National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The...
Transcript of National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The...
![Page 1: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part 4
Risk analysis
Final report to Ofcom
March 2004
Contributors: Chris Davis John Berry Charles Chambers Nick Kirkman
Quotient Associates Limited ATDI LimitedPO Box 716 15 Kingsland CourtComberton Three Bridges Road, CrawleyCambridge, CB3 7UW West Sussex, RH10 1HL
E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]: www.QuotientAssociates.com Web: www.atdi.co.uk
![Page 2: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Contents
CONTENTS Page
1. Introduction .........................................................................................................11.1 Methodology ...........................................................................................11.2 Identifying potential changes ..................................................................21.3 On-going changes in spectrum management .........................................3
2. Risk assessment.................................................................................................52.1 Classification of total risk ........................................................................52.2 Summary of assessed risks ....................................................................6
3. Results and conclusions .....................................................................................83.1 The level of risk.......................................................................................83.2 Sources of risk ........................................................................................93.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................10
4. Annex A ............................................................................................................12
Quotient/report/qa0324 i
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 3: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
The overall objective of the National Autonomy study is to develop an understanding of the extent to which it would be feasible for the UK to make use of spectrum autonomously whilst still behaving responsibly towards its neighbours and meeting itsinternational treaty obligations. Part 1 of the project analysed several potential examples of autonomous1 use covering a range of frequency bands, applications andregulatory regimes.
The objective of Part 4 of the project, reported here, is to assess the risk that futureautonomous use of spectrum in the UK could be compromised by changes in theregulatory environment. Such changes could result from actions at the international level (ITU-R), the European level (EU, CEPT) or at the national level by the UK’sneighbours. Of course there would be other risks to autonomous use of spectrum suchas the availability of suitable equipment, the lack of a market for the service provided orobsolescence due the development of a superior technology, or it may turn out to beimpossible to reach a suitable agreement with the neighbouring administration or spectrum user. However, these risks would either be solved in advance of anassignment for autonomous use, or would be risks that the spectrum user would be expected to understand and accept. Therefore they are not considered here.
It should be noted that the examples of autonomous use (the scenarios) referred toin this report have been developed solely for the purposes of this study. They in noway reflect the views, plans or expectations of Ofcom and no inferences can bedrawn from their inclusion here.
1.1 Methodology
In assessing the overall risk that there might be to autonomous use of a particular piece of spectrum it is necessary to take account of both the probability of a changeoccurring and the impact that the change would have on the spectrum user. Ourapproach in assessing the overall risk is to:
��Identify changes to the regulatory environment that could occur and the likelihoodof occurrence;
1The study considers varying degrees of autonomy. These range from the use of non-standardised
technologies to the operation of services outside the ITU-R Frequency Allocation Table on a nointerference, no protection basis although the focus is on the lesser degrees of autonomy. The results from Part 1 are given in the report, National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part 1: Technicaloptions.
Quotient/report/qa0324 1
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 4: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Introduction
��Assess the impact that the change would have on the spectrum user;
��For each change to assess the overall risk by multiplying the likelihood of occurrence by the impact on the user;
��Sum the scores for each change to obtain an overall measure of risk for eachscenario.
This analysis is summarised in Chapter 2 and detailed in Annex A. The result is anoverall risk “score” for each of the 13 scenarios developed and analysed in Part 1 of the project. The set of overall risk scores is then used to:
��Identify any correlations between risk and other attributes of autonomous use. Inparticular we look for correlation between risk and the degree of autonomyinvolved, the application or service, and the frequency concerned. The purpose is to identify what types of autonomy would be relatively low risk, and what typeswould be relatively high risk;
��Assess the overall level of risk to a programme of autonomous spectrumassignments. This assessment will be based on assumptions as to future events and will therefore be approximate. Nevertheless, it is expected to provide a usefulindicator of the risks associated with autonomous spectrum use.
For the purpose of this exercise, potential changes will be considered over a timeperiod of 10 to 15 years, this being the time span over which a piece of spectrum mightbe selected and assigned for autonomous use and give time for the associatedbusiness to make a return on its investment.
1.2 Identifying potential changes
Spectrum management practices have evolved considerably over the past decade, andsignificant further changes are planned or under active consideration both in the UK and by neighbouring administrations. These plans and debates are clearly useful indicators of potential future changes, and were therefore reviewed at the start of thiswork. A brief summary is given in the following section. In addition, the Study teamexamined:
��The agendas for WRC-07 and WRC-10;
��The programmes of work of the EU Radio Spectrum Policy Group and the Radio Spectrum Committee;
��EU research programmes (under the Information Society Technologiesprogramme);
Quotient/report/qa0324 2
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 5: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Introduction
��Ofcom’s programme responding to the Independent Review of Radio Spectrum Management.
Potential changes of relevance to future autonomous use of the spectrum were then identified through a two step process.
��A Study team brainstorm was used to generate a range of potential changes covering all scenarios analysed in Part 1 of the project;
��A Workshop was held with the Ofcom project Steering Group to review the ideas already generated, to identify additional potential changes, and to assess thelikelihood of each change taking place.
1.3 On-going changes in spectrum management
1.3.1 The introduction of market mechanisms
Market mechanisms have already been introduced into spectrum assignment andlicensing through spectrum auctions and administrative incentive pricing, in the UK andelsewhere in Europe. A further development of the market approach, transferablespectrum rights, is currently being discussed with a view to its possible introduction. This has the potential to give rise to changes that could compromise autonomousspectrum usage within the UK.
