EN    EN EN 
EN    EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 20.9.2010 
SEC(2010) 1034 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
  
Accompanying document to the 
Proposal for a 
 
DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN P ARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 
 
establishing the first radio spectrum policy programme  
   
{COM(2010) 471} {SEC(2010) 1035} 
EN 3   EN Disclaimer: 
This report commits only the Commission's servic es involved in its preparation and does not 
prejudge the final form of any deci sion to be taken by the Commission 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. Background, context and consultation ......................................................................... 6 
1.1. Background and context............................................................................................... 6 1.2. Consultation and expertise ........................................................................................... 6 1.2.1. Overview of main consultations  of external stakeholders ........................................... 6 
1.2.2. Internal consultations .................................................................................................. .7  
1.2.3. Main conclusions from the consultative process ......................................................... 7 1.3. Structure of this Impact Assessment............................................................................ 8 2. Problem definition........................................................................................................ 9 2.1. Fundamental challenges associated to radio spectrum management ........................... 9 
2.2. Factors intrinsic to ra dio spectrum management ....................................................... 11 
2.2.1. Technical characteri stics of spectrum ........................................................................ 11 
2.2.2. Characteristics of allocation and assign ment of frequency bands to users ................ 11 
2.3. Increased reliance on technologies that make use of spectrum.................................. 18 
2.4. The EU dimension ..................................................................................................... 19 3. objectives pursued by the RSPP................................................................................. 21 4. Policy options for the as sessment of the RSPP.......................................................... 23 
5. Assessment of the impact of the scop e that can be given to the RSPP...................... 26 
5.1. Comparing the impact of the basic options................................................................ 26 5.1.1. No Radio Spectrum Policy Programme ..................................................................... 26 5.1.2. Policy Programme with a scope limited to electronic commun ication services........ 26 
5.1.3. Policy Programme with a scope going be yond electronic communication services . 27 
6. Assessment of the impact of the possible initiatives  under the RSPP ....................... 29 
6.1. Contributing to the Digital Agenda for Europe.......................................................... 29 6.2. Facilitating easy and equal access, fo stering flexibility and competition.................. 36 
6.3. Enhancing efficient use of spectrum.......................................................................... 43 6.4. Contributing to combating climate change – transport and energy ........................... 46 
6.5. Defending European interests at international level .................................................. 48 
EN 4   EN 6.6. Assessing administrative burden................................................................................ 51 
6.7. Conclusions............................................................................................................... . 53 
7. Evaluation and monitoring......................................................................................... 58 
 
ANNEX 1: Summary of the outcome of the Spectrum Summit, 22-23 March 2010 .............. 45 ANNEX 2: Summary of responses to the public consultation................................................. 47 
ANNEX 3: Draft RSPG Opinion on the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme......................... 49 
ANNEX 4: Glossary of abbreviations used in the IA report ................................................... 59 ANNEX 5: Glossary of definitions .......................................................................................... 60 ANNEX 6: List of references................................................................................................... 6 1 
EN 5   EN MODIFICATIONS FOLLOWING THE OPINION OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT BOARD  
In response to the suggestions of the Impact  Assessment Board (Opinion dated 2 July 2010), 
and in addition to specific modifications based on a quality assessment carried out prior to the 
Board's deliberations, the following changes have  been introduced in the text of the final 
report. 
(1) The problem definition has been developed to clarify the functioning of the current 
radio spectrum framework; 
(2) Better explanation of the link between two main identified problems, i.e. suboptimal 
use of spectrum and mismatch between de mand and available spectrum resources, and 
the objectives of the programme; 
(3) The preferred option in relation to climat e change has been clearly identified; 
(4) The importance for the internal market of  issues covered by an extension of the 
programme beyond electronic communications  services has been explained.  
(5) Noting the importance attached to the need to accompany follow-up measures that are 
likely to have significant impacts with sepa rate impact assessments, an indication is 
provided of those follow-up measures for whic h it is already clear th at such an impact 
assessment will be required. Information is also provided in chapter 6.7 regarding those measures for which the need of a further impact assessment will have to be examined, based on the guidelines devel oped in the Commission, once preparatory 
work has been completed and the fo rm of possible action identified; 
(6) Changes have also been intr oduced with regard to the presentation of the report. 
 
EN 6   EN 1. BACKGROUND , CONTEXT AND CONSULTATION  
1.1. Background and context  
Radio Spectrum is an essential resource for many services: mobile, satellite and fixed wireless 
communications, TV and radio broadcasting, tr ansport, navigation systems (GPS/Galileo), 
and many other applications (m edical equipment, alarms, re mote controls, hearing aids, 
microphones, etc.). Radio technology supports public  services such as defence, security/safety 
and scientific activities (e.g. meteorology, Ea rth observation and monitoring, radio astronomy 
and space research).The Europ ean mobile industry supports 3 .5 million jobs, generates around 
€130bn in tax revenues for European governme nts, and contributes €140bn directly to 
European GDP.i  
As a measure of the importance of these wireless  applications and servi ces to society and the 
economy, access to radio spectrum has become essential in efforts to promote economic 
recovery and growth, to ensure  high-quality jobs and long te rm EU competitiveness, and to 
bridge the digital divi de. Developing a co-ordinated radio spectrum policy is therefore a 
matter of strategic importance for the European Un ion, as this is needed to enhance a genuine 
single market for wireless services and equi pment, while creating new opportunities for 
innovation and maximising the efficient use of th e resource. An effective EU spectrum policy 
will amplify the positive impact of these wi reless services and equipment on economic 
recovery and social in tegration across the EU.  
This Impact Assessment accompanies a proposal for an EU radio spectrum policy programme 
which sets out policy orientations and objectives  for the strategic planning and harmonisation 
of the use of radio spectrum to achieve these goals. Implem enting such a policy will be 
instrumental to the forthcoming 'Digital Agenda  for Europe' and the role it has to play in 
fulfilling the targets of the 'Europe 2020' initiative, the European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. 
The envisaged Programme takes its inspiration from the recently adopted legislation on the 
regulatory framework for electronic communications
ii. This states that the Commission may 
submit a multi-annual Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) to be adopted by the 
European Parliament and Council. The general goa l to be achieved by the RSPP is stated in 
Article 8a(3) of the amended Framework Dire ctive: "Such programme s shall set out the 
policy orientations and objectives for the strate gic planning and harmonisation of the use of 
radio spectrum in accordance with the provisi ons of this Directive and the Specific 
Directives." The Programme will therefore set out the guiding principles and the objectives to be followed by Member States and EU institut ions in the field of radio spectrum and will 
indicate the initiatives that will be taken to allow a swift implementation of these principles 
and objectives. 
1.2. Consultation and expertise  
1.2.1.  Overview of main consultati ons of external stakeholders 
Interested parties were given several oppor tunities to provide th eir input through the 
consultation process conducted by the Commission, which has played  an integral part in the 
development of the radio spectrum policy pr ogramme and of this impact assessment: 
EN 7   EN – The Spectrum Summit  organised jointly by the European  Commission and the European 
Parliament on the 22-23 March 2010, which was a significant and high profile consultation 
exercise. It demonstrated a clear understand ing amongst EU institutions, Member States' 
representatives and stakeholders of the need  for significant efforts and some difficult 
decisions in order to ensure that more radi o spectrum will be accessible for the applications 
having the highest social and economic impact (summary of results at tached in Annex 1),  
– Public consultation on the draft proposals se t out in a consultation document entitled 
"Public Consultation/Call for Input in preparation for the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme"; this closed on 9 April 2010 and generated over 100 cont ributions (summary 
of results attached in Annex 2). 
As well as the public consultations and discussi ons with stakeholders, and in line with the 
Framework Directive, the Commission reque sted the Radio Spec trum Policy Group (an 
advisory body established by the Commission, co mposed of high-level officials from the 
Member States) to provide a formal opinion on the Programme, which was subject to a 
separate public consultation (draft attached in Annex 3). The Commission shall take utmost 
account of this Opinion in fi nalising the draft proposal. 
The Commission has complied with  the minimum consultation standards laid down in the 
impact assessment guidelines as the consultations  have lasted a total of eight weeks (4 each) 
and a further possibility was given to stakehol ders to express their views at the Spectrum 
Summit.  
1.2.2.  Internal consultations  
Regarding internal consultations, other services  of the Commission with a policy interest in 
the subjects involved have been associated in the development of this analysis. An Impact 
Assessment Steering Group including all relevant services was established, and met first on 9 
February 2010 to discuss the roadmap for this  impact assessment. The Interservice Steering 
Group was also intended to faci litate the identification of ar eas where radio spectrum can 
contribute to attaining the polit ical priorities of the European  Union, which might include new 
areas and/or areas of strategic importance.  A second took place on 12 April 2010 to discuss 
this impact assessment.  
The Inter Service Steering Group was drawn fr om the existing Spectru m Inter Service Group, 
however further representatives of  policy areas were invited to reflect the strategic scope of 
the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme, together  with other Directorates of DG INFSO. 
Together with other units in DG INFSO , DG ENTR, DG MOVE (former DG TREN), DG 
SANCO, DG EMPL, DG AGRI, the services of JRC in Ispra, the Legal Service and the 
Secretariat General were represented at, or have contributed to, the meetings.  
1.2.3.  Main conclusions from the consultative process 
Summary of results of the Spectrum Summit 
At the Spectrum Summit there was agreemen t on the need to be ambitious in the 
implementation of spectrum policy at EU leve l. The Summit recognise d the importance of 
spectrum in supporting EU policy in itiatives to foster  economic growth and social inclusion, 
especially through the development of wireless broadband , but also for the development of 
broadcasting, smart energy grids and appli cations for public safety, amongst other 
applications outside the realm of electronic communications services. The efficient use of 
EN 8   EN spectrum was a key principle that met with unani mous support, and which in the future could 
be facilitated through e ffective and regular reviews of spect rum use. The fact that economies 
of scale cannot be created in Europe wit hout EU co-ordination and, where necessary, 
harmonisation, was a recurring concern. Some di verging views were ex pressed, and there was 
a clear acknowledgment that difficult decisions would have to be taken because of the difficulty of reconciling competing needs and intere sts in the use of the scarce resource that is 
spectrum . Further details of the main points of discussion of the Summit are given in 
Annex 1. 
Summary of the Public Consultation 
In total over 100 contributions were received fr om a wide range of stakeholders responding to 
the questions raised in relation to a range of topics envisaged to be  address in the Radio 
Spectrum Policy Programme. The answers received represent a valuable input to the Impact 
Assessment and are duly taken into account; more over in some cases the input received is 
specifically mentioned in sections 5 and 6 of this document. The majority clearly addressed 
spectrum issues related to the digital dividend , which appears presently to be the area in 
which radio spectrum policy can have the largest impact on economic growth and social inclusion. There was widespread agreement th at spectrum should be used efficiently, in 
particular where demand is high. Several respo ndents proposed to review the efficiency of 
spectrum use, while others emphasised the need for stability of investment. Another important 
aspect for many respondents was the need for action to develop broadband for all.  
A summary of contributions receiv ed is attached in Annex 2. Views were most divergent in 
relation to potential European  coordination of assignment pr ocedures, where a significant 
number of stakeholders have called for further coordination at  European level, but Member 
States insist in maintaining this competence at national level. Another area in which there was a significant difference of opini on was in relation to the possi ble identificati on of a second 
sub-band for electronic communications services  in the digital dividend spectrum below 1 
GHz. On this issue there were significant di vergences of views between stakeholders and 
between national administrations. 
1.3. Structure of this Impact Assessment  
This impact assessment follows as far as possible the guidelines by the SG and is structured 
accordingly: 
• Chapter 2
 gives the problem definition by explaini ng the issues and challenges concerning 
spectrum that arise from EU policy goals and polit ical priorities, and in light of the current 
inefficiencies in the management and usage of radio spectrum. 
• Chapter 3  identifies general principles  and objectives to be established in response to those 
EU policy goals and political priorities.  
• Chapter 4  examines the policy options for spectrum to be addressed by the RSPP and sets 
out the link between the problem definition, the general princi ples and objectives and the 
subsequent analysis of  specific initiatives. 
• Chapter 5  assesses the potential impact of choices to be made regarding a spectrum policy 
programme, including issues  regarding the format and scope of the RSPP. 
EN 9   EN • Chapter 6  assesses the impact of differ ent types of initiative related to spectrum policy to 
be retained for the first RSPP.  
• Chapter 7  examines the monitoring and eval uation requirements of the RSPP. 
2. PROBLEM DEFINITION  
2.1. Fundamental challenges associated  to radio spectrum management 
Radio spectrum is a scarce resour ce, the use of which is limite d by the laws of physics and the 
rate of technological progress. The demand for high quality and cost e ffective spectrum bands 
is rapidly growing. Scarcity is present when  the demand for spectrum usage exceeds the 
spectrum resources available, a nd this is most obvious when ne w technologies pave the way 
for new usages and applications that compete fo r spectrum. Scarcity can also be induced or 
amplified by inefficient management of spectru m (a regulatory issue), particularly when 
management models have been developed in a time of less demand and less scarcity, or by 
inefficient technical usage of spectrum (a technical issue).  
The ITU has estimated the future spectrum bandwidth requirements for the development of 
IMT-2000 and IMT-advanced systems (i.e. 3G and 4G mobile communications) as amounting 
to between 1280 and 1720 MHz in 2020 for the commercial mobile industry for each ITU region including Europe (ITU Report ITU-R M.2078). In the same vein, considering the 
important increase in data traffic volumes, reports indicate that spectrum needs per operator might multiply by up to 8 times within the ne xt decade. Such an increase will impose 
significant constraints on wireless operators and require the freeing of additional spectrum.  
The highest growth rate in the EU broadband market is indeed in mobile broadband, where 
take-up increased 115% in the last year
1. Wireless technologies are increasingly important in 
the push for innovation and growth, and partic ularly in meeting the need for broadband 
communications services in combination with the mobility function which is relevant for a 
growing number of applications2. Wireless broadband also constitutes an economic access 
platform in areas where fixed broadband acces s cannot be realised at bearable costs. 
As an illustration of the challenge for wireless broadband, it should be considered that for 4G 
mobile communications, while 2x5 MHz are ne cessary for speed of 38 Mbps, 2x10 MHz are 
necessary for 75 Mbps, and 2x20 MHz for 150 Mbps. Globally, mobile data traffic will 
double every year through 2013, increas ing 6 fold between 2008 and 2013.  
Capacity requirements per application 
Application  Capacity  
Mobile voice call 6-12 kbps 
Text-based email 10-20 kbps 
                                                 
1 Jan 2009 to Jan 2010, See Europe's Digital Competitiveness Report, 2010. Mobile data volumes have 
corresponding large increa ses with, for example, OFCOM estimating a UK volume growth of 2300% in 
the past 2 years. 
2 Beyond general internet access, broadband wireless communications offer a significant usage potential 
in  areas such as eHealth, assist ed Living, ePayment, multimedia en tertainment, social networking, 
location based services etc.  
EN 10   EN Medium-quality music stream 128 kbps 
Basic high speed internet 1 Mbps 
Internet video  1 – 2 Mbps 
Standard definition TV 2 Mbps 
high speed internet 5 Mbps 
High definition TV 7.5 – 9 Mbps 
Multimedia web interaction 10 Mbps 
Enhanced high speed internet 10-50 Mbps up to 100 Mbps 
Source: Based on Rysavy Research, 2010. 
 
As demand for wireless services increases, th e key priority will be  to make effectively 
available to users those frequencies that ha ve already been earmarked through harmonised 
allocations, including radio spectrum to be rel eased from the digital dividend and from the 
reutilisation of frequencies h itherto reserved for second gene ration (GSM) services. It must 
also be ensured that sufficient and appropria te spectrum for both the coverage and the 
capacity needs of wireless broa dband technologies is designa ted and made available to 
achieve the target set above for 2020. The posit ive effects of these measures on broadband 
development can be amplified by concerted e fforts by Member States to maintain and 
promote effective competition by introducing spectrum trading and by taking measures to 
prevent potential distortions wh en modifying existing licences. 
In view of the above, two main problems can be identified:  
• Suboptimal use of spectrum with regard to the potential economic, social and 
environmental benefits. 
• A mismatch between the growing demand fo r new wireless services and available 
spectrum resources. 
In both cases inefficiencies in the distribution an d use of spectrum create costs, lead to wasted 
opportunities for business and so ciety, reduce the take-up of innovative technologies and 
services and may result in both public and commercial services not being available. Minimising these problems requires developing a stronger and more coherent vision of the 
manner in which spectrum is to be used, in orde r to be able to make the increasingly sensitive 
choices that need to be made on the use of spectrum. 
The increasing significance of spectrum use as an enabler for sustainable growth, 
competitiveness and productivity in the European internal market, and in important European 
sectoral policies, needs to be taken into account . Coupled with the fact that not all demand for 
spectrum can be satisfied, this means that priori ties need to be defined which ensure that 
spectrum is allocated and used in an efficient and effective way, taking into account the policy 
objectives of the European Union and ensuri ng the avoidance of ha rmful interference. 
As well as tackling inefficiencies, therefore, se tting priorities in the RSPP will also help to 
improve and streamline the management of sp ectrum so that the impact of scarcity is 
mitigated as much as possible. This will facilitate the development of technical implementation measures under the remit of the Radio Spectrum Decision
iii.  
EN 11   EN It should also help to identify where there may be added value in EU-wide harmonisation 
even in regard to assignment of spectrum, in justified cases. 
2.2. Factors intrinsic to radi o spectrum management  
2.2.1.  Technical characteri stics of spectrum 
Radio spectrum is a resource which is not consum ed when being used. However, several users 
occupying the same frequencies ma y affect each other's operations . This is called interference 
and results in a limitation of available spectru m resources at a given moment and location.  
Spectrum is not only exemplified by scarcity, but  the physical characteristics of spectrum 
changes over the frequency bands, typically the hi gher the frequency band the more difficult it 
is for signals to travel over distance. Moreover,  very low frequencies have limitations in terms 
of capacity, making them less attractive to broa dband services. Therefore, the bands between 
300 MHz and 3 GHz are considered to be the most  valuable part of spectrum. It has to be 
recognised that the allocated fr equency band has a large impact on the costs associated with 
an application or service, especially in th e case of mass market services where coverage, 
capacity as well as operational costs are impor tant. Therefore there is higher demand for 
lower parts of the spectrum. Likewise some pa rts of the spectrum are less suited for some 
applications or users due to the charac teristics of particular frequencies.  
With scarcity comes the constant potential for interference between different signals on the 
same or adjoining frequencies, which can degrad e or completely block one or both signals, in 
which case it becomes harmful interference. Allowing harmful interf erence reduces or 
nullifies the efficient use of spectrum. But in a nu mber of cases an application can to a certain 
extent tolerate interference without signifi cantly degrading the underlying service quality. 
Hence, the impact of interference on a service needs to be considered on a case by case basis. 
Interference is a key parameter for users of spectrum, as it determines the viability of a 
wireless application (e.g. guarant eeing a certain quality of serv ice). Since interference can be 
mitigated in many cases by technical means,  interference translates into costs.  
Another characteristic of radio sp ectrum is that radio emission s do not stop at borders. As a 
consequence interference is an important issue no t just within the EU, but also at borders to 
third countries of the EU, which necessitate bila teral and/or EU level negotiations with third 
countries depending on the circumstances.   
2.2.2.  Characteristics of allocation and assi gnment of frequency bands to users 
Spectrum management is a task of distribution of a scarce resource under determined usage 
conditions. From a political point of view, the ta rget is to maximise the socio-economic and 
environmental benefits inhe rent to radio spectrum.  
Management involves two steps: allocation of spectrum bands and assignment of spectrum 
usage rights.  
Through allocation  decisions, administrations respons ible for spectrum management 
determine the usage conditions for specific frequency bands, e.g. by specifying channel plans, maximum emissions permitted etc.. In certain cases, bands are reserved for specific usages (e.g. frequencies used for radio astronomy or me teorological services) or  types of networks 
(e.g. satellite networks, terrestria l cellular networks etc.). Allo cation is one important factor 
EN 12   EN which determines the suitability of specifi c spectrum bands for interested users while 
potentially affecting scarcity and spectrum supply. 
 
