1BD.91 Official]ournal of the European Communities l^oCl^^ 
^ The Committees comments 
^.1. In the light of the general picture given above, 
the aims of maximum safety in maritime navigation 
and of protecting the marine environment are to be 
welcomed. 
^. The Committee things it essential for the deveL 
opmentoftheLoranCsystem—a technology proposed 
also by the Aiember States themselves—to involve a 
role for the Community bodies in coordinating the 
various initiatives and giving positive encouragement 
to ever broader participation of the member States at 
the European level. 
^.1. Apart from making it possible to cover increase 
ingly wideareas,itisimportanttoachievearational 
and balanced distribution of the costs between the 
various users and governments. 
PooneatBrussels,^Aprill99P 
1. The package of proposals which the Commission 
has referred to the Committee is designed to facilitate 
and encourage the use of satellite communications' 
These have been developed dramaticallydunng recent 
years and, as the European Community approaches the 
Europewide market of 199^., satellite communications 
are becoming a vital element for the transEuropean 
services and networks needed for the single European 
market, and the broadercontmental dimension which ^.^ whereas satellite technology is the most suit 
able for global coverage, adding ^ones together can 
mal^e the LoranC system also suitable for covering 
areas larger than that of Europe. 
^. The Committee things it necessary,asamatter 
of pnonty,to solve the problems arising in the Eastern 
mediterranean from the closure of the station at ^arga^ 
burunmTurleey,whichleavesalarge navigation area 
uncovered. 
^^. The Committee fully supports the European 
Community^scoordmationefforts, intended to ensure 
the development of a compatible system and its 
inclusionofthelargestpossiblenumberof European 
States. 
It regards these efforts asafundamental factor for the 
safety of maritime navigation in European and adjacent 
waters. 
is developing from the revolutionary changes in Eastern 
Europe. 
^. Introduction 
^.L In recent years the dominant trend worldwide in 
telecommunications ^including broadcasting^has been 
liberalisation, corporatisation and privatisation Some COpinionontheCommissionCommunicationentitled:TowardsEurope-widesystemsand 
services — Creen^aperonacommon approach in the field of satellite communications in 
the European Community 
^Cle^9^ 
On ^9 November 1990 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Commits 
tee, under Article 198 of theTreaty establishing the European Economic Commumty,on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The SectionforTransportandCommumcations, which wasresponsiblefor preparing the 
Committees worl^onthe subject, adopted itsCOpmion onlO Apnll991. The Rapporteur 
was Aiiss narrow. 
At is ^8^th plenary session ^meeting of^Apnll991^,the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
No C 159/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 6. 91 
Member States have abolished their national telecom­
munications monopoly and established an independent 
regulatory body to licence the former monopolist and 
other organizations to compete in both equipment and 
services. In the UK, for instance, the Government separ­
ated British Post and Telecommunications in 1981 fol­
lowed by the privatisation of British Telecom in 1984 
and the setting up of the Office of Telecommunications 
to regulate a range of companies, including British 
Telecom, to provide equipment and services on a com­
petitive basis. In France, Germany and the Netherlands, 
for example, the telecommunications administrations 
have been corporatised and moves have been made to 
separate operational and regulatory functions. As might 
be expected, the regulatory body's main objective is to 
create conditions in which market entry can take place 
to ensure that the former monopolist does not dominate 
the new situation. 
2.2. In Europe satellites, which carry a small pro­
portion of telecommunications traffic compared with 
the terrestrial sector, have not been greatly affected by 
these changes, for technical and administrative reasons. 
An added problem, inhibiting liberalization has been 
the need in most cases for international co-ordination. 
2.3. Yet satellites can offer significant technical and 
economic advantages over terrestrial links. A satellite 
network path basically consists of the earth segment 
(including the transmitter and receiver) and a space 
segment (the satellite). Earth stations can be deployed 
very quickly, on a short-term basis and for a small 
volume of traffic (a thin-route) when it would be unec­
onomical to lay a terrestrial link. They can be deployed 
to fit a user's needs, instead of to fit in with the existing 
wired network. 