Spectrum trading within a neighbouring country would permit a spectrum owner to sellhis spectrum, in whole or in part, to a third party. Depending upon the rights associatedwith the spectrum concerned, the new owner might deploy new technology or, potentially, a new application. Such a change could take place at short notice and lead to a change to the cross border environment in which the UK spectrum user had been operating. For example, a UK spectrum user operating on a no interference, noprotection basis could find their operations disrupted by higher levels of interference from across the border. Furthermore, sales of subsets of an assignment could result inspectrum fragmentation and require a UK-based spectrum user to co-ordinate in adifferent way with each new spectrum user in a neighbouring country, depending upontheir application or technology.
1.3.2 The Commons approach
In this approach anyone is permitted to make use of a particular band or bands ofspectrum. As with some of the current licence exempt assignments, rules on thetechnology or protocols to be used may be imposed in order to ensure reasonablyequitable sharing of the spectrum between users.
Quotient/report/qa0324 3
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 6: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Introduction
Should this approach gain enough support, it is possible that further tranches of spectrum could be assigned for licence exempt use on a European or an internationalbasis. This has the potential to change the cross border environment although,typically, radiated powers would be low and cross border issues would be expected tobe minor. More importantly, and if widely adopted, the result could be the uncontrolledimport and use of equipment in a band used for an autonomous (but licensed)application in the UK with the clear potential to cause disruptive interference.
1.3.3 The European Union
The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legalframework in the EU for the co-ordination of radio spectrum policy approaches. In linewith this the Commission has established both the Radio Spectrum Policy Group andthe Radio Spectrum Committee. The remit of the Radio Spectrum Policy Group is to provide policy and strategic advice radio spectrum policy issues, on co-ordination ofpolicy approaches and on harmonised conditions with regard to the availability andefficient use of radio spectrum. The role of the Radio Spectrum Committee is torecommend and adopt technical measures necessary for the implementation of EU policies. Where appropriate these measures are to be developed in cooperation withthe CEPT.
Thus, it is likely that the EU will continue and indeed expand its activities in the area of spectrum harmonisation. Clearly, the identification of additional spectrum for harmonised applications (depending on the precise legal process adopted in each case) and the reassignment of existing harmonised bands at the end of the effectivelife of their current application has the potential to constrain the UK’s freedom to assignspectrum for autonomous use.
Quotient/report/qa0324 4
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 7: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Risk assessment
2. RISK ASSESSMENT
The analysis of the potential changes, their likelihood and possible impact on the autonomous spectrum user are detailed in Annex A.
Each potential change was classified into one of four classes of likelihood, Veryunlikely, Small, Medium or High, with a corresponding score of 0 to 3 respectively.Similarly, the possible impact on the spectrum user was classified into one of fourclasses: None, Small, Medium or Large again with a corresponding score of 0 to 3 respectively. Each change could therefore contribute a “risk score” of between 0 and 9, with a score of 9 corresponding to a high likelihood of a change occurring that wouldhave a major negative impact on the spectrum user. The total risk score for eachscenario was determined by summing the risk scores for all the applicable changes.
We note that spectrum which is little used or for which there is no obvious near term demand is a potential candidate for a change of use nationally, internationally or on aEuropean basis. There is, therefore, a higher risk of a change within such bands.Where appropriate this general risk of change has been included in the riskassessment for the corresponding scenario.
2.1 Classification of total risk
The total risk scores range from two to twenty four. For the purposes of analysis it is helpful to group the scenarios into a smaller set of risk classifications. These werederived as follows.
��First, we consider the situation in which a band of spectrum has been identified assuitable for some autonomous usage but for which there is a high probability of afuture change with a large, negative impact. In this case, a potential spectrum user would likely consider investment in a business that relied on access to the band to be high risk. If there were two such potential high risk changes, autonomous use ofthe band would most probably be considered untenable. The first case correspondsto a risk score of 9 and the second to a score of 18.
��Secondly, we consider the situation in which there are a small number of potential changes but each has a low probability of occurrence and each would have a small impact on the autonomous user. In this case, the potential spectrum user would likely consider the risk acceptable. This would correspond to a risk score of aroundfour.
Taken together this suggests that the total risk scores be classified as follows.
Quotient/report/qa0324 5
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 8: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Risk assessment
Score Classification
In excess of 14 Very high risk
9 or higher High risk
5 or higher Medium risk
4 or less Low risk
Table 2.1: Classification of the total risk scorefor each scenario.
2.2 Summary of assessed risks
Based on the above classification, the risk assessments detailed in Annex A aresummarised in the table below.
No. Scenario Total risk score
Riskclassification
1 Community sound broadcasting on HF Public Correspondence channels
3 Low
2 Local VHF sound broadcasting in the 66 to 87.5 MHz mobile band
4 Low
3 Digital wide band PMR with digital TV in Band III (200 MHz)
11 High
4 Unrestricted wide band PMR in the 450 - 470 MHz band with narrow band in France
2 Low
5 UTRA TDD in spare DVB-T channels (500 MHz) 11 High
6 Fixed wireless access in 900 MHz TETRA band 12 High
7 Re-farming of GSM spectrum to UTRA (900 MHz & 1800 MHz)
7 Medium
8 Terrestrial DAB local radio at 1800 MHz 18 Very high
9 Part of 1800 MHz band reallocated to fixed links 24 Very high
10 Portable Wireless DSL in the 2010 - 2020 MHz IMT-2000 band
17 Very high
Quotient/report/qa0324 6
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 9: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Risk assessment
No. Scenario Total risk score
Riskclassification
11 Use of 2.7 - 2.9 GHz Aeronautical band for fixed links
3 Low
12 FWA spectrum used for OB links (3.5 GHz) 13 High
13 Disregard technical standards and channelplans for terrestrial fixed services at 32 GHz
8 Medium
Table 2.2: The total risks assessed for each scenario.