Spectrum allocations by sector (108 MH z – 6 GHz) in a typical EU country3 
 
Wik, 2008Other Commercial, 
26.7%Defence, 27.2%
Broadcasting, 8.2%
Public Safety, 0.9%Aeronautical, 17.1%
Other Public, 1.4%Maritime, 3.6%Mobile, 15.0%
 
 In order to be able to use spectrum, spectrum usag e rights need to be av ailable. This is called 
assignment of usage rights
.  
Two types of usage rights  can be distinguished, depending on  the degree of ownership. Since 
the type of usage right determines the number of  users of a spectrum ba nd, it not only affects 
the efficiency of spectrum usage but also de termines the responsibility for preventing 
interference. 
– Assigning individual usage rights , either on an exclusive basis or to a small number of 
users. Through these individual usage rights the user is guara nteed a generally high level of 
protection against interference, since potential interferers are barred from using the same 
spectrum.  
– Shared usage rights  by opening a spectrum band to a usually undetermined number of 
users within the generic technical limits set out in the allocation to limit the risk of 
interference. However, an interference free e nvironment is not guaranteed and the burden 
                                                 
3 The figures include the main harmonised allocations plus national assignments applicable to the UK. 
Harmonised allocations account for over 90% of p ublic sector spectrum allocations (in bandwidth 
terms). Note that to avoid double counting we have assumed that all spectrum used by the civil aviation and maritime sectors is classed under those sectors,  even where this spectru m is also used by the 
Defence sector. Where spectrum is widely used for commercial applications but is also used by the 
Defence sector (e.g. the 5 GHz WLAN bands), this has been classified as commercial. 
EN 13   EN is on the user to take adequate measures to protect his usage of the spectrum from 
interference. 
These notions are further developed under par. 2.2.3 on spectrum management models. 
The methodology of selecting of usage right ho lders (primary assignment) determines the 
hurdle for a potential spectrum user to access radi o resources and also the usage he can make 
of it (availability of spectrum, costs, time frame;  local or wide area usage etc). It is hence a 
central issue to efficient spectrum management  as it directly impacts on whether the spectrum 
users selected are the ones making the most efficien t use of the resource. It is also critical to 
determine the degree of competition between spectrum users. 
Decisions on spectrum assignment can have an effect on competition as they can change the 
role and power of market player s. Generally there is the risk that incumbent users can receive 
an undeserved competitive advantage and that co mpetition is distorted. Any application of the 
flexibility principle must also take into account legacy  situations and ensu re that competition 
is not distorted. Spectrum can create a barrier to entry for new services, applications, and 
therefore can hamper the take- up of innovation. At the same ti me legacy rights exist for 
incumbent users. The rapid changes in tech nology, as well as user demand, mean that 
innovation must be facilitated and not hampered by spectr um policy, while taking into 
account legacy situatio ns and legitimate expectations of  existing users in the specific 
frequency bands.  
There are different degrees of motivation and incentives to use spectrum efficiently. The 
issuing of spectrum rights by itself does not a priori  guarantee efficient use, either in technical 
terms or in drawing the maximum socio-economic benefits from radio resources. One way of 
promoting efficiency is to establish paym ents for the commercial usage of spectrum 
corresponding to its value, either at the moment  of assigning usage rights (e.g. via auctions) or 
as permanent payment by usage right holders (e .g. via administrative incentive pricing). 
Such market incentive mechanisms do not trad itionally apply to non-commercial usages of 
spectrum, such as defence, or public protection and di saster relief (PPDR). The Public sector 
is a substantial user of spectrum, with a ssignments representing 40- 50% of the valuable 
frequencies below 15 GHz, and spectrum assignments  in the public sector are often viewed as 
permanent and in most cases, without cost; leadi ng to the situation that efficiency of current 
use is rarely challenged. This can create an incentive for public sector organisations to seek spectrum resources beyond their ne eds for current use, holding spectrum for the possibilities 
of future use leading to spectrum hoarding. Spectrum hoarding in turn by its na ture leads to 
inefficient use of spectrum. Furthermore often th ere is a lack of transparency and information 
on spectrum allocation so that the extent of public use of spectrum is not always known by 
either the national spectrum regul ator or by the spectrum users. Public sector agencies may 
not face sufficient incentives to make the most  economically efficient use of their spectrum 
assignments (e.g. through sharing wi th other compatible uses), or to give back spectrum to the 
spectrum management authority if they no longer need it. 
There are applications which ma y require exclusive use of bands, such as for safety of life 
purposes. Other applications can operate in diff erent bands, but the nature of the application 
requires special arrangements (e.g. certain services  such as relief services (PPDR) need to 
access spectrum immediately and with priority). 
EN 14   EN Furthermore there is a significant internatio nal dimension to spectrum management, as 
international coordination of spectrum allo cation takes place at global level through the 
International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a UN body. The next World Radio 
Conference organised by the ITU is planned fo r 2012, at which negotiations will be held on 
several radio spectrum allocations, and where Eur opean interests will ha ve to be defended in 
the competitive negotiating environment at gl obal level for a range of frequency bands.  
Functioning of the current framework 
Radio spectrum policy and management, as th ey apply to electronic communications, are 
dealt with by the Framework Directive 200 2/21/EC and the Authorisation Directive 
2002/20/EC  as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC. The latter introduced significant 
regulatory improvements to ensure flexible and efficient use of spectru m, remove unnecessary 
rigidity in spectrum management and put in  place measures to deliver easier access to 
spectrum. Furthermore, the Radio Spectrum D ecision already allows for harmonisation of 
technical conditions for the use of spectrum re levant to existing EU policies depending on 
spectrum for the use of spectrum relevant to existing EU policies depending on spectrum 
necessary for the internal market in Co mmunity policy areas such as electronic 
communications, transport and re search. As expressed in recital 4 of the Radio Spectrum 
Decision, "this decision is based on the principle that, where th e European Parliament and the 
Council have agreed on a Community policy which depends on radio spectrum, committee procedures should be used for the adop tion of accompanying technical implementing 
measures". 
Commission Directive 2002/77/EC (the "Competition" Directive)  also aims at eliminating 
exclusive and special rights in the use of freque ncies and requires that assignment of spectrum 
be based on objective, transparent, non-discrimi natory and proportional criteria. The so-called 
R&TTE Directive 1999/5/EC governs the placing on the market, free movement and putting 
into service in the Community of radio equipment and telecommunications terminal 
equipment, including the fulfilment of essen tial requirements such as the avoidance of 
harmful interference. 
Spectrum use has increasing significance as an enabler for sustainable growth, 
competitiveness and productivity in the in ternal market not only for electronic 
communications but also for other important  EU policy areas. Sinc e not all demand for 
spectrum can be satisfied, priorities need to be defined which ensure that spectrum is allocated 
and used in an efficient and effective way, taki ng into account EU policy objectives. Such EU 
policies include electronic co mmunications with the objective of offering broadband 
communications for all, broadcasting, transport, applications such as al arms, remote controls, 
hearing aids, microphones and medical equipment,  research, environmen t protection and fight 
against global warming, safety, health, Eart h observation, Global Monitoring for Environment 
and Security (GMES), and GALILEO, the indepe ndent European satellite navigation system. 
Decisions on spectrum use clearly have economi c, safety, health, public interest, cultural, 
scientific, social, environmental and techni cal implications, and clearly go well beyond the 
sphere of electronic communications. 
Legal Basis - Art 114 TFEU  
It is therefore appropriate to go beyond Article 8a of the Framew ork Directive and to base the 
Decision on Article 114 TFEU, considering the importance of the availability and efficient 
EN 15   EN use of radio spectrum necessary for the establ ishment and functioning of the internal market 
as a whole, for electronic communications as well as for other EU policy areas. 
Description of stakeholders:  
1) Industry: 
- manufacturers of radio equipment (equipment us ing frequencies) and other applications of 
non ECS use like radars; 
- mobile and fixed wireless communications services providers;  - radio and television broadcasters; 
2) Non commercial users- public sector: main ly social and environmental added value 
- Military uses,  
- public protection and disaster relief  (PPDR), police, fire brigades,  
- radio astronomers,  - maritime and aviation transport;  - truck and taxi fleet;  - programme making and special events (wir eless microphones for public performances in 
theatres, shows); 
3) Citizens using radio equipment/ applications to receive services 
- wifi 
- large variety of short range wireless devices 
- radionavigation; - handicapped and sick persons through improved  medical wireless devices, hearing aids, 
social alarms (for social inclus ion purposes in particular) etc. 
4) Different level of regulators and public  spectrum management authorities:  
- international level,  mainly the International Teleco mmunications Union, to allocate 
spectrum between various types of uses, in order to avoid harmful interference 
- EU level: harmonisation of t echnical conditions for the use of  spectrum and coordination of 
certain policy aspects to the extent require d by the completion of the internal market. 
- national level: national frequency authorit ies have the main competence on spectrum 
regulation and management. In some cases ther e are separate national regulatory authorities 
responsible for the authoris ation / licensing of spectru m usage in the electronic 
communications and in the broadcasting domains. 
 
Potential newcomers, new entrants and beneficiaries of EU spectrum policy 
The EU RSPP should not only al low existing spectrum users to benefit from increased 
capacities and better coor dinated and hence valuab le spectrum, it should also allow new users 
to develop. This would include new wireless se rvices operators, new digital television and 
radio broadcasters, public protecti on and disaster relief users, sc ientific resear chers, maritime 
EN 16   EN and air transport, utilities such as electricity  and gas providers, and ci tizens who make daily 
use of all types of wireless devices including handicapped and sick people.  
2.2.3.  Spectrum management models 
Three models  of spectrum management can generally be identified:  
– the administrative model  where public authorities decide on the allocation of spectrum and 
the assignment of spectrum usage rights and no secondary trading is permitted; 
– the market-based model  where, after initial assignm ent of usage rights by a public 
authority, market forces determine the use of  spectrum as well as the actual users of the 
spectrum, through the possibility to trade righ ts and to adapt the us e of the spectrum;  
these two models are particularly relevant for the assignment of individual spectrum usage 
rights - 
and 
– the unlicensed model  where users share spectrum and anybody has access to spectrum 
subject to certain minimal requirements set out in the allocation such as technical usage conditions.  
Where individual usage rights are required and where demand for spectrum exceeds supply, 
administrative decisions are now increasingl y replaced by competitive bidding procedures 
conducted by administrations to evaluate applicat ions against pre-determin ed selection criteria 
or by auctions on the considerati on that the market can best iden tify the most efficient user.  
On the contrary, shared spectrum usage does not  require the issuance of  individual rights and 
sets a very low barrier to access spectrum, albeit  at the price of having to share the usage of 
spectrum with potentially many othe r users; as a consequence, such model applies primarily 
to short range transmissions where the density of users is low and creates additional costs to mitigate interference from other users.  
Sharing of spectrum is likely to  emerge as a key method to ensu re technically efficient use of 
spectrum; this will require to meet regulatory ch allenges (e.g. to manage interference, ensure 
equitable access to spectrum, solve competition issues, manage information on spectrum 
usage and deal with existing legacy usage right s). It is made increasingly possible through 
recent technological developments allowing to better handling interference. Innovative solutions are appearing, such as d ynamic  spectrum access; this allows each user to get part of 
the spectrum band according to his actual immedi ate needs, allows other users to use the 
remaining part of the band, makes spectrum usag e possible for a much larger user community 
and allows individual and exclus ive rights to be granted to meet temporary needs, thereby 
creating a real-time spot market for spectrum rights. Certain spectrum bands can also be 
shared in their so-called white spaces, i.e. parts of the band which are kept unused for the avoidance of interference between the main user s of the band such as broadcasters. Spectrum 
sharing is also possible where radio transm itters can adapt themselves with so-called 
software-defined radio or cognitive radio to find unused frequencies and adapt transmission 
power levels.  
Advantages of the various management models ar e marked as (+) if minor or (++) if major, 
while disadvantages are marked (-) if less si gnificant or (--) if  more significant.  
EN 17   EN "Unlicensed" approach  
Regulatory 
burden An unlicensed approach allows delivery of various services (++) and permits different 
technologies to be used. (++) 
Access Anyone can access and use the spectrum (++) . New technologies can access spectrum, 
but there may be an issue of managing generational change (+) 
Interference The necessary technologies to implement inte rference management are today available 
for short range communications (+) Tec hnologies for managing interference are a 
constraint on product design and require industry agreement and licensing (-) Longer 
range communications can as yet not be manage d in this way (- -) In future this may 
move to a (+) 
Innovation It may enable innovation and investment in  services, as well as increased competition 
(++) 
 
"Market-based" approach  
Regulatory 
burden Allowing secondary trading of spectrum usage rights between users would deliver some 
benefits by simplifying transfers (+), further increased when combined with removal of 
restrictions on services and limitation of technical restrictions to the minimum (++) 
Access Secondary trading complements administrative issuance of spectrum rights (+); 
combined with neutrality, it allows the introduction of new technologies (++) 
Interference The definition of technical parameters of sp ectrum usage rights is crucial to interference 
management. Increased monitoring and enfo rcement are required to manage the 
expected "denser" use (+) 
Innovation This model encourages innovation and invest ment and removes artificial regulatory 
bottlenecks constraining competition (++), w ith the risk however of hoarding (- -)  
 
"Administrative" approach  
Regulatory 
burden The regulatory burden of the administrative approach can be diminished; this would 
benefit existing users (+) 
Access Access to spectrum for new entrants would remain unchanged (=) If regulatory burden 
is lowered, new technologies would have  improved access provided this benefits 
existing users (+/=) 
Interference Interference management would remain at a high level (++) 
Innovation Innovation and investment would depend on administrative decisions. The limitation of 
competition would benefit operators and t echnology providers, but not consumers (-) 
 
Evolution and the influence of market forces in services and applications using spectrum 
EN 18   EN With the review of the regulatory framework  for electronic communi cations, the introduction 
of flexibility, the service and technology principles and the possi bility to trad e spectrum, the 
decision making power will shift somewhat from pub lic administrations to the user and to the 
market forces. It will be a move from a command-and-control approach where public 
administrations decide how to use spectrum to a context where the decision on the use of the 
spectrum will be determined more and more by the market and by the user of the spectrum 
himself. The regulators will have to ensure th at this occurs smoothly by ensuring that no 
harmful interference is o ccurring, that technical quality of the service is ensured, that health is 
protected, that spectrum is used efficiently, that  general interest objectives may be fulfilled, 
that safety of life services are guaranteed, that social, regi onal and territorial cohesion is 
promoted, as well as cultural and linguistic diversity together with media pluralism. 
This flexibility principle is slowly being intr oduced in the use of spectrum, and has been so 
under the notion of WAPECS (Wireless Acce ss Policy for Electronic Communications 
Services). A studyiv contracted by the Commission in 2004 to Analysys, estimated that the 
introduction of flexibility combined with spec trum trading, could bri ng an additional EUR 9 
billion per annum in consumer surplu s relative to the st atus quo scenario. 
 
