About WRTC12

What is the World Radiocommunication Conference, how is the RSGB involved and what is up for discussion in WRC-12?

Many Radio Amateurs probably know the Conference by its earlier name—World Administrative Radio Conference or WARC for short. This is on account of the 30m, 17m and 12m bands that resulted from WARC-79 (the conference that took place in 1979). More recently WRC-03 granted the amateur service the additional 100 kHz at 7 MHz while WRC-07 achieved a global allocation at 136 kHz.

The ITU re-structured WARC in 1992 and renamed it the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC). It is organised on a nominal 4 year cycle, with the provisional agenda set two conferences ahead. The final agenda is then agreed at the preceding conference. Apart from some standing agenda items, WRC-07 selected 25 items from over 200 proposed agenda items for its following conference, WRC-12. Of these one item, Agenda Item 1.23, is directly relevant to radio amateurs as it considers a secondary allocation near to 500 kHz. Whilst new allocations are obviously of particular interest, one of the less obvious reasons for paying attention to these conferences is the need to protect our existing allocations. In terms of protecting existing bands the amateur community has interests in two agenda items at WRC-12, namely Agenda Items 1.14 and 1.15. These will be outlined below. In addition, we are also following 1.10 as there is a relationship with our own item, 1.23.

The preparatory process for a WRC starts more or less immediately after the end of the preceding conference. It is multi-faceted with committee work being driven within a large number of structures within ITU as well as groupings, such as CEPT, CITEL, ASMG, ATU, etc.

Through CEPT, we aim to reach what is termed a European Common Proposal (ECP), a year or so out from the conference on each agenda item. In terms of the agenda items of interest this is reached though international meetings of a project team (PT) responsible to the Conference Preparatory Group; each meeting takes 3 or 4 days. The RSGB has been present at many of these meetings as a part of Ofcom’s UK delegation. Through this mechanism we have submitted technical papers and have been actively involved in the discussions. Ofcom determines the UK’s position on all agenda items though a structure of UK committees, consultations with stakeholders (that includes the RSGB) as well as through public consultation.

The RSGB role in CEPT was mostly carried out by RSGB Director John Gould, G3WKL with ex-President Colin Thomas, G3PSM having the position of CEPT Coordinator for Agenda item 1.23. John was represented at some meetings by Murray Niman, G6JYB or Jim Moritz, M0BMU. The Spectrum Forum was kept informed of progress and key issues, and also involved in clearing the Society’s input to Ofcom’s public consultation. This is an important part of the preparation process as it provides us with a formal way of influencing Ofcom’s thinking on spectrum matters. For example in the preparatory process for WRC-12 we have been active with Ofcom in protecting our future interest on the spectrum above 275GHz, where amateurs have already made pioneering QSOs in other countries. Ofcom is also aware of our position on a number of issues and needs relating to other parts of the spectrum.

The ITU preparatory process runs in parallel with that of CEPT, CITEL, etc, where twice yearly meetings of the various sector working groups consider technical studies. These meetings often run over 10 consecutive days. Of relevance to the agenda items of interest for WRC-12 we attend or monitor WP5A and WP5B. In outline these working parties consider technical issues with a view of defining the methods to satisfy each agenda item. The background and rationale is collated in a document termed the “CPM Text”. ITU’s CPM Text is used by CEPT, CITEL, etc, in their deliberations.

This outline can be put into perspective following a recent estimate given that the whole of the WRC-07 preparation and conference cost, world-wide, was of the order of US$1bn. If one takes the total bandwidth of spectrum up for consideration at WRC-12, which is about 3,000 kHz, and ratio this with the 15 kHz being considered for the amateur service near to 500 kHz, the proportional spend on our interest would be of the order of US$5m. Of course, the actual expenditure is much much lower on this item, but it helps to illustrate the benefit that the amateur community gets though organisations like the RSGB and IARU being able to represent the interests of the ITU recognised amateur services. It also puts into perspective our much more modest costs of selectively attending key meetings within CEPT and ITU, and sometimes the conference itself.

As indicated earlier, the key agenda items apart from 1.23 in which we have been actively involved include:

  • Agenda Item 1.10 that looks at the provision for maritime communications (including satellite), with an emphasis on automated identification systems, with a view to identifying additional frequency channels. The crossover with our interest in agenda item 1.23 refers to outline plans that the maritime service has for developing new systems in the band 495-505kHz.
  • Agenda Item 1.14 covers the needs of the radiolocation service in the range 30–300MHz. Its intent is to find new allocation(s) for radars in this range to provide increased resolution and range, including use for detecting natural and artificial objects in space. Our initial concern with this agenda item was that one of the initial options was close to our 2m band; this option was dropped quite early in the preparatory process.
  • Agenda Item 1.15 considers the need to provide a more definitive provision for oceanographic radars in the range 3 to 50MHz. These radars have operated on an experimental basis without formal allocations for many years. Whilst none of the methods that might satisfy this agenda item are considering spectrum used by radio amateurs, we monitor the item as one of the options is adjacent to the bottom of our 20m band.
  • Agenda Item 1.22 considers short-range devices (SRD), e.g. RFID, short-range telemetry, radio-microphones, induction loop-systems, etc. Although we have not got SRD out of our bands, and are unlikely to do so, amateur interest is not to extend SRD within our bands, and for keeping it on a non-protected basis.

Looking ahead the provisional agenda for the WRC that follows WRC-12 will be set at that conference. The IARU coordinates the amateur position and maintains a policy document on what is seen as the amateur community’s spectrum needs. The RSGB can and does influence IARU thinking as well as keep Ofcom informed. Support for amateur proposals for future agenda items require as much assistance from national administrations, like Ofcom, as is possible in order to get new proposed agenda items accepted for the next conference. Overall, the amateur community does well considering our size and perhaps importance when seen alongside other users of the spectrum. Through the network of national societies, like the RSGB, brought together by the IARU we form a well organised group that is able to influence on a global basis others involved in the conference.