Note that scenarios 1, 9 and 11 in the above list are considered unlikely to be practical in the light of potential cross border interference problems2. They are included in thetable for completeness but will not be considered further.
2 See the report, National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part 1: Technical options.
Quotient/report/qa0324 7
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 10: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Results and conclusions
3. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
3.1 The level of risk
The number of scenarios that fall into each of the four different risk classifications isshown in Figure 3.1. Although the classifications are of necessity approximate, theresults show that:
��A useful proportion of the scenarios (40%) would be subject to a relatively small risk of disruptive future changes;
��However, the practicality of 60% of the scenarios could be called into doubt by thelikelihood that future changes could seriously disrupt any assignment toautonomous use.
0
1
2
3
4
Low Medium High Very high
Figure 3.1: The number of scenarios assessed at each of the fourdifferent levels of risk.
Figure 3.2 demonstrates the correspondence between the level of risk assessed foreach scenario and the degree of autonomy involved. This suggests a degree ofcorrelation between the two with the greater risk being associated with larger degrees of autonomy. The number of samples, however, is small and given the variety ofchanges that can contribute to the risk (as identified in Table 4.1) any correlation would be expected to be weak.
The results were also examined for correlation between the level of risk and the applications involved, and between the level of risk and the severity of thecorresponding cross border restrictions. No useful correlations were identified.
Overall, we conclude that future regulatory changes could have a significant negative impact on autonomous use of spectrum by the UK. The level of risk can vary from lowto very high and will need to be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Quotient/report/qa0324 8
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 11: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Results and conclusions
UTRA/DVB-T (5)
Change of
technology /
relaxed stds
Change within
Region 1 FAT
Change outside
Region 1 FAT
FWA/TETRA (6)
OB/FWA (12)
T-DAB/GSM (8)
PMR/TV (3)
PMR/PMR (4)
UTRA/GSM (7)
FS stds (13)
PWDSL/UTRA (10)
Radio/PMR (2)
Very high
High
Medium
Low
UTRA/DVB-T (5)UTRA/DVB-T (5)
Change of
technology /
relaxed stds
Change within
Region 1 FAT
Change outside
Region 1 FAT
FWA/TETRA (6)
OB/FWA (12)
FWA/TETRA (6)
OB/FWA (12)
T-DAB/GSM (8) T-DAB/GSM (8)
PMR/TV (3)PMR/TV (3)
PMR/PMR (4)PMR/PMR (4)
UTRA/GSM (7)
FS stds (13)
UTRA/GSM (7)
FS stds (13)
PWDSL/UTRA (10)PWDSL/UTRA (10)
Radio/PMR (2)Radio/PMR (2)
Very high
High
Medium
Low
Figure 3.2: The level of assessed risk (vertical axis) is shown foreach scenario as a function of the degree of autonomy
3. Each
scenario is identified by the technologies involved and the scenario number (corresponding to that given in Table 2.2).
3.2 Sources of risk
The risks considered here arise from the potential for future changes in the regulatoryenvironment to compromise the utility of autonomous spectrum assignments. Suchchanges may come about as a result of decisions at the international level (ITU-R), atthe European level (EU, ECC/CEPT), or at the national level by the UK’s neighbours.Figure 3.3 shows how the changes, identified in the analysis in the previous chapter(see Table 2.2), breakdown into the three levels. Both the number of potential changesand the contribution to the total risk score are given.
The results show that the number of changes and the consequential risk are most likely to arise from actions at the European level or at the national level by our neighbours.To minimise such risks to any autonomous assignments by the UK, it would be prudent to consider:
3 In line with Part 1 of the study the scenarios have been grouped into three levels of autonomy. The first
covers a change of technology or a relaxed adherence to technical standards whilst maintainingconformance to harmonised applications. The second encompasses a change of application or service in conformance with the ITU-R Frequency Allocation Table for Region 1. The third covers changes outsidethe Frequency Allocation Table and operation under Article 4.4 of the Radio Regulations.
Quotient/report/qa0324 9
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 12: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Results and conclusions
��Seeking agreement to the change within the appropriate European bodies or withneighbours as appropriate;
��Registration of station assignments made under a primary or secondary allocationwith the ITU Radiocommunications Bureau.
ITU-REurope
Neighbours
No of changes
Risk score0
10
20
30
40
50
Figure 3.3: The number of potential changes to the regulatoryenvironment, and their cumulative contribution to the total risk score, broken down according to the presumed source ofchange.
3.3 Conclusion
The results from this part of the National Autonomy study show that there are risks toautonomous use of the spectrum that will arise from changes to the regulatoryenvironment at international, European and national levels. The level of risk for anyindividual autonomous assignment can vary from minor to very high, and a separate assessment will be necessary in each case. It is likely that the level of risk will requireserious consideration (high or very high in the classification used here) by the potential spectrum users in around 60% of cases. In addition, it should be noted that:
��The likelihood of a high level of risk may be less for autonomous use whichinvolves a change of technology or the relaxation of adherence to technical standards but maintains conformance to harmonised applications. Even here,however, high levels of risk are expected to arise in some cases;
��Spectrum which is either little used or where there will be a major future change(such as a step change of technology or wide spread closure of networks) is more likely to be subject to a change in its regulatory status. Consequently, autonomoususe of such spectrum is more likely to be at risk from such future changes.