2.3. Increased reliance on technologies  that make use of spectrum 
There is a wide range of uses for radio sp ectrum. Beyond electronic communication services 
(ECS) there are numerous other se rvices, applications and user s scattered across the spectrum 
bands, often sharing a common range of frequencie s. Therefore there is a particular difficulty 
in dividing spectrum according to uses and in singling out those uses which relate to ECS.  
The growing demand for spectrum is fuelled by th e pervasive role of the internet, where data 
communication plays an increasing role for ev ery citizen. Coupled w ith increasing mobility, 
nomadic working etc. wireless data services ar e currently increasing dramatically in usage 
terms but also in terms of data volumes and bandwidth arising from personal communications 
(voice and images), media consumption (aud io, video, broadcasting), gaming, access to 
personal data, general information access, so cial networking, practical operations (e.g. 
banking, payment, interaction with administra tions etc.). Consumers want to enjoy the 
benefits of competing wireless services as th is drives services quality and affordability. 
Making available sufficient spectrum and a harmonised spectrum space can at EU level constitute the key challenge s to satisfy these demands 
A significant problem that results relates to the accessibility of a service using radio spectrum 
and the potential exclusion of certain potential users due to different factors. The digital 
divide refers to the divide between certain groups of people who have access to and/or make 
use of certain digital services and others who do not. The dividing line can be a function of a 
range of criteria, for example gender, age or socio-economic background. Furthermore one 
can identify a geographical divide in respect of access to a broadband service (whether wired or wireless), with some areas left without any broadband cove rage. Consideration should be 
given to the quality divide that relates to acces s to the latest technol ogies and highest data 
rates, with some areas only having access to le ss advanced broadband services (this is likely 
to be strongly correlated to the geographical divide). Such a divide may result in a loss of 
socio and economic benefits for those who miss access.  
EN 19   EN Due to the lack of availability of mobile broadband coverage ther e is also a potential risk of 
broadband mobility divide, meaning the divide between the certain groups of people who 
have access to and/or make use of certain mobile digital servic es and others who have only 
access to and/or make use of dig ital services at a fixed location. 
2.4. The EU dimension  
Spectrum management is still largely a Member  State competence, which should however be 
exercised in compliance with EU law. While the need of a certain level of coordination at EU 
level is generally acknowledged, this raises the question of why and to what extent specific 
EU actions on spectrum adds value. 
According to the draft RSPG opinion on the RSPP, spectrum is  a national resource which 
should be managed in a coordinated manner by EU Member States in  conjunction with the 
European Commission, within the international regulatory context. This demonstrates the 
general attitude of Member St ates to spectrum management.  
Added value of EU coordination on balance 
The following reasoning for action at national level can be applied:  
• Some uses of radio spectrum, the markets for wireless services as well as needs for public 
services vary greatly amongst Member States. Spectrum management therefore needs to be 
differentiated to take into account  the specific national conditions. 
• Each Member State carries a le gacy of spectrum management history. Aligning this legacy 
according to new EU prerogatives in terms of spectrum usage is difficult and costly, and 
requires time.  
Today, there is only to a limited extent a coordinated "EU spect rum space", with the 
exception of the harmonisation of usage conditio ns (allocation) of certa in bands on the basis 
of the Radio Spectrum Decision. The European Union framework for granting rights of use 
for spectrum in electronic communications is otherwise limited to ge neral principles, and 
assignment in terms of methods and usage right conditions are not coordi nated at EU level. 
Also, significant amounts of spectrum are used fo r activities outside of the competence of the 
European Union (defence and security).  
As a result, the development of a co-ordinated  internal market in wireless equipment and 
services remains limited. Accord ing to a study conducted in 2004, even if Member States 
individually took the most appr opriate action to modernise th eir spectrum management, the 
effect would be that Europe would fail to real ise 30% of the potential benefits unless the EU 
coordinated its efforts.v There is a high potential for added value in attaining more efficiency 
in the use of radio spectrum within the Eu ropean Union by addressing following potential 
drawbacks of a unilateral or uncoordi nated approach by Member States. 
• Lack of coherence of national approaches might  hamper the usability of the spectrum and 
might lead to a fragmentation of the European internal market;  
• Lack of economies of scale and Europe-wide coverage of services may hurt the European 
economy. The use by one Member State of a gi ven frequency band will entail significant 
extra equipment and terminal costs, if the same equipment or application operates on a 
different band elsewhere. This prevents governments, operators and users from benefitting from economies of scale and hinders the development of the internal market.  
EN 20   EN • With a fragmented internal market industr y faces a higher administrative burden in 
following applicable spectrum re gulations and this poses also an additional barrier to entry 
for innovatory applications since for each individual Member State administrative 
procedures and regulatory requirement need to be respected individually.  
• It might lead to a missed opportunity in boostin g the innovation potentia l at European level 
and in addressing potential bottlenecks relatin g to radio spectrum which could create a 
significant barrier to entry to innovative services and applic ations. Therefore this could 
lead to a possible delay in investments as incentives for investment could be far more 
limited for national Member States markets than for a coordinated European market where spectrum requirements are aligned 
• Radio emissions do not stop at borders. Lack of EU coordination resu lting in cross border 
interference might prevent Member States from  allocating radio spectru m to its best uses; 
interference impair significantly how the application relying on spectrum works and the 
quality of the service provided and might th erefore have significan t negative effects on 
functioning of the economy as such. Interoperabi lity of applications and services would be 
endangered as consumers crossing the borde r might need different equipment and 
applications to receive the same kind of service. And again cross border interference 
results in higher costs for operators of the di fferent applications a nd therefore leads to 
higher prices for consumers. 
• A unilateral approach at Member States level might lead to an inefficient way of using 
spectrum and a suboptimal use of spectrum with  regard to the poten tial economic, social 
and environmental benefits at European level. 
• Coordination with third countries and inte rnational representation of common interests 
might be more difficult and less fruitful if Member States act unilaterally and not unified 
under the umbrella of the European Union with its economic and political weight;  
• Lack of clear and measurable political priori ties, agreed among the institutions, may delay 
important European initiatives that depend or benefit from strategic actions in the area of 
radio spectrum use. 
Despite the above potential European  added value, the EU's current  role in spectrum policy is, 
as said, limited. Following the indication give n by the amended Framework Directive, and 
based on Article 114 TFEU, a Radio Spectrum Po licy Programme should therefore set out the 
guiding principles and the objectiv es to be followed by Member St ates and EU Institutions in 
the field of radio spectrum and indicate the in itiatives which, in line with subsidiarity and 
proportionality, should be taken to allow a sw ift implementation of these principles and 
objectives. 
Political acceptance of an RSPP with Council and the EP 
The EP and Council have called for a general po litical assessment of spectrum management, 
beyond technical issues which are normally d ealt with under the Radio Spectrum Decision.  
As Recitals 4 and 5 of the 2002 Radio Spectrum Decision already provided, there is a need for 
EP and the Council to agree on EU radio spectr um policies. Any new po licy of the European 
Union in that field should be ag reed by the EP and the Council on the basis of a proposal from 
the Commission.  
EN 21   EN Building thereupon, Recita l 28 of Directive 2 009/140/EC, while recognisi ng that spectrum 
management largely remains within the competence of the Member States, calls for harmonisation at European Union level which can help ensure that spectrum users derive the 
full benefits of the internal market and so that EU interests can be effectively defended 
globally. The EP and Council have theref ore called upon the Commission to propose 
legislative multiannual radio spectrum policy progr ammes to set out the initiatives for the 
strategic planning and harmonisatio n of the use of radio spectrum in the European Union.  
Recital 28 defines the possible content of such  programmes as being in itiatives referring to 
the availability and efficient use of radio spectrum necessary for the establishment and 
functioning of the internal market, referring, where appropriate, to "the harmonisation of 
procedures for the granting of general authoris ations or individual rights of use for radio 
frequencies where necessary to overcom e barriers to the internal market". 
The Spectrum summit co-organised on 22-23 Ma rch 2010 by the EP and the Commission has 
shown strong support from the Members of Parl iament, from Member States and from the 
industry for such a programme. Member States are also taking part in the exercise as the 
Radio Spectrum Policy Group, which gathers high representatives from each Member State. 
This group produces an opinion as to the fu ture content of the programme, which the 
Commission takes fully into account in the preparation of the RSPP. 
3. 
OBJECTIVES PURSUED BY THE RSPP 
Setting out initiatives for the strategic pla nning and harmonisation of the use of radio 
spectrum, presupposes the identification of wider political priorities for which radio spectrum 
is identified to play a key enabling role with a clear EU perspective. Spectrum is essential for 
the development and use of wireless technologies  and applications that foster growth, public 
safety and security, and therefore comes into pl ay to established political priorities of the 
European Union.  
Reflecting this role of radio spectrum, th ere are already today regulatory principles 
established in the EU regulatory framework for electronic communications services, as 
amended in 2009, as well as the goals already es tablished in the Radio Spectrum Decision and 
its implementing measures. 
The RSPP should therefore build on these provisi ons by reaffirming and further clarifying the 
guiding principles, such as the respect where possible of technology and service neutrality in 
the allocation and assignment of spectrum, a nd by gearing initiatives associated to radio 
spectrum at EU level towards common usage conditions where necess ary, while otherwise 
ensuring full co-ordination across the EU, or strengthening co-operation between Member States, as appropriate. 
Noting that the RSPP is multi-annual , it is possible to pick and focus on the most urgent and 
important issues now, while leaving other impor tant issues for following programmes. Given 
the fast moving technical area, the envisaged scope should not le ad to an exhaustive list of 
actions, but rather targeted a set of concrete and measurable goals to be achieved in a five 
year time frame, after which point in time the next RSPP would be drafted.  
The first Radio Spectrum Policy Programme will ou tline at a strategic level how the use of 
spectrum can contribute to the current political prio rities of the European Union from 2011 to 
2015 and will set out the guiding principles and the objectives to be followed by Member 
EN 22   EN States and EU Institutions in the field of radio spectrum, indicating initiatives allowing a swift 
implementation of these principles and objectives.  More specifically, and based on the 
problems described in chapter 2, the fo llowing objectives can be identified: 
• Support objectives relating to wireless br oadband laid down in the EU2020 strategy 
and Digital Agenda for Europe  through radio spectrum policy ; The EU 2020 initiative 
has established the high level strategic goals  of European policy up to 2020. This strategy 
has identified a flagship initiative which direc tly is linked to the us e of spectrum resources 
and where demand for spectrum is exponentia lly growing: the objectives related to 
coverage and speed requirements on broadba nd access. These objectives pose a challenge 
in relation to a main problem identified, namely the mismatch between the growing 
demand for new wireless services and available spectrum resources; 
• Promote efficiency of spectrum use in th e areas of EU policy, in particular by 
fostering flexibility and competition ; Furthermore spectrum is a scarce resource which is 
too valuable to be wasted. Th is resource has to be managed efficiently in order to allow 
users to benefit from most valuable uses of  spectrum. In the areas of EU competence 
therefore it is important to promote as far as possible the efficient use of spectrum; 
• Promote innovation at European le vel with a radio spectrum policy . A fragmented 
European market can significantly hamper innova tion as entry barriers  are higher and also 
as incentives for investment are lower than for a functioning internal market. However innovation is crucial as innovation itself can  support optimising the use of spectrum 
through the introduction of new and more efficient technologies  and therefore can 
potentially contribute to d ecreasing the mismatch between demand and supply of spectrum. 
• Address weaknesses in the pr ocess and methodology of spec trum management within 
the limits of EU competency ; As explained in 2.2 there is a slow swift in spectrum 
management towards more market oriented ap proaches, however this trend is present in 
the different Member States to various degrees . As spectrum management is considered by 
Member States a national competence this is an important, but difficult area where nevertheless efficient use of spectrum c ould be further enhanced and therefore 
contributions could be made to addressing th e problems of suboptimal use of spectrum and 
the mismatch between demand and supply of radio spectrum. 
• Support objectives relating to combatin g climate change an d promoting energy 
efficiency laid down in the EU2020 and Digital Agenda for Europe through radio 
spectrum policy . Applications exist which rely on the use of radio spectrum and which are 
tools to support the combat against climate change and to promote energy efficiency. The Commission has identified a few applicatio ns which have these features and there 
potentially spectrum availability at European level could pose a bottleneck to their full 
development. An example is the intelligent transport systems which ensure that travel 
routes are optimised and therefore less CO 2 is emitted. Again as high level political 
priority has been allocated to these objectiv es, also radio spectrum policy has to support 
these sectoral policies by eliminating any bot tlenecks at the level of radio spectrum 
availability and by potentially ensuring spectru m with conditions harmonised at European 
level.  
• Protect European policy interests at intern ational arenas and s upport Member States 
when dealing with third countries in relation to radio spectrum policy ; The European 
Union should use its economic and political wei ght in supporting Eur opean interests also 
EN 23   EN in relation to radio spectrum so as to limit cross border interference with third countries 
and therefore to ensure that radio spectrum use is further optimised with third countries and at an international level. 
• Contribute to promoting the internal market  of equipment, services and/or networks . 
The harmonised use of spectrum, or at least the coordinated use of spectrum at European 
level is an essential prerequisite of the esta blishment and functioning of the internal market 
for equipment and services which rely on spectrum use. Therefore only once the 
suboptimal use of spectrum and the mismatch  between demand and available spectrum 
resources are addressed to a sufficient degree, will an internal market be possible for such equipment, services and/or networks which rely on spectrum resources use. 
At this stage it is not possible to seek to engage  in a fully detailed analysis of the impact an 
RSPP would have for each of the principles and objectives listed above, or  the proportionality 
of each proposal. The aim of this impact assessment is rather to make the link between these specific objectives and initiatives in radi o spectrum policy which would support their 
achievement. 
The current impact assessment is hence at the same strategic level as the proposal it 
accompanies. This approach is in line with the spirit of the regulatory framework and the 
proportionality principle it advocates. Furthermor e, it corresponds to th e feedback received 
from the public consultation and during the Sp ectrum Summit emphasising the need to stick 
to a strategic direction of spectrum policy at EU le vel, rather than to take policy actions at EU 
level on an ad hoc basis without a frame of objective.  
4. P
OLICY OPTIONS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE RSPP 
The institutional debate  that will follow the Commission' s proposal will allow a focused 
discussion on what are the areas in which fu rther EU harmonisation and coordination could 
add value, and what measures can lead to a more  efficient use of radio spectrum of benefit to 
stakeholders from an economic, social  and environmental point of view.  
The recently amended regulatory framework for electronic communications states that the 
Commission may submit a multi-annual Radio Spectrum Policy Programme to be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council.  Th is regulatory framework relates to electronic 
communications services (ECS), but there are significant areas of spectrum use that fall 
outside the scope of ECS, including transport, scientific use, medical equipment etc. Because 
the majority of the usable spectrum is not devoted  to ECS, it is already the case that neither 
the scope of the Radio Spectrum Decision nor th e remit of the RSPG are limited to ECS, so 
extending the scope of the Radio Spectrum Po licy Programme to uses in sectors beyond 
electronic communication services must be strongly considered.  
As a result, it is necessary that, in this Im pact Assessment, the scope of the proposal is 
examined. Three basic options have therefore been defined, as follows: 
– The baseline scenario that the management of radio spectrum continues on the current 
basis, without setting out the guiding principles , objectives and initiatives in the form of a 
policy programme, and without linking current actions on spectrum to a wider context. 
(The amended Framework Directive makes it po ssible, but not mandatory, to act, as does 
the Radio Spectrum Decision for tec hnical harmonisation measures.) ; 
EN 24   EN – A radio spectrum policy programme is develo ped with the limited scope defined in the 
Framework Directive, namely el ectronic communication services; 
– A radio spectrum policy programme is deve loped addressing all sectors where radio 
spectrum is used, and where the EU has in ternal market or sectoral competence. 
Once the scope of the proposal has been defined,  the impact assessment will have to assess on 
a strategic level the following policy options responding to the objectives defined in chapter 
3: 
– No initiative identified to be addressed unde r the first Radio Spectrum Policy Programme;  
– Identification of initiative in the form of  further analysis, study and discussion.  
– Identification of initiative in the form of concrete actions in terms of content or procedure; 
In view of the political prioriti es at stake, objectives have been identified, resulting from the 
problem definition, taking full account of the Opin ion of the RSPG as well as the results of 
the public consultation and the cont ributions at the Spectrum Summ it. It is assessed in terms 
of the above policy options to decide whethe r the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme should, 
in fact, set out the guiding principles and the objectives to be followe d by Member States and 
EU institutions in the field of radio spectrum, i ndicating the initiatives to be taken to allow a 
swift implementation of these principles a nd objectives. The links between the problem 
definition, the principles and obj ectives deriving from this, and the identification of policy 
options that result, are shown as follows. 
EN 25   EN Policy challenge or problem 
(see chapter 2) Objectives 
(see chapter 3) Resulting areas where the 
RSPP shall set out principles, 
objectives and initiatives  (see 
chapter 6) 
Mismatch between growing demand for new wireless services and available spectrum resources; Geographical divide in respect of access to 
broadband services Enable sufficient progress to 
support overarching objectives relating to broa dband access laid 
down in the EU2020 strategy and the Digital Agenda  through 
radio spectrum policy Contributing to Digital Agenda 
for Europe to enable "Broadband for all" at an appropriate speed  
Suboptimal use of spectrum: Inefficient use of spectrum from a technical, economic and/or social point of view; as spectrum is a scarce resource efficient use of it is vital Promote efficiency of spectrum 
use in all areas of EU policy, in particular by fostering flexibility and competition Review of spectrum use; public 
use of spectrum; the first steps are to review how spectrum is currently used 
Mismatch between growing demand for new wireless services and available spectrum resources: Spectrum being a potential bottleneck for innovation; Suboptimal use of spectrum: Inefficiencies in terms of spectrum allocation and assignment process Promote innovation at European 
level with a radio spectrum policy  Equal and easy access to 
spectrum; entry barriers to spectrum use should be lowered for innovatory applications 
Suboptimal use of spectrum: 
Inefficient use of spectrum 
from an environmental point of view; some applications which are very valuable from an environmental perspective might not have sufficient spectrum available to operate Support overarching objectives 
in relation to energy efficiency 
and combating climate change laid down in the EU2020 strategy and the Digital Agenda  through radio spectrum policy Combating climate change and 
promoting energy efficiency by 
ensuring that those identified applications using spectrum that serve this purpose have sufficient spectrum available 
Suboptimal use of spectrum: Interference at borders as radio emissions do not stop at borders Defend European policy 
interests at international arenas and support Member States when dealing with third countries in relation to radio spectrum policy Defending EU interests at 
international level; help Member States, when negotiating  with neighbouring countries on spectrum matters 
In chapter 3 an additional spec ific objective is defined in re lation to the promotion of the 
internal market of equipment, services and ne tworks. This, however, do es not translate into 
one specific area, since any harmonisation measur e for radio spectrum at European level has 
the potential to promote the internal market of  equipment, services and/or networks by 
creating a bigger European market in that spec ific frequency band for that specific spectrum 
use. While realising this potential depends on se veral factors which are partially outside the 
scope of this exercise (e.g. the functioning of the internal mark et for equipment is examined 
by DG ENTR and is governed by the R&TTE Directiv e), a co-ordinated approach to spectrum 
can have significant benefits for a genuine inte rnal market. The internal market dimension is 
discussed in each of the sections  of chapter 6, if appropriate. 
EN 26   EN 5. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF THE SCOPE THAT CAN BE GIVEN TO THE RSPP 
Quantifying the impacts of a strategic proposal su ch as the RSPP is very difficult even if, 
clearly, any subsequent initiativ es undertaken on the basis of the programme in this area are 
likely to have an economic, environmental, social  or cultural impact. However, there may also 
be tangible impacts arising from a decision not to  identify a specific acti on, or from a failure 
to implement it. Impacts will vary according to  the particular use of radio spectrum. The 
section will thus assess, in quali tative terms, the impacts of the basic policy options regarding 
the existence and scope of the RSPP. 
5.1. Comparing the impact of the basic options 
5.1.1.  No Radio Spectrum Policy Programme  
The problem definitions set out in section 2 can be addressed through measures and action 
carried out without the development of a Radi o Spectrum Policy Programme. In this case 
spectrum management at national and European le vel would continue alo ng the same lines as 
at the moment, and the Commission could make ad hoc proposals for initiatives it felt were 
necessary to support curr ent policy objectives in line with  the existing legal framework.  
It is not possible to quantify the opportunity costs arising fr om the absence of a strategic 
proposal agreed by the main EU institutions, notab ly in terms of lack of predictability of 
policy initiatives, and a lack of legal certainty as well as weaknesses in the transparency of the 
decision processes overall. But the loss of credibi lity and the political cost if the Commission 
were not to make a proposal and consequently  not involve the European Parliament and 
Council in a decision making pro cess on spectrum policy could be immense. It could also 
give rise to a serious deficit in the developm ent of specific policy initiatives relating to the 
development of wireless broadband, which c ould have a potentially significant negative 
economic and social impact. The amendment of  the GSM Directive showed how the absence 
of awareness and discussion on st rategic objectives can lead to considerable delays in the 
adoption process even for technical measures wh ich had widespread support, and has a direct 
regulatory and economic impact. In this case it led to delays in the clarification and 
modification of operators' licences in a number of Member States at a crucial time for the 
development of 3G services. Su ch delays are detrimental to a rapidly devel oping, technology 
driven sector which is dependent of spectrum.  
5.1.2.  Policy Programme with a scope limited to electronic communication services 
Compared to the option under 5.1.1, the benefits of preparing a strategic document setting out 
priorities of spectrum management at European level would ensure that actions in the area of 
spectrum are transparent and predictable. Furthe rmore the aim is to identify the most urgent 
needs for action, so that adequate time and effo rt is dedicated to appropriate planning of 
activities and foreseeing potenti al obstacles and problems of spectrum allocation beforehand.  
As an example, the Spectrum Summit gave stak eholders an additional opportunity to raise any 
topic in this context which they considered important, and also allowed for a face-to-face 
debate between various stakeholders and w ith decision-makers. This event provided an 
additional possibility for the Commission to gather information on the demand for spectrum 
and on barriers that stakeholders  face. Essential input was also  received on what Members of 
Parliament consider vital for inclusion in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme. Therefore 
the information gap between the European Commission dealing with spectrum policy and stakeholders using spectrum on a daily basis c ould be reduced, a deep er knowledge and better 
EN 27   EN understanding was achieved on the demand side. Through this extensive involvement of 
stakeholders the European Commission is also in a better position to actually respond to these 
needs and there is a higher like lihood that the initia tive of the Commissi on will result in 
policy choices and priorities which are future proof and fit the needs well.  
Moreover through the endorsement by the European Council and European Parliament of the 
Radio Spectrum Policy Programme, and the invol vement of the RSPG through its opinion, 
any initiative retained will ensure a coherent  approach and will command a high degree of 
consensus. This in turn creates higher certainty and stability in the regulatory environment for 
stakeholders, which should lead to greater success in achieving the policy objectives 
identified.  
While high-level policy objectives  are identified in documents  such as the Europe 2020 
strategy, the European Commission must subsequently analyse in dividual goals in depth and 
propose detailed measures to reach the stated  aims. The Commission needs to undertake 
further effort in identifying the detailed step s necessary to achieve the high level objectives. 
The Radio Spectrum Policy Programme is one of these tools which provides for a more 
detailed strategy which in turn can ensure that a high level objective is achieved.  
There are no direct costs elements which would accompany the elaboration of the Radio 
Spectrum Policy Programme, apart from administrative effort to develop this document. The Programme sets out the principles and the obj ectives to be followed by Member States and 
EU Institutions in the field of radio spectrum and indicates the in itiatives to be taken to allow 
a swift implementation of these principles and objectives. It is not envisaged to create an 
exclusive and prescriptive list of actions to be implemented in the next 5 years. Such a list 
would limit to an essential extent the flexibility of the European Commission to act in the field of radio spectrum policy if circumstances change.  
A Radio Spectrum Policy Programme proposed by the European Commi ssion and adopted by 
the Parliament and Council engages the credibilit y of the European institutions and hence has 
a good probability of being implem ented. There is a risk, howeve r, that an overly ambitious 
policy programme fails, as Member States mi ght not implement the proposals. Creating a 
Radio Spectrum Policy programme which does not  provide sufficient vision or strategic 
perspective could lead to underperformance in te rms of the potential that  could be exploited. 
Therefore, it is important to reach a balance as regards ambition and practical feasibility.  
Electronic communications and other type of services are scattered over a significant number 
of frequency ranges, which makes it difficult to single out non ECS uses and apply different 
spectrum management measures than for ECS. This  would also lead to further inefficiencies 
in spectrum management and would lead to  further administrative burden as spectrum 
management would become even more complex. Also as spectrum is a scarce resource, only 
addressing the problems identified for some uses , namely the ECS uses would be insufficient. 
5.1.3.  Policy Programme with a scope going b eyond electronic communication services 
When considering whether to propose a Radi o Spectrum Policy Progra mme, the scope of the 
initiative needs to be defined. The initial legal basis, from which the impetus for the elaboration of such a strategic document orig inated, was the Framewor k Directive covering 
electronic communication services  (ECS). However, as radio frequencies are used for far 
more than just telecommunications, it has to be examined whether limiting the Radio 
Spectrum Policy Programme to ECS is justifie d, and what scope is most beneficial.  
EN 28   EN In the public consultation a significant proportion of contributions relate d to services other 
than electronic communication services, and va luable input had been received which shows 
that stakeholders consider it important that othe r applications (where radio spectrum is used), 
are covered by the RSPP. (See Annex 2) 
In the public consultation the fo llowing key issues (together with  a set of questions for each 
topic) were identified in connection with the EU political priorities that were considered most 
relevant for the RSPP: 
a. Economic recovery and growth 
b. Social inclusion, se rvices for citizens 
c. Environmental and health protection 
d. Space exploration, transport safety 
e. Effective coordination at in ternational level and negotia tions with third countries 
f. Refarming and competition 
It is clear by looking at these themes that not  all relate to electroni c communication services 
(i.e. point d) or can cover both electronic co mmunications services as well as services not 
related to electronic communications (i.e. points a, b, c, e, f).  
Furthermore, the Radio Spectrum Policy Group re fers several times in its draft opinion to 
objectives in other domains, and makes clear that the scope of the RSPP should not be limited 
to ECS: "All sectoral interests (e.g. ECS, br oadcasting, transport, military, public use of 
spectrum, environment, space, etc.) should be cons idered. It is necessary to ensure that all 
stakeholders are consulted in a transparent way on the elaboration of spectrum allocation 
solutions, concerning new technologies in particul ar. This also requires clarity and certainty 
so that all stakeholders have  a view on how their positions  are treated and how spectrum 
decisions are made." 
In addition, the Spectrum Summ it provided a significant opportuni ty to receive feedback on 
the scope of the RSPP. There were no negative views expressed by partic ipants on extending 
the scope of the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme  so that all spectrum users are covered. On 
the contrary, in several interventions stake holders stressed the importance of addressing 
spectrum uses outside of the electroni c communication framework. (See Annex 1) 
The reasoning put forward in section 5.1.2 on the benefits and costs of developing a Radio 
Spectrum Policy Programme, as opposed to conti nuing with ad hoc policy initiatives, are 
valid both for a RSPP whose scope is limited to ECS or one whose scope is wider.  
Finally, and above all, addres sing only ECS would hinder the implementation of efficient 
spectrum use, one of the main principles of  spectrum management. Because there are many 
situations where spectru m use by ECS and non-ECS applications  is shared or contiguous, any 
one-sided consideration would lead to a re duction of opportunitie s to implement this 
important and widely supported principle. Fail ing to deal with spectrum management on a 
coherent and unified basis coul d be detrimental to consumer s and also to industry, which 
produces equipment using radio spectrum ranging from health applications to intelligent 
transport management. 
EN 29   EN As a conclusion, the reasoning above suggests that  the best option is the development of a 
Radio Spectrum Policy Programme with a scope which ensures completeness and consistency 
for all users and services using radio spectru m, hence option 3 is the preferred option.  
6. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF THE POSSIBLE INITIATIVES UNDER THE RSPP 
It has been determined in th e previous chapter that the sc ope of the RSPP should cover all 
sectors using spectrum and for which the EU ha s competence. This chapter will analyze the 
options for defining initiatives established to respond to the ge neral objectives arising for 
spectrum from EU policy priorities and su sceptible to figure in the first RSPP. 
There are 5 areas resulting from the problem definition and the rela ted objectives. For each 
chapter examining the different areas of potentia l measures, options have been defined in the 
following way:  
Option 1: No initiative identified to be addressed under the first Radio Spectrum Policy 
Programme;  
Option  2:  Identification of initiative in the fo rm of further analysis, study and discussion.  
Option 3: Identification of initiative in the form of concrete actions in terms of content or 
procedure; 
These options differ in content depending on the area discussed. As areas of potential 
measures are relatively unrelated and deferring, in  chapter 6.5 the above structure is not fully 
maintained, as the topic addressed relates to the protection of European interests in international relations where option 2 is less us eful and therefore the analysis follows the 
structure used in chapter 5 establishi ng the options by scope of the RSPP. 
 
