Interference management
workshop
Review of the Radiocommunications Act 1989
• Overview
• Session 1:
– Spectrum licence certification
• Session 2:
– Licence parameters and unwanted emissions
• Session 3:
– Harmful interference and dispute provisions
How does the Act deal with interference
Prevention
Band planning
Parameters on management
rights
Licence certification
Technical compatibility and
no harmful interference
Licence parameters
Equipment performance
standards
Applies to MR regime
Applies to RL regime
Crown owned covered by PIBs;
Private - no
PIBs
All defined in Act
N/A
Required by s25 of Act
Under Regulations
s25 and s25A of Act
Regulation 12(1)(b)
s49 of Act and Form 7 in
Regulations
In Regulations and PIBs
s133 but policy decision to not
apply to MRs
Yes
How does the Act deal with harmful
interference
MR regime
RL regime
Direct negotiation
Lawful
Arbitration
Unlawful
Injunction
Unlawful and lawful
Tort (nuisance)
Unlawful
Damages
Emissions
Redress
Lawful
Regulatory enforcement
• Offences
• Infringement offences
• Regs Schedule 1 conditions
Spectrum licence
certification
Session 1
Spectrum licence certification
• Carried out by AREs
• The right incentives?
– No liability under the Act for poor certification
– No evidence of assessment required
• The right inputs?
– Limited guidance on what needs to be considered outside s25A
– Licence information sufficiently defining the transmitter and receiver characteristics
• Registrar checks compliance with the requirements of the Act, but not the
technical compatibility of the licence
• Auditing of licences is undertaken for between 1% and 5% of licences
• Once registered, any transmission in accordance with a licence is lawful
Adding the right incentives?
AREs
Option 1
Option 2
Retaining assessment calculations
Introduce liability under the Act for poor
performance
Matters an engineer must certify
• s25(5) & s25A – approved engineer’s judgement on
technical compatibility for spectrum licences
– will not cause harmful interference, and have regard to:
• International Radio Regulations (IRR)
• ITU-R Recommendations & Reports
• Reference standards issued by the Secretary
• s101 & s111 – Spectrum & Radio licensees must
comply with IRR
International Radio Regulations
• Part of an international treaty that
New Zealand is a signatory
• Subject to amendments once every
4 years at World Radio Conferences
• Underpin many aspects of
spectrum management
International
Radio Regulations
International Radio Regulations
• Comply with IRR is overly
simplistic?
• Reference to IRR without details
leave too much flexibility in
assessing technical compatibility?
• Potentially contradictory between
licensee vs signatory?
International
Radio Regulations
Technical compatibility and IRR
Within the Act
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Further define “technical compatibility” by
referencing some IRR Articles
Incorporate key requirements from IRR as principles
in the Act
Provide guidance on the IRR and require compliance
with this guidance in the Act
Within the Act
• Option 3: Further define “technical
compatibility” by referencing some IRR Articles
– Difficult to explicitly define technical compatibility
– Contents of IRR may subject to amendments by
WRC every four years
Within the Act
• Option 4: Incorporate key requirements from
IRR as principles in the Act
– Multitude of views on what to incorporate
– Not sure whether appropriate to include an
interpretation of the IRR incorporated into the Act
– Contents of IRR may subject to amendments by
WRC every four years
Within the Act
• Option 5: Provide guidance on IRR and require
compliance with this guidance in the Act
– Equivalence in compliance with this guidance and
the IRR enabled in the Act
– Inter-related nature of the multiple volumes of IRR
may be difficult to be summarised
Technical compatibility and IRR
Within the Act
Option 3 Further define “technical compatibility” by referencing
some IRR Articles
Option 4 Incorporate key requirements from IRR as principles in
the Act
Option 5 Provide guidance on the IRR and require compliance
with this guidance in the Act
Outside the Act
Option 6 Provide guidance/training for approved persons on
assessment of technical compatibility and understanding
of IRR
Outside the Act
• Option 6: Provide guidance/training for approved
persons on assessment of technical compatibility
and understanding of IRR
– Provide targeted guidance on specific requirements &
obligations depending on the relevant services
– Public Information Brochures (PIBs), e.g. PIB 38, PIB 39,
or other guidance for private management rights
– Using licensing revenue to fund professional
development for approved engineers/certifiers
Additional matters
Should the Act include additional matters as part of
assessing technical compatibility?
