multiplexed UEs during an OCC group.
Observation 8	The OCC length impacts many aspects such as TX phase continuity and power consistency, UCI multiplexing, time/frequency pre-compensation update interval, RV cycling interval, scheduling and frequency hopping.
Observation 9	Using a longer OCC length than necessary for the number of OCC multiplexed UEs can have negative impacts on performance, scheduling flexibility, PUSCH dropping in case of overlapping PUCCH, etc. The OCC length should be dynamically indicated, so that it can be adapted to the current number of OCC multiplexed UEs.
Observation 10	According to the objectives in the WID, the PUSCH OCC feature "may be applicable for UEs operating in terrestrial networks base on a common design".
Observation 11	OCC performs well on the terrestrial non-line-of-sight channel TDL-C.

Based on the discussion in the previous sections we propose the following:
Proposal 1	The dropping of PUCCH can be done according to legacy procedures also when OCC is used, and there is no need to update the timeline conditions.
Proposal 2	When a UE multiplexes A-CSI on PUSCH with OCC, the UE multiplexes the A-CSI on all PUSCH repetitions in the first OCC group.
Proposal 3	When a UE multiplexes A-CSI on all PUSCH repetitions in the first OCC group, if PUCCH overlaps with any PUSCH repetition in the first OCC group, the agreement from RAN1#120bis applies with the following modification related to the FFS in the first bullet:
	If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)
o	FFS: PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports
Proposal 4	The case that PUCCH is overlapping with PUSCH in both time and frequency domain and PUSCH is dropped (Option 2) can be avoided by gNB implementation.
Proposal 5	In the agreement from RAN1#120bis, the FFS in the third bullet is resolved as follows:
	UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group
o	FFS: whether tThe above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH.
Proposal 6	Confirm Working assumption 1 from RAN1#120bis.
Proposal 7	Confirm Working assumption 2 from RAN1#120bis.
Proposal 8	For CG and DG PUSCH with OCC, the RV cycling is counted based on nominal transmissions of OCC groups, without considering if the PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group are dropped due to overlap with PUCCH.
Proposal 9	Support frequency hopping between OCC groups.
Proposal 10	The frequency hopping interval for OCC PUSCH should be RRC configured.
Proposal 11	For OCC PUSCH, RAN1 should define events that cause phase continuity and power consistency not to be maintained during an OCC group based on feedback from RAN4.
Proposal 12	For OCC PUSCH, events that cause phase continuity and power consistency not to be maintained during an OCC group should be avoided by gNB to the extent possible.
Proposal 13	For OCC PUSCH, if an event occurs during an OCC group that causes phase continuity or power consistency not to be maintained, UE should drop all its PUSCH transmissions during the OCC group. If the UE is unable to drop all PUSCH transmissions due to timeline conditions, it should drop as many as possible.
Proposal 14	For OCC PUSCH, the UE does not autonomously change its time or frequency pre-compensation during an OCC group.
Proposal 15	The OCC enabling can be implicit from the presence of other OCC-specific RRC parameter(s).
Proposal 16	For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support dynamic indication of OCC length.
Proposal 17	To dynamically indicate OCC length and OCC sequence index in DCI for CG PUSCH type 2 and DG PUSCH:
	Add a new RRC-configured field OCClength in PUSCH-Allocation-r16 and indicate the OCC length using the TDRA field in DCI.
	Calculate the OCC sequence index as OCCsequenceIndex = mod(DMRS port, OCClength), where the DMRS port is indicated by the (unmodified) antenna ports field in DCI.
Proposal 18	A new optional field indicating the OCC length is added to the TDRA table, e.g., in PUSCH-Allocation-r16 in PUSCH-TimeDomainResourceAllocation-r16 in PUSCH-TimeDomainResourceAllocationList-r16.
Proposal 19	RAN1 to consider the following generic rule for PUSCH dropping:
	In any scenario where a PUSCH repetition in an OCC group would be dropped according to legacy rules, the UE drops all PUSCH repetitions in the OCC group.
Proposal 20	The PUSCH OCC feature should be applicable both to NTN and TN depending on UE capability.
 

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503282
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19 – 23, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Huawei, HiSilicon
Title:	Discussion on uplink capacity/throughput enhancement for FR1-NTN
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, the potential specification changes to support inter-slot OCC are discussed. The observations and proposals are summarized as the following:
Proposal 1: Since the number of repetitions is always 1 when A-CSI report is multiplexed on the PUSCH with no transport block, inter-slot OCC cannot be applied for PUSCH repetition type A with no transport block and a CSI report(s). 
Proposal 2: When a UE is scheduled to transmit a transport block and aperiodic report(s) on a PUSCH with inter slot OCC, the A-CSI report(s) should be multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within the first OCC group.
Proposal 3: When the PUSCH is to be dropped according to the legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, and if PUCCH with/without repetitions overlaps with PUSCH in both time domain and frequency domain, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group. 
Proposal 4: There is no need to further study the scenario where multiple PUCCHs in different PUCCH slots overlap with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group.
Proposal 5: The working assumptions 1 and 2 can be confirmed based on the assumption that UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group if PUCCH with/without repetitions overlaps with PUSCH in both time domain and frequency domain and PUSCH is to be dropped according to the legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied (Proposal 2).
Proposal 6: When semi-static betaOffsets are applied when UCI is multiplexed on a PUSCH, separate sets of ,  can be configured and applied when UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH with or without inter slot OCC.
Proposal 7: Even when PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group are dropped for OCC with CG PUSCH, RV applied to PUSCH should only be determined as legacy manner i.e. by transmission occasions. 
Proposal 8: For inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition type A, the time interval of inter-slot frequency hopping should be extended to a number of slots aligned with the time span of an OCC sequence, and intra-slot frequency hopping should be avoided. 
Proposal 9: For OCC DG PUSCH, OCC length can be configured explicitly together with pusch-AggregationFactor in PUSCH-Config (Option 1), or together with numberOfRepetitions in PUSCH-Allocation-r16 (Option 3), according to where the repetition number is configured.
Proposal 10: For OCC CG PUSCH Type 2, OCC length can be configured explicitly together with repK in ConfiguredGrantConfig (Option 1), or together with numberOfRepetitions in PUSCH-Allocation-r16 (Option 3), according to where the repetition number is configured.
Observation 1: Via configuring different values of OCC length within different PUSCH-Allocation-r16 for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the activation/deactivation of OCC and the applied OCC length can be dynamically determined from the TDRA indicated in DCI 0-1/0-2. 
Proposal 11: For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 2, OCC sequence can be associated with antenna port indicated in the DCI and a new field is not needed. 
Proposal 12: For PUSCH transmission corresponding to configured grant type 1, OCC Length, can be configured within configuredGrantConfig together with repK, and OCC sequence can be associated with antenna port in rrc-ConfiguredUplinkGrant.
Proposal 13: To support inter-slot OCC with PUSCH repetition type A in Rel-19 for FR1-NTN, the RRC parameters in Table 1 should be introduced.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                                                                            R1-2503380
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	vivo
Title:	Remaining issues on NR-NTN uplink capacity enhancement
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provide our views on NR NTN OCC schemes. According to the discussions, we have the following proposals: 
Proposal 1. If a PUSCH repetition is dropped due to the legacy rule (e.g., due to PRACH, other PUSCH, HD-redcap etc.), the entire OCC group of the PUSCH repetition is dropped, and the corresponding timeline (if present) to determine whether to drop the PUSCH is updated to the first PUSCH repetition of the OCC group or last PUSCH repetition of the OCC group correspondingly.
Proposal 2. Adopt TP#1 and TP#2.
Proposal 3. When an OCC group is dropped, OCC is still applied for the remaining repetitions after dropping.
Proposal 4. If an OCC group is dropped, RV cycling for the OCC group is also skipped.
Proposal 5. NW shall ensure that the number of PUSCH repetitions is always an integer multiple of the OCC group size when OCC is enabled. Alternatively, if NW schedules a PUSCH transmission with a number of repetitions that is not a multiple of the OCC group size, it is up to UE implementation whether OCC is applied to the residual repetitions, where the RV for the residual repetitions is determined by assuming that the residual repetitions belong to an OCC group.
Proposal 6. At least the following event would break phase continuity and power consistency within an OCC group:
Any two consecutive PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group that are mapped to two consecutive slots but are separated by a non-zero gap
Any two consecutive PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group are separated by a non-zero gap longer than a threshold
Other uplink transmissions are scheduled between the two consecutive PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group
Proposal 7. Do not support DCI based explicit enabler/disabler (including joint coding with DMRS port information).
Proposal 8. OCC length is configured by RRC.
Proposal 9. For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, OCC sequence index is jointly coded with DMRS port 0/1/2/3.
Proposal 10. Confirm the working assumptions of handling PUCCH/PUSCH overlapping.
Proposal 11. If A-CSI report is transmitted on PUSCH repetition with enabled OCC, the A-CSI report is repeated in the OCC group.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                                                 R1- 2503529
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Spreadtrum, UNISOC, SGITG
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity and throughput enhancement 
Document for:	Discussion and decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provided views on Redcap positioning. In summary, we have following proposals:
Proposal 1: For maintaining phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH, other uplink transmission between any two PUSCH repetitions within an OCC period can be avoided by gNB implementation.
Proposal 2: Redcap HD UE does not support PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC in Rel-19 NTN.
Proposal 3: For PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC and PUCCH with/without repetitions, it can confirm dropped PUCCH is involved in the timeline determination, as same as legacy.
Proposal 4: For resolving the overlapping PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC and P/SP CSI on PUCCH with/without repetitions, further discuss impacts to CSI reference resource.
Alt1: For CSI reference resource determination, the first PUSCH repetition of an OCC group is used instead of uplink slot of CSI report. 
Alt2: P/SP-CSI on PUCCH does not expect overlapping over PUSCH in other than the first PUSCH repetition in an OCC group.
Proposal 5: it is good enough up to gNB implemantion to avoid PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain.
Proposal 6: For PUCCH without repetition, FFS point of whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH is aligned with draft CR.
Proposal 7: UE does not expect to transmit one PUCCH without repetitions providing HARQ-ACK information or CSI reports in a slot and another PUCCH with repetitions in a later slot that would overlap with the PUSCH transmission.
Proposal 8: Confirm the following working assumption together with the proposal 7 to replace the third bullet. 
Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.
Proposal 9: UE does not expect to transmit more than one PUCCH without repetitions providing HARQ-ACK information or CSI reports or SR in different slots that would overlap with the PUSCH transmission
Proposal 10: When a DCI triggers A-CSI report on PUSCH, the A-CSI multiplex on all repetitions of the first PUSCH OCC group.
Proposal 11: When OCC group dropping, it has no impact on RV determination.
Proposal 12: For inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A, frequency only hops across different PUSCH OCC group, and there is no hop among repetitions in one PUSCH OCC group.
The RB start index in inter-slot frequency hopping with DMRS bundling can be used as baseline. 
Proposal 13: The candidates values of OCC length are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (i.e., Option 3).
Proposal 14: The OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2 can be associated with DMRS antenna port and implicitly indicated during scheduling.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		                           R1-2503584
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda item:		9.11.3
Source:			Samsung
Title:			Discussion on uplink capacity/throughput enhancement for NR-NTN
Document for:		Discussion and decision

Conclusion
This contribution discussed on remaining issues for uplink capacity/throughput enhancements. Followings are proposals and observations in this contribution. 
Proposal 1: RAN1 conclude that for PUSCH repetitions with A-CSI reports, inter-slot OCC does not apply . 

Proposal 2: Confirm the following two working assumptions made in RAN1#120b meeting.
Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.
Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

Proposal 3: Update the agreement made in RAN1#120b as following

Proposal 4: For DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2,
RRC configures N candidate values of {OCC length and OCC sequence} and a new field in the DCI indicates one of N candidate values in case of N > 1.

Proposal 5: RAN1 discusses performance benefit in order to decide whether to enhancement frequency hopping for inter-slot OCC PUSCH.

Proposal 6: RAN1 defers the decision whether to support TBoMS for PUSCH with OCC in Rel-19 NTN.

Proposal 7: RAN1 does not discuss further whether to limit the number of PRBs applicable to OCC PUSCH. 

Observation 1: No further clarification is needed in case where PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain. 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2503637
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Title 	:  Discussion on UL capacity enhancement for NR NTN
Source 	:  ZTE Corporation, Sanechips
Agenda item	:  9.11.3
Document for	:  Discussion

Conclusion
In this contribution, the simulation assumption and OCC design are discussed with following observations and proposals.
Proposal 1: For A-CSI report transmitted on OCC based PUSCH, the CSI report is transmitted on all PUSCH repetitions in the OCC group(s) that include the first transmission occasion associated with first and/or second SRS resource set.
-  The potential text proposal for TS 38.214 section 6.1.2.1 can be

Proposal 2: The following agreement can be revised as:

Proposal 3: For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, OCC sequence index can be implicitly indicated in DCI by association with DMRS port as shown in the following tables:
For OCC-2, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as
For OCC-2, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as
Proposal 4: Single parameter with 1 bit {OCC-2, OCC-4} can be used to indicate OCC length in RRC signalling for both DG and CG Type-2 based PUSCH transmission.
When OCC length is larger than repetition number, the OCC sequence needs to be scaled and mapped to the repetitions.
When OCC length is smaller than repetition number, the OCC sequence needs to be repeated and mapped to the repetitions.
OCC enabler
Proposal 5: Single parameter with 1 bit {enabled, disabled} can be used to enable or disable OCC functionality in RRC signalling for both DG and CG based PUSCH transmission.
Proposal 6: UEs supporting capability of corresponding OCC length can be assumed as having the capability of maintaining the phase continuity over the transmissions in an OCC group, no need to introduce new UE capability. 
Proposal 7: No need to define conditions under which the phase continuity and power consistency can be applied.