6.1. Contributing to the Digital Agenda for Europe 
The World Bank’s Information and Communi cation for Development 2009 report suggests 
that the contribution of broadba nd to economic growth is s ubstantial, and may be more 
profound than comparable narrowband or voi ce-based ICTs. Broa dband not only plays a 
critical role in the workings of the economy, it connects consumers, businesses and 
governments, and facilitates so cial interaction. The Recomme ndation of the OECD Council 
on Broadband Development recognises this gr owing importance of broadband and its 
principles have been instrumental  in fostering broadband development.
vi 
In this context the Europe 2020 Strategy has set an  ambitious target, which is being elaborated 
in the flagship initiative "A Digital Agenda for Europe", to  deliver sustainable economic 
benefits from a Digital Single Market base d on ultra fast internet and interoperable 
application, contributing to the objectives of broadband access for all by 2013, and access to 
much higher internet speeds of above 30 M bps by 2020, including 50% or more of European 
households subscribing to intern et connections above 100 Mbps.  
A speed of 30 Mbps would mean being able to provide 2 or 3 HDT V channels to each home. It 
would also increase access to applications such as e-governme nt and e-educa tion (including 
distance learning), would en hance e-accessibility, and would enable and fa cilitate teleworking for 
EN 30   EN a larger proportion of the popu lation. Applications li ke e-government have a crucial role in 
reducing administrative burden. The deployment of  mobile broadband infra structure would fully 
enable the use of e-Health applic ations, in particular telemedicine (health services at distance). 
The Radio Spectrum Policy Programme should s upport the Digital Agenda for Europe, given 
that wireless services have a huge potential for ensuring that the objectives of the digital 
agenda are achieved.  
As one prominent example, the Commission signa lled the potential socio-economic benefits 
of the digital dividend, in its October 2009 Communicationvii and Recommendation to 
Member States building on the general anal ogue broadcasting switch off in 2012. Through the 
Radio Spectrum Policy Programme, the issues raised in the Communication can be highlighted, and appropriate follow-up can be given to the medium and long-term actions 
identified for the digital dividend.  
Option 1: No initiative id entified in the first RSPP  
There seems to be a strong consensus in Eu rope on the importance of broadband access for 
citizens and business. Nevertheless under th is option, the European Commission would not 
propose any further measure or action (even th ough a political commitment was made in the 
EU 2020 strategy to do so), but developments  would continue along the line of national 
actions in line with the current regulatory fram ework. In this context it should be noted that: 
• The data available
viii makes it clear that in most Member  States the current coverage of 
both wired and wireless networks is likely to leave some areas and communities without 
broadband access. In addition, amongst users that  receive internet/dat a services, some may 
only enjoy relatively low speeds (i.e. 128 kbps) compared to the be st services av ailable in a 
given Member State or even compared to the average service available.  
• A number of Member States are developing and implementing ambitious plans to ensure 
full broadband population coverage within the next few years. This commitment is towards 
extending the coverage of broadband networks and improving the quality of service that 
users enjoy. Still the RSPG concludes that th e relative roles of wired, terrestrial wireless 
and satellite networks in extending coverage  and quality will depend on local 
circumstances and that a “one size fits all” a pproach to the digital di vide is not suitable. 
• The Commission has already taken a number of ac tions aimed at designating and making available 
spectrum for wireless broadband over the last tw o years. Four Commission Decisions (including 
the Decision on 800 MHz adopted on  6 May 2010) and one Directive currently designate a total 
of 860 MHz of spectrum with in the EU , but a large portion of this spectrum still remains to be 
awarded at national level. In comparison the Un ited States has designate d (but also awarded) 
around 410 MHz of spectrum and ha s plans to designate a furthe r 500 MHz in the coming years. 
Discussions at the Spectrum Summit often referred to the European leadership in mobile voice, but also warned against laggi ng behind other regions in te rms of mobile broadband.  
• The satellite industry can play an importa nt role in reaching the objectives being 
established in the Digital Agenda, since this platform has the potential to reach all EU 
citizens at an economic and environmental cost th at is lower than for terrestrial platforms. 
Users could be reached for whic h other technologies are not suite d or it is not affordable 
and profitable. With the spectrum already alloca ted to satellite services at European and 
international level, satellite operators have the resources available to immediately bridge 
EN 31   EN the digital divide in Europe, contrary to other wireless technologies which require the 
rollout of more base stations to be able to  deploy their complementary solutions. Sufficient 
steps have been undertaken in the past in relation to the allocatio n of spectrum for the 
satellite industry to enable them  to step in to be able to achieve 100% coverage of Europe 
by 2013. The question, however remains, what this  platform would be able to provide in 
terms of data rates and number of connections as well as at what price.  
Option 2: Initiative identified in the form  of further, analysis, study and discussion 
The Radio Spectrum Policy Programme should facilita te the political priorities formulated in 
the Digital Agenda for Europe by setting out gu iding principles and objectives (e.g. through 
specific targets), and indicating initiatives rela ting to radio spectrum ove r the next 5 years. 
This could also include preparatory work that c ould lead to concrete ac tions in a subsequent 
policy programme. Under option 2 it should be assessed whether further discussion, analysis 
and/or study is needed defining the wa y how to reach the above objective.  
The RSPG noted in its position paper that there ar e limitations to the data that are available 
regarding broadband access and services in Eu rope. Specifically in relation to wireless 
broadband, the amount of statistical informati on available on coverage, adoption and quality 
of service is generally scarce. These data ar e central in understand ing European broadband 
markets and in shaping informed policies for the future. 
Stakeholders have noted the im portance of harmonised conditions which are technology and service 
neutral in the public cons ultation. They also point  to the EU wide and ev en global dimensions of 
these services, which necessitate long preparation periods to find harmonised spectrum bands at the 
global level. Work within the ITUix, which was done prior to the la st World Radio Conference in 
2007, came to the conclusion that by the year 2020  a total of between 1270 MHz to 1720 MHz of 
spectrum would be needed for a low and high us er demand, respectively. These also took into 
account European studiesx on consumer demand for mobile servic es and foresaw the need of speeds 
around 30 Mbps in general with a possibility to us e speeds up to 100 M bps. WRC-07 did not 
identify such amounts and if there is to be any further identifications before 2020, studies on 
possible frequency bands would need to commence before 2015. 
The lead times for identification of additional sp ectrum in the EU and even more so at global 
level can be long. In principle, there are risks that a delay in the identification of additional spectrum for a particular use could play a pa rt in constraining market developments and 
reducing benefits to societ y, if studies are not star ted in a timely fashion.  
This would also build on the review (and an inve ntory) of current spectrum use, in particular 
in the range 300 MHz to 3 GHz, with the aim of identifying old and inefficient technologies 
(both commercial and public sectors), unused assignments and sharing opportunities, as 
examined further in Section 6.3 below. 
Consequently, further study or analysis could be  undertaken of the need s and requirements for 
additional spectrum of terrestrial  wireless broadband, based on comparable data on wireless 
broadband and with an aim of meeting the final target set by Europe 2020.  
As regards satellites, their key characteristic is that, once in orbit, the service they provide is 
immediately available to all users under the satel lite’s footprint, at a known cost, subject to 
certain constraints in densely constructed ur ban areas. However at present the cost for a 
household or a business to use the services of sa tellites exceeds signific antly the costs arising 
EN 32   EN if other wired or wireless techno logies were available, mainly  because of costly end-user 
equipment. Also, given the fact that the demand for broadband capacity is increasing 
exponentially, it is important to verify whether th e satellite platform wo uld be able to meet 
this growing demand. Furthermore in case that sate llite industry needed further spectrum to be 
allocated to it for this purpose, the most suit able spectrum bands would have to be identified 
Areas for further analysis and study in relation to the satellite industr y could entail studying 
the provision of a harmonised satellite solution th at will ensure the coverage of even the most 
remote areas of Europe with a broadband offeri ng to access the Internet at a comparable price 
to terrestrial offerings. 
Option 3: Initiative identified in  the form of concrete action   
The RSPG concludes in a position paperxi that, in preparing for the future, Member States and 
the European Commission should be ready to take appropriate and timely action where a shortage in the availability of spectrum for wireless broadband is iden tified. This would be 
likely to involve identifying a dditional spectrum at European le vel. But before that, it is 
important to ensure that existing designated spect rum at EU level has been assigned to the full 
extent at national level and that rights of use that  have been granted are actually used efficiently 
by network operators. Some respondents to the public consultation deplore the situation that 
spectrum bands, e.g. at 2.6 GHz, have not yet been assigned to network operators in a substantial number of MS. Full a ssignment of already designated  spectrum would lead to 860 
MHz being available across the EU under technology and service neutral conditions 
A technical implementation measure covering  the 2 GHz bands would bring the total 
spectrum designated to terrestrial ECS in Europe to 1015 MHz
xii at the moment. Further 
measures taking into account spectrum iden tified at WRC-07 could also be reassessed, 
although preliminary discussion with the MS in the Radio Spectrum Committee have shown 
some reluctance to opening ba nds at 450 MHz and 2.3 GHz. On the other hand, the RSPG 
Opinion on the RSPP encourages the further identification of bands where technology and 
service neutrality is applied (so called WAPECS bands).  
The spectrum freed as a result of  the digital dividend should be  made available and usable 
without undue delay. The date of  2013 seems to be possible, s ubject to limited exceptions due 
to technical constraints until 2015 for Member St ates who can demonstrate such a need. The 
date of 2013 seems workable considering that Germany has already assigned spectrum in the 
800 MHz band and that a number of Member St ates (including Spain, France, UK, Portugal, 
Austria, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Finl and) have already clea r plans to adopt 800 
MHz band, and considering the high demand for su ch spectrum as evidenced in the results of 
the recent auction held in  Germany for that band. 
This would also build on the review and inventor y of current spectrum use, in particular in the 
range 300 MHz to 3 GHz, with the aim of iden tifying old and inefficien t technologies, unused 
assignments and sharing opportunities, as ex amined further in Section 6.3 below. 
Consequently the initiative for terres trial wireless broadband would be to:  
a) Ensure that sufficient spectrum for coverage  and capacity purposes is allocated within the 
EU so that all citizens have  access to wireless broadband at a sufficient speed  by 2015 and 
commence with all necessary steps to achieve at least 30 Mbps by 20 20, this would include 
making available spectrum freed as a result of th e digital dividend, examine the possibility to 
free further spectrum for example below 1 GHz and if necessary, the identification of 
EN 33   EN additional spectrum for terrestrial as well as satellite broadba nd communications, and 
encourage coverage of rural areas complement ed, if necessary, by technical harmonisation 
measures under the Radio Spectrum Decision, accompanied where applicable by a further 
impact assessment.   
 b) Ensure that all spectrum designated by Commission Decisions 2008/477/EC (2.6 GHz), 
2008/411/EC (3.4-3.8 GHz) and 2009/766/EC ( 900/1800 MHz) has been assigned by 
1.1.2012 under authorisation conditions that en able consumers to easily access wireless 
broadband services. This date should be feasib le as the deadlines for designating and making 
the spectrum available will all have expire d (some having expired as early as December 
2008). Therefore, taking into account the deadli nes set by the Authorisation directive which 
are normally much shorter and the need to ensure  efficient and effective use of spectrum, such 
deadline of 2012 is reasonable. 
In order to reach the 100% coverage goal and the objective in relation to the speed of the 
connection, potential actions in relation to the satellite industry could entail designating 
harmonised spectrum bands for satellite br oadband using the mechanisms of the Radio 
Spectrum Decision to give certainty for investment. 
Comparison of options  
For option 1 to be satisfactory, the Commission would have to be sure that the different 
market players providing broadband  services would be able to deliver the services needed to 
achieve the EU2020 goals without any further re gulatory measure in a llocating or assigning 
spectrum for these purposes.  In the case of th ere being no co-ordinated EU action, it is likely 
that differences between Member States are d eepened and a geographical digital divide is 
maintained. Generally this would not be benefici al for the further deve lopment of a European 
internal market, nor for the competitiveness of Europe compared to other regions in the world. Nor would it promote the inclusion of European  citizens as due to their geographic location 
many would continue to be disadvantaged in benefiting from digital services. It should be 
noted that there was broad support in the public  consultation for a harmonised approach to 
making spectrum available at EU level and en suring its assignment as soon as possible. 
Not taking action would also no t take into account the nume rous responses in the public 
consultation which refer to the importance for Europe to  
• remain a leader in mobile in the broadband era,  
• cope with economic recovery and prom ote social inclusion through wireless 
technology and 
• ensure that existing harmonised spectrum is  assigned as soon as possible at national 
level and to look for further opportun ities for harmonised spectrum use. 
Moreover, the spectrum summit showed a political will to act urgently and to challenge the 
status quo, given the substantial impact these services can have on economic recovery and 
growth.  
In conclusion, the initiative for te rrestrial wireless broadband outlined in option 3  represents 
an important step on the way to achieving the overall goals of EU2020 and should be included in the first RSPP. While the EU 2020 strategy co vers the next 10 years, the RSPP addresses a 
shorter timeframe. Therefore, realistically, th e first RSPP should try to  achieve a provisional 
EN 34   EN target, which ensures that sufficient progress is made in ensuring adequate spectrum for 
coverage and capacity purposes so as to allo w the overall objective to be attained in 2020. 
Further analysis in form of an impact asse ssment will be needed and conducted once concrete 
steps are identified. Additionally, it will be important to monitor the demand for wireless 
broadband based on comparable data, in order to act as appropriate in the second RSPP.    
It has been recognised that the satellite indu stry can play an importa nt and vital role in 
achieving the goals laid down in the EU2020 Strategy. Howe ver uncertainties remain, 
especially concerning the cost involved. While the satellite indus try has the capability to help 
in meeting the 100% coverage target, it cannot provide a broadband service to 450 million EU citizens due to capacity constraints on existing and planned satellite systems
xiii.  
Contributions to the public consultation have show n that there is a high po tential that a significant 
drop in cost of customer  premise equipment,  which is needed to receiv e signals from satellites, 
can be achieved till 2015. This is an essential fact or for the viabi lity and feasibilit y of a satellite 
contribution or solution in achieving "broadba nd for all". Otherwise CP E equipment might need 
to be subsidised in order to remain affordable  for consumers who do no t have a choice between 
technologies due to their location and/ or w ho cannot pay for th e difference in price between other 
technologies and a satellite solution. A ccording to the European Sate llite Operators Association, 
the public investment support needed may relate to the cost of the nece ssary ground equipment, 
which currently would amount to  ca. 250-500 EUR per user. 
Concerning satellite, it should be noted that allocations  exist and operators are making use of 
spectrum and there is also substantial further capacity in the form of orbital slots which could be used to support further sa tellite offerings. Consequently , the focus could be on studying 
satellite capacities, in particular, to achieve social in clusion and the target of 100 % 
broadband coverage within the EU by 2013 and on the provision of satellite services at a 
comparable price to terrestrial offerings. More study is needed in order to assess the number 
of households that could be served with broadb and services at speeds of 10 Mbps at a price 
comparable to terrestrial offerings. Thes e studies should therefore show whether the 
allocation of additional (harmonised) spectrum to satellite operators would allow a more 
efficient use of the spectrum in question, ta king in particular in to account the EU2020 
broadband objectives. Consequently, the studies reflected in Option 2 should be performed.  
As long as there is no clarity on what the spectrum demand w ould be and how the target of 
broadband for all can be tr anslated into spectrum n eeds of the satellite indu stry, it is premature to 
consider concrete measur es. However, further concrete initiativ es should not be excluded at this 
stage and, once studies have be en undertaken, option 3 should be taken into consideration.  
As regards the Digital Dividend, the Impact  Assessment carried out in 2009 accompanying 
the above Communication remains valid in its en tirety, and therefore th is impact assessment 
does not repeat that analysis. However, there ar e two aspects which need  further reflection as 
either progress has been made or as  potential obstacles have come up: 
1. The Commission has just adopted the 800 MHz Decision to ensure a harmonised approach 
to use of this sub-band in Member States that  decide to re-allocate it. In the Commission's 
view it is important to agre e on a common target date for the opening of the 800 MHz band 
in all Member States and on review mechan isms to assess the progress achieved on the 
efficient use of the digital di vidend spectrum. At the spectrum Summit, significant support 
emerged for a mandato ry target date of 2015 at  the latest (but  there were se veral requests 
for this to be achieved earlier). This is to be welcomed based on the detailed analysis 
EN 35   EN provided in the Impact Asse ssment accompanying the Communi cation in Oc tober 2009, 
which concluded that in case all Member States cleared and awarded the 790–862 MHz 
sub-band by 2015 in a format that  enables it to be  used for wireless broadband or other 
electronic communications services, betwee n EUR 19 billion and EU R 46 billion over 15 
years in net present value w ould be generated depending on the assumed level of demand 
for different services. Significant social bene fits would be generate d by greater access to 
broadcasting content and broadba nd services in sparse ly populated areas and as well as for 
disabled and elderly people, a nd the possibility to ensure a European wide operability of 
services. With a non-m andatory approach some of th e economic (on average EUR 2 
billion) and social bene fits would be lost.   
 Several Member States will be able to make the 800 MHz band available as early as 2012. In those cases, the social and economic be nefits identified in the earlier Impact 
Assessment on the use of this band for wireless broadband services will accrue from an earlier date and will therefore be maximised. These early movers will also have a direct impact on the availability of  equipment at an economically-acceptable price, as 
manufacturers move to satisfy demand in larg e Member States such as Germany. Early 
experience of the ne gotiations carried out be both France and Germany with all 
neighbouring countries indica tes that frequency coordi nation can be conducted 
successfully with neighbouri ng Member States (where ne cessary, with EU support), 
with the result that further negotiations by other countries should prove increasingly 
straightforward. While due account will have to  be taken of Member States that have 
ongoing co-ordination difficulties with neighbou ring non-EU countries, as well as with 
those Member States that have just begun digital broadcasting in MPEG-2 format and 
will require a reasonable transition period of between 2 to 4 years after final analogue 
switch off in 2012, the economic and social bene fit of having a signif icant majority of 
EU Member States designate the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband use from the 
end of 2013 onwards would be considerable. 
2. There is limited quantitative evidence regarding the extent of potential interference 
from wireless broadband devices to cable re ceivers, so it has not been possible to 
include this cost in the modelling of the study on which the Impact Assessment based 
itself. Following adoption of the 800 MH z Decision, mobile  uplinks (832–862MHz) 
may interfere with some nearby cable receiver s. Nevertheless, the scale of the expected 
private value benefits for wireless broadband means that the cost of mitigating this interference would need to be  very large in order to change the conclusions.  
Several national technical studies in this matter ha ve not led to definite conclusions so far, and 
a further discussion and exchange of study results was conducted in June at a second 
workshop organised by the European Commi ssion. This workshop has shown good progress 
on immunity solutions for the cable equipment,  so that there is st rong indications that 
interference could be reduced to tolerable and manageable levels. This results from an 
invitation from the Commission to the standardis ation bodies to revise and develop standards 
for the affected TV receiver equipment and to  find mitigating solutions until new equipment 
is placed on the market. Some contributions  to the public consultation have called for 
harmonising spectrum for the purposes of PMSE  (Programme Making and Special Events); 
the assessment of this need had been carried ou t in the context of the Impact Assessment of 
the Digital Dividend in 2009.That impact assessm ent identified the risk  of disruption of 
important services already maki ng use of part of the UHF wher e the digital dividend spectrum 
is located. The main category of legacy se rvices in the UHF spectrum, and therefore 
potentially interfering with the use of the dig ital dividend, is commonly referred to as wireless 
EN 36   EN microphones and services ancillary to broa dcasting and programme making. Wireless 
microphone and similar ancillary services can use these particular frequencies (known as 
‘interleaved spectrum’ or ‘white spaces’). They  are essential to a number of sectors of the 
economy, particularly broadcasting, content production and events organising (such as 
concerts and public speaking for instance). Any changes to the band shoul d carefully consider 
the ability of these users to offer continuity of  service as well as their financial viability and 
cultural importance. 
Based on the issues mentioned above as well as the substantial political  support expressed at 
the Spectrum Summit and in line with the result s of the public consul tation and considering 
the possibility to conduct an inventory of sp ectrum use as envisaged under section 6.3 below 
(see 1.2.3. for the summary for the results of the public  consultation) the initiatives in the 
RSPP context are to: 
a) Ensure that sufficient spectrum for coverage  and capacity purposes is allocated within the 
EU so that all citizens have access to wirele ss broadband at a sufficient speed  by 2015, and 
commence with all necessary steps to achieve at least 30 Mbps by 2020; this would include 
making spectrum available spectrum which will be freed as a result of the digital dividend, 
examine the possibility to free further spectru m for example below 1 GHz and if necessary, 
identify additional spectrum for terrestrial and satellite broadband communications, and 
encourage coverage of rural areas, accompan ied if necessary by technical implementing 
measures under the Radio Spectrum Decision. 
b) Ensure that all spectrum  designated by Commission Deci sions 2008/477/E C (2.6 GHz), 
2008/411/EC (3.4-3.8 GHz)  and 2009/766/EC (900/ 1800 MHz) has been authorised by 1.1.2012 
under authorisation conditions that enable co nsumers to easily access wireless broadband 
services. 
c) Agree on 2013 as a common target date fo r clearing the 800 MHz ba nd in line with the 
existing technical harmonisation Decision, while en suring an adequate derogation process in 
duly justified cases (until 2015), especially wher e co-ordination problems with third countries 
exist or where the complexity of the spectrum  replanning for digita l television requires a 
longer transition period. This will also require the establishment of a review mechanism to 
assess the progress achieved on the efficien t use of the digital dividend spectrum; 
d) Ensure that the expected impact of the digital dividend in terms of improving access to 
broadcasting content and broadband services in  sparsely populated areas and for socially-
vulnerable groups, including accessibility for disabled  people, to ensure social inclusion in the 
EU, is fully realised and that PMSE and cable  service requirements are taken into account. 
e) Study the provision of a harmonised satellite so lution that will ensure the coverage of even 
the most remote areas of Europe with a broadband offering to access the Internet at a 
comparable price to terrestrial offerings. 
6.2. Facilitating easy and equal access, fostering flexibility and competition  
Easy access to spectrum is about creating flex ibility by removing regulatory barriers that 
could stifle innovation and market entry, such as restrictive conditions re lated to services and 
technologies. Equal access to spectrum touches upon issues related to an effective competitive 
environment as well as avoiding competitive dist ortions when a reassignment (refarming) of 
existing rights of use takes place.  
EN 37   EN Flexibility may relate to the way spectrum is  assigned – through individual rights or general 
authorisations, through the possibility to easily  trade spectrum rights – and to the way it is 
used – facilitated by the principles  of service and technology neutrality. 
Flexible use of spectrum and limited harmonisation of authorisations have been strengthened 
in 2009 by the revised regulatory framew ork for electronic communications which 
strengthened the principl es of technology neutralit y and service neutralityxiv xv. 
The 2009 revised framework also allows the common identification of bands for which usage rights 
may be made tradable. Since 2002, Member States have had the possibility to introduce spectrum 
trading as they see fit, and several Member States  had done so already, but in different formats and 
bands. A prospective spectrum user therefore coul d not buy the same spectrum in all Member States 
according to a standard procedure. The rules es tablished in the revised framework could be 
facilitated by more homogen eity of procedures and of  similarity of rights to be purchased or leased.  
In line with subsidiarity, harmonisation of authorisation conditions and procedures for 
spectrum use has until now taken the form of harmonisation recommendations of the 
Commissionxvi, which are not binding, except that pur suant to Article 19 of the Framework 
Directive, national authorities, must take the  utmost account thereof and explain the reasons if they decide not to follow it. In one case though, re garding- mobile sate llite communications 
(MSS) services - authorisation conditions and pr ocedures as well as selection criteria and 
procedures have been harmonised through a binding Parliament and Council Decision
xvii. 
Option 1: No initiative identified in the first RSPP Several bands have already been opened 
to more flexible use, e.g. the GSM spectru m for third generation mobile communications 
(UMTS) and soon to the fourth generation. Besi des defining technical usage conditions, this 
requires an examination by Member States an d the Commission of potential competition 
consequences. This issue is also examined  by the Radio Spectrum Policy Group and the 
ERG/BEREC. The opening of the GSM 900 MHz band by the 2009 amended GSM Directive, for example, could possibly result in competitive  distortion if certain mobile operators who 
have not been assigned spectrum in that ba nd are disadvantaged compared to existing 900 
MHz users who, as a result of the opening, woul d be automatically able to provide 3G 
services in that band. The opening of the digi tal dividend in the 800 MHz band in conjunction 
with the liberalisation of th e 900 MHz band will also need  particular attention. The 
Commission must ensure that national decisi ons are non-discriminatory and do not distort 
competition to the benefit of incumbent operators. However, Option 1 does not allow competition matters to be addressed from the EU perspective. 
Under this option the Commi ssion would not propose any measures to be undertaken in 
relation to spectrum trading and authorisatio n, despite the fact that the provision was 
expressly included in the revi sed regulatory framework, nor w ould it take into account the 
RSPG Opinion, which calls to the designa tion of more spectrum under a technology and 
service neutral regime. 
Also no measures would be proposed at Europ ean level in relation to enhancing innovation 
through general authorisations, like the iden tification and alloca tion of spectrum under 
harmonised technical conditions for innovative a pplications as spectrum is considered by the 
Member States as a national resource. 
Option 2: Initiative identified in the form of further, analysis, study and discussion  
EN 38   EN In order to reach a better bala nce between the applic ation of different spectrum management 
models (i.e. moving away from the administrativ e approach towards the market approach and 
the collective use of spectrum approach), further analysis could be carried out in this field. 
Some evidence already was gathered through studiesxviii on the spectrum allocation models 
applied today in Europe, suggesting also me asures to promote a better management of 
spectrum leading to a more efficient use of sp ectrum. The RSPG could continue its work on 
reports developed jointly with BEREC on competition and assignment issues and further develop its views on the common use of spectrum, with a vi ew to identifying concrete 
initiatives to be launched at a later stage. 
Option 3: Initiative identified in the form of concrete action  
The existing principle of flexible use of spectrum has repercussions on authorisation 
conditions and procedures for access to spectr um. While the public co nsultation shows wide 
support for this principle several responses raise concern about delays and competition 
distortions at the level of national authoris ations and would welcome EU guidance to the 
Member States in this respect.  
Furthermore, there was widespread support in  the public consultati on for the imposition of 
common conditions so as to ensure a transparen t and coherent approac h, even where it is 
necessary and in the public interest to impose ce rtain obligations or restrictions, for example 
coverage obligations below 1 GHz to facilitate rural coverage. During the consultation exercise, industry called for comm onality across the EU, especia lly in the area of broadband 
communications, where economies of scale are be ing created outside of Europe. This is 
important to overcome barriers to the internal market, to avoid fragme ntation resulting from 
diverging national author isation policies, and to  create new market opportunities for spectrum 
users and accelerating innovation.  
The RSPP should state the principle of flexib ility of spectrum use, including through the 
development of a co-ordinated approach to  authorisation conditions, and to foster 
competition. The initiative in this respect would be to develop guidelines on authorisation 
conditions and procedures in order to maximise flexibility in the use of spectrum, with the 
aim of avoiding delays and competitive distortions and facilitating commonality across 
Europe. Such guidelines would be prepared by the Commission together with the Member 
States. Although not binding, they would call fo r a consensual coopera tion of all Member 
States and ensure a smooth and thorough implementation. The recent negotiations of the 
Review of the regulatory regime of electro nic communications indeed showed strong 
reluctance of Member States to allow the Commi ssion to regulate these measures in a binding 
fashion, be it with the involvement of Member  States in a regulatory comitology procedure. 
Of course, this would not rule out the possibi lity for the Commission to adopt Article 19 FD 
recommendations or to submit proposals fo r co-decision harmonisation measures on the 
model of the MSS Decision, should there be a n eed for binding solutions to be approved by 
both Parliament and Council. 
These guidelines should include  
- the establishment of coverage conditions for spectrum below 1 GHz which would oblige 
right holders to deploy their se rvices in rural and less covere d areas to achieve economic and 
social objectives, considering that one of the ma in justifications for freeing such spectrum as 
part of the digital dividend is its goo d propagation capacities over vast areas, 
EN 39   EN - allowing rights holders to offset the cost of  such coverage obligat ions taking also into 
consideration the fees which woul d be charged for their licences.  
Other issues to be addressed would include ne twork sharing, the applic ation of spectrum caps, 
preservation of competition in the assignment of (additional) spectrum to certain 
undertakings, avoiding spectrum hoarding and ensuring that operators have access to 
contiguous blocks of spectru m appropriate for broadband. 
The new article 9b(3) of the revised Framewor k Directive allows the Commission to adopt 
comitology decisions to identify frequency ba nds for which rights to use radio spectrum may 
be made tradable or leasable, at the ex clusion of spectrum used for broadcasting.  
The bands where flexibility has been introdu ced according to the new WAPECS approach 
(e.g. the 800 MHz, 900MHz, 1800MHz, 2.5GHz to 2.69GHz, or 3.4 to 3.8GHz bands, which are open to wireless electronic communications services) should be addr essed in particular. A 
study
xix contracted by the Commission in 2004, estimates that if flexibility is combined with 
spectrum trading, this could realise an additi onal EUR 9 billion per annum in consumer 
surplus relative to th e status quo scenario.  
Furthermore, RSPG pointed out in its opinion on the RSPP that in order to achieve a truly 
effective and efficient use of spectrum at European  level it is of vital importance to facilitate 
the application of regulatory improvements lik e introducing service a nd technology neutrality 
and market mechanisms like secondary trading to remove unnecessary rigidity in spectrum 
management and put in place measures to deli ver easier access to spect rum. In addition, the 
RSPG has advised the Commission to take all actions to designate more frequency bands 
under service and technology neut ral regimes (i.e. WAPECS). 
Therefore, in line with the revised regul atory framework, the Co mmission could adopt a 
Decision to make the bands  790-862 MHz (800 MHz ba nd), 880-915 MHz, 925-960 MHz 
(900 MHz band), 1710-1785 MHz, 1805-1880 MHz (1800 MHz band), 1900-1980 MHz, 
2010-2025 MHz, 2110-2170 MHz (2 GHz band), 2500-2690 MHz (2.6 GHz band), and 3.4-
3.8 GHz (3.6 GHz band) subject to spectrum tradi ng. Thus the initiative w ould be to take all 
actions to designate frequency bands under tech nology and service neutral regimes and ensure 
that those frequency bands where flexible use has been, and will be, introduced are tradable 
on the secondary market. 
A concrete measure facilitating easy access to radio spectrum to boost innovation would aim 
to achieve the identification and allocation of spectrum for innovative applications using the 
mechanisms of the Radio Spectrum Decision. Th is would necessitate harmonised technical 
conditions for these applications subject only to gene ral authorisations an d therefore operating 
under collective use of spectrum model.  
EN 40   EN The seventh Framework Programme invests heav ily into ICT research with several EUR 
billion being spent in the 2007 to 2013 time period. Those applications that are likely to have 
the largest economic impact a nd/or potential for investment (possibly in the areas of 
Cognitive Radio or eHealth), and which are in need of easy access to radio spectrum, should 
be identified taking into account technology and service neutrality principles.. Afterwards a 
study of spectrum bands that would be optimised  for, without being limited to, use by these 
applications could be undertaken and using th e mechanisms of the Radio Spectrum Decision 
harmonised technical conditions acr oss Europe could be set. Ot her actions in this context 
could be the integration of cogn itive radio technologies as well as an initiative to inform 
SMEs and research projects about and promote th e availability of trial licences and already 
harmonised bands (e.g. under the  Decision for Shor t Range Devices), which facilitate testing 
of new technologies and equipment.  
The initiative could be to iden tify and allocate spectrum for innov ative applications with the 
aim of promoting and accommodati ng at least three R&D initiative s that are foreseen to have 
a major socio-economic impact and/or potential  for investment from SMEs. This should be 
done under harmonised technical conditions and s ubject only to general authorisations. .  
Comparison of options 
As negotiations for the 2009 review of the el ectronic communications regulatory framework 
showed, Member States do not easily accept ha rmonisation measures regarding conditions 
and procedures relating to spectrum author isation, since they consider that spectrum 
management is basically a nationa l competence. Member States wi ll systematically resist and 
try to limit the impact of any measure proposed  by the Commission to the strict minimum. 
Nevertheless, there is strong support in the public  consultation also for some elements related 
to assignment, such as covera ge obligations for spectrum be low 1 GHz, ensuring awards of 
wireless broadband spectrum take place by a certa in date and providing guidelines to the MS 
on how to avoid competitive distortions.  
The review of the telecom package was accompan ied by an impact assessment for which the 
Commission had decided to contr act external support to constr uct an econometr ic model to 
identify the impacts of certain policy choices.xx It had been noted that building a verifiable 
econometric model was hampered by lack of compar able data or incomplete sets of statistics. 
To our knowledge, the econometric model developed for the current exercise  in order to test 
the impacts of regulatory choices, was one of the first attempts to deliver an evidence-based 
impact assessment in the field of spectrum management. 
The table below provides a summary on main lik ely impacts and risks arising from further 
coordination in spectrum trading compared to  no change. The signs represent a scale of 
possible impacts vis-à-vis the “no change scenario”: ¬ positive impact , O neutral impact,  − 
negative impact. 
EN 41   EN Summary on the main impacts and risks  
 Introduce the principle of technology and 
service neutrality and co-ordinated spectrum 
trading  No change  IMPACTS 
AND RISKS  
ECONOMIC  
Investment and 
innovation ¬ More flexible and co-ordinated spectrum 
management will significantly encourage 
investment and innovation. New entrants will be 
able to acquire spectrum through spectrum trading 
or operate in unlicensed bands (if technologies 
managing interference are available).  Does not facilitate cross-border investment and 
deployment of new innovative cross-border 
services. Differences in regulation do not 
particularly encourage operators to invest in other 
Member States.  
Competition ¬/O Introduction of co-ordin ated spectrum trading 
could lead to more consolidation of the 
mobile/wireless market. Preventing spectrum 
hoarding through effective competition regulation 
will be crucial. Stronger competitive pressure on 
broadcasters. Gradual increase in competition from 
new entrants and new technologies as more 
unlicensed bands become available (i.e. 
development towards Scenario 1).  Limited competition, disadvantageous position for 
new entrants, and uneven development in Member 
States (some MS advanced in market opening and 
introduce more flexibility whereas others still rely 
predominantly on administrative model of 
spectrum management).  
Internal market, 
regulatory 
consistency ¬ Improvements removing the current 
fragmentation in national spectrum policies – 
through strengthened co-ordination mechanisms. 
More opportunities for development or cross-
border or pan-European se rvices using frequencies. Inconsistent application of rules, slow progress 
based on voluntary co-ordination with lengthy and 
cumbersome procedures, risk of increasing 
differences between MS. Slow deployment of 
cross-border services.  
EU 
competitiveness  
 ¬/O More flexibility and better co-ordination of 
spectrum management should strengthen 
competitiveness of the mobile/wireless industry. 
Risk of spectrum hoarding and oligopoly situations 
(i.e. operators with “deep pockets controlling the 
market) if competition law is not properly 
enforced.  Risk of gradual erosion of the mobile/wireless 
industry’s competitiveness vis-à-vis the rest of the 
world. Economies of scale and scope harder to 
achieve for mobile/wireless operators, slower 
uptake of cross-border services.  
Economic 
operators' costs 
and benefits ¬/− More opportunities for new entrants, 
challenges for incumbent operators and 
distributors of broadcasting (see more detailed 
analysis of stakeholder impacts in Table X.) Reaffirmed position for the current spectrum 
holders, high barriers of entry for new service 
providers and new technol ogies, impact varies by 
national spectrum regime.  
Administrative 
costs, 
simplification ¬/O Overall reduction due to lower administrative 
burden and less regulation for operators. Less 
burdensome general authorisations will be used 
more often than more burdensome individual 
licenses. Some additional burden related to 
transition to a more flexible and co-ordinated 
system.  No change, no reduction of administrative burden 
for operators. Partial reduction possible in MS 
which decide to implement a more flexible 
spectrum regime.  
Consumer 
benefits  ¬ More choice, more services, lower cost 
(especially if more unlicensed bands are used in 
the future).  Same choices as today, big differences between 
MS as regards service offerings and prices (not 
justified by differences in the underlying costs) 
Overall 
economic 
growth ­/O Economic modelling using scenarios shows 
that more flexible and co-ordinated spectrum 
management has a significant and positive impact 
on GDP growth (the difference between the best-
case and the worst-case scenario would be approx. 
0.1% of the annual GDP growth)  Slower GDP growth than in Option 1 (scenario 3 
shows the worst-case model for this option where 
MS withdraw from any EU co-ordination)  
EN 42   EN  SOCIAL 
Social and 
digital inclusion ¬/O Impact will depend on other factors, such as 
the future universal service concept. Positive 
impact of co-ordination on regulatory consistency 
should have positive effect on digital inclusion 
across the EU. More choice and cheaper wireless 
services should contribute to social inclusion and 
bridging the digital gap between regions. Impact will depend on other factors, such as the 
future universal service concept. Wireless services 
generally less affordable and less available across 
the EU than in Option 1. However, big differences 
between MS can be expected.  
Employment 
and labour 
market ­/O Difficult to predict the outcome. Scenario 
modelling shows a positive impact on employment 
in knowledge industries. Positive spill-over effects 
to other sectors can be expected. Negative 
employment effect for market players who will not 
adapt to the change.  Only limited spill-over effects can be expected due 
to slower deployment of new wireless technologies 
and services.  
There are large potential economic benefits if fl exibility is combined with secondary trading 
as outlined above. Even though in the accompanying impact assessmentxxi as best option, the 
compulsory coordination was identified, onl y a voluntary coordina tion was endorsed by 
Member States in this field. The Commission therefore aim for Option 3 and try to propose 
further small steps which lead into the dire ction of improved coordination without impeding 
the flexibility of Member States.  
The adoption of an implementing measure to iden tify bands which should be  made tradable in 
the whole EU in line with option 3 is preferab le. The Commission also envisages proposing to 
adopt a recommendation on the harmonisation of the format and content of rights which 
would be made tradable. A first step in th is direction has alread y taken place through 
Commission Decision 2007/344/EC, which requires Member States as of 1 January 2010 to 
publish information on rights of use, i.e. identity of the right holder, expiry date of the right, 
geographic validity and tradability in a common data format. In line with what is proposed 
with regard to flexibility earlier in this  section, the recommendation should build on the 
information being made available by member St ates to set clear, generic and transparent 
conditions that should appear  in such rights of use  
Applications only subject to general authorisa tions (often also called "collective use of 
spectrum") already today have a large impact  on society and business. A Commission studyxxii 
of 2006 suggests that the European market fo r products and services dependent on collective 
use of spectrum is cu rrently around €25 billion.  The economic importance of collective use is 
indicated by the economic benef its it provides in terms of sy stem cost savings, productivity 
gains, reductions in congestion and accidents in transport networks, health and safety benefits, 
and user convenience. For example, public WiFi  services depend entire ly on collective use of 
spectrum. The RSPP should establish the prin ciple that the EU should adopt wherever 
possible (starting in certain ba nds) a collective use approach to operate alongside the more 
conventional licensing of spectrum where harmfu l interference conti nues to be a policy 
concern, and the proposal would be devel oped further in a Co mmission Communication  
Option 3 is the preferred option beca use of its added value in the re moval of barriers  in access to 
spectrum for innovative applicatio ns coming out of European rese arch, which have the potential 
for a high economic, social and or  environmental impact. Harmoni sed conditions across the EU 
have the potential to generate economies of scale to the benefit of these applications and they could strengthen the po ssibilities for SMEs, including munici palities and commune s, which have 
neither the financial nor human resources to opt for individual right s of use.  
EN 43   EN 6.3. Enhancing efficient  use of spectrum  
Efficient spectrum use is a principle laid down in the Framework Directive and the Radio 
Spectrum Decision. This key prin ciple has broad support  among stakeholders and regulators alike 
as is apparent from the public consultation , the RSPG Opinion and the di scussion at the Spectrum 
Summit. Therefore, it is important  to promote this prin ciple, especially in spectrum bands that 
have the highest value in soci o-economic terms, i.e.  in the range from 300 MHz to 3 GHz.  
Public sectors are substantial users of spectrum – with assign ments representing 40-50% of 
the valuable frequencies below 15 GHz. Even a marginal efficiency gain that could be 
exploited at EU level could l ead to valuable spectrum becoming available for new services 
with the possibility of  sharing spectrum resources (norma lly without negative impact on pre-
existing uses) or even state-of-the -art equipment, in order to lowe r costs. At the same time this 
sector also has requirements for new broadband services which have a high social value in 
terms of providing public safety. Public safety is  assumed to comprise primarily police, fire 
and ambulance services, including the Public Pr otection and Disaster Relief (PPDR). Within 
the public safety field emergency services like  PPDR play a vital role to society. At the 
moment the emergency services sector  tends to be highly fragmented.  
Option 1: No initiative id entified in the first RSPP No action in this field would mean that 
especially in the spect rum range of high socio-economic valu e such as the range 300 MHz to 
3 GHz opportunities would be missed to improve  the quality of admi nistrative decision 
making both at national as well as European le vel. Comprehensive information about whether 
or not this frequency range is actually being us ed as efficiently as possible would be missing 
as it is not available today. 
Currently at European level, information on spec trum allocations and applications in all 27 
Member States and some other CEPT countri es is reported in the European Frequency 
Information System (EFIS), which is ad ministered by the CEPT based on Commission 
Decision 2007/344/EC. There is co nsiderable variation in the level of detail provided by 
individual countries. More importa ntly EFIS data is not providi ng sufficient information to be 
able to assess the efficiency of spectrum use, as no data is provided on  several aspects like 
efficiency of equipment used in the respective fr equency band, especially in the public sector.  
If not to promote the efficient use of spectrum,  the European Commission has no competence to 
deal with specific segments of public sector use of radio spectrum (e.g. defence), however in 
some areas like civil protection and transport the possibility exists to take  certain measures at 
European level. Under this op tion the Commission however woul d not make any further steps 
and rely on harmonisation measures carried out  in the past or ongoing in relation to 
transport.xxiii In relation to Public Pr otection and Disaster Relief  at the mome nt so called 
"TETRA" and "TETRAPOL" standards apply, wh ich provide for harmonisation at a voluntary 
basis. 
Option 2: Initiative identifi ed in the form of further, analysis, study and discussion 
Participants at the spectrum su mmit, the RSPG and also studiesxxiv have called for a review or 
a periodic survey of current spectrum use and the evaluation of future needs based on 
consumer and business demands.  
The RSPG has suggested in its  opinion on the Radio Spectru m Policy Programme a proposal 
for concrete action on how to improve the efficiency of spectrum use. The RSPG believes that, with a view to release more “new” spectrum, the European Commission should take into 
EN 44   EN account an analysis of market and technology trends to identify developing and potential 
future significant uses of spectrum. The proc ess should also identify possible target frequency 
bands, including frequency bands currently used  by the public and commercial sectors, to 
promote intelligent sharing and compatibility solu tions with other commercial or public sector 
services and to duly consider whether certain frequency bands will need to be made available.  
Further analysis and study could be envisaged in  the field of public use of spectrum especially 
as regards how potentially to  incentivise the use of spect rum by public bodies, taking into 
account the limited European competence in this matter.   
The initiative would be to conduct a review (and an inventory) of current spectrum use, in 
particular in the range 300 MH z to 3 GHz, with the aim of id entifying old and inefficient 
technologies (both commercial and public s ectors), unused assignments and sharing 
opportunities.  
Actions could entail a study th at identifies spectrum currently being used by old and 
particularly inefficient equipmen t or where use is limited in the first place. With the aim of 
finding those bands which have the lowest oppor tunity cost at the European level, the 
investigation would flag to Member States and i ndustry where it is most effective to divest so 
that harmonised spectrum may emerge over a period of time. Such preparatory work might 
lead to further action in future Programmes. 
Option 3: Initiative identified in the form of concrete action  
Under this option concrete meas ures based on the review and inventory discussed in option 2 
could lead to concrete initiatives in term s of technical implementing measures for new 
significant uses of spectrum taking into account market and/or social demands.  
One example could be the following. According to a recent studyxxv, given the limitations in 
capacity of existing dedicated networks to deli ver mobile broadband services for PPDR, it is 
considered likely that a new generation of solu tions will be required across Europe in the next 
5 to 10 years, to meet future public safety user demands, which will require additional 
spectrum to deliver the services required. In concrete terms this study concludes that there is a 
need for 2x10 MHz for harmonised spectrum across Europe for broadband PPDR applications. Noting the essential coverage requi rements of these services, spectrum must be 
found below 1 GHz. The Commission would issue a Mandate to CEPT and possibly draft a 
technical implementation measure using the mechanisms of the Radio Spectrum Decision, 
since there is support from the public consul tation for harmonised technical measures.  
Comparison of options 
It would seem appropriate that before taking any further action a review of efficient spectrum 
use needs to be carried out. This proposal is also benefiting from an immense political support 
by stakeholders, which facilitates its implementa tion once the details on scope of the review 
are defined. Further steps in promoting and ensu ring the efficiency of the use of spectrum can 
and should follow once the information gap is  closed or at least narrowed down.  
According to a Study
xxvi conducted for the Commission, there is a good case for liberalising 
allocations to the public sector, so that wher e feasible, allocations are made more technology 
and service neutral in line w ith European Commission Policy in respect of communications 
services (e.g. WAPECS policy). Th e extent of liberalisation that is optimal varies from band 
EN 45   EN to band, depending in part on the nature of the spectrum band harmonisation necessary to 
meet requirements for cross border co-operation and coordination and in part on the scope for 
sharing between different applications.  
More efficient and effective use of radio spect rum by the public sector  could produce multiple 
benefits, including: 
• More effective delivery of se rvices by the public sector; 
• A "new" digital dividend (spectrum currently  used exclusively by the public sector 
might be either freed or else made availa ble for sharing), which could bring additional 
economic and social benefit and can gene rate substantial economic spill-over; 
• Increased speed and administrative efficiency  and also less administrative burden in 
responding to spectrum needs that change over time. 
In more concrete terms the following costs and benefits of harmonising spectrum for 
broadband public safety communicati ons (PPDR) can be identified: 
 