Quotient/report/qa0324 10
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 13: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Results and conclusions
There are opportunities to reduce the level of risk and the following are recommendedfor consideration:
��Preference should be given to spectrum which is already widely used in Europe for applications that are expected to remain stable for some years;
��Agreement to the intended change by the UK should be sought within theappropriate European bodies or with the UK’s neighbours wherever practical;
��Consideration should be given to the registration with the ITURadiocommunications Bureau of stations within an autonomous assignment wherethe use falls under a primary or secondary allocation.
Quotient/report/qa0324 11
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 14: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
National Autonomy – Risk analysis Annex A
4. ANNEX A
The following table lists all the potential changes identified for each scenario and thepotential impact on the autonomous spectrum user. The right hand columns give theassessed risk score for each change and the total risk score for each scenario.
Quotient/report/qa0324 12
© 2004. Hard copies or higher resolution versions of the documents are available on application to the Ofcom ContactCentre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA.
![Page 15: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
1C
om
munity
sound
bro
ad
castin
g o
n H
F P
ub
licC
orr
esp
on
de
nce c
ha
nn
els
Outs
ide F
AT
there
fore
on
NIN
P b
asis
ITU
-R s
tudie
s c
om
e u
pw
ith
an
alte
rnative
use
. V
ery
un
like
ly(w
ithin
tim
escale
s)
Co
uld
pre
ve
nt
or
de
gra
de
au
ton
om
ous u
se
in U
K.
La
rge
Th
is a
pp
licatio
n is
no
tse
en
as v
iab
le,
the
refo
re t
here
is
no
ris
k o
f it b
ein
gcom
pro
mis
ed
03
Aneig
hbour
reassig
ns for
PC
use
V
ery
un
like
lyW
ould
cause a
nd s
uffer
inte
rfe
rence
Larg
e0
Aneig
hbour
reassig
ns
fre
qu
encie
s fo
re
g s
ho
rtra
nge tele
metr
y
Very
un
like
lyS
mall
due t
o low
pow
er
Sm
all
0
CE
PT
recom
mends n
ew
sta
nd
ard
fo
r e
ma
il in
PC
ch
an
ne
ls
Lo
wC
ou
ld p
reve
nt
or
de
gra
de
au
ton
om
ous u
se
in U
K.
Larg
e3
2LocalV
HF
sound
bro
adcasting
in the 6
6 t
o88 M
Hz m
obile
band
Outs
ide F
AT
and E
CA
T
the
refo
re u
se
d o
n a
NIN
P
ba
sis
Mobile
lim
its n
ot
accepte
db
y n
eig
hb
ou
rs,
have
to
red
uce e
xp
ort
ed
em
issio
ns
by 1
0d
B
Me
diu
mS
teri
lise
d a
rea incre
ase
d t
o2
5,0
00 k
m2 a
nd/o
ru
se
dire
ctio
na
l a
nte
nn
a
Mediu
m4
4
No
use
fou
nd f
or
up lin
kband
Mediu
mH
alf
of fr
eed s
pectr
um
waste
dT
his
is n
ot a r
isk to
au
ton
om
ous u
se
Aneig
hbour
uses
frequencie
sfo
r F
ixed lin
ks
in lin
e w
ith
FA
T
Very
un
like
lyW
ould
cause m
ore
inte
rfe
rence in
UK
,a
nd
ne
igh
bo
ur
cou
ldcla
imp
rote
ctio
n.
Larg
e0
Continuin
gharm
onis
atio
no
f pu
blic
sa
fety
sp
ectr
um
co
uld
le
ad t
o r
edu
ce
du
sa
ge b
y s
om
e n
eig
hb
ou
rs
Mediu
mN
oim
pact
None
0
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
13
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 16: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
3D
igital w
ide b
and P
MR
with
dig
ita
l T
V in B
an
dII
I(2
00 M
Hz)
With
in F
AT
Fo
otn
ote
(exclu
din
g t
he R
epublic
of
Ire
lan
d)
an
d E
CA
T,
an
d in
lin
e w
ith
cu
rre
nt U
K /
Fra
nce M
OU
Fre
nch
de
cid
e to
co
ntin
ue
with a
nalo
gue T
V for
years
Mediu
mR
estr
ictions
would
be
sim
ilar
to c
urr
ent,
so q
uite
exte
nsiv
e b
ut
wo
uld
be
kn
ow
n a
t tim
e o
fassig
nm
ent.
Low
2
11
Aneig
hbour
auto
nom
ously
intr
od
uces
fixe
d lin
ks (
as
FA
T f
or
Regio
n 3
)
Very
un
like
lyO
uts
ide F
AT
so U
K c
an
cla
im p
rote
ctio
n f
or
exis
tin
ga
nd
fu
ture
mo
bile
insta
llations u
nder
Footn
ote
Low
0
RR
C s
ets
str
ict
limits o
n
use
for
mo
bile
ap
plic
atio
ns
(e.g
. g
ive
sp
rote
ction
on
lyto
bro
adcast usage).