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503684
St Julian's, Malta, 19th -23rd, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Moderator (MediaTek)
Title:	Feature lead summary #1 of AI 9.11.3 on NR-NTN uplink capacity and throughput
Document for:	Discussion
0 

Conclusions





8 Appendix A – RAN1 agreements

RAN1#120bis agreements
Agreement
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling

Agreement
Send LS to RAN4 on requirements for the phase continuity and power consistency:
RAN1 has agreed the following:
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling 
RAN1 ask RAN4 whether the same phase continuity requirements as for DMRS bundling can be applied for OCC length 2 and/or OCC length 4 under the same conditions as for DMRS bundling, or if new requirements are needed.

Agreement
The draft LS in R1-2503070 is endorsed. Final LS is in R1-2503071.

Agreement
OCC length and OCC sequence for OCC with CG PUSCH Type 1 is configured by RRC higher-layers.
Up to RAN2 whether to signal this with one or two RRC parameters
Note: OCC lengths and sequences to be provided in the table of RRC parameters to be prepared by the WI rapporteur

Agreement
For OCC with CG-PUSCH, the RV sequence applied across OCC groups is RRC configured among the RV sequences defined for legacy CG PUSCH, i.e., [0,2,3,1], [0,3,0,3] or [0,0,0,0].
Note: no new RRC parameter is needed for the above
FFS: if OCC group dropping is later agreed, how to count RVs may need to be discussed for that case

Agreement
For resolving the overlapping PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC and PUCCH with/without repetitions, the legacy timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping PUSCH [/ PUCCH] applies according with the following update:
“the first PUSCH repetition of an OCC group” is used instead of “PUSCH repetition” for the legacy timeline condition, where the legacy PUSCH repetition that overlaps with a PUCCH belongs to the OCC group
Note: how to capture the above agreement is up to the spec editor.

Agreement
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, consider the following options:
Option 1: Configured by RRC higher-layer parameter.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 2: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is implicitly determined from the configured repetition number.
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 4: Single value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (no RRC configuration of candidate values).
Option 5: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: it is not precluded to select a different option for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2.

Agreement
If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, the legacy conditions and rules for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping applies with the following updates:
If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)
FFS: PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports
If the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlaps with the PUCCH are dropped (Option 2)
FFS: if PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain.
UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group.
FFS: whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH
Note 1: If the UCI on the PUCCH is dropped according to legacy rules and [updated] timeline conditions for UCI dropping are satisfied, there is no [additional] spec impact. (Option 1)
Note 2: There can be multiple PUCCHs with same or different UCI types in the same slot (i.e. CSI report and HARQ-ACK) as in the legacy specifications

Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.

Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

Agreement
For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in DCI
FFS: with a new field or reusing an existing field


RAN1#120 agreements

Conclusion
For OCC time synchronization / alignment of multiplexed UEs to maintain orthogonality of the codes used for OCC, OCC group alignment is handled by network scheduling without specification impact.

Conclusion
OCC with Msg3 PUSCH is not in scope of Release 19 NR NTN Ph3.

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, support Option 1 
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups.
Note: when option 1 is applied, RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
No optimization in Rel-19 for pairing UEs with OCC2 and UEs with OCC4.

RAN1#119 agreements
Observation:
Option 1 Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs with 2 PRBs can meet VoIP 2% BLER within 1 dB of single UE baseline for 8 slots or larger with UE grouping with similar CFO (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 200 Hz).
 
Observation:
Option 2 Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs with TBoMS can meet VoIP 2% BLER target within 1 dB of single UE baseline with 2 PRBs and 4 repetitions or larger; and with 1 PRB and 8 repetitions or larger, without need for CFO grouping.  

Agreement
RAN1 to confirm the working assumption of RAN1#118bis with revisions as follows:
Support OCC length 2 with inter-slot OCC to multiplex up to 2 UEs.
Support Option 1: inter-slot OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs using Hadamard sequences
RAN1 does not pursue Option 2: Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
RAN1 does not pursue Option 3: Combination of Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 2 and intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 2 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Note 1: there will be separate UE capabilities for OCC length 2 and OCC length 4, where UE capability for OCC length 2 is a prerequisite for UE capability for OCC length 4.
Note 2: gNB can ensure the performance of Option 1 by UE grouping with similar CFO (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 50 or 100 Hz or 200 Hz). Without CFO grouping (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 400 Hz), the performance of option 1 is degraded by at least 1 dB in several cases. For CFO grouping, several companies in RAN1 state that CFO grouping is feasible based on network implementation without any new specification impact.
RAN1 assumes no specification impact for CFO grouping
RAN1 does not pursue closed-loop frequency adjustment commands.
RAN1 assumes that RAN4 does not define new UE requirements for CFO.


Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, the following are considered:
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups
Note 1: RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
Option 2: Fixed RV is used across OCC groups
Option 3: For OCC length 2, fixed RV is used across two OCC groups, RV cycling is used across groups of two OCC groups



Agreement
If PUCCH without repetition overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group, the following options to be considered: 
Option 1: UCI is dropped
FFS: whether all UCI is dropped
Option 2: UCI is transmitted on PUCCH, and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group are dropped.
Option 3: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH with inter-slot OCC
Option 3-a: UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC
FFS: which OCC group
Option 3-b: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH and OCC is not applied within the OCC group
Option 3-c: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH and OCC is not applied within the PUSCH repetitions
Note: combination of the above can be considered
FFS Details timeline of PUCCH and PUSCH
FFS: handling of PUCCH with repetition
FFS: handling of different UCI types

RAN1#118bis agreements
Working assumption
For the normative phase, 
Support OCC length 2 with inter-slot OCC to multiplex up to 2 UEs.
Support OCC length 4 with one of the following OCC techniques
Option 1: Inter-slot with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Option 2: Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Option 3: Combination of Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 2 and intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 2 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Note 1:
At least consider 8 slots, 16 slots, and 20 slots for VoIP with BLER 2% target, with 1 RB, 2 RBs when comparing Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3. Companies can additionally report on 4 slots at least for 2 RBs.
Option 2 assumes TBoMS, FFS Option 3 assumes TBoMS
Note 2: as part of the working assumption, it is assumed that there would be separate UE capabilities for OCC length 2 and OCC length 4, where UE capability for OCC length 2 is a prerequisite for UE capability for OCC length 4.

Conclusion
For TBS calculation and rate matching for OCC with PUSCH, for inter-slot OCC in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis:
for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 2 and for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 4 in option 1 in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis
No change in determination of TBS 
No change for rate matching

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with PUSCH
For inter-slot OCC for OCC length 2 and for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 4 in option 1 in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis 
Same RV value is used in one OCC group (i.e., OCC length applied to N slots).
FFS: RV cycling can be additionally used across OCC groups

Agreement
For OCC sequence for OCC with PUSCH: 
For OCC length 2, re-use orthogonal sequence [1 1; 1 -1] 

RAN1#118 agreements
Agreement
At least one of the OCC techniques when PUSCH repetitions are used will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with OCC length 2
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with OCC length 2 and 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 and 4
Note: combination of techniques is not precluded
PUSCH repetition Type B is not considered

Conclusion
Multiplexing of 8 UEs with PUSCH OCC is not discussed in RAN1 until the work for multiplexing of less than 8 UEs has been completed.

RAN1#117 agreements
Agreement
For the normative phase, at least one of the OCC techniques will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A with OCC length 2 or 4
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC with OCC length 2 or 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 or 4
FFS Combination of OCC techniques including multiplexing of 8 UEs
FFS Use of OCC techniques with TBoMS
FFS Backward compatibility with non-Rel-19 UEs

Conclusion
OCC with PUSCH can support at least multiplexing of 2 or 4 UEs and achieve up to 2 or 4 times capacity gains respectively, when repetitions are used.
Note: the actual gain may be less due to e.g. intra/inter cell interference.

RAN1#116bis agreements
Agreement
Support OCC for PUSCH in Rel-19 NR NTN:
At least PUSCH with Type A repetition
FFS PUSCH without Type A repetition for intra-symbol and/or inter-symbol cases
At least code length 2 or 4, FFS code length 8 
FFS: number of RBs
Potential OCC techniques listed below are for further down-selection:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A 
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC 
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4)
Combinations of OCC techniques
TBoMS for OCC techniques is FFS

Agreement
RAN1 to at least further study the potential specification aspects on OCC techniques:
TBS calculation / Rate matching
UCI multiplexing
RV cycling across repetitions
Frequency hopping, e.g. intra /inter slot
OCC indication/configuration
Power control
FFS others aspects


RAN1#116 agreements
Agreement
Adopt the table below for assumptions for Evaluation parameters for link level evaluation in NR NTN UL capacity and throughput enhancements



Agreement
-

Agreement
Adopt the table below for assumptions for KPIs for link level evaluation in NR NTN UL capacity and throughput enhancements





9 Appendix B – Simulation results

Ericsson R1-2503240 
Frequency hopping

Figure 1: LDR/ VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group frequency hopping on NTN-TDL-A. Left: LDR. Right: VOIP.

Figure 2: LDR/VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group frequency hopping on NTN-TDL-C. Left: LDR. Right: VOIP.

RV cycling

Figure 3: LDR PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group RV cycling. Left: 2 UEs. Right: 4 UEs.


Figure 4: VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group RV cycling. Left: 2 UEs. Right: 4 UEs.

UCI on PUSCH 

Figure 5: LDR PUSCH BLER performance with UCI multiplexing. Left: 8 repetitions. Right: 16 repetitions.



Figure 6: VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with UCI multiplexing. Left: 8 repetitions. Right: 16 repetitions.



Figure 1: Link level performance of OCC for VoIP on terrestrial TDL-C channel.

Qualcomm 2504412

OCC CW hopping:


Fig.1 Performance comparison of no OCC CW hopping vs OCC CW hopping for 4 UEs with VoIP for different number of repetitions (slots)

10 Appendix C – Tables with OCC sequence associated with antenna ports

Ericsson R1-2503240, Qualcomm R1-2504412 
(based on RAN1#120bis Proposal)
OCC length 2 and 4:

OCC length 2:

Huawei R1-2503282

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2
Proposal 11: For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 2, OCC sequence can be associated with antenna port indicated in the DCI and a new field is not needed. 

ZTE R1-2503637

For OCC-2, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as
For OCC-2, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as


Nokia R1-2504181
Maximum OCC length 4:

Maximum OCC length 2:


Xiaomi R1-2503897
For  DMRS with maxlength=1 and taken Table 1 as a reference, if the OCC length is 2, then the first two rows in Table 1 can be respectively associated with OCC sequence index #0 and OCC sequence index #1. When the OCC length is configured to 4, four rows in Table 1 are respectively associated with OCC sequence index #0, 1, 2, 3. 
Table 1: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Vivo R1-2503380
If OCC length2 is configured, the following table is applied
If OCC length4 is configured, the following table is applied.




11 Appendix D – Draft TPs

Vivo R1-2503380

TP1 for 38.213 v18.6.0


TP2 for 38.213 v18.6.0











































11 

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503685
St Julian's, Malta, 19th -23rd, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Moderator (MediaTek)
Title:	Feature lead summary #2 of AI 9.11.3 on NR-NTN uplink capacity and throughput
Document for:	Discussion
0 

Conclusions





8 Appendix A – RAN1 agreements

RAN1#120bis agreements
Agreement
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling

Agreement
Send LS to RAN4 on requirements for the phase continuity and power consistency:
RAN1 has agreed the following:
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling 
RAN1 ask RAN4 whether the same phase continuity requirements as for DMRS bundling can be applied for OCC length 2 and/or OCC length 4 under the same conditions as for DMRS bundling, or if new requirements are needed.

Agreement
The draft LS in R1-2503070 is endorsed. Final LS is in R1-2503071.

Agreement
OCC length and OCC sequence for OCC with CG PUSCH Type 1 is configured by RRC higher-layers.
Up to RAN2 whether to signal this with one or two RRC parameters
Note: OCC lengths and sequences to be provided in the table of RRC parameters to be prepared by the WI rapporteur

Agreement
For OCC with CG-PUSCH, the RV sequence applied across OCC groups is RRC configured among the RV sequences defined for legacy CG PUSCH, i.e., [0,2,3,1], [0,3,0,3] or [0,0,0,0].
Note: no new RRC parameter is needed for the above
FFS: if OCC group dropping is later agreed, how to count RVs may need to be discussed for that case

Agreement
For resolving the overlapping PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC and PUCCH with/without repetitions, the legacy timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping PUSCH [/ PUCCH] applies according with the following update:
“the first PUSCH repetition of an OCC group” is used instead of “PUSCH repetition” for the legacy timeline condition, where the legacy PUSCH repetition that overlaps with a PUCCH belongs to the OCC group
Note: how to capture the above agreement is up to the spec editor.