Benefits  Costs 
PPDR as service with a high social value as 
it brings benefits to the whole society 
Cross-border interoperability (as emergency situations are often cross-border and/or involve multinational teams - e.g. natural disasters, terr orism or routine cross-
border activities) 
Portability of PPDR equipment across borders 
Avoiding harmful interference (and thereby promoting efficient use of spectrum) within the EU Economic value of the harmonised band 
(opportunity cost of using spectrum) not properly reflected, potent ially an alternative 
use could be considered more efficient from an economic point of view (A harmonised allocation of spectrum for broadband PPDR communications would not be determined by the market, as PPDR users do not have financial means to compete for the spectrum in the market (e.g. through auctions), therefore there is a market failure. In this case, the allocation of spectrum would rather be decided at the politic al level and would be 
based on the social value of PPDR.) In any case, the possibility fo r and consequences of 
measures under which all users would have to pay for spectrum, including public sector and providers of general interest services, , should be further analysed considering in particular their impact on the efficient use of spectrum and on the possibility for certain users to carry out their mission, as well as to the potential need for subsidies and the absence of state aids.  
Harmonisation of spectrum at EU level is laying down the foundation needed from a spectrum point of view to promote the functioning of the in ternal market  Restrictions on use for alternative uses in the 
frequency band assigned to PPDR even if spectrum assigned to PPDR is underused or unused  
EN 46   EN Creation of larger equipment markets  Rest rictions on ability to  refarm spectrum for 
new services 
Economies of scale (e.g. in equipment manufacturing)    
Promoting competition between equipment 
suppliers   
By larger markets, economies of scale and 
competition, the cost for the equipment needed and therefore for the PPDR services should decrease   
Several contributions received in  the course of the public cons ultation have pointed to the 
need for and supported more harmonised spectrum for PPDR.  
In conclusion, the most important step will be to strengthen the guiding principle of efficient 
spectrum use by creating a detailed and transp arent EU inventory, with the necessary 
safeguards to preserve secrecy regarding public  defence and security, and by clarifying the 
level of utilisation by each user. Such an exerci se would have the larges t benefit in the range 
300 MHz to 3 GHz, where the socio-economic value is the greatest. Following that exercise, 
future significant uses based on market and social demands should be identified with the aim of finding appropriate refarming or  sharing solutions. One potential  initiative in this area is 
the introduction of a harmonisation measure for PPD R, as this would be considered to be 
worthwhile and beneficial to European citizens.  
Consequently the initiative to fo llow regarding PPDR, insofar as it relates to matters under EU 
competence, would be to ensure that safety re lated communications have  access to appropriate 
spectrum to introduce innova tive services for the benefit of EU citizens and to ensure that public 
sector use benefits from more effectiv e and spectrally efficient technologies. 
6.4. Contributing to combating climate chan ge – action regarding transport and 
energy 
The EU2020 strategy sets out objec tives relating to sustainable growth and in achieving a 
sustainable, resource effi cient and competitive economy.  In this context resource efficiency 
should be improved by 20% and al so the roll out of smart grids using ICTs should be 
accelerated.  Furthermore the Commission should presen t proposals n relation to transport and 
energy saving through intelligent traffic management, in view to the further reduction of CO2 
emissions for passenger cars, for the aviation and maritime sectors.  
Option 1: No initiative id entified in the first RSPP The question is whether further 
measures are needed in spectrum policy to support these initiatives in the first Radio Spectrum Policy Programme or if, for the moment, the needs of stakeholders in this field are 
sufficiently covered.  
1. “Intelligent Transport Syst ems” (ITS) refers to the ap plication of Information and 
Communication Technologies (ICT) to transpor t, including wireless  applications. These 
applications are being developed for different tr ansport modes and for in teraction between them. 
The Commission's Action Plan for the Deployme nt of Intelligent Transport Systems in 
Europe
xxvii aims to accelerate and coordinate the deployment of ITS in road transport, 
EN 47   EN including interfaces with other transport modes. One of its priority area s is clean and energy-
efficient transport. ITS applications have an esse ntial role to play in the greening of transport, 
for example differentiated charging of vehi cles by Electronic Toll Collection systems for 
circulating on certain routes is a way to influe nce traffic demand. In addition, ITS applications 
for journey planning and dynamic in-vehicle navi gation contribute to congestion relief, to 
greener mobility and to  less energy consumption. 
ITS cooperative systems can be used  to improve transport efficienc y, as they can pr ovide for more 
reliable real-time travel and tr affic information, which will enha nce efficient and flexible route 
planning, time savings a nd pollution control on sensitive parts of the road network. Such systems 
also rely on availability of and access to radio spectrum, as th ey are based on an exchange of 
information and communication betw een vehicles and with the road infrastructure and, when 
appropriate, a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) po sitioning and time. 
In relation to intelligent traffic management a nd the optimisation of traffic routes, significant 
steps have been undertaken in the past which ensu re that spectrum is not  a constraint and that 
sufficient spectrum is allocated to such measures. For the moment there are no indications on additional spectrum needs for ITS purposes, but any potential additional needs raising for 
access to adequate spectrum by future ITS applicati ons has to be monitored on a regular basis.  
2. Smart Grids and smart metering have the ta rget of providing reliable and secure 
communications networks used to efficiently manage the electricity (and gas) networks 
(generation - transmission - distribution) and therefore contribute to achieving the goal to 
reduce energy consumption by 20% to combat climate change. This implies a significant 
amount of wireless devices and networks to cover remote sens ing and control functions. The 
issue of a mass markets for such devices and inte roperability must be ta ken into consideration. 
In the current situation the us e of spectrum is not harmonised at European level, instead 
individual frequencies are assigned by Member States for specific applications. Estimations 
by actors in the sector of the bandwidth require d for smart grids suggest that between 15 and 
30 MHz is needed ideally in a location below 1 GHz because of the excellent propagation 
characteristics of thus spectrum including good coverage, in-building pe netration and no clear 
line of sight required. However, these ar e the same characteristics sought by many 
applications, and spectrum could potentially be used up to 3 GHz. 
Option 2: Initiative identifi ed in the form of further, analysis, study and discussion In 
relation to “Intelligent Transport Systems” (ITS) the Commission continues to monitor as part of its ongoing activities the development of t echnology and therefore spectrum needs. Under 
this option a further discussion, study, analysis would be launched to assess spectrum needs. 
The initiative would be to continue monitori ng in its ongoing activitie s the development of 
technology and therefore spectru m needs to assess if furthe r EU intervention on spectrum 
needs is required.  
Recently a study has been published on potentia l spectrum harmonisation of smart grids.xxviii 
Nevertheless further studies could follow to de epen the knowledge in this field to determine 
which bands could be considered for harmoni sation, and whether dedi cated spectrum would 
be necessary or sharing spectrum would be sufficient.  
The initiative would be to consider an EU wide spectrum harmonisation for smart energy 
grids and smart metering on the basis of studies  to deepen the knowledge  in this field to 
EN 48   EN determine which bands could be considered  for harmonisation, and whether dedicated 
spectrum would be necessary or shari ng spectrum would be sufficient.  
Option 3: Initiative identified in the form of concrete action As regards “Intelligent 
Transport Systems” (ITS) harmonisation measures  have been undertaken in the past, however 
further measures might be envisaged even though no specific need had been flagged by 
stakeholders in this respect. 
In line with the study mentioned above a tech nical harmonisation measure under the Radio 
Spectrum Decision could be proposed for smart grids and smart metering. Either one single 
(contiguous) frequency band or a set of bands c ould be harmonised to be used by smart grids 
and smart metering Europe wide. Given the requi rement for high security and reliability of 
smart grids and smart metering applications, lice nsed spectrum and use of dedicated networks 
are recommended by the above stud y. It is acknowledged, however,  that sharing of spectrum 
with military on geographic/ time basis should be also possible. 
Comparison of options 
1. For “Intelligent Transport Systems” (ITS) , as harmonisation measures have been 
undertaken in the past which apparently fulfil current spectrum needs and since the 
Commission is presently monitoring technolo gical developments an d the evolution of 
spectrum needs in this field, the best option is option 1: to continue mon itoring without 
specifying any further action in the framework of this first RSPP, possibly leading to the 
preparation of further action or meas ures in this area in a next RSPP. 
2. For smart grids a nd smart metering as an action to comb at climate change, EU-wide spectrum 
harmonisation would significantl y support the mission-critical re quirements of power supply 
including reliability,  security and quality of service, and refl ect the cross-border nature of 
electricity interconnected networks . It would also ensure  good coverage of ru ral areas and reduce 
harmful interference also in border  regions. Efficient use of spec trum would be further promoted 
by completing the internal mark et through economies of scale (e .g. in equipmen t manufacturing) 
and the creation of large equipment markets. Mo reover, spectrum harmoni sation would encourage 
wider harmonisation in non-EU  neighbouring countries. 
However, immediate harmonisation action might lead to suboptimal spectrum allocation if not 
considered carefully, and impose unnecessary restri ctions for alternative uses in the frequency 
bands which would be assigned to smart grids. Therefore, option 2 has to be preferred for smart 
grids and metering. 
6.5. Defending European interests at international level 
The possible initiatives with an international di mension are analysed at the level of scope of 
the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (basic op tions, discussed in section 5) as, from a 
methodological point of view, iden tifying an initiative in the fo rm of further analysis, study 
and discussion is not a va lid option for international negotiations. An analysis at the level of 
the scope of the RSPP seems mo re appropriate since it exam ines on what subject and how 
international negotiations should be sought at EU level. 
Option 1: No initiative iden tified in the first RSPP in rel ation to external relations  
The coordination of spectrum at a global level is the responsibility of the International 
Telecommunications Union (ITU), a United Nations agency with the mission to maintain and 
EN 49   EN extend international cooperation for the improve ment and rational use of telecommunications 
of all kinds. Approximately every four years,  the ITU holds the World Radiocommunication 
Conference (WRC), a process aimed at adapting the ITU Radio Regulations, the international 
treaty coordinating spectrum usage globally. The next WRC, the culmination of several years 
of preparatory work, will be held in Geneva in 2012, for which the agenda had been fixed. 
The CEPT has traditionally developed European negotiating positions required for a technical-
regulatory conference like W RC, and is likely to continue doing so where no acquis 
communautaire or EU policy is concerned. The WRC-12 ag enda includes important topics with 
an effect on EU policies, for example as regards satellites. Autonomous, permanent and 
interference-free access to reliable information rela ting to environmental and security issues is 
of strategic importance for Europe. There are su bstantial environmental, economic and societal 
benefits associated with improved use of Earth observation- derived data, which is provided by 
a European programme called Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES). GALILEO, an independent Europe an satellite navigation system, will provide for precise and 
reliable positioning contributing not only to increa sed transport safety, but also to efficient and 
energy-saving running of transport systems. Th e added value and benefit created by these EU 
programmes have been shown.
xxix The spectrum bands needed for these applications to operate 
are assigned and secured, ho wever might be renegotiated at a global level at WRC-12. 
The possibilities to support an EU Member St ate in its relations w ith neighbouring states 
would by necessity be ad hoc, with the risks of  fragmentation of policy that this entails.  
Option 2: Initiative with a scope of ECS is developed in relation to external relations 
If the RSPP was limited to electronic comm unications services, this would not limit the 
applicability of the procedure as the EU approach  to international relatio ns in spectrum policy 
derives from the Framework Directive Article  8a4 ("policy objectives" in the context of 
international spectrum negotiations), and not 8a 3 (introducing the possibility to establish a 
strategic radio spectrum policy programme). It wo uld however require a separate legal proposal 
to give effect to the common EU policy. This would be an unn ecessary dispersal of resources. 
In relation to cross border coope ration, the process described above  can be anchored also in 
an RSPP with limited scope, but would be a majo r conceptual problem where the use is ECS 
on only one side of the border. It would also be difficult to support an application such as 
modernising Air Traffic Control which is an im portant EU policy goal but which is not ECS.  
Option 3: Initiative on external relations with scope going beyond ECS  
An initiative would be to reflect European Union policy priorities during the negotiations at 
the World Radiocommunications Conference in  2012 (WRC-12) with a particular aim of 
ensuring common European positions on sectorial pol icies and on more flexib le spectrum use.  
Space applications being a policy of the Eur opean Union would be defended accordingly.  
 A further initiative would be to give the Eu ropean Commission a role in the negotiations at 
the WRC-12 that corresponds to its responsibi lity for spectrum matters in the EU, while 
actively ensuring that cha nges in the ITU Radio Regulations are supportive and 
complementary to the applicable princi ples of the EU regulatory framework. 
EN 50   EN The successful harmonisation and modernisation of spectrum usage with in the EU inevitably 
create cross-border issues between EU Member States and neighbouring third countries. Where 
this is the case the European Union should suppor t the involved Member States in their work to 
resolve such issues, and encourage the neighb ouring state to consider a similar policy as 
adopted in the Union.  
Furthermore an initiative would be to support the coordination of key spectrum bands such as 
the digital dividend and 3.4-3.8 GHz, with non-EU neighbouri ng countries through active 
participation by the European Commission. 
Comparison of options 
Spectrum harmonisation in Europe is a key enabler for the completion of the EU Single 
Market in goods and services, and on a wider level can fost er international commercial 
exchanges by removing technical barriers to trade. The challenges of managing the radio 
spectrum effectively are often better addres sed by cooperation between countries. Together 
with the value of economic activities - total value of spectrum-dependent se rvices in the EU is 
between 2 % and 2.5 % of annual European gr oss product, i.e. in excess of EUR 250 € 
billionxxx, – this explains why Europe as an economic area must give importance to 
international negotiations affecting radio spectrum usage.  
Most WRC decisions have an impact and applic ability over a long time frame (often 10 to 20 
years after the conference). It is  therefore important to ensure that agendas are sufficiently 
"future-proofed" to be able to address the spectrum require ments of important policies and 
trends. EU policies which are relevant in this context and which are likely to increase in importance over this period include sustainable development and climate change. Particular 
attention should be given to efforts undertaken  to identify the spectrum requirements for 
future applications in this area and to ensure that they are anchored in a timely manner in the 
ITU process. In this context Europe will need  to ensure its interests are safeguarded by an 
adequate protection and compatibility with satellite systems. 
The RSPG recognises in its draft opinion on th e Radio Spectrum Policy Programme that the 
joint formulation and efficient representation of European spectrum interests in international fora is necessary. In the view of the RSPG, increased importan ce should be given to ensuring 
that the ITU Radio Regulations  provide sufficient flexibilit y, facilitate harmonisation at 
European level and do not constrain the EU from  acting in the best interests of European 
consumers. Furthermore the identification of Eur opean spectrum interests and priorities shall 
be followed by the development of a programme  for regular discussi ons on spectrum policies 
with non-EU countries and other regions. This  programme should contain actions aimed at 
presenting EU spectrum policy goals and unders tanding those of non-EU countries and other 
regions in order to obtain their understanding and support to reach the EU policy goals. This may serve the promotion of European spectrum  policy in countries at the EU borders and 
even globally in order to facilitate cross- border coordination, eco nomies of scale and 
opportunities for European industry. 
As regards cross border cooperation, an EU a pproach representing a coherent block of 27 
Member States should wield greater influence in negotiations with third c ountries than in case 
of a bilateral approach by Member States. A bilateral approach mi ght lead to further 
fragmentation in the use of key spectrum bands  as different Member States might adopt 
different approaches and reach different comp romises with third countries. In addition a 
bilateral approach might impede the avoidan ce of harmful interferen ce in border regions 
EN 51   EN A case in point is the bands affected by the digital dividend. Due to its low frequency, the 
UHF broadcasting band (470 to 862 MHz) provide s optimal signal propagation characteristics  
in terms of coverage and indoor  penetration. Network infrastr uctures in the UHF band could 
thus be significantly more cost-effective  than existing systems and could facilitate the 
deployment of mobile systems in sparsely-populated regions and highly built-up urban areas. 
However, because of the long distances travelled by signals transmitted in these frequencies, co-ordination and inte rference with neighbouring third c ountries are significant issues.  
Wider access to broadband is an aim that most of the EU's neighbours share and a transition 
to similar technologies at the EU's external  borders would greatly simplify cross-border 
coordination. A similar case could be made for th e EU's efforts to modernise air traffic control 
and make flying within the EU safer still. 
Given the difficulties that will arise if this area is not a central consideration of EU spectrum 
policy, the principle should be established that  EU Member States will reflect European 
Union policy priorities duri ng the negotiations at the World Radiocommunications 
Conference in 2012 (WRC-12). As the ECS regulat ory framework calls on Member States, in 
applying the framework provisions  on the management of radio frequencies, to respect the 
relevant international agreements, including th e ITU Radio Regulations, for this reason much 
closer co-ordination of the pos itions taken by EU Member Stat es in the WRC is required to 
ensure that any development of the Radio Regula tions is in conformity with EU policies and 
objectives. We should therefore have a part icular aim of ensu ring common European 
positions on all relevant sectoral policies and on more flexible spectrum use, and of giving the 
European Commission a role in these negotiati ons that corresponds to its responsibility for 
spectrum matters in the EU. Furthermore, wh ile respecting the ITU Radio Regulations, EU 
Member States should not accept changes in thos e regulations that woul d further constrain the 
applicability of the principles of the regul atory framework. Moreover the development and 
exploitation of space applications  should be enabled with a particular focus on GALILEO and 
GMES, by ensuring availability and protection of the necessary radio frequencies. Option 3 is therefore the preferred option. 
6.6. Assessing administrative burden  
Introducing a Radio Spectrum Policy Programme is likely to have both positive and negative 
impacts on administrative costs.  
On one hand, some initiatives identified in  chapter 6 have significant positive effects on 
administrative burden, i.e. reduce administrative costs. Generally, the use of ICT plays an 
important role in reducing administrative burden as  internal processes are made more efficient 
with the use of ICT. More specifically, e-go vernment initiatives are widely accepted as 
contributing to the reduction of administrative burden. . Providing broadband coverage for all 
is essential to allow all citizens and businesse s to benefit from the advantages of ICT in 
general and of e-government in particular so as to make their operations more efficient. 
Furthermore proposals on providi ng guidance on authorisations  should rather simplify and 
facilitate authorisation procedures and th erefore should contribute the reduction of 
administrative burden. 
On the other hand some preferred options ha ve potential negative e ffects on administrative 
burden, especially on public administrations such as th e National Regulat ory Authorities 
(NRAs) dealing with spectrum management. A proposal on a re view or inventory of radio 
spectrum use might create some additional task s for national administrations although these 
EN 52   EN tasks would normally fall within the overall need to ensure efficient use of spectrum; Also the 
potential introduction of a covera ge obligation in a specific sp ectrum range would create the 
need for further monitoring whether coverage obligations are adhered to. These measures 
would both entail additional information obliga tions; however the benefits generated by the 
proposal would outweigh the additiona l administrative costs imposed.  
 