Me
diu
mH
igh
er
leve
ls o
f p
rote
ctio
nw
ou
ld in
cre
ase
co
ord
inatio
n a
rea a
nd
/or
leave m
obile
assig
nm
ents
vuln
era
ble
to la
ter
DV
B-T
de
plo
ym
en
ts.
Mediu
mF
irm
and fin
al coord
ination
arr
an
ge
me
nts
co
uld
take 2
to
3 y
ea
rsto
ag
ree.
4
With
the c
ha
ng
e t
o d
igita
lte
chn
olo
gy t
he F
ren
ch
wis
hto
am
end the
agre
em
ent
to p
rote
ct
the
bo
rde
r but
the
cu
rre
nt
MO
U w
ou
ld b
e th
esta
rtin
gp
oin
t fo
r n
ego
tiation
s.
Mediu
mT
he p
rote
cte
d a
rea
inF
rance w
ould
incre
ase
Mediu
m4
Fre
nch
sw
itch
toP
MR
,cla
imco-p
rim
ary
use u
nder
Fo
otn
ote
, a
nd w
ish
top
rote
ct th
e b
ord
er.
Sm
all
The p
rote
cte
d a
rea
inF
rance w
ould
incre
ase
although the m
obile
technolo
gie
s w
ould
be
expecte
d to b
e r
easonably
com
patible
Sm
all
1
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
14
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 17: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
4U
nre
str
icte
d w
ide b
and
PM
R in the 4
50 -
470 M
Hz
ba
nd
with
narr
ow
ba
nd
in
Fra
nce
Inconfo
rmance w
ith F
AT
an
d E
CA
T b
ut
outof
line
with
EC
CR
ecom
mendations o
n t
he
intr
oduction
of
wid
e b
and
dig
ital P
MR
A n
eig
hbour
intr
oduces
fixe
d lin
ks o
n a
co
-pri
ma
ryb
asis
and
cla
im p
rote
ctio
nfr
om
futu
rein
sta
llatio
ns
Very
un
like
lyP
ote
ntia
lly s
eve
re im
pa
ct
on a
ll subsequentP
MR
de
plo
ym
en
ts in t
he
ba
nd
.
La
rge
Ch
an
ge
, o
ther
tha
n o
f th
e
techn
olo
gy,
isco
nsid
ere
dvery
un
like
ly in
th
isb
an
d.
02
Oth
er
mo
bile
tech
no
log
ies
are
deplo
yed in
neig
hbouring c
ountr
ies.
Mediu
mT
he t
echnolo
gie
s a
reexpecte
d to b
e r
easonably
com
patible
.
Sm
all
2
ITU
-R R
eg
ion
al con
fere
nce
allo
cate
s B
roa
dca
st
he
rea
s a
dd
itio
na
l co
-prim
ary
se
rvic
eto
exp
an
d a
mo
un
to
f bro
adca
st
sp
ectr
um
fo
rh
igh
ca
pacity a
ccess lin
ks.
Very
un
like
lyM
obile
and b
roadcast
technolo
gie
s w
ould
be
expecte
d to b
e r
easonably
com
patible
Sm
all/
mediu
m0
5U
TR
A T
DD
in s
pare
DV
B-
T c
hannels
(500 M
Hz)
Outs
ide F
AT
prim
ary
allo
catio
n b
etw
ee
n 4
70
-790 M
Hz b
ut
within
Footn
ote
(exclu
din
gB
elg
ium
and
the R
epublic
of Ir
ela
nd)
Bu
to
pe
rate
s a
s N
INP
Neig
hbours
decid
eto
co
ntin
ue w
ith
an
alo
gu
e T
V
for
ma
ny y
ea
rs
Me
diu
mL
ike
ly t
o le
ad t
osevere
co
nstr
ain
tso
n U
K u
sa
ge o
r re
tun
ing o
f entire
UT
RA
ne
two
rk o
nch
an
geo
ve
r to
d
igita
l T
V.
Mediu
m4
11
RR
C s
ets
str
ict
limits o
n
use
for
mo
bile
ap
plic
atio
ns
(e.g
. g
ive
sp
rote
ction
on
lyto
bro
adcast usage).
Me
diu
mH
igh
er
leve
ls o
f p
rote
ctio
nw
ou
ld in
cre
ase
co
ord
inatio
n a
rea a
nd
/or
leave m
obile
assig
nm
ents
vuln
era
ble
to la
ter
DV
B-T
de
plo
ym
en
ts.
Mediu
mF
irm
and fin
al coord
ination
arr
an
ge
me
nts
co
uld
take 2
to
3 y
ea
rsto
ag
ree
so
the
re is r
isk in
the
meantim
e.
4
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
15
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 18: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
RR
Cre
quires
sta
tion
by
sta
tio
nco
ord
inatio
n f
or
all
tra
nsm
itte
rs.
Mediu
mW
ould
constr
ain
rate
of
ne
two
rk d
eplo
ym
en
t.S
mall
2
Neig
hbours
assig
nfo
rm
ob
ile u
sa
ge w
ith
adiffe
rent
TD
D t
echnolo
gy
(eg P
WD
SL)
Sm
all
Mobile
technolo
gie
sare
expecte
d to b
e r
easonably
com
patible
.