Agreement
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, consider the following options:
Option 1: Configured by RRC higher-layer parameter.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 2: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is implicitly determined from the configured repetition number.
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 4: Single value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (no RRC configuration of candidate values).
Option 5: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: it is not precluded to select a different option for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2.

Agreement
If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, the legacy conditions and rules for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping applies with the following updates:
If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)
FFS: PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports
If the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlaps with the PUCCH are dropped (Option 2)
FFS: if PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain.
UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group.
FFS: whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH
Note 1: If the UCI on the PUCCH is dropped according to legacy rules and [updated] timeline conditions for UCI dropping are satisfied, there is no [additional] spec impact. (Option 1)
Note 2: There can be multiple PUCCHs with same or different UCI types in the same slot (i.e. CSI report and HARQ-ACK) as in the legacy specifications

Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.

Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

Agreement
For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in DCI
FFS: with a new field or reusing an existing field


RAN1#120 agreements

Conclusion
For OCC time synchronization / alignment of multiplexed UEs to maintain orthogonality of the codes used for OCC, OCC group alignment is handled by network scheduling without specification impact.

Conclusion
OCC with Msg3 PUSCH is not in scope of Release 19 NR NTN Ph3.

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, support Option 1 
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups.
Note: when option 1 is applied, RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
No optimization in Rel-19 for pairing UEs with OCC2 and UEs with OCC4.

RAN1#119 agreements
Observation:
Option 1 Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs with 2 PRBs can meet VoIP 2% BLER within 1 dB of single UE baseline for 8 slots or larger with UE grouping with similar CFO (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 200 Hz).
 
Observation:
Option 2 Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs with TBoMS can meet VoIP 2% BLER target within 1 dB of single UE baseline with 2 PRBs and 4 repetitions or larger; and with 1 PRB and 8 repetitions or larger, without need for CFO grouping.  

Agreement
RAN1 to confirm the working assumption of RAN1#118bis with revisions as follows:
Support OCC length 2 with inter-slot OCC to multiplex up to 2 UEs.
Support Option 1: inter-slot OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs using Hadamard sequences
RAN1 does not pursue Option 2: Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
RAN1 does not pursue Option 3: Combination of Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 2 and intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 2 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Note 1: there will be separate UE capabilities for OCC length 2 and OCC length 4, where UE capability for OCC length 2 is a prerequisite for UE capability for OCC length 4.
Note 2: gNB can ensure the performance of Option 1 by UE grouping with similar CFO (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 50 or 100 Hz or 200 Hz). Without CFO grouping (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 400 Hz), the performance of option 1 is degraded by at least 1 dB in several cases. For CFO grouping, several companies in RAN1 state that CFO grouping is feasible based on network implementation without any new specification impact.
RAN1 assumes no specification impact for CFO grouping
RAN1 does not pursue closed-loop frequency adjustment commands.
RAN1 assumes that RAN4 does not define new UE requirements for CFO.


Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, the following are considered:
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups
Note 1: RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
Option 2: Fixed RV is used across OCC groups
Option 3: For OCC length 2, fixed RV is used across two OCC groups, RV cycling is used across groups of two OCC groups



Agreement
If PUCCH without repetition overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group, the following options to be considered: 
Option 1: UCI is dropped
FFS: whether all UCI is dropped
Option 2: UCI is transmitted on PUCCH, and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group are dropped.
Option 3: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH with inter-slot OCC
Option 3-a: UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC
FFS: which OCC group
Option 3-b: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH and OCC is not applied within the OCC group
Option 3-c: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH and OCC is not applied within the PUSCH repetitions
Note: combination of the above can be considered
FFS Details timeline of PUCCH and PUSCH
FFS: handling of PUCCH with repetition
FFS: handling of different UCI types

RAN1#118bis agreements
Working assumption
For the normative phase, 
Support OCC length 2 with inter-slot OCC to multiplex up to 2 UEs.
Support OCC length 4 with one of the following OCC techniques
Option 1: Inter-slot with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Option 2: Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Option 3: Combination of Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 2 and intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 2 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Note 1:
At least consider 8 slots, 16 slots, and 20 slots for VoIP with BLER 2% target, with 1 RB, 2 RBs when comparing Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3. Companies can additionally report on 4 slots at least for 2 RBs.
Option 2 assumes TBoMS, FFS Option 3 assumes TBoMS
Note 2: as part of the working assumption, it is assumed that there would be separate UE capabilities for OCC length 2 and OCC length 4, where UE capability for OCC length 2 is a prerequisite for UE capability for OCC length 4.

Conclusion
For TBS calculation and rate matching for OCC with PUSCH, for inter-slot OCC in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis:
for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 2 and for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 4 in option 1 in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis
No change in determination of TBS 
No change for rate matching

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with PUSCH
For inter-slot OCC for OCC length 2 and for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 4 in option 1 in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis 
Same RV value is used in one OCC group (i.e., OCC length applied to N slots).
FFS: RV cycling can be additionally used across OCC groups

Agreement
For OCC sequence for OCC with PUSCH: 
For OCC length 2, re-use orthogonal sequence [1 1; 1 -1] 

RAN1#118 agreements
Agreement
At least one of the OCC techniques when PUSCH repetitions are used will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with OCC length 2
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with OCC length 2 and 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 and 4
Note: combination of techniques is not precluded
PUSCH repetition Type B is not considered

Conclusion
Multiplexing of 8 UEs with PUSCH OCC is not discussed in RAN1 until the work for multiplexing of less than 8 UEs has been completed.

RAN1#117 agreements
Agreement
For the normative phase, at least one of the OCC techniques will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A with OCC length 2 or 4
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC with OCC length 2 or 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 or 4
FFS Combination of OCC techniques including multiplexing of 8 UEs
FFS Use of OCC techniques with TBoMS
FFS Backward compatibility with non-Rel-19 UEs

Conclusion
OCC with PUSCH can support at least multiplexing of 2 or 4 UEs and achieve up to 2 or 4 times capacity gains respectively, when repetitions are used.
Note: the actual gain may be less due to e.g. intra/inter cell interference.

RAN1#116bis agreements
Agreement
Support OCC for PUSCH in Rel-19 NR NTN:
At least PUSCH with Type A repetition
FFS PUSCH without Type A repetition for intra-symbol and/or inter-symbol cases
At least code length 2 or 4, FFS code length 8 
FFS: number of RBs
Potential OCC techniques listed below are for further down-selection:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A 
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC 
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4)
Combinations of OCC techniques
TBoMS for OCC techniques is FFS

Agreement
RAN1 to at least further study the potential specification aspects on OCC techniques:
TBS calculation / Rate matching
UCI multiplexing
RV cycling across repetitions
Frequency hopping, e.g. intra /inter slot
OCC indication/configuration
Power control
FFS others aspects


RAN1#116 agreements
Agreement
Adopt the table below for assumptions for Evaluation parameters for link level evaluation in NR NTN UL capacity and throughput enhancements



Agreement
-

Agreement
Adopt the table below for assumptions for KPIs for link level evaluation in NR NTN UL capacity and throughput enhancements





9 Appendix B – Simulation results

Ericsson R1-2503240 
Frequency hopping

Figure 1: LDR/ VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group frequency hopping on NTN-TDL-A. Left: LDR. Right: VOIP.

Figure 2: LDR/VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group frequency hopping on NTN-TDL-C. Left: LDR. Right: VOIP.

RV cycling

Figure 3: LDR PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group RV cycling. Left: 2 UEs. Right: 4 UEs.


Figure 4: VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group RV cycling. Left: 2 UEs. Right: 4 UEs.

UCI on PUSCH 

Figure 5: LDR PUSCH BLER performance with UCI multiplexing. Left: 8 repetitions. Right: 16 repetitions.



Figure 6: VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with UCI multiplexing. Left: 8 repetitions. Right: 16 repetitions.



Figure 1: Link level performance of OCC for VoIP on terrestrial TDL-C channel.

Qualcomm 2504412

OCC CW hopping:


Fig.1 Performance comparison of no OCC CW hopping vs OCC CW hopping for 4 UEs with VoIP for different number of repetitions (slots)

10 Appendix C – Tables with OCC sequence associated with antenna ports

Ericsson R1-2503240, Qualcomm R1-2504412 
(based on RAN1#120bis Proposal)
OCC length 2 and 4:

OCC length 2:

Huawei R1-2503282

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2
Proposal 11: For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 2, OCC sequence can be associated with antenna port indicated in the DCI and a new field is not needed. 

ZTE R1-2503637

For OCC-2, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as
For OCC-2, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as


Nokia R1-2504181
Maximum OCC length 4:

Maximum OCC length 2:


Xiaomi R1-2503897
For  DMRS with maxlength=1 and taken Table 1 as a reference, if the OCC length is 2, then the first two rows in Table 1 can be respectively associated with OCC sequence index #0 and OCC sequence index #1. When the OCC length is configured to 4, four rows in Table 1 are respectively associated with OCC sequence index #0, 1, 2, 3. 
Table 1: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Vivo R1-2503380
If OCC length2 is configured, the following table is applied
If OCC length4 is configured, the following table is applied.




11 Appendix D – Draft TPs

Vivo R1-2503380

TP1 for 38.213 v18.6.0


TP2 for 38.213 v18.6.0











































11 

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503686
St Julian's, Malta, 19th -23rd, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Moderator (MediaTek)
Title:	Feature lead summary #3 of AI 9.11.3 on NR-NTN uplink capacity and throughput
Document for:	Discussion
0 

Conclusions

The agreements made in this RAN1 meeting are copied below. There are no open issues on necessary enhancements for discussions for the maintenance phase in RAN1 for UL capacity enhancements. 


7.1 UCI multiplexing:


PUSCH dropping:
Agreement
Remove the FFS in sub-bullet of 2nd bullet in RAN1#120bis agreement on UCI multiplexing.
If the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlaps with the PUCCH are dropped (Option 2)
FFS: if PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain.

PUSCH repetitions with A-CSI report:
Agreement
When OCC is applied on the PUSCH with UL-SCH with repetition type A and A-CSI report is triggered, the following applies: 
The A-CSI report(s) is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within the first OCC group

Agreement
Revise the first bullet in RAN1#120bis agreement on UCI multiplexing with “without A-CSI reports” and FFS removed as below:
If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)
FFS: PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports

Multiple PUCCH:
Agreement
Remove the FFS in the sub-bullet of 3rd bullet in RAN1#120bis agreement on UCI multiplexing.
UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group.
FFS: whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH

PUCCH with repetitions:
Agreement
Confirm RAN1#120bis Working Assumption 2 on UCI multiplexing with revised text: 
Working Assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

PUCCH and PUSCH with different priorities:
Agreement
Confirm RAN1#120bis Working Assumption 1 on UCI multiplexing with revised text: 
Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.


7.2 OCC indication / configuration:

OCC length indication:
Agreement
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support:
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter as part of the TDRA table with a new column for configuring the OCC length, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
No additional rows for the TDRA table

OCC sequence indication:
Agreement
For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in DCI Format 0_1 and Format 0_2. Support implicit DCI indication with re-use of antenna port field.
Association between antenna ports and OCC sequence is defined by re-using the legacy tables with two new columns added for OCC sequence. Note: the tables could directly reference the OCC sequence index (Table 6.3.2.5A-1 and Table 6.3.2.5A-2 in TS38.211) or spell out the sequence as in the example below.

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2


OCC enabler:
Conclusion
Explicit configuration / indication of OCC enabler is not supported.

7.3 Signaling aspects of OCC with PUSCH


Frequency hopping:
Agreement
A UE is not expected to be configured with frequency hopping for PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC.

OCC group definition:
Agreement
Alt 2. For PUSCH grouping with inter slot OCC, the integer number of OCC groups is determined as M =N/L, where N is the number of repetitions of PUSCH and L is the OCC length.
An OCC group is defined by L consecutive PUSCH repetitions. OCC Group m includes PUSCH repetition mxL, mxL+1, .., (m+1)xL-1, where m=0,1, .., M-1

TBoMS support:
Conclusion
RAN1 will not specify enhancements for support of TBoMS with inter-slot OCC for PUSCH in Rel-19.

1 PRB only:
Conclusion
There is no consensus in RAN1 to introduce a restriction on the number of PRBs to support inter-slot OCC for PUSCH.
8 Appendix A – RAN1 agreements

RAN1#120bis agreements
Agreement
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling

Agreement
Send LS to RAN4 on requirements for the phase continuity and power consistency:
RAN1 has agreed the following:
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling 
RAN1 ask RAN4 whether the same phase continuity requirements as for DMRS bundling can be applied for OCC length 2 and/or OCC length 4 under the same conditions as for DMRS bundling, or if new requirements are needed.

Agreement
The draft LS in R1-2503070 is endorsed. Final LS is in R1-2503071.

