Agenda item 1.23 – Amateur service secondary allocation Presenter: Dale Hughes

Agenda item 1.23 …to consider an allocation of about 15 kHz in parts of the band 415-526.5 kHz to the amateur service on a secondary basis, taking into account the need to protect existing services… Why? Sufficiently different characteristics to adjacent amateur service allocations at 137 kHz & 1.8 MHz to ‘fill a gap’. Agenda item 1.23 was to consider the possibility of a new medium frequency secondary allocation for the amateur service. The characteristics of this part of the radio frequency spectrum are sufficiently different to amateur service allocations at 137 kHz and 1.8 MHz to make such an allocation a useful and attractive addition to the available amateur bands. A MF allocation would ‘fill a gap’ in available bands with respect to propagation and utilisation opportunities.

Australia's position going into WRC-12 Allocation was supported: Existing users (NDB’s) must be protected from harmful interference. Protection measures for existing users were agreed. Due to incumbent users a subset of the band was the most likely outcome so either WRC ‘method’ was acceptable. Australia supported a new MF allocation for the amateur service providing existing services were protected from interference. In Australia, the other users of the band are Non Directional Beacons used for aircraft navigation and while these beacons will be phased out over time, there is still a need to protect them. Protection measures were discussed and agreed. Two methods, with slightly different frequency ranges, were proposed as affirmative options to satisfy the agenda item. These ranges overlapped and due to required protection measures for NDB’s a subset of either method would satisfy the Australian needs.

At first, very slow progress at Sub Working Group level. Progress during WRC-12 #1 At first, very slow progress at Sub Working Group level. General agreement between the ‘affirmative’ side about frequency band limits, but… Strong opposition from a number of countries to any allocation with delaying tactics employed to prevent any progress. At the World Radiocommunications Conference, the sub-working group tasked to discuss the agenda item met many times over the first 2 weeks to resolve the issues. Progress was slow… Amongst countries that supported the ‘affirmative’ position, there was general agreement about the agenda item, but a number of administrations and regional bloc’s strongly opposed the agenda item. There was endless discussion about whether an allocation should be made, it became apparent that this was simply a delaying tactic meaning that the issue would be elevated to higher level committees with less likelihood of success.

Again more argument and delaying tactics… Progress during WRC-12 #2 A ‘drafting’ group was formed to develop a document that contained both positions. Again more argument and delaying tactics… Change of CEPT and APG positions meant progress, but reduced bandwidth. Power limits and geographic spacing limits suggested, resisted… accepted. Due to the slow progress at the sub-working group level, the chairman of the SWG decided to form a drafting group with the very specific scope to develop a document that contained both the proposed changes to the radio regulations if the affirmative position was accepted, and the no-change position if that became the consensus position. The very specific scope allowed the group to focus on the document itself and to avoid the endless discussions about whether, or not, an allocation should be given. Some delaying tactics were again tried, but due to the clearly defined scope of the drafting group, the objectors were ‘out of scope’ and progress was made and a document was created. During this time, there were changes in the position of the CEPT and APT groups and this helped to achieve a final consensus position. Additional protection measures were proposed, resisted by some regional bloc’s then finally accepted in order to reach a position that stood a good chance of being accepted by administrations that opposed the agenda item.

No consensus at Sub Working Group level. Progress during WRC-12 #3 No consensus at Sub Working Group level. Elevated to Com4 level and passed after discussion. Attempt by one administration at plenary to impose very restrictive protection measures overcome. Affirmative position accepted and passed by plenary session. In the end there was no consensus at the SWG level, but we did have a suitable document that contained both possible outcomes and this went to the next level committee, where the affirmative position was finally agreed. One administration required some rewording of the document and another administration attempted to add very restrictive measures, but this was defeated following a strong response from the CEPT and CITEL blocs.

WRC outcome is in line with the original Australian position: A new secondary allocation for the amateur service between 472 and 479 kHz 5 W e.i.r.p. limit and other protection measures. The outcome is good and is in line with the original Australian position and will meet the needs of the amateur service in Australia and other countries where operation is permitted, and provides protection for the incumbent users.

Provide opportunity for: Future impact: Will allow the amateur service to develop skills and expertise at medium frequencies. Will enhance capability for disaster relief and emergency communications. Provide opportunity for: research and development of new communications modes to cope with weak signals and high noise levels, research of propagation characteristics. The future impact of the new allocation is that it will allow interested members of the amateur service to develop new skills and expertise in the using medium wave frequencies. The allocation will significantly enhance activities that require reliable ground wave propagation, including possible emergency and disaster relief communications that are beyond the range of the usual VHF equipment used in many instances.. The allocation will also provide opportunity for investigation of new communications modes to cope with the high levels of noise and weak signals encountered at these frequencies. In addition, the new allocation will also allow novel investigations into propagation characteristics of the band; the diverse locations of amateur stations combined with readily available signal processing software and internet access may result in new understanding of propagations modes and communications applications.

The WRC delegates and ARSG members for their support and enthusiasm. Thanks go to: The ACMA for: their leadership, organization and support activities at WRC-12 and the ‘community’ participation process in the WRC preparatory phase. The Wireless Institute of Australia for its untiring support of the amateur radio service. The WRC delegates and ARSG members for their support and enthusiasm. Acknowledging the late Mr. Keith Malcolm. Finally I would like to thank: The ACMA for its expertise in organising and leading the Australian delegation to WRC-12, also their support and assistance for the ARSG and WRC-PG meetings in the years leading up to WRC-12. The participation of the community of radio users in the process of developing the various Australian positions on the agenda item was critical to our success. My sponsors, The Wireless Institute of Australia for their untiring support of the interests of the Australian amateur service in all of its diverse activities and for this challenging and interesting assignment. My colleagues, the ARSG and WRC delegates for their honest exchange of opinions, engineering excellence, fellowship and enthusiasm in the ARSG, APG, ITU study groups and the WRC meetings. Not forgetting the late Mr. Keith Malcolm, the previous agenda item coordinator who passed away unexpectedly in October 2011. Keith laid the groundwork for the successful outcome of this agenda item.