Sm
all
1
6F
ixed w
irele
ss a
ccess in
900 M
Hz T
ET
RA
band
With
in F
AT
but
outs
ide
EC
AT
and H
arm
onis
ation
for
dig
ital P
MR
Neig
hbours
intr
oduce
fixed
links o
n a
co
-prim
ary
ba
sis
Lo
wS
ign
ific
ant
imp
act
on
subsequent
deplo
ym
ents
in N
I
Larg
e3
12
Neig
hbours
intr
oduce
bro
adcasting
on a
co-
prim
ary
ba
sis
Very
un
like
lyE
xpecte
d to b
e s
imila
r to
T
-DA
B a
t 1800 M
Hz.
Mediu
m0
Neig
hbours
assig
nth
isband to G
SM
-R
Lo
wS
imila
r to
co
-exis
ten
ce
with
TE
TR
A b
ut
limitin
gco
ve
rag
e t
o r
ailw
ays w
illm
itig
ate
the
impact.
Sm
all
1
Ne
igh
bo
urs
assig
nto
FW
AM
ed
ium
FW
Aa
nd
FW
A c
an c
o-
exis
t fr
om
ER
Cstu
die
sS
mall
2
As
a b
an
d w
ith
little c
urr
en
tu
sa
ge a
nd p
ote
ntia
lly lo
wfu
ture
usa
ge it
is a
p
ote
ntia
l ca
nd
ida
tefo
rh
arm
on
isatio
n t
o m
ee
ta
futu
re n
ee
d.
Hig
hIm
pact depends u
pon
the
applic
ation.
Mediu
m6
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
16
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 19: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
7R
e-f
arm
ing o
f G
SM
spectr
um
to U
TR
A (
900
MH
z &
18
00 M
Hz)
Inco
nfo
rmity w
ith
FA
T a
nd
E
CA
T b
ut
pote
ntia
lly o
ut
of
line w
ith E
CC
H
arm
on
isatio
n in
itia
tive
s
Th
e F
ren
ch d
o n
otre
mo
ve
the lim
ited n
um
ber
offixed
links in
the
1800 M
Hz b
and
Low
Gre
ate
r chance o
f conflic
t w
ith U
K U
TR
A b
ase
sta
tions b
ut
UK
opera
tor
will
als
o h
ave
at
least
2U
TR
A F
DD
carr
iers
Sm
all
17
EU
mandate
sth
atall
mobile
lic
ences b
em
ade
techn
olo
gy n
eu
tra
la
nd
som
e n
eig
hbouring
opera
tors
deplo
y T
DD
syste
ms
Mediu
mW
e c
an e
xpect
agre
em
ent
on
measure
s to p
rote
ct
exis
ting F
DD
mobile
syste
ms (
GS
M o
r U
TR
A)
Sm
all
2
Mobile
opera
tors
in F
rance
de
plo
y D
VB
-T t
o p
rovid
eh
igh
ca
pacity m
ob
ile d
ow
nlin
k s
erv
ices
Low
DV
B-T
would
be r
ela
tively
low
po
we
r a
nd
de
sig
ne
dto
fit in
with
a m
ob
ilen
etw
ork
,so
the e
ffect
wo
uld
be
expecte
d to b
e s
mall.
Sm
all
1
Part
sofspectr
um
are
de
sig
nate
d f
or
DV
B-T
retu
rn c
ha
nn
els
.
Sm
all
Re
turn
ch
ann
el lik
ely
to
be
lo
w p
ow
er
an
d n
arr
ow
band im
ply
ing a
sm
all
impact
on U
TR
A.
Sm
all
1
EU
Directive o
rders
2G
Hz
ba
nd
to b
e u
se
d f
irst
for
3G
Very
un
like
lyP
ossib
le r
eb
an
din
g o
f a
lle
qu
ipm
en
t to
2G
Hz.
Larg
e0
Atth
e t
ime o
fth
e c
losu
reofG
SM
netw
ork
s u
se o
fth
e b
an
ds fo
ro
the
ra
pp
licatio
ns b
eco
me
sa
po
ssib
ility
in
ne
igh
bo
urin
gco
untr
ies.
Mediu
mT
he im
pact
would
depend
on
th
e a
pp
lica
tio
n b
utth
ein
tro
ductio
n o
f a
new
ap
plic
atio
n w
ou
ld t
ake
a
cco
un
t of
exis
tin
go
pe
ration
s.
Sm
all
2
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
17
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 20: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
8T
err
estr
ial D
AB
local ra
dio
at
18
00
MH
zO
uts
ide F
AT
and E
CA
T
the
refo
re u
se
d o
n a
NIN
P
ba
sis
Tig
hte
r N
INP
crite
ria
ap
plie
d b
y n
eig
hbours
Mediu
mR
estr
ictions
becom
ese
ve
reL
arg
eW
ou
ld b
e k
no
wn
at
the
tim
e o
fassig
nm
ent.
018
Neig
hbours
assig
nnew
fixe
d lin
ks in
the b
an
d.
Low
Becom
es
unusable
Larg
e3
Neig
hbours
assig
nT
-DA
Bouts
ide the
FA
T.
Low
Would
require
coord
ination
but pro
bably
manageable
Mediu
m2
Neig
hbours
mig
rate
toU
TR
AH
igh
If E
RC
/RE
C/(
01
)01 a
pp
lies
em
issio
n lim
its w
ou
ld b
esim
ilar.
Sm
all
3
EU
Directive m
andate
s u
se
for
mobile
serv
ice o
nly
Low
UK
would
have t
o c
ancel
bro
adcasting lic
ences
with
in s
om
e p
eri
od
Larg
e3
ITU
-R a
lloca
tes p
art
ofth
eband for
aero
nautical
tele
metr
y.