Agreement
OCC length and OCC sequence for OCC with CG PUSCH Type 1 is configured by RRC higher-layers.
Up to RAN2 whether to signal this with one or two RRC parameters
Note: OCC lengths and sequences to be provided in the table of RRC parameters to be prepared by the WI rapporteur

Agreement
For OCC with CG-PUSCH, the RV sequence applied across OCC groups is RRC configured among the RV sequences defined for legacy CG PUSCH, i.e., [0,2,3,1], [0,3,0,3] or [0,0,0,0].
Note: no new RRC parameter is needed for the above
FFS: if OCC group dropping is later agreed, how to count RVs may need to be discussed for that case

Agreement
For resolving the overlapping PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC and PUCCH with/without repetitions, the legacy timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping PUSCH [/ PUCCH] applies according with the following update:
“the first PUSCH repetition of an OCC group” is used instead of “PUSCH repetition” for the legacy timeline condition, where the legacy PUSCH repetition that overlaps with a PUCCH belongs to the OCC group
Note: how to capture the above agreement is up to the spec editor.

Agreement
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, consider the following options:
Option 1: Configured by RRC higher-layer parameter.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 2: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is implicitly determined from the configured repetition number.
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 4: Single value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (no RRC configuration of candidate values).
Option 5: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: it is not precluded to select a different option for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2.

Agreement
If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, the legacy conditions and rules for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping applies with the following updates:
If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)
FFS: PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports
If the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlaps with the PUCCH are dropped (Option 2)
FFS: if PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain.
UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group.
FFS: whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH
Note 1: If the UCI on the PUCCH is dropped according to legacy rules and [updated] timeline conditions for UCI dropping are satisfied, there is no [additional] spec impact. (Option 1)
Note 2: There can be multiple PUCCHs with same or different UCI types in the same slot (i.e. CSI report and HARQ-ACK) as in the legacy specifications

Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.

Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

Agreement
For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in DCI
FFS: with a new field or reusing an existing field


RAN1#120 agreements

Conclusion
For OCC time synchronization / alignment of multiplexed UEs to maintain orthogonality of the codes used for OCC, OCC group alignment is handled by network scheduling without specification impact.

Conclusion
OCC with Msg3 PUSCH is not in scope of Release 19 NR NTN Ph3.

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, support Option 1 
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups.
Note: when option 1 is applied, RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
No optimization in Rel-19 for pairing UEs with OCC2 and UEs with OCC4.

RAN1#119 agreements
Observation:
Option 1 Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs with 2 PRBs can meet VoIP 2% BLER within 1 dB of single UE baseline for 8 slots or larger with UE grouping with similar CFO (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 200 Hz).
 
Observation:
Option 2 Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs with TBoMS can meet VoIP 2% BLER target within 1 dB of single UE baseline with 2 PRBs and 4 repetitions or larger; and with 1 PRB and 8 repetitions or larger, without need for CFO grouping.  

Agreement
RAN1 to confirm the working assumption of RAN1#118bis with revisions as follows:
Support OCC length 2 with inter-slot OCC to multiplex up to 2 UEs.
Support Option 1: inter-slot OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs using Hadamard sequences
RAN1 does not pursue Option 2: Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
RAN1 does not pursue Option 3: Combination of Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 2 and intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 2 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Note 1: there will be separate UE capabilities for OCC length 2 and OCC length 4, where UE capability for OCC length 2 is a prerequisite for UE capability for OCC length 4.
Note 2: gNB can ensure the performance of Option 1 by UE grouping with similar CFO (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 50 or 100 Hz or 200 Hz). Without CFO grouping (e.g. maximum differential CFO of 400 Hz), the performance of option 1 is degraded by at least 1 dB in several cases. For CFO grouping, several companies in RAN1 state that CFO grouping is feasible based on network implementation without any new specification impact.
RAN1 assumes no specification impact for CFO grouping
RAN1 does not pursue closed-loop frequency adjustment commands.
RAN1 assumes that RAN4 does not define new UE requirements for CFO.


Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, the following are considered:
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups
Note 1: RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
Option 2: Fixed RV is used across OCC groups
Option 3: For OCC length 2, fixed RV is used across two OCC groups, RV cycling is used across groups of two OCC groups



Agreement
If PUCCH without repetition overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group, the following options to be considered: 
Option 1: UCI is dropped
FFS: whether all UCI is dropped
Option 2: UCI is transmitted on PUCCH, and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group are dropped.
Option 3: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH with inter-slot OCC
Option 3-a: UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC
FFS: which OCC group
Option 3-b: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH and OCC is not applied within the OCC group
Option 3-c: UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH and OCC is not applied within the PUSCH repetitions
Note: combination of the above can be considered
FFS Details timeline of PUCCH and PUSCH
FFS: handling of PUCCH with repetition
FFS: handling of different UCI types

RAN1#118bis agreements
Working assumption
For the normative phase, 
Support OCC length 2 with inter-slot OCC to multiplex up to 2 UEs.
Support OCC length 4 with one of the following OCC techniques
Option 1: Inter-slot with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Option 2: Intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 4 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Option 3: Combination of Inter-slot OCC with OCC length 2 and intra-symbol pre-DFT OCC with OCC length 2 to multiplex up to 4 UEs.
Note 1:
At least consider 8 slots, 16 slots, and 20 slots for VoIP with BLER 2% target, with 1 RB, 2 RBs when comparing Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3. Companies can additionally report on 4 slots at least for 2 RBs.
Option 2 assumes TBoMS, FFS Option 3 assumes TBoMS
Note 2: as part of the working assumption, it is assumed that there would be separate UE capabilities for OCC length 2 and OCC length 4, where UE capability for OCC length 2 is a prerequisite for UE capability for OCC length 4.

Conclusion
For TBS calculation and rate matching for OCC with PUSCH, for inter-slot OCC in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis:
for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 2 and for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 4 in option 1 in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis
No change in determination of TBS 
No change for rate matching

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with PUSCH
For inter-slot OCC for OCC length 2 and for inter-slot OCC for OCC length 4 in option 1 in the working assumption of RAN1#118bis 
Same RV value is used in one OCC group (i.e., OCC length applied to N slots).
FFS: RV cycling can be additionally used across OCC groups

Agreement
For OCC sequence for OCC with PUSCH: 
For OCC length 2, re-use orthogonal sequence [1 1; 1 -1] 

RAN1#118 agreements
Agreement
At least one of the OCC techniques when PUSCH repetitions are used will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with OCC length 2
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with OCC length 2 and 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 and 4
Note: combination of techniques is not precluded
PUSCH repetition Type B is not considered

Conclusion
Multiplexing of 8 UEs with PUSCH OCC is not discussed in RAN1 until the work for multiplexing of less than 8 UEs has been completed.

RAN1#117 agreements
Agreement
For the normative phase, at least one of the OCC techniques will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A with OCC length 2 or 4
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC with OCC length 2 or 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 or 4
FFS Combination of OCC techniques including multiplexing of 8 UEs
FFS Use of OCC techniques with TBoMS
FFS Backward compatibility with non-Rel-19 UEs

Conclusion
OCC with PUSCH can support at least multiplexing of 2 or 4 UEs and achieve up to 2 or 4 times capacity gains respectively, when repetitions are used.
Note: the actual gain may be less due to e.g. intra/inter cell interference.

RAN1#116bis agreements
Agreement
Support OCC for PUSCH in Rel-19 NR NTN:
At least PUSCH with Type A repetition
FFS PUSCH without Type A repetition for intra-symbol and/or inter-symbol cases
At least code length 2 or 4, FFS code length 8 
FFS: number of RBs
Potential OCC techniques listed below are for further down-selection:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A 
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC 
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4)
Combinations of OCC techniques
TBoMS for OCC techniques is FFS

Agreement
RAN1 to at least further study the potential specification aspects on OCC techniques:
TBS calculation / Rate matching
UCI multiplexing
RV cycling across repetitions
Frequency hopping, e.g. intra /inter slot
OCC indication/configuration
Power control
FFS others aspects


RAN1#116 agreements
Agreement
Adopt the table below for assumptions for Evaluation parameters for link level evaluation in NR NTN UL capacity and throughput enhancements



Agreement
-

Agreement
Adopt the table below for assumptions for KPIs for link level evaluation in NR NTN UL capacity and throughput enhancements





9 Appendix B – Simulation results

Ericsson R1-2503240 
Frequency hopping

Figure 1: LDR/ VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group frequency hopping on NTN-TDL-A. Left: LDR. Right: VOIP.

Figure 2: LDR/VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group frequency hopping on NTN-TDL-C. Left: LDR. Right: VOIP.

RV cycling

Figure 3: LDR PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group RV cycling. Left: 2 UEs. Right: 4 UEs.


Figure 4: VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with/without inter-OCC group RV cycling. Left: 2 UEs. Right: 4 UEs.

UCI on PUSCH 

Figure 5: LDR PUSCH BLER performance with UCI multiplexing. Left: 8 repetitions. Right: 16 repetitions.



Figure 6: VoIP PUSCH BLER performance with UCI multiplexing. Left: 8 repetitions. Right: 16 repetitions.



Figure 1: Link level performance of OCC for VoIP on terrestrial TDL-C channel.

Qualcomm 2504412

OCC CW hopping:


Fig.1 Performance comparison of no OCC CW hopping vs OCC CW hopping for 4 UEs with VoIP for different number of repetitions (slots)

10 Appendix C – Tables with OCC sequence associated with antenna ports

Ericsson R1-2503240, Qualcomm R1-2504412 
(based on RAN1#120bis Proposal)
OCC length 2 and 4:

OCC length 2:

Huawei R1-2503282

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-6A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2,
except that dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured and
π/2-BPSK modulation is used

Table 7.3.1.1.2-7A: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=2
Proposal 11: For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 2, OCC sequence can be associated with antenna port indicated in the DCI and a new field is not needed. 

ZTE R1-2503637

For OCC-2, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as
For OCC-2, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=1, Table 7.3.1.1.2-6 is revised as

For OCC-4, maxLength=2, Table 7.3.1.1.2-7 is revised as


Nokia R1-2504181
Maximum OCC length 4:

Maximum OCC length 2:


Xiaomi R1-2503897
For  DMRS with maxlength=1 and taken Table 1 as a reference, if the OCC length is 2, then the first two rows in Table 1 can be respectively associated with OCC sequence index #0 and OCC sequence index #1. When the OCC length is configured to 4, four rows in Table 1 are respectively associated with OCC sequence index #0, 1, 2, 3. 
Table 1: Antenna port(s), transform precoder is enabled, dmrs-UplinkTransformPrecoding and tp-pi2BPSK are both configured, π/2-BPSK modulation is used, dmrs-Type=1, maxLength=1

Vivo R1-2503380
If OCC length2 is configured, the following table is applied
If OCC length4 is configured, the following table is applied.




11 Appendix D – Draft TPs

Vivo R1-2503380

TP1 for 38.213 v18.6.0


TP2 for 38.213 v18.6.0











































11 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #121	                       R1-2503763
St Julian's, Malta, May 19th – May 23rd, 2025
Agenda Item: 9.11.3
Source:	TCL
Title: Discussion on the NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancements
Document for: Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provided our views on NR-NTN uplink capacity enhancements. Our observations and proposals are as follows:
Proposal 1: The OCC length and OCC sequence for configured grant Type 1 PUSCH can be configured through RRC.
Proposal 2: For DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the OCC length can be configured through RRC or the candidate length values 2 and 4 can be configured in RRC and activated by DCI or MAC-CE.
Proposal 3: Special fields of the CS-RNTI scrambled DCI can be utilized for explicit indication of OCC for configured grant Type 2 PUSCH.
Proposal 4: For inter-slot OCC, the total number of repetitions after OCC spreading should be studied.
Proposal 5: For inter-slot OCC, the solution when the number of repetitions is greater than the length of the OCC sequence should be studied.
Proposal 6: If the multiple PUCCHs with repetitions overlap the OCC group, the following options can be considered:
Option 1: Only one PUCCH with repetition can be multiplexed with PUSCH with OCC.
Option 2: The non-overlapping parts after the multiplex between two PUCCH with repetition can be dropped.
Proposal 7: A group-common DCI to schedule the transmission of multiple UEs with OCC on the same resources can be studied to improve the overhead of signaling.

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	  R1-2503776
St Julian's, Malta, 19 - 23 May, 2025 

Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	CATT
Title:	         Discussion on UL capacity enhancement for NR NTN 
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we analzyed potential issues of UL capacity enhancement for NR NTN, and the observations proposals are listed as follows:
The UE cannot transmit PUSCH and PUCCH simultaneously in a single carrier, regardless of whether the PUSCH and PUCCH are allocated in different PRBs or not.

The corresponded PUSCH is to be counted when all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlaps with the PUCCH are dropped. 
when A-CSI reports occasion is on the first PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group, PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports is transmitted on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group; otherwise, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and PUSCH repetition is dropped.
 UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions with A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH when the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing is satisfied.
The overlap of PUSCH and PUCCH is only related to time overlapping.
For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in DCI implicitly with association with DM RS port.
For occ-Length for OCC with DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, OCC Length applicable to PUSCH can be configured by RRC higher-layer parameter.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                  			               R1-2503814
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.11.3	
Source:	InterDigital, Inc.
Title:	NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusions
In this contribution, the following proposals are made:
Proposal 1: For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support one of the Option 3 or Option 5. 
Proposal 2: Support OCC based PUSCH transmissions with TBoMS.  

