Spectrum harmonisation in Europe: two case studies Thomas Ewers, Chairman, ECC Policy Tracker Latin America Spectrum Conference Mexico City, 7th September 2011

Spectrum harmonisation in Europe: two case studies CEPT and ECC: who we are and what we do The ECC approach to cognitive radio The ECC foundations for the Digital Dividend German auction of Digital Dividend Spectrum ECC cooperation with Latin America

The CEPT – what it is What the CEPT is National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) Independent voluntary association; defined by its ‘Arrangement’ Its objectives are reached through tangible outputs and mutual support

Where the ECC fits in CEPT CEPT’s structure is defined by three separate areas of activity

European regulatory framework Three actors at the European level

Role of the ECC in Europe Consensus and voluntary character: flexible instrument of the national administrations Technical expertise EU mechanisms recognise that most regulatory responsibilities are applied at a national level (European Commission focuses on single market issues) Range of subjects: ‘high profile’ and ‘low profile’: …all are important Geographical reach

7 ECC structure ECC WG FM Frequency Management WG SE Spectrum Engeneering WG NaN Numbering and Networks CPG Conference Preparation ECO PT1 IMT Matters Steering Group (ThinkTank) Structure follows areas of activity

ECC key outputs Impact on industry ECC Decisions CEPT Reports ECC Reports ECC Recommendations Information exchange between members European Common Proposals to WRCs

Harmonisation – what we mean by it today Designation of frequency ranges for one or more purposes Technical conditions applying to these designations Power limits Bandwidth specifications Date related provisions Other implementation aspects: e.g. mitigation techniques. Trend towards technological and service neutrality

Harmonisation – the benefits Economies of scale in manufacture Consumer benefit in device portability Avoid inefficiencies in the interference zone either side of the national boundaries

Pre-harmonisation: Cognitive Radio Potential benefits of harmonisation Common technical conditions in behaviour and organisation of systems with a cognitive dimension Common strategic assumptions in use of frequency bands Clearer signals to manufacturers: faster progress of equipment to market; Pooling of expertise

ECC approach to Cognitive Radio - activities Major workshop January 2009 Correspondence Group on White Space Devices in UHF Spectrum Engineering Project Team (SE43) established conclusions on WSD in UHF Ongoing Correspondence groups on frequency management, regulatory and spectrum engineering aspects

ECC approach to Cognitive radio – main elements of policy A cognitive element is already important in some mitigation techniques Cognitive sensing is not yet mature for devices more powerful than SRDs Database-only approaches could be a practical intermediate step if they are not too ambitious in scope Recognise scepticism about the Cognitive radio business model in short term

Digital Dividend A controversial concept in 2006 RRC06 was for broadcasting; ‘Clause 42’ opened the door Most saw Digital Dividend as not implementable in Europe. Others saw once-in-lifetime opportunity; economics of scale for new services

Digital Dividend in Europe: the first principles ECC established a Task Group (TG4) Focused on hypothetical future in 2015 July 2007: CEPT Report 22 “harmonisation is feasible…if it is not mandatory” decisions on use should be left to administrations (within GE06) no prejudice to national licence conditions Then WRC07: allocated 790 – 862 MHz for mobile as well as broadcasting

Making the Digital Dividend an efficient and pratical reality Numerous deliverables: Harmonised conditions for MFCN in the band MHz (ECC Decision) Frequency planning and frequency coordination for terrestrial systems for Mobile Fixed Communications Networks in the frequency band MHz (ECC Recommendation) Rearrangement activities for broadcasting services in MHz (ECC Report) DVB-T performance in the presence of UMTS (ECC Report) CEPT Reports: Frequency (channelling) arrangements for the MHz band” (Task 2 of the 2nd Mandate to CEPT on the digital dividend) The identification of common and minimal (least restrictive) technical conditions for MHz for the digital dividend in the European Union Guideline on cross border coordination issues between mobile services in one country and broadcasting services in another country Continuation of PMSE operating in the UHF, including the assessment of the advantage of an EU approach Technical Roadmap proposing relevant technical options and scenarios to optimise the Digital Dividend Feasibility of fitting new applications/services into "white spaces" of the digital dividend Technical Options for the Use of a Harmonised Sub-Band in the Band MHz for Fixed/Mobile Application (including Uplinks) Technical Feasibility of Harmonising a Sub-band of Bands IV and V for Fixed/Mobile Applications (including uplinks) Compatibility between “cellular / low power transmitter” networks and “larger coverage / high power / tower” networks Least restrictive technical conditions for WAPECS frequency bands

Making the Digital Dividend an efficient and pratical reality Guard ba nd Downlink Duplex gap Uplink 1 MHz30 MHz (6 blocks of 5 MHz)11 MHz30 MHz (6 blocks of 5 MHz) A lot of detailed technical provisions…..