Lo
wA
ffecte
dsp
ectr
um
wo
uld
be
co
me u
nusa
ble
fo
r b
roa
dcastin
g.
Larg
e (
for
part
of
band)
3
Atth
e t
ime o
fth
e c
losu
reofG
SM
netw
ork
s u
se o
fth
e b
an
d fo
roth
er
ap
plic
atio
ns b
eco
me
sa
po
ssib
ility
.
Mediu
mT
he im
pact
depends o
nth
eapplic
ation.
Mediu
m4
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
18
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 21: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
9P
art
of
1800 M
Hz b
and
reallo
cate
d t
o fix
ed lin
ks
With
in F
AT
an
d E
CA
T b
ut
dis
regard
s h
arm
onis
ation
for
dig
ita
l ce
llula
ruse
Ne
igh
bo
ur
assig
ns
fixe
dlin
ks in a
cco
rd w
ith
FA
TLow
Coord
ination
with
neig
hbours
would
be
req
uire
d,
aff
ectin
gsu
bse
qu
ent
insta
llatio
ns.
Larg
e (
for
part
of
band)
Th
is a
pp
licatio
n is
no
tse
en
as v
iab
le,
the
refo
re t
here
is
no
ris
k o
f it b
ein
gcom
pro
mis
ed
324
Neig
hbours
assig
nT
-DA
Bouts
ide the
FA
T.
Low
UK
fix
ed lin
ks w
ould
have
prim
acy.
None
0
Neig
hbours
mig
rate
toU
TR
AH
igh
Coord
ination w
ould
be
required.
Larg
e (
for
part
of
band)
9
EU
Directive
mandate
use
for
mobile
serv
ice o
nly
Low
UK
would
have t
o c
ancel
fixed lin
k lic
ences
within
som
e p
eriod
Larg
e (
for
part
of
band)
3
ITU
-R a
lloca
tes p
art
ofth
eband for
aero
nautical
tele
metr
y.
Lo
wA
ffecte
dsp
ectr
um
wo
uld
becom
e u
nusable
for
fixed
links.
Larg
e (
for
part
of
band)
3
Atth
e t
ime o
fth
e c
losu
reofG
SM
netw
ork
s u
se o
fth
e b
an
d fo
roth
er
ap
plic
atio
ns b
eco
me
sa
po
ssib
ility
.
Mediu
mT
he im
pact
depends o
nth
ea
pp
licatio
n b
utfixe
d lin
ks
are
susceptible
toin
terf
ere
nce.
Hig
h6
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
19
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 22: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
10
Port
able
Wirele
ss D
SL in
the 2
010 -
2020
MH
z IM
T-
2000 b
and
With
in F
AT
an
d E
CA
T b
ut
outs
ide h
arm
onis
ed
allo
catio
n t
oIM
T-2
00
0
Neig
hbours
deplo
yP
WD
SL o
r sim
ilar
lice
nse
dte
chn
olo
gy
Mediu
mS
imila
r to
GS
M w
ith
GS
MS
mall
217
EC
C p
air
s it
with
part
of
2.5
GH
z u
npaired b
and
for
IMT
-2000
Low
Part
of
2.5
GH
z I
MT
-2000
ba
nd
co
uld
be r
ed
uce
din
ca
pacity o
r p
ossib
ly b
e
unusable
Larg
e3
Euro
pe w
ide a
llocation f
or
air
bo
rne P
MS
E lin
ks.
Me
diu
mIn
terf
ere
nce lik
ely
to
be a
sig
nific
ant
pro
ble
m.
Larg
e6
Neig
hbours
do
notre
move
fixed lin
ks
Low
Coord
ination d
ista
nces a
rela
rge
Larg
e3
Ba
nd
allo
cate
das
exte
nsio
n to
2.4
/5 G
Hz
"IS
M"
ba
nd
Very
un
like
lyE
qu
ipm
en
t w
ou
ld b
e lo
wp
ow
er
bu
t d
ep
loym
en
tw
ould
be u
ncontr
olle
d.
Larg
e0
As
a H
arm
onis
ed b
and
with
little
use t
he
reis
the
po
tentia
l fo
rth
is b
an
d t
o b
eharm
onis
ed for
anoth
er
applic
ation.
Mediu
mT
he a
pplic
ation is
un
kn
ow
n.
Mediu
m4
11
Use
of2
.7 -
2.9
GH
zA
ero
nautical band
for
fixed
links
Outs
ide F
AT
and w
ould
o
pe
rate
on N
INP
basis
ITU
-R r
ecom
mends h
igher
leve
ls o
f p
rote
ctio
nL
ow
Re
du
ces
furt
he
rth
eu
sa
bili
ty o
f th
e b
and
for
oth
er
ap
plic
atio
ns
La
rge
Th
is a
pp
licatio
n is
no
tse
en
as v
iab
le,
the
refo
re t
here
is
no
ris
k o
f it b
ein
gcom
pro
mis
ed
33
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
20
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 23: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
12
3.5
GH
z s
pectr
um
used
for
OB
lin
ks
With
in F
AT
an
d E
CA
TH
igh
er
de
nsity u
sag
e in
Fra
nce
Sm
all
Incre
ases p
robabili
ty o
f in
terf
ere
nce.