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121  	  R1-2503847
St Julian's, Malta, 19th – 23rd May, 2025
Source: 	CMCC
Title:	Discussion on the NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancements
Agenda item:	9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion & Decision

Conclusions
In this contribution, we discuss the remaining issues of the enhancements of PUSCH multiplexing. The observations and proposals are listed below. 

Observation 1:
The PUCCH overlapping with PUSCH repetition can be avoided through gNB’s scheduling. 

Observation 2:
The agreements (including option 2 and option 3-a) can be applied to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH and without additional specification impacts. 

Observation 3:
The agreements (the option 2) can be applied to the case of PUCCH repetition colliding with PUSCH repetitions. 

Observation 4:
The dynamic switching between OCC length 4 and length 2 happen only for the UEs supporting the capability of OCC length 4.

Proposal 1: 
When OCC is enabled, aperiodic CSI report(s) is repeated on all PUSCH repetitions within the first OCC group.

Proposal 2: 
If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, and if the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, 
UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions with/without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)

Proposal 3:
For the DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 1, the OCC length can be configured through RRC.

Proposal 4:
For the DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 1, the specific OCC sequence can be indicated through DCI.

Proposal 5:
For the candidate solutions of the configuration or the indication of the OCC length, option 2 and option 4 can be deprioritized.

Proposal 6:
RRC based OCC sequence indication needs to be discussed for CG PUSCH type 2.

Proposal 7:
It should be further studied whether to support the frequency hopping in the NTN scenario and with the OCC multiplexing in the time domain.

Proposal 8:
To maintaining the phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH, the conditions of DMRS bundling can be reused. 

Proposal 9:
The OCC group can be defined as the N consecutive slots or repetitions for PUSCH transmission, in which N equals to the length of OCC.

Proposal 10:
OCC multiplexing can only be performed when the repetition number is equal or larger than the indicated repetition number. Otherwise, the OCC multiplexing is considered as deactivated. 

Proposal 11:
For PUSCH repetition factor which is not the multiple of the OCC length, e.g. ‘n3’ and ‘n7’, consider the following options:
Option 1: The repetition factor which is not the multiple of the OCC length is not allowed when OCC multiplexing enabled. 
Option 2: When n3 and n7 is indicated, the OCC multiplexing is considered as deactivated.
Option 3: When n3 and n7 is indicated, the OCC sequence is applied sequentially.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		    R1-2503897
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025


Source: 	     Xiaomi
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN PUSCH capacity enhancement 
Agenda item:       9.11.3
Document for:    Discussion and Decision

Conclusion  
In this contribution, we discuss the normative work of NR-NTN PUSCH capacity enhancement. Based on the discussion, our views are summarized as follows.

Proposal 1: Support inter-slot OCC multiplexing for UEs operating in TN based on a common design.
Proposal 2: Support OCC multiplexing for DCI format 0_1 and DCI format 0_2.
Proposal 3: Configure the OCC length by RRC signalling.
Proposal 4: Implicitly enable the OCC multiplexing by the RRC configuration of the OCC length.
Proposal 5: Implicitly indicate the OCC sequence index via the legacy antenna port field in the scheduling DCI, with a mapping relationship between OCC sequence indexes and DMRS ports and/or DMRS sequences.
Proposal 6: For OCC with DG PUSCH, the RV sequences are [0, 2, 3, 1], with the first RV indicated by RV field in the scheduling DCI. 
Proposal 7: Deter the RV for the follow-up OCC group(s) when OCC group(s) dropping is occurred.
Proposal 8: Mandate the support of inter-group frequency hopping for inter-slot OCC multiplexing.
Proposal 9: Utilize the existing frequency hopping flag in the scheduling DCI to enable the inter-group frequency hopping for OCC multiplexing.
Proposal 10: Don’t support inter-slot OCC multiplexing for TBoMS transmission.

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121                                    	R1-2503909
Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025                 	 
	 
Agenda item:	9.11.3
Source:	NTPU
Title:	Discussion on the NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancements
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
Following proposals are made:
Proposal 1: If a scheduled OCC group is not transmitted (i.e., the entire group is dropped), the RV shall not be incremented. The RV counting shall be based on non-dropped OCC groups.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		                                                    R1-2503931
St Julian's, Malta, 19 - 23 May, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	NEC
Title:	NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:	Discussion 

Conclusion
From the discussion, we have the following observations and proposals.

Proposal 1: Using DMRS bundling with OCC could enhance the OCC performance.

Proposal 2: The OCC group duration determines the actual TDW length

Proposal 3: DMRS bundling capability is reused for OCC

Proposal 4: For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, candidate values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.

Proposal 5: if timeline condition for Option 3.a is met and semi-static betaOffsets are applied when UCI is multiplexed on a PUSCH, separate sets of ,  can be configured and applied when UCI is multiplexed on PUSCH with or without inter slot OCC.

Proposal 6: If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with the same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, and if PUCCH overlaps with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain, PUCCH should be dropped.

Proposal 7: Multiple PUCCHs overlapping with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions are not considered in R-19.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2504002
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Source:	Fujitsu
Title:	Discussion on uplink capacity/cell throughput enhancement for FR1-NTN
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provide our views as below.
Proposal 1: For OCC length indication for DG/CG type 2 PUSCH, support Option 2 with small specification impact, DCI-based OCC control and only adding RRC parameter.

Proposal 2: For OCC sequence indication for DG/CG type 2 PUSCH, reusing an existing field should be supported to keep DCI payload size.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		                         R1-2504055
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda item:			9.11.3
Source:	China Telecom
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:		Discussion

Conclusions
In this contribution, we provide our views on potential signaling aspects and have the following proposals:
Proposal 1: If PUCCH with repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with the same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group(s) that overlap with the PUCCH are dropped.
Proposal 2: If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with different priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, the legacy conditions and rules for prioritization for dropping applies with the following updates:
If the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlap with the PUCCH are dropped (Option 2).
If the UCI on the PUCCH is dropped according to legacy rules and updated timeline conditions for UCI dropping are satisfied, all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group are transmitted and UCI is dropped, and there is no additional spec impact (Option 1).
Proposal 3: For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support Option 4: Single value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (no RRC configuration of candidate values).
Proposal 4: Introduce a new field in DCI to indicate OCC sequence and OCC length. 
Proposal 5: For inter-slot OCC with PUSCH repetition type A, intra-slot frequency hopping should be avoided.
Proposal 6: Support OCC group based frequency hopping. 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1-2504105
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	HONOR
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN UL capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusions
In this contribution, we provide our views on NR-NTN Uplink Capacity/Throughput Enhancement with the following and proposals.
Proposal 1: If A-CSI is transmitted in PUSCH repetition type A when OCC is enabled, A-CSI should be repeated in one OCC group.
Proposal 2: Support that UE does not expect PUCCH to overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain when OCC is enabled. If such an overlap occurs, UCI should be dropped and PUSCH should be transmitted (Option 1).
Proposal 3: Confirm the working assumption 1 and 2.
Proposal 4: The RV of the OCC group right after the dropped OCC group should be same as that of the dropped OCC group to maintain the continuity of RV sequence across OCC groups.
Proposal 5: Support Option 1, i.e., the OCC length is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter for both DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2.
Proposal 6: Support to reuse the antenna ports field in DCI to indicate the OCC sequence index for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2.
Proposal 7: Support inter-slot OCC with TBoMS for PUSCH and each part of TBoMS is repeated OCC length times in sequence, and one OCC group includes the repetitions of one part of TBoMS.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2504151
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda item:	9.11.3
Source: 	ETRI
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, ETRI’s views on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement were shown and the following proposals were made:
Proposal 1. For DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH type 2, support option 3 (first preference) or option 5 (second preference):
Candidates (or Max value) of occ-Length: On top of the UE capability reports on OCC length 2 and 4, introduce an RRC signalling to configure candidates of occ-Length
occ-Length & occ-Sequence are explicitly indicated by a new DCI field
Note: occ-Length could be omitted by the association with the bitwidth of occ-Sequence
Proposal 2. For DG PUSCH, For CG PUSCH type 2, and CG PUSCH type 1,
OCC is disabled, if occ-Length configuration/indication is absent
OCC is disabled, if occ-Length is not configured as 2 nor 4
Proposal 3. Regarding the OCC sequence, support the following orthogonal sequences for OCC length 4
Proposal 4. RAN1 to clarify whether or not to support OCC for TBoMS transmission in NTN. If supported, RAN1 to consider the following cases:
Case #1: numberOfSlotsTBoMS = 2, numberOfRepetitions = 2
Case #2: numberOfSlotsTBoMS = 2, numberOfRepetitions = 4
Case #3: numberOfSlotsTBoMS = 2, numberOfRepetitions = 8

Proposal 5. RAN1 to clarify the total number of PUSCH repetitions with OCC schemes:
Option#1: total number of PUSCH repetitions =  (legacy)
: numberOfSlotsTBoMS
: numberOfRepetitions
The total number of repetitions ( is multiples of OCC length 
Option#2: total number of PUSCH repetitions =  (new)

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1- 2504155
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Lenovo
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN Uplink Capacity/Throughput Enhancement 
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion [RAN1#117]
OCC with PUSCH can support at least multiplexing of 2 or 4 UEs and achieve up to 2 or 4 times capacity gains respectively, when repetitions are used.
Note: the actual gain may be less due to e.g. intra/inter cell interference.

Agreement [RAN1#117]
For the normative phase, at least one of the OCC techniques will be specified:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A with OCC length 2 or 4
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC with OCC length 2 or 4
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4) with OCC length 2 or 4
FFS Combination of OCC techniques including multiplexing of 8 UEs
FFS Use of OCC techniques with TBoMS
FFS Backward compatibility with non-Rel-19 UEs

RAN1#116-bis meeting agreement
Agreement
Support OCC for PUSCH in Rel-19 NR NTN:
At least PUSCH with Type A repetition
FFS PUSCH without Type A repetition for intra-symbol and/or inter-symbol cases
At least code length 2 or 4, FFS code length 8 
FFS: number of RBs
Potential OCC techniques listed below are for further down-selection:
Inter-slot time-domain OCC with PUSCH repetition Type A 
Inter-symbol(s) time domain OCC 
Intra-symbol pre-DFT-s OCC (comb-like structure as in PUCCH format 4)
Combinations of OCC techniques
TBoMS for OCC techniques is FFS

Agreement
RAN1 to at least further study the potential specification aspects on OCC techniques:
TBS calculation / Rate matching
UCI multiplexing
RV cycling across repetitions
Frequency hopping, e.g. intra /inter slot
OCC indication/configuration
Power control
FFS others aspects

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2504181
Malta, MT, 19 - 23 May 2025

Agenda item:	9.11.3
Source:	Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell
Title:	Discussion of NR-NTN uplink capacity enhancements 
WI code:	NR_NTN_Ph3
Release:	Rel-19
Document for:		Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution we have presented our views, which is best summarized through our observations and proposals which are as follows:
Observation 1: A CSI report could always be available in the first slot of an OCC period if the associated CSI reference resource is determined by the minimum required CSI processing time plus the time consumed by (OCC_LEN – 1) slots, and the performance impact by shifting the associated CSI reference resource is negligible in NTN.
Observation 2: In the case of inter-slot (i.e. PUSCH repetitions Type A) OCC, frequency hopping might impair applicability of OCC.
Observation 3: In case of explicit configuration or specification of a set of OCC sequences to use for PUSCH repetitions, an indication of the OCC sequence length is not necessary.
Observation 4: Applying GNSS update during OCC time window may break OCC orthogonality.