Option 7 Cumulative effects
Option 8 Planned/proposed licences to be considered
in technical compatibility
Option 9 Future uses of adjacent bands to be
considered in technical compatibility
Additional matters – Cumulative
• Option 7: Cumulative effects
– Difficult to define cumulative interference explicitly
– When planning a new service
• Cumulative effect would be studied (ITU-R Recs/Reps)
• Relevant protection requirements outlined in IRR (outcomes
from WRC)
– Complying with IRR & have regard to ITU-R Recs/Reps
would inherently address cumulative effects
Additional matters – Future uses
• Option 8: Planned/proposed licences
– May avoid anticipated interference issues
• Option 9: Future uses of adjacent bands
– Difficult to predict future changes without the
definition of a timing ‘horizon’
– Unrealistic technical compatibility assessment with
premature assumptions and speculative parameters
Session 1 : Questions and discussion
Option 1
Retaining assessment calculations
Option 2
Introduce liability under the Act for poor performance
Option 3
Further definition by referencing some IRR Articles
Option 4
Incorporate key requirements from IRR as principles in the Act
Option 5
Provide guidance on the IRR and require compliance with this
guidance in the Act
Option 6
Provide guidance/training for AREs on assessment of technical
compatibility and understanding of IRR
Option 7
Cumulative effects considered in technical compatibility assessment
Option 8
Planned/proposed licences considered in technical compatibility
assessment
Option 9
Future uses of adjacent bands considered in technical compatibility
assessment
Licence parameters
and unwanted
emissions
Session 2
General licensing parameters
• Engineering and certification of licences rely on
accurate licence information
• Assumptions on missing information tend to cause
anomaly
• Likely spectrum denial due to licence record of
over-stated licence parameters
• Unspecified reference bandwidth for some power
related parameters
General licensing parameters
Accuracy of licence information
Option 10 Set tolerance limits on over-recording
Option 11 Increase scrutiny of licence application
Option 12 Regular audits
Reference bandwidth
Option 13 Add reference bandwidth to power related
licensing parameters
Accuracy of licence information
• Option 10: Set tolerance limits on overrecording licence parameters
– Largely affect radio licences
– Difficult to set a realistic tolerance limit due to
dynamic power control in some transmitters
– Enforcement on any tolerance limit would require
active monitoring
Accuracy of licence information
• Option 11: Increase scrutiny of licence
applications at licensing stage
Random
compliance audit
• Option 12: Regular audits
Random
licence audit
Approved
Persons
• Certify licence
Registrar
• Check whether licence application
meets requirements in the Act
Licence
registered
in Registry
Reference bandwidth
• Option 13: Add reference bandwidth to power related
licensing parameters
– Partially rectified in the Regulations (via Form 7)
where power related parameters must be provided
with reference bandwidth
– Comply with IRR
⇒ IRR Appendix 3
⇒ Recommendation ITU-R SM.329
Co-location
Co-location
• Licence certification typically based
on desktop analysis
• Real site engineering may differ to
what was assumed in the
certification process
• Voluntary standard AS/NZS 5070
• Site issues and resolutions are
solely commercial arrangement
Co-location
• Option 14: Establish the role of site managers
and their responsibilities in the Act
– Site manager may address issue quicker on the spot
– Reduce administrative burden for the Ministry in
moderating interference between co-sited/colocated legal transmission
– Overly onerous on site manager
MR parameters
•
•
•
•
Adjacent Frequencies Emission Limit (AFEL)
Protection Limit (PL)
Power Floor (PF)
Unwanted Emission Limit (UEL) – associated to
spectrum licence
‘Spectrum Boundary Pegs’
Spectrum
licence
dBW
UEL = OOB + spurious
FB = Necessary bandwidth
freq
UEL
UEL
AFEL
Protection limit
Protection
limit
AFEL
AFEL
AFEL
Power
Floor
Power
Floor
Frequency
Boundary
Radio
licence
Management Right 1
Management Right 2
MR parameters
• Adjacent Frequencies Emission Limit (AFEL)
– Maximum emission limit outside MR lower/upper
frequency boundaries to prevent causing interference to
other MRs
– AFELs set for older MRs (technology neutral) versus
newer MRs (technology flexible)
– The Act does not specify how wide/narrow AFEL should
be beyond MR boundaries
MR parameters
• Protection Limit (PL)
– Maximum emission limit within MR lower/upper
frequency boundaries where AFEL of other MRs
must not exceed
– Must not be lower than power floor
– No further guidance on how this limit should be
established
MR parameters
• Power Floor (PF)
– Minimum level of emission, expressed in terms of e.i.r.p.