Sm
all
113
EU
Directive m
andate
s u
se
for
4G
- lik
ely
to h
ave
fle
xib
ility
bu
ilt in
Mediu
mU
K h
as to d
iscontinue u
se,
butth
ere
are
oth
er
EN
G/O
B b
an
ds
Sm
all
2
No
t m
an
date
d f
or
4G
but
ne
igh
bo
urs
de
plo
y 4
G
Hig
hM
ore
lik
ely
to
inte
rfe
re w
ith
4G
syste
mb
ut sim
ilar
mitig
tion m
easure
sw
ould
apply
Sm
all
3
Neig
hbours
use
retu
rned
sp
ectr
um
to O
BM
ed
ium
Inte
rfe
ren
ce b
eco
me
s less
pre
dic
table
Mediu
m4
Allo
cate
dto
fixe
dsate
llite
se
rvic
e lin
ks.
Lo
wS
eve
rein
terf
ere
nce
possib
leLarg
e3
13
Dis
regard
technic
al
sta
nd
ard
s a
nd
ch
an
ne
lpla
ns
for
terr
estr
ial fixed
se
rvic
es a
t 3
2 G
Hz
In lin
e w
ith
FA
T a
nd
EC
AT
b
ut
ign
ore
s h
arm
onis
ed
sta
nd
ard
s a
nd
ch
an
ne
lp
lan
s
A f
utu
reW
RC
ha
rmo
nis
es
these
bands for
the
Hig
hD
en
sity F
ixe
d S
ate
llite
Se
rvic
e
Lo
wF
urt
he
r d
ep
loym
en
t in
UK
would
require c
oord
ination
with
ne
igh
bo
urs
' H
DF
SS
.
Mediu
mT
hese r
isks a
pply
even t
o
sp
ectr
um
use
rs o
pe
ratin
gin
lin
e w
ith
Eu
rop
ean
sta
nd
ard
s a
nd
ch
an
ne
lp
lan
s.
08
EC
Cre
com
mends
Radio
navig
ation s
erv
ice
inth
ese
ban
ds in lin
ew
ith
FA
T a
nd E
CA
T.
Fix
ed
Se
rvic
es m
ad
e a
secondary
allo
cation
Very
un
like
lyF
urt
he
r d
ep
loym
en
t lik
ely
to b
e p
reve
nte
d w
ith
tim
efo
r re
pla
cem
ent
of curr
ent
insta
llations.
Larg
e0
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
21
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
![Page 24: National Autonomy in the use of spectrum in the UK – Part ... · 1.3.3 The European Union The recent EU Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC) established a policy and legal framework](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050116/5f4d6c3ad98fb45aaa740663/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
National A
uto
nom
y –
Ris
k a
naly
sis
Annex A
No
.S
cen
ari
oR
eg
ula
tory
mo
del
Ris
ks
Pro
bab
ilit
yIm
pli
cati
on
s f
or
the U
K
sp
ectr
um
user
Imp
act
Co
mm
en
tS
co
res
To
tal
sco
re
EU
mandate
s (
part
of)
the
ba
nd
fo
rve
hic
le c
olli
sio
navoid
ance r
adar.
Lo
wL
ow
po
we
r b
ut
ub
iqu
ito
us
de
plo
ym
en
t w
ou
ld lim
it
are
as w
here
fix
ed lin
ks
co
uld
be u
sed
.
Hig
h3
EC
CD
ecis
ion
allo
cate
s(p
art
of)
the b
and f
or
HA
PS
fee
de
r lin
ks.
Lo
wF
urt
he
r d
ep
loym
en
t in
UK
mig
ht
req
uire c
oo
rdin
atio
nw
ith
ne
igh
bo
urs
'fee
de
rlin
ks.
Low
1
Th
e f
actth
atth
is b
an
d is
cu
rre
ntly u
nu
sed
makes it
mo
re lik
ely
th
at
it w
ou
ld b
ese
lecte
dfo
r a
ne
wapplic
ation.
Mediu
mF
ixed lin
ks a
re s
usceptible
to inte
rfe
rence b
ut
mitig
ate
d b
y s
hort
er
pro
pagation d
ista
nces.
Mediu
m4
Tab
le 4
.1:
Assessm
en
to
f p
ote
nti
al
ch
an
ges
an
dth
eir
po
ten
tial
imp
act
on
an
au
ton
om
ou
s s
pectr
um
user
for
each
scen
ari
o,
an
d t
he
ove
rall
ris
k s
co
res
in
ea
ch
ca
se
. T
he
fo
llo
win
ga
bb
revia
tio
ns
are
us
ed
in
th
e t
ab
le:
FA
T f
or
the
IT
U-R
Fre
qu
en
cy A
llo
ca
tio
n T
ab
le f
or
Reg
ion
1;
EC
AT
for
the
Eu
rop
ean
Co
mm
on
Allo
cati
on
Ta
ble
; N
INP
fo
r n
o i
nte
rfere
nce
, n
o p
rote
cti
on
: R
RC
for
ITU
-R R
eg
ion
al
Rad
ioC
on
fere
nc
e.
Qu
otie
nt/
rep
ort
/qa
03
24
© Q
uo
tie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.
20
03
22
Co
mm
erc
ial in
Co
nfid
en
ce
. N
o p
art
of
the
co
nte
nts
of
this
do
cu
me
nt
ma
y b
e d
isclo
se
d,
use
d o
r re
pro
du
ce
d in
an
y f
orm
, o
r b
ya
ny
me
an
s,
with
ou
t th
e p
rio
r w
ritt
en
co
nse
nt
of
Qu
otie
nt
Asso
cia
tes L
td.