 
EN 53   EN 6.7. Conclusions 
Policy challenge 
or problem (see chapter 2) Objectives 
(see chapter 3) Resulting areas where the 
RSPP shall set out principles, objectives and initiatives  (see chapter 6) Conclusion on which initiatives the RSPP shall set out 
Agree on 2015 as a common target date  for clearing the 800 MHz band in 
line with the technical harmonisati on Decision and establishment of a 
review mechanism to assess the progress achieved on the efficient use of the digital dividend spectrum. 
Ensure that the expected impact of  the digital dividend in terms of  
improving access to broadcasting co ntent and broadband services in 
sparsely populated areas and for socially-vulnerable groups, including 
accessibility for disabled people, is fully realised and that PMSE and cable service requirements are taken into account. 
Ensure that sufficient spectrum for coverage and capacity purposes is 
allocated within the EU so that a ll citizens have access to wireless 
broadband at a sufficient speed by 2015 and commence with all necessary steps to achieve at least 30 Mbps by 2020 
Ensure that all spectrum desi gnated under Commission Decisions 
2008/477/EC (2.6 GHz), 2008/411/EC (3.6 4-8 GHz) and 2009/766/EC 
(900/1800 MHz) will have been aut horised by 1.1.2012 under authorisation 
conditions that enable consumers to eas ily access wireless broadband services Mismatch between 
growing demand for 
new wireless services 
and available spectrum 
resources; 
Geographical divide in 
respect of access to 
broadband services Define steps to take so as 
to enable sufficient progress to support 
overarching objectives 
relating to broadband 
access laid down in the 
EU2020 and the Digital 
Agenda for Europe  
through radio spectrum 
policy Contributing to the Digital 
Agenda for Europe to 
enable "Broadband for all" 
at an appropriate speed  
Studying the provision of a harmonised sate llite solution that will ensure the 
coverage of even the most remote areas of Europe with a broadband offering to access the Internet at a comp arable price to terrestrial offerings 
 