Proposal 1: For inter-slot OCC, in case a UE experiences an event that breaks phase consistency, the UE shall drop the remaining PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group.
Proposal 2: For inter-slot OCC, in case a UE is able to foresee an event that breaks phase consistency within an OCC group, the UE shall drop the entire transmission during the given OCC group.
Proposal 3: RAN1 to conclude that it is not expected that the UE applies autonomous event(s) within an OCC period.
Proposal 4: UE postpones UCI multiplexing to the subsequent OCC group of the same set of PUSCH repetitions if the updated timeline conditions are not met.
Proposal 5: the A-CSI reports is multiplexed into each of the PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group in case of PUSCH repetitions with A-CSI reports.
Proposal 6: PUCCH vs. A-CSI overlapping is extended from slot level to OCC group level, that is, when HARQ-ACK and A-CSI is in a same OCC group, HARQ-ACK should be multiplexed with A-CSI.
Proposal 7: PUCCH vs. A-CSI overlapping is extended from slot level to OCC group level, that is, when CSI on PUCCH and A-CSI is in a same OCC group, CSI on PUCCH should be dropped.
Proposal 8: A UE does not expect that a PUCCH overlaps with PUSCH repetition with OCC in both time and frequency domain.
Proposal 9: In the case of PUSCH dropping within an OCC group, a UE may expect multiple PUCCHs in different slots of the dropped OCC group.
Proposal 10: UE drops all the PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group if at least one of the PUSCH repetitions is dropped based on the existing PUCCH vs. PUSCH overlapping handling.
Proposal 11: In the case of PUCCH repetitions colliding with PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC, UE prioritizes the channel whose repetitions start earlier and drops the later channel, or part of it.
Proposal 12: The CSI reference resource associated to a CSI report is shifted earlier by (OCC_LEN - 1) slots when OCC is configured for PUSCH transmissions.
Proposal 13: Discuss extension of the inter-slot frequency hopping with inter-slot bundling for PUSCH feature in case of PUSCH repetitions Type A with OCC.
Proposal 14: Related to Comeback proposal 3.2 from RAN1#120-bis, support option A. That is, “OCC length is configured by higher-layer signaling and sequence index is indicated in DCI; Implicitly with re-using DM RS port field, and for OCC length 4 [and 2] is configured by higher-layer signaling and sequence index is indicated implicitly in DCI with association with DM RS port [with reference to tables]”.
Proposal 15: DMRS port number per OCC sequence may additionally be RRC configured in the case of utilization of DMRS antenna port bits for indication of the OCC sequence.
Proposal 16: To support MU-MIMO with UL capacity enhancements, introduce multiple OCC disabled states, each with a different DMRS antenna port number.
Proposal 17: Adopt the following tables for dynamic indication of OCC sequence index and OCC length for maximum OCC lengths 4 and 2 respectively:
Maximum OCC length 4:

Maximum OCC length 2:

Proposal 18: RAN1 to explore methods to address potential issues with GNSS update when OCC is applied. The methods should specify rules and requirement at UE side and coordination with NW to avoid timing misalignment. 
Proposal 19: RAN1 to further discuss the higher layer parameters to use for UL capacity enhancements for NR over NTN.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1-2504201
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th - 23th, 2025

Source:	OPPO
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement 
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we discuss the potential specification impacts to support PUSCH repetition Type A with inter-slot OCC in NR-NTN. The following proposals are made.
Proposal 1: For OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support indicating OCC length and OCC index in the corresponding DCI. 
Proposal 2: For UCI multiplexing on PUSCH with inter-slot OCC, if the number of HARQ-ACK information bits to be transmitted on PUSCH is 0, 1 or 2 bits and without CG-UCI, the resources for potential HARQ-ACK transmission should be reserved on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group. 
Proposal 3: Do not introduce a separate  factor for UCI multiplexing on PUSCH with inter-slot OCC. The actual  factor is proportionally reduced based on the OCC length for calculating the number of REs allocated for UCI on each PUSCH.
Proposal 4: For PUSCH repetition Type A with inter-slot OCC, PUSCH frequency hopping should be performed in unit of OCC group if inter-slot frequency hopping is configured.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2504272
St Julian's, Malta, 19th -23rd, 2025

Source:	MediaTek Inc.
Title:	NR-NTN uplink capacity and throughput enhancements
Agenda item:	9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion
In this contribution, we have the following observations and proposals:

UCI multiplexing:
Proposal 1: The end of the last symbol of the triggering PDCCH for A-CSI report is received and processed before the first symbol of the first PUSCH repetition of an OCC group for UCI multiplexing on PUSCH.
Proposal 2: RAN1 confirms agreement on “UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group” applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH.
Proposal 3: RAN1 confirm Working Assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.
Proposal 4: RAN1 confirm Working Assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

OCC indication/configuration:
Observation 1: For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, it is sufficient for the OCC sequences for OCC 2 or OCC 4 to be configured.  
Observation 2: OCC length 2 or length 4 is implicitly known from indication via DCI of a sequence with OCC 2 or a sequence with OCC 4 respectively.
Proposal 5: For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in a new 2-bit DCI field.

Phase continuity with OCC with PUSCH:
Observation 3: To maintain phase continuity for OCC with PUSCH, a UE should not use a new GNSS position fix or new ephemeris to re-calculate and apply satellite delay and Doppler for UE pre-compensation during OCC group.
Proposal 6: RAN1 can wait for RAN4 reply LS on requirements for the phase continuity and power consistency.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504344
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025 

Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Apple
Title:	On NR-NTN Uplink Capacity Enhancement
Document for:	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provided our views on NR-NTN uplink capacity enhancements. Our proposals are as follows:

Proposal 1: For TBoMS based PUSCH transmissions with repetition, support slot-based OCC spreading.
The same RV value is used in N OCC groups,
RV cycling across N OCC groups is supported, 
where N is the number of slots per TB.

Proposal 2: When PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, if the UCI with aperiodic CSI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions, then the aperiodic CSI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group. 

Proposal 3: When PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, if the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions and PUCCH and PUSCH repetition overlap in both time and frequency domain, then OCC-based PUSCH repetition is transmitted and UCI on PUCCH is dropped.

Proposal 4: UE does not expect multiple PUCCH without repetitions in different PUCCH slots overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group, except any of the following conditions. 
Only one UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetitions according to legacy rules and updated timeline conditions.
PUSCH repetitions are dropped according to legacy rules and updated timeline conditions.

Proposal 5: Confirm the working assumption that different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH applies the same UCI multiplexing or dropping rule as the same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH (with the modifications in Proposals 2, 3, 4).

Proposal 6: Confirm the working assumption that PUCCH with repetitions applies the same UCI multiplexing or dropping rule as PUCCH without repetitions (with the modifications in Proposals 2, 3, 4).

Proposal 7: RAN1 to determine whether to reduce the resource allocation of UCI if it is multiplexed on PUSCH repetitions in an OCC period.

Proposal 8: For type 2 configured grant PUSCH, support a single OCC length is configured by RRC via ConfiguredGrantConfig (i.e., Option 1).
An OCC sequence index for the configured OCC length is dynamically indicated by a new field of activation DCI. 

Proposal 9: For dynamic grant PUSCH, support
a single OCC length is configured by RRC via PUSCH-Config (i.e., Option 1)
An OCC sequence index for the configured OCC length is dynamically indicated by a new field of DCI. 
candidate OCC lengths are configured by RRC via PUSCH-TimeDomainResourceAllocationList-r16 (i.e., Option 3)
The TDRA index of DCI dynamically indicates the OCC length. 
An OCC sequence index for the indicated OCC length is dynamically indicated by a new field of DCI. 

Proposal 10: The following RRC parameters are introduced for inter-slot OCC with PUSCH repetition. 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		                     R1-2504412
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Agenda item:	9.11.3
Source: 	Qualcomm Incorporated
Title: 	NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
OCC with Msg3 PUSCH is not in scope of Release 19 NR NTN Ph3.

Agreement
For RV cycling for OCC with DG-PUSCH, support Option 1 
Option 1: RV cycling is used across OCC groups.
Note: when option 1 is applied, RV cycling is applied when the number of repetitions is greater than the OCC length
No optimization in Rel-19 for pairing UEs with OCC2 and UEs with OCC4.

Agreement
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling
Agreement
Send LS to RAN4 on requirements for the phase continuity and power consistency:
RAN1 has agreed the following:
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH.
FFS: under which conditions the above applies, e.g. under the same conditions that phase continuity applies for DMRS bundling 
RAN1 ask RAN4 whether the same phase continuity requirements as for DMRS bundling can be applied for OCC length 2 and/or OCC length 4 under the same conditions as for DMRS bundling, or if new requirements are needed.

Agreement
OCC length and OCC sequence for OCC with CG PUSCH Type 1 are configured by RRC higher-layers.
Up to RAN2 whether to signal this with one or two RRC parameters.
Note: OCC lengths and sequences to be provided in the table of RRC parameters to be prepared by the WI rapporteur.
Agreement
For OCC with CG-PUSCH, the RV sequence applied across OCC groups is RRC configured among the RV sequences defined for legacy CG PUSCH, i.e., [0,2,3,1], [0,3,0,3] or [0,0,0,0].
Note: no new RRC parameter is needed for the above.
FFS: if OCC group dropping is later agreed, how to count RVs may need to be discussed for that case.

Agreement
For resolving the overlapping PUSCH repetitions with inter-slot OCC and PUCCH with/without repetitions, the legacy timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping PUSCH [/ PUCCH] applies according with the following update:
“the first PUSCH repetition of an OCC group” is used instead of “PUSCH repetition” for the legacy timeline condition, where the legacy PUSCH repetition that overlaps with a PUCCH belongs to the OCC group.
Note: how to capture the above agreement is up to the spec editor.

Agreement
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, consider the following options:
Option 1: Configured by RRC higher-layer parameter.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 2: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is implicitly determined from the configured repetition number.
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: this does not preclude jointly configuring OCC sequence and OCC length with the same RRC configuration
Option 4: Single value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (no RRC configuration of candidate values).
Option 5: Max value is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH and by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Note: it is not precluded to select a different option for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2.

Agreement
If PUCCH without repetitions overlaps with inter-slot OCC with any PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group with a same priority index for PUCCH/PUSCH, the legacy conditions and rules for UCI multiplexing or prioritization for dropping applies with the following updates:
If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions without A-CSI reports within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH. (Option 3-a)
FFS: PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports
If the PUSCH repetition is dropped according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for PUSCH dropping are satisfied, UCI is transmitted on PUCCH and all PUSCH repetitions within the OCC group that overlaps with the PUCCH are dropped (Option 2)
FFS: if PUCCH is overlap with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain.
UE does not expect there are multiple PUCCHs without repetitions in different PUCCH slots with a same or different UCI types other than SR overlapping with multiple PUSCH repetitions in the same OCC group.
FFS: whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH
Note 1: If the UCI on the PUCCH is dropped according to legacy rules and [updated] timeline conditions for UCI dropping are satisfied, there is no [additional] spec impact. (Option 1)
Note 2: There can be multiple PUCCHs with same or different UCI types in the same slot (i.e. CSI report and HARQ-ACK) as in the legacy specifications

Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.

Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact is identified.

Agreement
For the OCC sequence applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, the sequence is indicated dynamically in DCI
FFS: with a new field or reusing an existing field

In this contribution, we present our views on remaining issues for NR NTN uplink capacity enhancements.
Specification aspects
2.1 Bandwidth limitation
In RAN1#116b, it was discussed whether to limit the number of allocated PRBs when using OCC, which resulted in the following FFS (highlighted):

Although there seemed to be consensus among companies that using OCC with large PRB allocation does not provide any gain, it was argued that this should be a scheduling decision at the gNB and not specified. We disagree with this statement.
OCC for PUSCH is a new feature introduced quite late in the lifecycle of NR. Since Rel-15, the hardware and processing in products have been optimized to accommodate increasing data rates while keeping low area and power consumption. Performing OCC “at the envelope” (i.e., without limiting the number of PRBs, modulation order, etc.) would necessitate overdimensioning the UE hardware and processing to accommodate spreading + OCC with very large allocations, or running the hardware at higher clock rates (resulting in increased power consumption) to meet the timeline requirements. In the absence of specification limitations, the UE will need to be more complex and/or increase its power consumption to accommodate cases for which there is no capacity benefit. 
For more than 1 PRB allocation, the same multiplexing capability can be realized by first reducing the PRB allocation down to 1 PRB, and then applying OCC within the 1 PRB (e.g. applying OCC-4 for 2 PRBs would be equivalent to applying OCC-2 to two different allocations of 1 PRB). Therefore, we make the following proposal.
Proposal 1: OCC schemes can only be applied when the number of allocated PRBs is 1.
2.2 TBoMS
One FFS from the previous meeting is whether OCC should be supported with TBoMS. In our view, and similar to the case of PUSCH with type A repetition, PUSCH with TBoMS and repetitions should also be supported. Therefore, we make the following proposal:
Proposal 2: OCC is supported for TBoMS at least for the case of repetitions

2.3 Signaling and DCI design
For DG-PUSCH, the enablement of OCC should adhere to the standard procedures in NR: the feature is enabled by RRC, and subsequently the DCI may indicate which codeword is to be used by the UE. Note that dynamic signaling of the codeword is desirable to allow dynamic pairing of UEs based on e.g. data arrival, power imbalance, etc.
Proposal 3: For DG-PUSCH:
The maximum OCC factor (2 or 4) is configured by RRC.
DCI dynamically indicates the OCC factor (no-OCC or 2 or 4)
For any OCC scheme to work, the UE needs to be notified about the following OCC parameters:
The OCC factor (M) – maybe semi-statically configured using RRC or dynamically configured using DCI.
The OCC codeword (CW) – For each OCC factor, there are M possible codewords. The UE needs to be informed in the DCI about what codeword to use for a given OCC factor.
Four bits are allocated in DCI for scheduling UL PUSCH for antenna ports e.g., in DCI format 0_1 (38.212). These bits were introduced to support MU-MIMO capabilities, however since NTN UL is expected to operate with 1 Tx/Rx, these bits may be reused to indicate an OCC factor and an OCC codeword. For example, to support OCC of up to 4 UEs (including no OCC), we would need 1 (no OCC) + 2 (OCC 2 + 2 CW) + 4 (OCC4 + 4 CW) entries to indicate OCC configuration. This translates to 3 bits and the UL PUSCH antenna port filed may be repurposed for OCC accordingly. This will result in some changes made to the tables in Section 7.3.1.1 of 38.212. For example, the joint encoding of DMRS port, OCC factor and CW index may be jointly encoded as follows:

Note that value 6 corresponds to no OCC (OCC factor of 1). 
Similarly, for the case of maximum OCC factor of 2, the following table can be adopted:

Proposal 4: The indication of DMRS port, OCC factor and OCC CW index are jointly encoded in DCI. 