specified in a record of management rights
– Wherever not specified, -50 dBW (ref BW) would apply
– Three-pronged role:
• s35(2): Minimum level for Protection Limit
• s102(2): Maximum emission on frequencies outside of UEL of
spectrum licences
• s110(2): Demarcation between spectrum licence and radio
licence within the MR boundaries
MR parameters
• Option 15: Clarify the role of Power Floor
– Confusing three-pronged role
– Possible removal of the role of Power Floor under
s102(2) as maximum emission on frequencies
outside of UEL
– Require a new mechanism to manage unwanted
emissions on frequencies outside of UEL
MR parameters
• Option 16: Mechanism to implement unwanted
emissions for frequencies outside UEL
– Adopt industry best practice by aligning to common
out-of-band and spurious domains
– Alignment with Radio Licence regime
– EITHER: Require Reference Standards under s133 to be
applied to spectrum licence
– OR: Comply with IRR ⇒ inherently cover IRR Appendix 3
and Recommendation ITU-R SM.329
Receive protection
• Concept of Maximum Permitted Interfering
Signal (MPIS) replaced by harmful interference
and dispute process in the Act
• Definition of MPIS is no longer in the Act
• MPIS is enforced through the Regulations as it is
a mandatory parameter in Form 7
Receive protection
Maximum permitted interfering signal
Option 17 Extend MPIS to cover co-channel and
adjacent channel interfering signals
Option 18 Replace MPIS with another parameter (e.g.
I/N ratio)
Option 19 Make MPIS as ‘optional’ in Form 7
Receive protection
• Option 17: Extend MPIS to cover co-channel and
adjacent channel interfering signals
– MPIS with unit dBμV/m is not a one-size-fit-all measure
to analyse interference and claim receive protection
– Useful to MRs where frequency is not nationwide
allocated to same licensee, e.g. Broadcasting and
Managed Spectrum Park
– Adjacent channel interfering signals may unnecessarily
complicate the analysis under MPIS concept
Receive protection
• Option 18: Replace MPIS with another
parameter (e.g. I/N ratio)
– Preferred method of defining receive protection
may change over time depending on technology
– I/N ratio is more suitable for mobile-centric services
– MPIS is more suitable for broadcast-centric services
Receive protection
• Option 19: Make MPIS as ‘optional’ in Form 7
– MPIS retains as an optional parameter alongside
protection areas/locations
– Possible disparity when one spectrum licensee records
MPIS while another (within same MR) does not
– Disparity could be mitigated by recommending MPIS for
use within specific types of spectrum licences (e.g.
