Upload
lola
View
27
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
International Perspectives. New Zealand’s Radiocommunications Act Review. Radio spectrum management in NZ. MRs are tradable property rights Spectrum in MRs 471 MHz below 1 GHz 929 MHz between 1 and 5 GHz 3.6 GHz above 20 GHz In 2013/14, 97% of all licences were engineered by private sector. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
International PerspectivesNew Zealand’s Radiocommunications Act Review
Radio spectrum management in NZ
• MRs are tradable property rights• Spectrum in MRs
– 471 MHz below 1 GHz– 929 MHz between 1 and 5 GHz– 3.6 GHz above 20 GHz
• In 2013/14, 97% of all licences were engineered by private sector
• Radiocommunications Act 1989 establishes– Management rights (MR) regime (2/3
of Act provisions)
– Radio licencing regime– General user licencing regime – Approved engineers regime – Disputes processes– Compliance and enforcement– Transitional provisions (1/4 of Act
provisions)
NZ Act Review
• Key issues
– Flexibility vs certainty– Competition – Spectrum sharing– Interference
FlexibilityTechnology neutral MRs
• Changes by Spark (formerly Telecom) under their 850 MHz MR :– AMPS – DAMPS– CDMA– Wide band CDMA
No regulator involvement
The Act requires limited informationManagement rights
• Frequency boundaries, • Adjacent frequencies
emission limits • Power floor, and • Protection limit.
Spectrum licences
• Details of the licence holder• Transmission frequencies• Protection area• Term• Ability (or not) to modify the
licence and the permissions required
Limited processes specified• Public Information Brochures
(PIBS) are non statutory documents setting out:– Band plans– Licencing rules – Allocation processes– Renewal processes– Requirements for the approved
radio engineers’ regime
Competition1989• Market forces approach• Generic competition law
2000’s• Government policy used to shape
markets
2014• 700 MHz auction included ownership
restrictions and implementation requirements
Spectrum sharing
• Currently consulting on TV white space rules
• Dynamic access technologies potentially problematic
Interference management
Thank you