An OCC enable/disable flag may be needed to indicate to a UE whether it should apply OCC or not, and to differentiate UEs doing and not doing OCC, which in the above example is jointly encoded in the table with other parameters. Other limitations may be imposed to keep maximum flexibility of PUSCH scheduled with and without OCC, while simultaneously minimizing the overhead. For instance, following the reasoning in Section 4.1, we expect OCC to be used in allocations with small bandwidth. Additionally, we expect OCC to be supported with low MCS (coverage limited) scenarios and OCC is expected to perform better when TBoMS is enabled. Instead of using a separate flag for OCC, the NW and UE may derive this flag from several conditions indicated in the DCI. For example, if the transmission bandwidth is 1 PRB (based on FDRA field), the modulation of MCS is no higher than QPSK (based on MCS field), the slots used for TBoMS are greater than or equal to M (based on TDRA field) and the UL-SCH flag is set to 1, the UE and network can implicitly derive from these conditions that uplink communications with OCC are enabled. If these conditions are not satisfied, the UE and network can implicitly assume that the scheduled transmission is not using OCC, and the DCI may be interpreted according to the legacy rules. This implicit indication may help in reducing overhead in DCI for configuring OCC. Note that the bandwidth limitation mentioned in Section 3.1 about OCC being limited to 1 PRB has an advantage in this context as well i.e., implicitly indicating OCC in DCI (without increasing DCI overhead).
Proposal 5: Network may enable/disable OCC implicitly based on values of certain fields that meet certain conditions, e.g. OCC is only applied if the following conditions are met:
FDRA = 1 PRB.
Modulation order 
UL-SCH flag = 1

2.4 UCI multiplexing
In previous meetings, the following agreement was reached:


We propose to solve the FFSs as follows:
For the FFS on “if PUCCH overlaps with PUSCH repetition in both time and frequency domain”, we do not think there should be any additional handling for this case.
For the FFS on “whether the above applies only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH”, we propose to apply the restriction to all cases for specification simplicity.
Therefore, we do not propose to add any additional limitation on top of the previous agreement.
2.5 PT-RS
The specification impact of OCC on PT-RS has been overlooked in the previous meetings. Although typically used in FR2, RAN1 specifications allow usage of PT-RS regardless of the frequency range and, therefore, may be enabled in FR1 NTN. We believe that RAN1 should not specify the joint operation of PT-RS and OCC due to the following reasons:
Technically, TRS is designed for channels in which the phase changes symbol by symbol, requiring estimation of this phase variation. If the channel phase changes very rapidly across symbols, inter-slot OCC will suffer from loss of orthogonality and, therefore, should not be enabled.
From specification and implementation complexity point of view, enabling PT-RS (while keeping orthogonality across UEs using OCC) would be challenging, with RAN1 needing to discuss aspects such as whether PT-RS is OCC’d across slots.
Therefore, we make the following proposal:
Proposal 6: If the UE is scheduled to transmit PUSCH with OCC, PT-RS is not present in the PUSCH.
2.6 Phase coherence
One remaining issue is how to define the phase coherence requirement across PUSCH in the same OCC group. Given that the common understanding was that for PUSCH with OCC we would not introduce new RF requirements, we propose to reuse the mechanism and requirements introduced under DMRS bundling. If RAN4 decides that reusing these requirements is feasible, we propose to adopt the following propoposal:
Proposal 7: For phase coherence in PUSCH with OCC, reuse the DMRS bundling framework:
The UE declares the maximum TDW length during which it can keep coherent transmission.
The network may configure a TDW duration that is a multiple of the OCC group duration.
The events that result into loss of coherence are the same as for DMRS bundling
No new RF requirements are introduced.
FFS: Whether there is a new capability for the TDW length or the DMRS bundling capability is reused

OCC Codeword (CW) Hopping
In all the simulations done throughout the work item,it has been assumed that UEs used a fixed OCC CW during transmissions. In cases where there are significant CFO differentials between the UEs doing OCC, using a fixed CW throughout the whole OCC transmission may be detrimental. 
For the sake of illustration, let’s consider the extreme case of 4 UEs are using OCC and 2 of the UEs have such CFO differentials which convert CW of one UE to the CW of another UE – maximum interference case. If these 2 UEs fix their CWs for their whole transmission, both UEs will become undecodable at the receiver. However, if we change the CWs amongst the 4 UEs during transmission, this interference (confusion of one CW into another) will be randomized. If there are enough repetitions i.e., we change the OCC CW of each UE enough times during the whole transmission, this interference will average out. This averaging out of interference will result in performance gain. This can be observed in Fig. 1 below, where comparison between no OCC hopping and OCC hopping for 4 UEs OCC is shown for VoIP (TBS = 184) for different number of repetitions (slots).

Figure 1 Performance comparison of no OCC CW hopping vs OCC CW hopping for 4 UEs with VoIP for different number of repetitions (slots)
It can be observed from the figure that at low SNRs (more repetitions), OCC CW hopping helps with error flooring as compared to no hopping. Reducing this error flooring may be especially helpful in cases where low BLER is required. It should be noted that OCC CW hopping will not have any performance impact for OCC 2 (the two CWs can be considered somewhat anti-podal with or without hopping so there is no interference randomization). 
Proposal 8: OCC CW hopping is supported for OCC 4.

2.8 CG-PUSCH & starting slot

If we look at the current procedures for CG-PUSCH with repetition Type A (Section 6.1.2.3.1 - 38.214), when startingFromRV0 is set to ON, the initial transmission of a transport block depends on (1) the RV sequence configured and (2) transmission occasion where associated RV = 0. Associated RV for transmission occasion n is calculated as following per current specification -- (mod(((n-mod(n, N))/N)-1,4)+1)th value in the configured RV sequence. This may cause the OCC structure to break when OCC is enabled as we describe in the example below.
Assume no TBoMS, assume 8 transmission occasions (e.g., 8 slots) and startingfromRV0 is set to ON, assume configured RV sequence is {0,3,0,3} and assume OCC2 (an OCC group = 2 slots). In last meeting it was agreed that RV cycling is used across OCC group. The current specification tells us the following about example above
“the initial transmission of a transport block may start at any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions that are associated with RV=0 if the configured RV sequence is {0,3,0,3},”
Below is a Table that demonstrates what the above text says based on the RV cycling agreed for OCC.
Table 1 Demonstration of whether UE may or may not start a TB transmission with repetitions and OCC2 at  a particular transmission occasion according to the current specification, given the agreed RV cycling 

Note that expected RV is what the RV cycling would look like based on the agreement in previous meeting. Now let’s say a UE was scheduled to start transmissions with OCC in slot 6 with 4 repetitions (4 slots), which will span 2 OCC groups. The scenario is demonstrated in the figure below.
Figure 2 Demonstration of how structure of OCC breaks if agreed RV cycling is followed in context of current specification
It can be seen that, in this case:
OCC group 2 is not transmitted entirely.
OCC group 1 (of the UE starting in slot 6) overlaps with two different OCC groups of a UE that would start in slot 5.
Both cases break the orthogonality of OCC.
Observation 1: If a UE follows current specification for determining initial transmission of TB with repetitions and OCC, the UE may start transmissions in a slot that is not aligned with the start of an OCC group.
To circumvent this issue, we need to introduce dependence of “beginning of an OCC group” when it comes to initial transmission. Therefore, for UEs doing OCC, the initial transmission of a transport block would now depends on (1) the RV sequence configured (2) transmission occasion where associated RV = 0 and (3) whether an OCC group can begin at the current transmission occasion. This means that the figure above will look like following for OCC2:
Table 2 Demonstration of whether UE may or may not start a TB transmission with repetitions and OCC2 at a particular transmission occasion with the new independence, given the agreed RV cycling from []

One way of introducing this independence is modify the text in specification to following (changes are highlighted):
“the initial transmission of a transport block may start at 
the first transmission occasion of the K repetitions if the configured RV sequence is {0,2,3,1},
any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions that are associated with RV=0, and for which n mod M = 1 if the configured RV sequence is {0,3,0,3}, and 
any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions if the configured RV sequence is {0,0,0,0}, and for which n mod M = 1, except the last transmission occasion when K≥8.”
Where M is the OCC factor. Note that the change above is similar to what is in the spec. for TBoMS PUSCH Repetition Type A (Section 6.1.2.3.3 from 38.214). It should also be noted that M=1 corresponds to no OCC. 
Proposal 9: For initial TB transmission occasion of CG-PUSCH with OCC (and repetitions), a UE initial transmission of a transport block may start at:
the first transmission occasion of the K repetitions if the configured RV sequence is {0,2,3,1},
any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions that are associated with RV=0, and for which n mod M = 1 if the configured RV sequence is {0,3,0,3}, and 
any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions if the configured RV sequence is {0,0,0,0}, and for which n mod M = 1, except the last transmission occasion when K≥8.”

Summary
In this contribution we presented our views on uplink capacity enhancements for NR NTN. We made the following observations and proposals:
Proposal 1: OCC schemes can only be applied when the number of allocated PRBs is 1.

Proposal 2: OCC is supported for TBoMS at least for the case of repetitions

Proposal 3: For DG-PUSCH:
The maximum OCC factor (2 or 4) is configured by RRC.
DCI dynamically indicates the OCC factor (no-OCC or 2 or 4)

Proposal 4: The indication of DMRS port, OCC factor and OCC CW index are jointly encoded in DCI.

Proposal 5: Network may enable/disable OCC implicitly based on values of certain fields that meet certain conditions, e.g. OCC is only applied if the following conditions are met:
FDRA = 1 PRB.
Modulation order 
UL-SCH flag = 1

Proposal 6: If the UE is scheduled to transmit PUSCH with OCC, PT-RS is not present in the PUSCH.

Proposal 7: For phase coherence in PUSCH with OCC, reuse the DMRS bundling framework:
The UE declares the maximum TDW length during which it can keep coherent transmission.
The network may configure a TDW duration that is a multiple of the OCC group duration.
The events that result into loss of coherence are the same as for DMRS bundling
No new RF requirements are introduced.
FFS: Whether there is a new capability for the TDW length or the DMRS bundling capability is reused

Proposal 8: OCC CW hopping is supported for OCC 4.

Observation 1: If a UE follows current specification for determining initial transmission of TB with repetitions and OCC, the UE may start transmissions in a slot that is not aligned with the start of an OCC group.

Proposal 9: For initial TB transmission occasion of CG-PUSCH with OCC (and repetitions), a UE initial transmission of a transport block may start at:
the first transmission occasion of the K repetitions if the configured RV sequence is {0,2,3,1},
any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions that are associated with RV=0, and for which n mod M = 1 if the configured RV sequence is {0,3,0,3}, and 
any of the transmission occasions of the K repetitions if the configured RV sequence is {0,0,0,0}, and for which n mod M = 1, except the last transmission occasion when K≥8.”

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1-2504443
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	Panasonic
Title: 	Uplink capacity/throughput enhancement for NR-NTN
Agenda Item:		9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion and decision

Conclusion 
In this contribution, UL capacity/throughput enhancement using OCC for DFT-s-OFDM PUSCH was discussed. The following observations and proposals were made. 
Proposal 1: A-CSI is transmitted over the PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group. For collision with PUCCH and PUSCH repetition with A-CSI, apply the agreement in RAN1#120bis on UCI multiplexing to PUSCH repetition with A-CSI as well. 
Proposal 2: Apply the agreement in RAN1#120bis on PUSCH dropping regardless of the PUCCH and PUSCH collision in frequency domain.
Proposal 3: Apply “UE does not expect multiple PUCCHs in an OCC group” only when at least one of the overlapping PUCCHs result in a UCI being multiplexed on the PUSCH.
Observation 1: Because OCC is used together with repetition and OCC length is closely related with repetition factor, similar way as signaling of repetition factor is reasonable for signaling of OCC length. 
Observation 2: Semi-static configuration can be realized by configuring only one OCC length in the TDRA list. It is up to gNB implementation whether to dynamically change the OCC length. 
Proposal 4: Include OCC length in TDRA list (pusch-TimeDomainResourceAllocationList) and allow dynamic indication of OCC length in the TDRA list without increasing the DCI bits. (Option 3) 
Proposal 5: OCC sequence is implicitly indicated via DMRS port index, i.e. i.e. OCC sequence #n is linked to DMRS port #n ((n=0, 1 for OCC length 2 and n=0-3 for OCC length 4)). 
Proposal 6: When an event which causes power consistency and phase continuity not to be maintained occurs, all PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group shall be dropped. 
Proposal 7: For PUSCH dropping cases defined in the current specification, all PUSCH repetitions in an OCC group shall be dropped. 
Proposal 8: When DMRS bundling is used for PUSCH with OCC, start or end of the actual TDW should be aligned with the slot boundary between two OCC groups. 
Proposal 9: TBoMS should be supported for PUSCH with OCC. 
Proposal 10: For TBoMS with OCC PUSCH, the same OCC should be applied to adjacent slots (i.e. OCC group consists of consecutive slots).

