REVIEW OF SPECTRUM- Policy and Regulation

Extent of review : Broad ranging : Communications ?Focussed : Radiocommunications

- fundamental or incremental ?Is legislation :

- still fit for purpose ?- able to be re-purposed ?- lost its purpose in today’s setting ?

What legislation are we talking about ?

Dr Bob Horton

Comms Day Conference 7-8 October 2014, Melbourne

THE FUNDAMENTAL CHALLENGE- What has changed ?

• Demands for spectrum increased considerably• Spectrum equivalent of “Peak Oil” : rate of oil production enters terminal decline

following maximum rate of extraction

• Biggest future challenge is to manage an environment of co-existence of dis-similar services for widespread spectrum users• Implications for - current licensing incompatibilities

- policy and regulatory roles- institutional structures - international activities

GENERICS- basic questions

For any candidate application of spectrum, 3 questions need to be asked :• What is the reliable estimate of spectrum required for an application ?• How much spectrum has already been allocated and is being used in an

application ?• What are the sharing conditions between services ?Example : WRC 15 Agenda Item 1.1 – Spectrum allocation for IMT Advanced

• Subsidiary question : who should be asking the questions and who should be answering them ?

ASSESSING THE PUBLIC INTEREST- contrasting policy and regulatory views

To note : the Act is silent on defining the public interest. This leaves the regulator to divine an assessment within the fairly narrow constraints of its enabling legislation, largely related to Communications Policy.ACMA has devised a set of Principles to analyse and maximise public benefit. These are clinical and ultimately rely heavily on economic concepts: allocate spectrum to the highest value use or uses enable and encourage spectrum to move to its highest value use or uses use the least cost and least restrictive approach to achieving policy objectives to the extent possible, promote both certainty and flexibility balance the cost of interference and the benefits of greater spectrum utilisation

These Principles then inform an Analysis and Decision Making Framework as a key regulatory tool

PUBLIC INTEREST : A MINISTER’S BROADER POLICY VIEWS

• The Minister’s consideration of public interest leading to the Class of Services Determination 2012 was :

promoting the highest value use of spectrum investment and innovation competition consumer convenience determining an appropriate rate of return to the communityThis is a broader canvas intersecting with other policy portfolios illustrating wider values and the potential for collateral damage by a narrower mindsetExamples : Reticence to actively support existing C-band usage under challenge from IMT – Australia’s mentor role in the Pacific, Resource industry global dependency on C-band for 24/7 operation; Defence alignment with allies in 3.4-3.6 GHz; Meteorology dependency on C-band weather radars; DTH TV services in Australia; Earth observation dependency on foreign satellites etc

THE UK : A USEFUL INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE EXAMPLE- cleanly separating policy and regulation ; and enhancing

industry

Government and Ministry have created a clear long term Vision Statement. Expectations of the regulator, enhancement of policy involvement, industry input and structural relationships.

Australian Examples : RCC, IRAC

UK Spectrum Strategy Committee- Coordinates plans for spectrum for all elements

of Government- Main body to oversight delivery of Government

strategy- OFCOM is observer and resource UK Spectrum Policy Forum

- Open to all spectrum users- Assist UKSSC/OFCOM with industry views

OFCOM

GovernmentStakeholder

Executive- Productive

oversight

ROLESRegulator (in Australia) should• authorise use of spectrum within a simplified and consistent format

• monitor the intensity of application/use of spectrum

• report regularly and transparently on usage

• enforcement : devices, systems and spectrum conformity

• interact technically in international matters as directed

• be involved in priority areas for regulatory attention, where regulatory risk is high

Policy makers should engage in broad consultation and give regulatory guidance• generic expectations of licensees, compensation for vacating spectrum

• clarify expectations and degree of flexibility

• convey strategic intentions, broader influences and targets of Government

• engage in Australia’s Treaty responsibilities

• monitor and question broader impact of spectrum decisions

• oversight strategic and productivity matters

Industry involvement (including consultants) should be further enhanced• outsourced band management and assignment methods, where regulatory risk is not high (cf: Accredited Frequency Assigners)

• greater role in study activities for APT, ITU interactions, Delegation Leadership, participation, formulation of draft subordinate instruments

• Advise both policy and regulatory bodies

LICENSING

Overdue for simplification. Future intensified sharing of spectrum by different and new services eg. DSA, point to a more unified form of licensing. Both ALs and SLs deliver tax revenue. However in an environment of uncertainty, the granting of exclusive use of spectrum for a long period of time with a SL is high risk. Furthermore, the application of auction techniques whilst useful amongst like service providers has drawbacks amongst providers of dis-similar services (deepest pockets win) . Extra dividends reaped are usually lost to industry and become an opportunity cost to industry.

UNIFORM LICENSING

Picking up the best characteristics of current licensing types

Generic parameters compatible, shared access, adaptable, flexible conditions of tenure, presumption of renewal, surrender or reduction if not used or inefficient,

reporting on use on a regular open basis

Differentiation not the licence type, but the cost which reflects protection/coordination sought, a reflection

of the value extracted from use of the spectrum, versus politeness of the service.

Example : Dynamic Spectrum Access

INTERNATIONAL- attitude and culture

Types of involvement in Standards and Allocation Studies : Makers Influencers TakersThe first two categories require consistency of representation in order to build relationships and continuity. Willingness and ability to undertake international office bearer roles depends on this.

Rotation of staff leads to vanilla taker capability and the lack of ability to influence. Consistent attendees can become the teachers back home.

Harmonisation of standards and allocations of frequencies are key to economic opportunity. Failure to harmonise has an opportunity cost.

Whilst there is no legal obligation to harmonise internationally eg. with a National Spectrum Plan, failure to do so can be derelict and suicidal.

Policy oversight can provide an accountability mechanism.

Industry has a much bigger potential across the board, with the regulator needing to focus more on agreed prioritised areas