broadcasting and Managed Spectrum Park thru PIB 39)
Minimum receiver performance
• Interference is shared responsibility between
transmitters and receivers
• No control over receiver performance, except
under s134(1B), where regulations could be made
to declare receivers of any kind to be inappropriate
receivers
• Need to find ways to record receiver
characteristics in spectrum and radio licences
Minimum receiver performance
• Option 20: Include receiver performance on
licences
– Require licence to record both transmitter and receiver
– Redefine the term “inappropriate receiver”
– Potential increase in compliance cost for licensees and
additional compliance burden on the Ministry to police
such compliance
Minimum receiver performance
• Option 21: Apply Reference Standards issued
under s133 to management rights regime
– Current policy decision that restricted application of
Reference Standards only to radio licensing regime
– Not an amendment to the Act, but a reverse in
policy decision
Session 2: Questions and discussion
Option 10
Set tolerance limits on over-recording
Option 11
Increase scrutiny of licence application
Option 12
Regular audits
Option 13
Add reference bandwidth to power related licensing parameters
Option 14
Establish the role of site manager and their responsibilities in the Act
Option 15
Clarify the role of Power Floor
Option 16
Mechanism to implement unwanted emissions for frequencies outside UEL
Option 17
Extend MPIS to cover co-channel and adjacent channel interfering signals
Option 18
Replace MPIS with another parameter (e.g. I/N ratio)
Option 19
Make MPIS as ‘optional’ in Form 7
Option 20
Include receiver performance on licences
Option 21
Apply Reference Standards issued under s133 to management rights regime
Harmful
interference and
dispute provisions
Session 3
Interference occurs
Transmission
unlawful
Transmission lawful
Harmful interference
Safety of life
service
Not safety of life
service
CE may direct action
taken until resolved via
arbitration. Action may
include requiring either
or both transmissions to
cease; Arbitration; Tort
(nuisance)
Arbitration; Tort
(nuisance)
Not harmful
interference
Infringement
offence
No provisions
If harmful
interference
Prosecution
Injunction
Tort (nuisance)
Damages
Harmful interference disputes
Management rights
regime
Radio licensing regime
Lawful
Tort – s105
Arbitration – s106 to s109C
Tort – s105
Ministry may resolve –
s108(2)
Arbitration – s106 to s109C
Unlawful
Offence – s103
Tort – s105
Action for damages – s117
Injunction on application by
CE or rightholder – s118
Offence
Tort – s105
Harmful interference - definition
Option 22: Amend the definition of
harmful interference
Current definition in Radiocommunications Act:
Harmful interference is interference which
• endangers the functioning of a radio-navigation
service or of other safety services or
• seriously degrades, obstructs, or repeatedly
interrupts a radiocommunication service
Options
Option 23
Introduce a general presumption to remove
unwanted emissions causing harmful
interference
Option 24
Enable a manager to initiate an injunction
under s118
Options 25 to Changes to the arbitration process
28
Option 24: Add manager to s118
• To provide option for manager to initiate an
injunction for unlawful use of their spectrum
– Aligns with the underlying philosophy of manager
‘managing’ their spectrum
– Potentially already provided for under common law
Rights to transmit and receive
protection
• Right to transmit wanted and unwanted
emissions
• Right to receive protection is for co-channel
emissions only
• Unwanted emissions defined by UEL, power
floor and IRR
Option 23: Introduce a general
presumption
• That unwanted emissions causing harmful
interference should be removed
• Issues
–
–
–
–
Receiver performance
Poor certification
Poor physical engineering
Non standard equipment
Arbitration process
• Not current best practice dispute resolution
• Potentially longer than court action
• Removes the potential to claim damages under
the Act
Amending the arbitration process
• Option 25: Open arbitration to harmful interference from
lawful and unlawful emissions
– Removes barrier to arbitration process
– Blurs line between criminal and civil action
• Option 26: Specify timeframes for each step in the
Arbitration Act
– Speeds up process and creates certainty
– Pre-set timeframes would need to balance the time requires to
resolve more complex cases and shorter timeframes for simpler
disputes
Amending the arbitration process
• Option 27: Provide for interim measures
– Supports faster resolution of dispute
– Already enabled under Arbitration Act
• Option 28: Reduce prominence of first in time
– Removes possible barrier to upgrading equipment
– Removes certainty for existing users
General user licences and exemptions
• Option 29: Adding a process to resolve disputes
with transmissions under GURLs and
exemptions
– When interference occurs
– (When being issued)
Ministry involvement
• Option 30: Increase the Ministry’s involvement
in resolving interference disputes
– Interpretation of licence conditions
– Mediation service
– Arbitration panel or approved arbiters
– Others
Option 31: Introduce rights of appeal
on decisions by Ministry
• Judicial review – applies to all public bodies
• Specific rights of appeal under the Act
Session 3: Questions and discussion
Option 22
Amend the definition of harmful interference
Option 23
Introduce a general presumption that unwanted emissions causing harmful
interference should be removed
Option 24
Enable the manager to initiate and injunction under s118 for unlawful use of
spectrum
Option 25
Opening arbitration to harmful interference from lawful and unlawful
emissions
Option 26
Specify timeframes for each step in the Arbitration Act
Option 27
Provide for interim measures
Option 28
Reduce prominence of first in time
Option 29
Adding a process to resolve disputes with transmissions under GURLs and
exemptions
Option 30
Increase the Ministry’s involvement in resolving interference disputes
Option 31
Introduce rights of appeal on decisions by Ministry