EN 54   EN Ensure that safety related communi cations have access to appropriate 
spectrum to introduce innovative servi ces to the benef it of EU citizens 
Ensure that public sector use benefits  from more effective and spectrally 
efficient technologies Suboptimal use of 
spectrum: Inefficient 
use of spectrum from a 
technical, economic 
and/or social point of 
view Reveal areas of inefficient 
use of spectrum and 
propose within the areas 
of EU policy measures to 
promote efficiency of 
spectrum Review of spectrum use; 
public use of spectrum 
Introduce reviews (and an inventory) of  current spectrum use, with the aim 
of identifying old and inefficient t echnologies (both commercial and public 
sectors), unused assignments and sharing opportunities  
Develop guidance on authorisation cond itions and procedures in order to 
maximise flexibility in the use of sp ectrum with the aim of avoiding delays 
and competitive distortions and achieving a maximum of commonality across Europe
  
 Ensure that those frequency bands wh ere flexible use has been introduced 
are tradable on the secondary market Mismatch between 
growing demand for 
new wireless services 
and available spectrum 
resources: Spectrum 
being a potential 
bottleneck for 
innovation; Suboptimal 
use of spectrum: 
Inefficiencies in terms 
of spectrum allocation 
and assignment process Identify appropriate steps 
to promote innovation at 
European level with a 
radio spectrum policy and 
identify adequate steps to 
address weaknesses in the 
process and methodology 
of spectrum management 
within the limits of EU 
competency Facilitating equal and easy 
access to spectrum Identify and allocate spectrum for i nnovative applications with the aim of 
promoting and accommodating at least three R&D initiatives that are foreseen to have a major socio-econ omic impact and/or potential for 
investment from SMEs. This shoul d be done under harmonised technical 
conditions and subject only to general authorisations.  
 
 
EN 55   EN Continue monitoring the technological  development and changing spectrum 
needs for “Intelligent Transport System s” (ITS) to assess if further EU 
intervention on spectrum needs is required 
Suboptimal use of 
spectrum: Inefficient 
use of spectrum from 
an environmental point 
of view  Define steps to take so as 
to enable sufficient progress to support 
overarching objectives in 
relation to energy 
efficiency and combating 
climate change laid down 
in the EU2020 strategy 
and the Digital Agenda  
through radio spectrum 
policy  Combating climate change 
and promoting energy 
efficiency  Consider an EU-wide spectrum harmonisation for smart energy grids and 
smart metering on the basis of studies to  deepen the knowledge in this field 
to determine which bands could be considered for harmonisation, and whether dedicated spectrum would be necessary or sharing spectrum would 
be sufficient 
Reflect EU policy priorities duri ng the negotiations at the World 
Radiocommunications Conference in 2012 (WRC-12) with a particular aim 
of ensuring common European positions  on sectoral policies and on more 
flexible spectrum use.  
Give the European Commission a ro le in these negotiations that 
corresponds to its responsibility for spectrum matters in the EU, while 
actively ensuring that cha nges in the ITU Radio Re gulations are supportive 
and complementary to the applicable  principles of the EU regulatory 
framework Suboptimal use of 
spectrum: Interference 
at borders  Defend European policy 
interests at international 
arenas and support 
Member States when 
dealing with third 
countries in relation to 
radio spectrum policy Defend EU interest at 
international level, help 
Member States, when 
negotiating  with 
neighbouring countries on 
spectrum matters 
Support the coordination of key spec trum bands, such as the digital 
dividend and 3.4-3.8 GHz, with non-EU  neighbouring countries through 
active participation by th e European Commission 
 
 
EN 56   EN Follow up through the performance of more detailed impact assessments 
Individual impact assessments should be prepared  for measures that th e Commission is called 
upon to propose as a follow up to the Radio Sp ectrum Policy Programme and which meet the 
criteria established by the impact assessment guide lines. In general, impact assessments need 
to be prepared for important Commission initiatives which have the most far-reaching impacts through their content, their scope and / or their legal form.  
In regard to a number of issu es identified in the draft programme, further study, information 
gathering and consultation needs to be undertak en before a decision will be taken as to 
whether concrete action is requi red and, if so, whether it is necessary to conduct an impact 
assessment.  If so, these impact assessments will examine in greater detail economic, social and environmental impacts of potential meas ures identified in the RSPP including the 
question of administrative burden and of coopera tion with third countries  in the coordination 
of spectrum allocation. 
Such measures requiring further examinati on include the following, from section 6.7 above:  
• Further study or analysis of the needs and requirements for additional spectrum of 
terrestrial wireless broadband, based on compar able data on wireless broadband and with 
the aim of meeting the final target set by Eu rope 2020 so as to ensure that sufficient 
spectrum for coverage and capacity pur poses is allocated within the EU . 
• Studying the provision of a harmonis ed satellite solution that wi ll ensure the coverage of 
even the most remote areas of Europe with a broadband offering to acc ess the Internet at a 
comparable price to terrestrial offerings. 
• Reviews (and an inventory) of current spectru m use, with the aim of  identifying old and 
inefficient technologies (both commercial and public sectors), unused assignments and 
sharing opportunities. 
• Ensuring that safety related communications  have access to appropriate spectrum to 
introduce innovative services to the benefit of EU citizens. 
• Identifying and allocating spectrum for innovativ e applications with the aim of promoting 
and accommodating promising selected R&D initia tives that are foreseen to have a major 
socio-economic impact and/or pote ntial for investment from SMEs. 
• Continue monitoring the technological deve lopment and changing spectrum needs for 
“Intelligent Transport Systems” (ITS) to a ssess if further EU intervention on spectrum 
needs is required. 
• Considering EU-wide spectrum harmonisation fo r smart energy grids and smart metering 
on the basis of studies to determine whic h bands could be cons idered and whether 
dedicated spectrum would be necessary or spectrum sharing would be sufficient. 
A few topics have been already been identi fied as requiring an impact assessment. A 
communication is planned to be developed on th e collective use of spect rum in the EU. Once 
more information has been gathered, an impact assessment is envisaged that will provide an 
adequate and transparent basis for proposing any further measures in the context of 
authorisations and collective use of spectru m, including potential measures to design 
 
EN 57   EN authorisation schemes to contribute to low-carbon policy, safety services and public 
protection and disaster relief (PPD R), as well as scientific use. 
Moreover the results of the inventory of use might lead to the detection of unused or 
inefficiently used frequency bands where a tech nological change or ev en a new allocation and 
assignment of spectrum use might be necessa ry. Depending on the si gnificance of such 
findings of the inventory process the necessity of an impact assessment will be carefully evaluated and impact assessment will be carried ou t to establish the best use of such bands at 
European level if potential impacts are considered significant. 
Technical harmonisation measures have not been subject to impact assessments in the past. 
The RSPP might subsequently give rise to ha rmonisation measures for PPDR, satellites, smart 
grids and, potentially, PMSE. Following a decision in principle that such measures will be 
prepared, these would only be subject to an imp act assessment if it is considered that the 
impacts will be sufficiently significant, and if the usual steps undertaken in the preparation of 
a technical harmonisation measure (i.e. discussi on with stakeholders, mandate to CEPT on 
technical compatibility studies, discussion with and opinion by RSPG, discussion at the level 
of the Radio Spectrum Committee) are not d eemed sufficient to establish clearly the 
justification for th e specific action. 
In the area of wireless broadband, the Co mmission services hope to propose that the 
Commission adopts a further technical implem entation measure harmonising the 2 GHz band 
currently used for UMTS. Noting that this band is already in use for wireless broadband today 
and that the aim would be to introduce the technology and service neut rality concepts as 
already dealt with in this impact assessment a nd in the impact assessment carried out when 
introducing these concepts into the legal framewor k, it is not expected that it will be necessary 
to perform a further impact assessment on this subject. 
Further study or analysis is foreseen to be  undertaken of the needs and requirements for 
additional spectrum of terrestrial  wireless broadband, based on comparable data on wireless 
broadband and with an aim of meeting the fi nal target set by Europe 2020. Additionally a 
Communication on "European Broa dband: investing in digitally driven growth" is being 
developed by DG INFSO. Once further information is gathered it is envisaged to examine the 
necessity of an impact assessment on the sp ectrum requirements of such measures.   
As regards the common target date for cleari ng the 800 MHz band in line  with the technical 
harmonisation Decision and establishment of a review
 mechanism to assess the progress 
achieved on the efficient use of the digital di vidend spectrum the Commission is considering  
putting forward a more ambitious proposal of se tting 2013 as a target date. This would be 
highly beneficial as already examined and sh own in the impact a ssessment on the digital 
dividend and is also the logical consequence of the analysis done in this impact assessment in 
chapter. 6.1.  
 
EN 58   EN 7. EVALUATION AND MONITORING  
Following the principle of proportionality and given the strategic nature of the Radio 
Spectrum Policy Programme proposal, the eval uation and monitoring  requirements should 
equally remain on a general and strategic level. Therefore the particular  difficulty in defining 
and specifying indicators for th e purpose of monitoring and eval uation derives from the fact 
that the RSPP will not have a direct regulato ry impact itself, but only once further legal 
instruments are put in place. Only  intentions are expressed in the RSPP, but concrete actions 
which can be monitored and evaluated need to follow separately.  
As regards evaluation requireme nts it is planned that a revi ew is performed on the Radio 
Spectrum Policy Programme. 
As regards monitoring of indicat ors concerning specific EU polic ies, it is the role of the 
respective policy units to set up indicators for monitoring. A more detailed evaluation and 
monitoring system should be anchored to the respective sectoral policy initiatives, e.g. in 
energy efficiency, space policy or the Digital Agenda. What remains to be monitored as 
regards radio spectrum is how and whether tec hnological and also regu latory developments 
(both at national level and at international level) lead to a change is spectrum demand, in 
spectrum use and, furthermore, in the efficiency of spectrum use. This is part of the daily 
work of the Radio Spectrum Policy Unit, wh ich regularly meets stakeholders, follows 
discussions at the CEPT and ITU level, and holds regular meetings and discussions with 
representatives of Member States in the framework of the Radi o Spectrum Committee. 
Moreover, the Commission refers regularly to th e RSPG. At a very gene ral level, indicators 
relate to content, de pth, direction and speed  of change in demand for spectrum and use of 
radio spectrum, and in how spectrum is managed.  
The link between the use of spectrum in Member  States and its social and economic impact, 
either in specific application areas or in st ructural change, is too complex for aggregate 
measures of impact to be used as indicators of the effectiveness of the measures considered. It 
is therefore proposed to base the evaluation and monitoring on the specific objectives in the 
specific areas of focus. 
Special attention will be paid to assessing progress in the followi ng main areas addressed i.e.:  
• The timeliness of measures taken in Member States for ensuring the complete switch-off of 
analogue TV by 1 January 2012; 
• The progress in making the 790-862 MH z sub-band available for electronic 
communications under harmonised techni cal condition in Member States; 
• Progress in migrating to "best in class" technologies for the transmission of terrestrial 
broadcasting signals; 
• The progress made in attaini ng the coverage target for "b roadband for all"  objective and 
data speed targets from the point of view of spectrum demand; 
• The number of additional spectrum allocatio ns under harmonised technical conditions for 
innovative applications subject to only general authorisations  within the next 5 years; 
 
EN 59   EN • Progress made in implementing the Commi ssion Decisions 2008/477/EC (2.6 GHz), 
2008/411/EC (3.6 GHz) and 2009/766/EC (900/1800 MH z), so that spectrum use has been 
authorised by 1.1.2012 under authorisation conditions that enable consumers to easily access wireless broadband services; 
• The progress made in EU coordination of sp ectrum use for PPDR application till 2015; 
• Completeness of review of sp ectrum use (Percentage of spectrum for which detailed data 
was collected in the course of the review from Member States); 
• The progress made in EU coordination of spec trum use for smart grids application till 
2015; 
• Number of EU policies depending on radio sp ectrum use for which the European position 
could be defended in the ITU context. 
In line with the President's Political Guidelines  and the working methods of the Commission 
on evaluation of existing  policies, a general re view of the progress to wards the objectives set 
out in this document will be carried out in th e context of the preparation of the subsequent 
RSPP (from 2015 onwards). 
 