Digital Dividend: Constraints in Europe RRC06: principle of “equitable access” Much of the GE06 plan needs to be renegotiated to achieve equity in the reduced size of band Other legacy systems: ARNS in Russia and some neighbouring countries: protection requirements can constrain mobile plans Channel: in remaining in the digital broadcast band dividend band

Digital Dividend case history: Germany Technical regulation aspects Competition and economic aspects Legal and procedural implementation International specifications and agreements

20 Approach in Germany  Award of 360 MHz spectrum in one single auction combines award at 1.8/2/2.6 GHz with award at 800 MHz one single auction enables spectrum combinations for operators avoids artificial scarcity spectrum auctioned in abstract blocks if possible and in concrete blocks if necessary technology and service neutrality for Electronic Communications Services (ECS; can be used for mobile, fixed or nomadic systems or applications) spectrum cap and coverage obligations in the band 800 MHz

© Bundesnetzagentur21 German Auction 2010

22 Legitimising procedures  Procedures must be in line with the Telecommunications Act and Community law open non-discriminatory transparent  Instruments publication of key elements public consultations hearing the parties concerned (ie PMSE, broadcasting) participation of the federal states  Judicial review

23 Preparing the auction at 800 MHz / 1.8 / 2 / 2.6 GHz 2005Consultations on the availability of spectrum at 2 / 2.6 GHz 2007 Consultations on award at 1.8 / 2 / 2.6 GHz President's Chamber decisions on the order for an award the choice of an auction 2008 President's Chamber decision on the award conditions 2009 Consultations and decisions of the President's Chamber on combining the award of spectrum at 800 MHz with 1.8 / 2 / 2.6 GHz the auction rules April/May 2010 Auction conducted The German auction – a look back

24 Spectrum cap for 800 MHz Spectrum cap for the 800 MHz band:  General rule: acquisition of spectrum limited to 2 x 20 MHz for the 800 MHz band  But: spectrum assigned in the 900 MHz band also has to be taken into account  This meant for E-Plus/O2:max. 2 x 15 MHz Voda./T-Mobile: max. 2 x 10 MHz Newcomers:max. 2 x 20 MHz Spectrum cap for 800 MHz

25 Coverage obligation for 800 MHz  Each federal state ("Land") compiled its own list of areas needing coverage  In every Land, the towns and districts are to be provided with broadband access in four stages  Degree of coverage: 90% of the population by 2016 in each Land in listed areas

26 Balancing of interests All the different interests have to be taken into account and balanced against one another. Examples:  Balancing the spectrum requirements of new users or technologies with the need to preserve the rights of existing licence holders in adjacent spectrum  Avoid interference (keyword: balancing cable, DVB-T and LTE at 800 MHz)  Balancing the spectrum requirements of new users or technologies with the rights and interests of licence holders in the same spectrum (general authorisation for wireless microphones until 31 December 2015)  Migration concept is meanwhile offered, including individual authorisations in other bands.  Flexibilisation of existing usage rights and calls for reallocation of the 900 MHz spectrum

Key auction elements Preparation time4 years Frequency spectrum360 MHz Number of applications to qualify6 Number of bidders4 Duration of auction 6 weeks Number of rounds224 Auction revenuesAlmost 4.4 billion euros

© Bundesnetzagentur28 Outcome of the auction 95 MHz 70 MHz 99 MHz 95 MHz Telekom Vodafone E-Plus Telefonica O2 approx total 360 MHz

© Bundesnetzagentur29 Highest bids per operator €1,422,503,000 Vodafone €1,378,605,000 Telefonica O2 €283,645,000 E-Plus €1,299,893,000 Telekom

ECC cooperation with Latin America ITU CITEL Website resources: Portugal-Brazil cooperation agreement; and ARCTEL-CPLP REGULATEL – Portugal, Spain, Italy as observers

Spectrum harmonisation in Europe: two case studies Thomas Ewers, Chairman, ECC Policy Tracker Latin America Spectrum Conference Mexico City, 7th September 2011