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504481
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	Sharp
Title:	Discussion on NR NTN Uplink Enhancements
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Document for:	Discussion and Decision
OCC indication
The following agreement has been made for OCC design [1].

Furthermore, the following agreement has been made for OCC indication [2].

As stated in the agreement in [1], Hadamard sequences are employed for OCC length 2 and 4. The OCC sequence is then  for length 2 and  for length 4. The first two rows of the length 4 OCC is the same as the repetition of the length 2 OCC. 
Therefore, without information of the OCC length, the UE can identically determine the OCC sequence. For example, if the UE is indicated  and the number of repetitions is 2, the UE will assume OCC length is 2. On the other hand, if the UE is indicated  and if the number of repetitions is 4, the UE needs additional information regarding how to map RVs. Other than that, the PUSCH characteristics are the same irrespective of the OCC length being 2 or 4. 
Thus, the functionality of the OCC length needs to be identified first, to make a decision on OCC indication. Our understanding is that OCC length is used for the following purposes:
Determine OCC group length
Determine the size of the DCI field to indicate OCC
For the field design, the following agreement has been made [2].

In our view, the existing antenna port field with 2 bits for DFT-s-OFDM can serve as the OCC sequence indicator. OCC sequence and antenna port can be mapped one-to-one manner since different OCC sequences require an orthogonal antenna port. Therefore, our proposal is as follows:
Proposal 1: Antenna port field with two bits is reused to indicate an OCC sequence. 
If an enhanced low PAPR sequence is used for  BPSK, only two antenna ports are used. Therefore, it is suggested that only length 2 OCC is applicable for the enhanced low PAPR sequence.
Proposal 2: Only length 2 OCC is applicable if an enhanced low PAPR sequence is used for  BPSK.
Therefore, the OCC length does not have impact on the size of the DCI field. The only functionality of the OCC length indication is for determining OCC group. Thus, indication of max value for the OCC length is not necessary.
Proposal 3: Indication of max value for the OCC length is not necessary.
With the proposal above, Option 2 and 5 can be eliminated. Option 1 is not desirable since dynamic signaling of OCC is important. For example, even when both the UE and gNB support OCC length 4, there should be a possibility for the gNB to operate with OCC length 2 given the dynamic environment like in high MCS or grouping UEs with larger difference in frequency offsets. 
Among Option 3 and 4, Option 3 is more flexible and potentially reduce the DCI size by 1 bit when only one OCC length is required by the system. Thus, our proposal is configuring candidate value set for the OCC length and support dynamic indication when both OCC lengths are signalled via RRC.
Proposal 4: Support Option 3 (i.e., Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2).
To support Option 3, OCC length indication field needs to be introduced.
Proposal 5: Introduce OCC length indication field in DCI format 0_1 and 0_2.
Conclusion
In this contribution, we have the following proposals:
Proposal 1: Antenna port field with two bits is reused to indicate an OCC sequence. 
Proposal 2: Only length 2 OCC is applicable if an enhanced low PAPR sequence is used for  BPSK.
Proposal 3: Indication of max value for the OCC length is not necessary.
Proposal 4: Support Option 3 (i.e., Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2).
Proposal 5: Introduce OCC length indication field in DCI format 0_1 and 0_2.
References
RAN1 chairman’s note at RAN1#119 meeting, November 2024
RAN1 chairman’s note at RAN1#120bis meeting, April 2025

TDoc file conclusion not found

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		 	R1-2504517
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	NTT DOCOMO, INC.
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Document for: 	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
Observation 1: 
It is unclear whether or not PUCCH overlapping with the first OCC group is allowed in the scheduling order supported in R18 TEI.
Proposal 1:
PUSCH with OCC can be applied to CG PUSCH and DG PUSCH.
PUSCH for RACH-less handover, SDT-CG, and PUSCH scheduled by RAR UL grant corresponding to CFRA are out of scope of Rel-19 OCC for PUSCH.
Proposal 2:
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH under the same conditions that phase continuity and power consistency applies for DMRS bundling.
Proposal 3:
RAN1 to agree to ensure channel inferability within the same OCC group as described in clause 6.2 of TS 38.211.
Proposal 4:
For PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports, aperiodic CSI report is also multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within the first OCC group with inter-slot OCC.
Proposal 5:
Confirm the following working assumptions.
Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.
Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact
Proposal 6:
RAN1 to discuss scheduling restrictions for OCC in the case of the scheduling order supported in R18 TEI.
Proposal 7:
For the scheduling order supported in R18 TEI, PUCCH can be overlapped with a PUSCH repetition within other than the first OCC group, i.e., HARQ-ACK multiplexing on the first repetition is prohibited.
Proposal 8:
When a repetition within an OCC group would be dropped due to any of the following, all repetitions within the same OCC group are dropped: 
Case a: Overlapped with PRACH
Case b: Overlapped with other PUSCH
e.g., DG PUSCH vs. CG PUSCH, CG PUSCH vs. CG PUSCH, PUSCH associated with C-RNTI vs. Msg3/MsgA PUSCH, A-CSI on PUSCH vs. SP-CSI on PUSCH, PUSCH with UL-SCH vs. SP-CSI on PUSCH
Case c: Overlapped with other UL transmission that has a higher priority (based on priority index). 
Case d: Cancelled due to reception of a cancellation indication via DCI format 2_4
Case e: Overlapped with prioritized DL reception in a RedCap/eRedCap UE with half-duplex FDD (HD FDD)
Proposal 9: 
RAN1 to discuss the concurrence of the following two cases:
UCI multiplexing/dropping rule in case of PUCCH/PUSCH overlap
PUSCH drop due to other than PUCCH/PUSCH overlap
Proposal 10: 
RAN1 to discuss the following alternatives and to agree Alt 1.
Alt 1: PUSCH drop is performed without UCI multiplexing/drop.
Alt 2: UCI multiplexing/drop is applied first and PUSCH drop then.
Alt 3: The concurrence case is defined as an error case.
Proposal 11: 
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support 
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Proposal 12: 
Define OCC sequence indexes for OCC sequences for OCC length 2 and 4 as shown in the tables below:
Table (a). Orthogonal sequences  for PUSCH with OCC length =2
Table (b). Orthogonal sequences  for PUSCH with OCC length =4
Proposal 13:
The OCC sequence index is indicated with an existing field of DCI format 0_1/0_2/0_3, by associating with DMRS port.
Proposal 14:
For UCI multiplexing/drop, support the following TP for section 9 of TS 38.213.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121						        R1- 2504563
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source: 	LG Electronics
Title: 	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Document for:	Discussion and decision

Conclusions
In this contribution, we discussed UL capacity/throughput enhancement by using OCC in Rel-19 NR NTN and the following proposal(s) are made:

Proposal #1: To maintain phase continuity and power consistency for OCC with PUSCH, UE does not perform the followings UE operations within an OCC group:
UE specific and/or common TA update
UE pre-compensation update
Proposal #2: If the phase continuity requirements for DM-RS bundling can be applied for OCC with PUSCH, reuse the frameworks of DM-RS bundling for OCC with PUSCH.
Proposal #3: The update of the legacy timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing or prioritization can be applied for both of PUSCH dropping and PUCCH dropping.
Proposal #4: Extend the UCI multiplexing rule for PUSCH repetitions with an OCC group to include PUSCH repetitions with A-CSI report as follows:
If the UCI is multiplexed on the PUSCH repetition according to legacy rules and the updated timeline conditions for UCI multiplexing are satisfied, UCI is multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within an OCC group with inter-slot OCC overlaps with the PUCCH.
For PUSCH repetitions with A-CSI report, UE does not expect there is any PUCCH without repetitions for HARQ-ACK/CSI other than the first slot overlapping with the PUSCH repetitions in the first OCC group.
Proposal #5: Confirm the WAs for UCI multiplexing in RAN1 #120bis with the following updates:
Proposal #6: RAN1 support separate beta offset parameter(s) for OCC with PUSCH.
Proposal #7: RAN1 support OCC indication/configuration as follows:
For the OCC sequence applied for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2
The sequence is implicitly indicated by reusing DM-RS port field.
For the OCC length applied for DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2,
Candidate values are configured by higher-layer parameter for TDRA list, and the applied value is indicated by reusing TDRA field in scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2 (Option 3)
Proposal #8: RAN1 support dynamic OCC disabling by reserving a single state of DM-RS port field.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		 R1-2504584
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Source:	Google 
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement 
Document for:	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
Proposal 1: For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, it is configured by RRC higher-layer parameter (e.g., in PUSCH-Allocation and ConfiguredGrantConfig)
Proposal 2: If OCC group dropping is applied, postpone the RV of a dropped OCC group to the next available OCC group.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		 	R1-2504687
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	NTT DOCOMO, INC.
Title:	Discussion on NR-NTN uplink capacity/throughput enhancement
Agenda Item:	9.11.3
Document for: 	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
Observation 1: 
It is unclear whether or not PUCCH overlapping with the first OCC group is allowed in the scheduling order supported in R18 TEI.
Proposal 1:
PUSCH with OCC can be applied to CG PUSCH and DG PUSCH.
PUSCH for RACH-less handover, SDT-CG, and PUSCH scheduled by RAR UL grant corresponding to CFRA are out of scope of Rel-19 OCC for PUSCH.
Proposal 2:
RAN1 assumes that the UE is required to maintain phase continuity and power consistency for the duration of one OCC group with PUSCH under the same conditions that phase continuity and power consistency applies for DMRS bundling.
Proposal 3:
RAN1 to agree to ensure channel inferability within the same OCC group as described in clause 6.2 of TS 38.211.
Proposal 4:
For PUSCH repetition with A-CSI reports, aperiodic CSI report is also multiplexed on all PUSCH repetitions within the first OCC group with inter-slot OCC.
Proposal 5:
Confirm the following working assumptions.
Working assumption 1: The above agreement applies to different priority indexes for PUCCH/PUSCH if no additional specification impact is identified.
Working assumption 2: The above agreement applies to PUCCH with repetitions if no additional specification impact
Proposal 6:
RAN1 to discuss scheduling restrictions for OCC in the case of the scheduling order supported in R18 TEI.
Proposal 7:
For the scheduling order supported in R18 TEI, PUCCH can be overlapped with a PUSCH repetition within other than the first OCC group, i.e., HARQ-ACK multiplexing on the first repetition is prohibited.
Proposal 8:
When a repetition within an OCC group would be dropped due to any of the following, all repetitions within the same OCC group are dropped: 
Case a: Overlapped with PRACH
Case b: Overlapped with other PUSCH
e.g., DG PUSCH vs. CG PUSCH, CG PUSCH vs. CG PUSCH, PUSCH associated with C-RNTI vs. Msg3/MsgA PUSCH, A-CSI on PUSCH vs. SP-CSI on PUSCH, PUSCH with UL-SCH vs. SP-CSI on PUSCH
Case c: Overlapped with other UL transmission that has a higher priority (based on priority index). 
Case d: Cancelled due to reception of a cancellation indication via DCI format 2_4
Case e: Overlapped with prioritized DL reception in a RedCap/eRedCap UE with half-duplex FDD (HD FDD)
Proposal 9: 
RAN1 to discuss the concurrence of the following two cases:
UCI multiplexing/dropping rule in case of PUCCH/PUSCH overlap
PUSCH drop due to other than PUCCH/PUSCH overlap
Proposal 10: 
RAN1 to discuss the following alternatives and to agree Alt 1.
Alt 1: PUSCH drop is performed without UCI multiplexing/drop.
Alt 2: UCI multiplexing/drop is applied first and PUSCH drop then.
Alt 3: The concurrence case is defined as an error case.
Proposal 11: 
For the OCC length applied for OCC DG PUSCH and CG PUSCH Type 2, support 
Option 3: Candidates values are configured by RRC higher-layer parameter, and the applied value is indicated by scheduling DCI for DG PUSCH or by activation DCI for CG PUSCH Type 2.
Proposal 12: 
Define OCC sequence indexes for OCC sequences for OCC length 2 and 4 as shown in the tables below:
Table (a). Orthogonal sequences  for PUSCH with OCC length =2
Table (b). Orthogonal sequences  for PUSCH with OCC length =4
Proposal 13:
The OCC sequence index is indicated with an existing field of DCI format 0_1/0_2/0_3, by associating with DMRS port.
Proposal 14:
For UCI multiplexing/drop, support the following TP for section 9 of TS 38.213.
Observation 0:
Enabling both OCC and DMRS bundling for a given time may result in a longer duration to maintain phase continuity and power consistency than the duration reported as supported.
Proposal 0A:
RAN1 to discuss restrictions for the case where both OCC and DMRS bundling are enabled.
Proposal 0B:
It is expected that nominal TDW size (= N) is the same as or multiples of OCC length (= L).