EN 60   EN Annex 1  – re Section 1.2.1  
ANNEX 1: Summary of the outcome of  the Spectrum Summit, 22-23 March 2010  
The Spectrum Summit organised jointly by the Comm ission and Parliament was the first of its 
kind and attracted a total of 360 ex ternal participants. 70% of these external  participants were 
stakeholders, drawn from a wide variety of sectors and represen ting 226 different entities, and 
30% were from national institutions, including national Ministries, spectrum managers and 
national regulatory authorities as  well as audiovisual regulators. 
The idea of a Spectrum Summit came initially from the EP during the negotiations on the 
review of the regulatory fram ework. The principle aim was to allow a high level strategic 
discussion between decision-makers (and stakeholde rs) in order to identify the key issues to 
be addressed by spectrum policy ini tiatives at EU level. It was also intended to give MEPs a 
greater understanding of the issues involved, and to overcome frustrations previously 
expressed about a lack of EP involvement in key discussions on spectru m. With the inclusion 
in the final regulatory framework of the pr oposal for a Radio Spectrum Policy Programme 
(RSPP), the Summit took on added significance as  a means of giving political guidance for 
preparations of this strategic initiative. 
This note summarises the key results of the Summit, with a particular view towards the 
preparation of the RSPP. The key conclusion s that can be drawn from the high level 
deliberations between MEPs, Member States, st akeholders and the Commission at this event 
are the following. 
There was a positive attitude of collaboration  between EP, MS and the Commission. 
Previous concerns over differences in expectations  of EP and MS as to the level of detail that 
the RSPP should contain did not materialise. There was wide support  for staying at the 
strategic policy level. No-one ch allenged the existing regulatory tools, i.e. the Radio Spectrum 
Decision and the regulatory framework, nor was there an attempt to limit the Commission's 
freedom to act on spectrum under these tools by  proposing to make the RSPP an exhaustive 
list of actions. In general, there seem ed to be a wide political momentum  and a sense of 
urgency  to challenge the status quo.  
In view of the wide spread participation as well  as judging by the issues raised it is clear that 
the RSPP should also look at spect rum use which goes beyond electronic 
communications services . In particular, the non-ECS issues  of public sector use (including 
military), wireless microphones (and other eq uipment used for programme making and 
special events), and a sustaina ble environment (e.g. smart grids for electricity networks and 
Earth observation) were raised at the summit. 
The efficient use of spectrum  is a key principle which f ound unanimous support at the 
summit. Increasing efficient use in the future could be facilitated through effective reviews ( and an inventory) of cu rrent spectrum use, with the aim of identifying old and inefficient 
technologies (both commercial and public sectors), unused  assignments and sharing 
opportunities. Other key principles  that received wide support at the workshop were the 
promotion of competition and flexibility through  technology and service neutrality. The fact 
that, without EU harmonisation/consistency, eco nomies of scale can not (and are not) created 
in Europe any longer  was a recurring concern, but MS tended to emphasise coordination 
while stakeholders made a plea for harmonisation, in order to facilitate the functioning of the 
internal market and to creat e certainty for investment. 
 
EN 61   EN The main discussion at the summit focussed on the digital dividend  in the broadcasting band 
(470-862 MHz). While there were still several c oncerns expressed in terms of the risk of 
interference into existing TV r eceivers (including cable) and who would pay for the possible 
mitigating measures and migration of wireless  microphones, there was substantial support for 
taking an ambitious and cons istent approach to the 800  MHz band (soon subject to a 
Commission Decision). In particular, the set ting of a common date by which broadcasting 
should make way for new broadband technologies wa s seen as a urgent issue in order not to 
lag behind other regions where decisions ha ve already been taken and services are 
developing. Further efficiency gains in the br oadcasting band as well as an overall discussion 
of change in the importance of TV distributi on platforms could facilitate further opportunities 
for new services (i.e. a second digital dividend) as long as a pluralistic broadcasting landscape 
is protected. 
There was the important discussion on policy orientations and objectives for wireless 
broadband  both in terms of economic growth and social inclusion. Wireless broadband will 
be a key aspect of the digital agenda and is to be seen in a wider context than just the digital 
dividend. Both terrestrial wirele ss and satellite platforms can contribute to making broadband 
available, accessible and affordable to EU citizens. Many interventions noted the need for 
concrete and ambitious policy or ientations and objectives in li ght of the impact that other 
markets (USxxxi, Asia) would have on Europe. Participan ts also flagged the need to rapidly 
open existing spectrum bands that have alread y been harmonised at EU level (800 MHz, 900 
MHz, 1800 MHz, 2.6 GHz and 3.5 GHz) as many MS have not yet done so. There was 
support for spectrum trading in general and in pa rticularly in bands used for broadband access 
across Europe.  
Several participants raised a particular in terest in spectrum which is only subject to general 
authorisations , because of the easy and low cost acce ss conditions, such as is the case for 
WiFi. They also supported the application of innovative technologies such as cognitive radio 
which have the potential of in creasing spectrum sharing at the equipment level without the 
need for any intervention by regulators. In general it was felt that spectrum should be 
accessible to innovative services and technologies  coming out of European research 
programs so as to increase th e return in investment into R&D and to support industry.  
On the issue of international coordination  there was an uncontested plea for the European 
Union to adopt a united position in the context of the ITU as well as an enhanced role in the 
context supporting EU members in cont acts with neighbouring third countries. 
In the process of making spectru m use more flexible, several pa rticipants expressed concerns 
regarding national reassignment of current rights of use  (so-called refarming). There were 
concerns about competitive distortions, cohere nt application of conditions (e.g. spectrum 
caps, network rollout) and awar d procedures (auctions) when incumbents were competing 
against newcomers. Also the question of "who will pay?" was raised. 
Finally, in regard to several of the above issues, there wa s repeated acknowledgment that 
"difficult decisions would have to be taken" b ecause of the competing needs and interests in 
the scarce spectrum resource. 
 
EN 62   EN Annex 2  – re section 2.1 
ANNEX 2: Summary of responses  to the public consultation  
The public consultation on the R SPP gave rise to a substantial number of comments (over 100 
responses) from many different st akeholders representing a wide range of spectrum users. The 
responses to the public consultati on covered a wide range of topi cs. Nevertheless, the majority 
clearly addressed spectrum issues  related to the digital agenda , which seems be the area where 
radio spectrum policy can have the largest imp act on economic growth and social inclusion.  
Economic growth, social inclusion and services for the citizen 
The extent and range of comments made on this  subject clearly demonstrate the importance of 
wireless services in achieving the political goals set by the digital agenda. Many comments 
referred to the need for more spectrum in light  of the targets set by the digital agenda, the 
exploding data traffic on exis ting mobile networks, and othe r regions challenging Europe's 
leadership in mobile communications. Howeve r, many comments also warned that existing 
EU harmonised spectrum for wireless broadband ha s not been fully assigned (awarded) at the 
national level and once assigned was not  being used to the full extent. 
The digital dividend was a main focus of submi ssions with a variety of views concerning its 
further development. In the first place, there wa s substantial support for a target date (ranging 
from 2013 to 2015) by which the 800 MHz band should be fully released for wireless 
broadband services. More controversial is the iden tification of further spectrum in the digital 
dividend, i.e. below 790 MHz, for wireless broa dband. Stakeholders do not agree on the need 
for such action, while at the same  time they would like certainty  about the future of the band 
470-790 MHz. Investments into terrestrial broa dcasting networks will require parts of the 
digital dividend to accommodate new servi ces (e.g. HDTV) in fixed as well as in 
portable/mobile environments and more experience with coexistence between broadcasting, 
mobile and cable networks should be gained first.  
In any case, there is general agreement among all that spectrum should be  used efficiently, in 
particular where the demand is high. Several re spondents proposed to revi ew the efficient use 
of spectrum, notably there was support to do so below 3 GHz. 
Another important aspect is th e political priority of broadband for all. The satellite industry 
provided substantial information about short term plans to augment satellite capacities 
significantly over Europe so as to make this pl atform a viable alternative for households and 
businesses in need of broadband connections. Te rrestrial network operators also illustrated 
their coverage capabilities, which rely on spectrum below 1 GHz.  
There were numerous comments  supporting a coordinated appro ach to spectrum in Europe, 
which takes account of technology and service neut rality, but also ensu res economies of scale 
and the avoidance of interference. Action or gui dance at EU level was requested on several 
assignment issues related to more flexible use (refarming), such as avoiding competitive 
distortions, promoting network sharing, facilita ting wider blocks of spectrum for broadband 
technologies and ensuring the coherent applicat ion of coverage obligations (below 1 GHz) 
and spectrum caps. There was general support for ensuring that frequencie s that are used by 
wireless broadband are tradable.  
 
EN 63   EN Finally, there were contributions related to serv ices for the citizen. In particular, the spectrum 
needs for Public Protection and Disaster Re lief (PPDR), Programme  Making and Special 
Events (PMSE), and general authorisations to facilitate networks ope rated by communes were 
flagged as needing atten tion under the first RSPP. 
Other topics 
The consultation also addressed other issues alth ough it has to be said that these received less 
attention judging by the number of responses and the actions proposed.  
Concerning the impact that ra dio spectrum policy could have on the environment and health 
the main issue to note is the need to facilita te smart grids. Further information was provided 
on the investments that wireless communicatio n networks are making into energy savings, 
monitoring the Earth's surface et c, but, besides the need to protect existing use for 
interference, specific spectrum challenges that w ould need to be addressed in the first RSPP 
did not find wide support. Concerning health issues, while some citizens expressed concern 
about health effects arising from  the use of radio equipment, several comments from industry 
pointed to the latest scientific opinion which does not point to a ny health risks. Member States 
should base national limits on scientific opinions  and avoid non-scientific argumentation that 
could lead to fragmented appro aches and more public concern.  
Concerning space exploration and transport sa fety, there was support for efficient use of 
spectrum and an emphasis on protecting existing se rvices from interference. Several users of 
these services expressed concern about the appli cation of economic criteria to services in the 
general interest. Spectrum allocations for the relevant applications exist including for those linked to important EU policies such as SESA R and monitoring climate change. Currently all 
EU policy related applications seem to have spectrum, although some few respondents would 
like to augment their holdings based on certain capacity limits. Specific issues may need further study. 
Concerning effective coordination and negotiation at EU level, the general view seems to be 
that Member States, the Commission, CEPT a nd stakeholders should jointly prepare for 
World Radio Conferences. The ea rly availability of policy guida nce would be useful for the 
preparatory process. A partic ular role for the Commission during WRCs was seen with 
respect to important agenda items such as th e digital dividend and th e agenda of the next 
conference. There was general support for the Commission to facilitate negotiations with 
neighbouring third countries, especially on the topic of the di gital dividend.  
 
EN 64   EN   
ANNEX 3: Draft RSPG Opinion on the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme  
 
EN 65   EN  
 
 
EN 66   EN   

 
EN 67   EN 
 
 
EN 68   EN 
 
 
EN 69   EN 
 
 
EN 70   EN 
 
 
EN 71   EN 
 
 
EN 72   EN 
 
 
EN 73   EN 
 
 
EN 74   EN  
 
 
EN 75   EN ANNEX 4: Glossary of abbreviations used in the IA report  
BEREC Body of European Regulator s of Electronic Communications 
CEPT European Conference of Postal a nd Telecommunications Administrations  
ECC Electronic Communications Committee ECO European Communications Office ECS Electronic Communication Services  ERG European Regulatory Group  FCC Federal Communications Commission (in USA) GMES Global Monitoring for Environment and Security  HDTV High-Definition TV ITS Intelligent Transport Systems ITU International Telecommunication Union MCA mobile communications in airplanes  MCV mobile communications on vessels MFN Multi Frequency Networks NRA National Regulatory Authority 
RSD Radio Spectrum Decision, 676/2002/EC 
RSPG Radio Spectrum Policy Group RSPP Radio Spectrum Policy Programme PPDR Public Protection and Disaster Relief UHF Ultra High Frequency (band) UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System   
WAPECS Wireless Access Policy for Electronic Communications Services WRC World Radio-communication Conference 
 
 
EN 76   EN Annex 5 
Glossary 
Cognitive Radio:  A radio system employing technology th at allows the system: to obtain 
knowledge of its operational and geogra phical environment; to dynamically and 
autonomously adjust its operational parameters and protocols so as to coexist with other users 
in the same frequency band. Th e sophistication of such sy stems depends on technological 
progress. 
 
Flexibility Principle:  Flexibility in spectrum management and access to spectrum is 
increased through technology and se rvice-neutral authorisations to allow spectrum users to 
choose the best technologies and se rvices to apply in frequency bands declared available for a 
type of application in the relevant  national frequency allocation plans. 
General Authorisations : Under the Authorisations Directive, a legal framework established 
by a Member State ensuring rights for the pr ovision of electronic co mmunications networks 
or services and laying down sector  specific obligations that may apply to all or to specific 
types of electronic communicati ons networks and services. 
Harmful interference : Under the Authorisations Direct ive and the ITU Radio Regulations, 
interference which endangers the functioning of a radionavigation service or of other safety 
services or which otherwise seriously degr ades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a 
radiocommunications service operating in a ccordance with the applicable Community or 
national regulations. 
Service Neutrality : As part of the flexibility principle, service neutrality allows the provision 
of any service in a specific fre quency band that has b een identified for such use. However, for 
safety of life reasons a frequency band may be a llocated exclusively for one particular service. 
Furthermore, a specific service may be made obligatory (without excludi ng other services) in 
justified cases, such as the promotion of social , regional or territorial cohesion, the avoidance 
of inefficient use of radio frequencies or the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity and 
media pluralism. 
 
Technology Neutrality:  As part of the flexibility principl e, technology neutrality allows the 
deployment of any technology in a specific freque ncy band that has been identified for such 
use. However, there can be restrictions that n eed to be justified by th e need to avoid harmful 
interference (for example by imposing emission masks and power levels), to ensure the 
protection of public health by limiting public exposu re to electromagnetic fields, to ensure the 
proper functioning of services thro ugh an adequate level of tec hnical quality of  service, to 
ensure proper sharing of spectrum, to safeguard efficient use of spectrum, or to fulfil a general 
interest objective in conformity with Community law.  Collective Use of Spectrum (CUS): Collective Use of Spectrum allows an undetermined 
number of independent users to access spectrum in the same range of frequencies at the same 
time and in a particular geographic area u nder a well-defined se t of conditions. It 
complements the concept of indivi dual rights of use where only one  user holds the right to use 
a specific part of the spectrum. 
 
 
EN 77   EN Annex 6  
ANNEX 6: List of references  
                                                 
i Source: Mobile Industry Observatory 2009 
ii  Directive 2009/140/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 
iii Decision No 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a 
regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) 
iv Analysys et al, Study on Conditions and Options in Introducing Secondary Trading of Radio Spectrum 
in the European Community, Final Report for the European Commission, available at http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/radio_spectrum/activities/studies/index_en.htm 
v Analysys et al, Study on Conditions and Options in Introducing Secondary Trading of Radio Spectrum 
in the European Community, Final Report for the European Commission, available at http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/radio_spectrum/activities/studies/index_en.htm 
vi Broadband Growth and policies in  OECD countries, OECD 2008 
vii COM/2007/0700 
viii IDATE reports on Broadband Coverage in Europe; Data as of 31/12/2006 - 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/benchmarking/broadband_coverage_10_2007.pdf. 
Data as of 31/12/2007  - 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/benchmarking/broadband_coverage_2008.pdf. Data 
for Romania and Bulgaria, who joined the EU in 2007, are not available in these IDATE reports for the 
indicators considered here. 
ix See ITU Reports ITU-R M.2072 and ITU-R M.2078 
x Commission study on Future Mobile Services: http://fms.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/documents.htm 
xi  See  Position Paper on Wireless Broadband, 13 May 2009, Document RSPG09-284 link: 
http://rspg.groups.eu.int/_documents/documents/meeting/rspg19/rspg09_284_position_paper_wireless_broadban
d.pdf 
xii This includes spectrum available in the following frequency bands: 800 MHz band, 900/1800 MHz 
band, 2.6 GHz, 3.6 GHz and 2 GHz band.  
xiii As an example, Eutelsat one of the major providers in Europe, today has the capacity to serve 1 million 
European homes at speeds of up to 10 Mbps. By 2014 it plans to offer high speed broadband (50 or 100 Mbps) to 
French homes (the exact number of connections is not specified in the response to the public consultation).  
xiv to be implemented by Member States by 25 May 2011 for the rights to use spectrum assigned after that 
date, together with transitional arrangements for existing rights 
xv RSPG Opinion on WAPECS of 23 November 2005. 
xvi e.g. for RLAN in 5 GHz, mobile communications in airplanes (MCA) or mobile communications on 
vessels (MCV) 
xvii  Decision 626/2008/EC on the selection and autorisation of systems providing mobile satellite services 
xviii 'Optimising the Public sector's Use of the Radio Spectrum in the European Union'; WIK Consult; 2008 
 
EN 78   EN                                                                                                                                                          
And study on the Collective use of Spectrum  
xix Analysys et al, Study on Conditions and Options in Introducing Secondary Trading of Radio Spectrum 
in the European Community, Final Report for the European Commission, available at http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/radio_spectrum/activities/studies/index_en.htm 
xx Benchmarking Impacts of EU Policy Options for Economically Efficient Management of Radio 
Spectrum , SFC Associates, 2006, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/library/ext_studies/index_en.htm  
xxi See SEC(2007) 1472/3 Accompanying document to the Commission proposal for a Directive of the 
European Parliament and the Council amending European Parliament and Council Directives 2002/19/EC, 2002/20/EC and 202/21/EC; Commission proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council 
amending European Parliament and Council Directives 2002/22/EC and 2002/58/EC; Commission proposal for a 
Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council establishing the European Electronic Communications 
Markets Authority {COM(2007)697, COM(2007)698, COM(2007)699, SEC(2007)1473} 
xxii Executive summary of study on economic, legal and technical aspects of "co llective use of spectrum": 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/rad io_spectrum/_document_storage/studies/cus/cus_exec
sum_fin.pdf   
xxiii Commission decisions 2004/545/EC and 2005/50/EC 
xxiv 'Optimising the Public sector's Use of the Radio Spectrum in the European Union'; WIK Consult; 2008 
xxv Report for the TETRA association: Public safety  mobile broadband and spectrum needs, Analysys 
mason 
xxvi 'Optimising the Public sector's Use of the Radi o Spectrum in the European Union'; Wik Consult; 2008 
xxvii COM(2008) 886 of 16.12.2008 
xxviii Study for European Utilities Telecom Council (E UTC): Options for a Harmonised Allocation to 
Support Utility Operations ( Smart grids), 2209/EUTC/DR/v14, 16.03.2010, Aegis spectrum engineering 
xxix Impact Assessment on European  Space Policy prepared in 2007 
xxx Analysys et al, Study on Conditions and Options in Introducing Secondary Trading of Radio Spectrum 
in the European Community, Final Report for the European Commission, available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/radio_spectrum/activities/studies/index_en.htm 
xxxi Several stakeholders mentioned the recent US government initiative to make available an additional 500 
MHz of spectrum for broadband.