2.4. In addition, there are some circumstances where 
satellites are the only means of communication avail­
able. The most obvious example is satellite-point to 
multi-point communication such as broadcasting, 
where the signal is distributed simultaneously to all 
households within a wider coverage area than terrestrial 
broadcasting and provides multichannel services with­
out the need for any wires being laid. This kind of 
multipoint distribution is equally useful for the distri­
bution of data, especially financial information. 
2.5. Most current regulations at the national level 
do not allow these technical and economic advantages 
to be exploited to their full potential. Regulations 
restrict the direct marketing of satellite capacity to 
users. Either national regulation or the incompatibility 
of two (or more) sets of national regulations has meant that multipoint networks serving the Community as a 
whole are either not legally available or are only avail­
able in ways that inhibit their most economical use. 
2.6. It should be noted that most international and 
national regulatory systems for satellites were devised 
in the 1970s using the technical and economic character­
istics of satellite applications at that time. Today's 
satellites are much more powerful or can take advantage 
of technological advances which enable them to be 
accessed by relatively small transmitters and receivers. 
2.7. The Commission wishes to ensure that Member 
States take account of these new circumstances in line 
with the Treaty of Rome and especially the 1987 Green 
Paper on Telecommunications (*). 
2.8. The Commission sees an opportunity to (i) low­
er the barriers to entry to the provision of both satellites 
and satellite services, (ii) lower costs and (iii) allow 
more flexible user-oriented network configuration. 
2.9. It also seeks to minimise, or curtail, conflicting 
approaches between national bodies that may prevent 
intra-Community cooperation and also may jeopardize 
the effectiveness of the Community as a whole to com­
pete with other countries (e.g. USA). 
3. General comments 
3.1. The Committee supports the proposals in the 
Satellite Green Paper in light of the need to exploit the 
full potential of satellite technology and services in 
Europe. Liberalisation and the separation of oper­
ational and regulatory functions are, in the Committee's 
view, a prerequisite to achieve this. 
3.2. The Committee agrees with the statement by 
the Commission (Satellite Green Paper page 101 English 
Version) that: 
'In order to bring the regulation of access to—and 
provision of—space segment in line with general 
Community telecommunications policy, a number 
of basic principles will have to be emphasized: 
— the principle of open and efficient access, based 
on objective, transparent and non-discriminat­
ory procedures, 
— clear separation of regulatory and operational 
functions, 
— full application of the provisions of the Treaty 
[of Rome], in particular competition rules.' 
(l) Towards a Dynamic Economy — Green Paper on the develop­
ment of the Common Market for telecommunications services 
and equipment [COM(87) 290 (the 1987 Green Paper)]. 
17. 6. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/25 
3.3. The Committee agrees with the statement by 
the Commission (Satellite Green Paper page 119 English 
Version) that: 
'A fundamental principle of the reform must be the 
establishment of objective, transparent and non­
discriminatory procedures and the clear separation 
of regulatory and operational functions, both with 
regard to the provision and use of the earth segment, 
as well as with regard to access to—and provision 
of—space segment.' 
3.4. To achieve 'objective, transparent and non-dis­
criminatory procedures' it is fundamental that there 
be a clear separation of regulatory and operational 
functions. This is particularly so with regard to 'free 
(unrestricted) access to space segment capacity'. 
3.5. Furthermore the Committee agrees with the 
statement by the Commission (Satellite Green Paper 
pages 101-102 English Version) that: 
'The Member States are obligated to exercise their 
influence in order either to achieve an application 
of international agreements in conformity with the 
Treaty or to bring about an amendment of these 
agreements. The potential for conflict which may 
result from the current situation with regard to 
Treaty (of Rome) rules may be demonstrated by 
quoting from the principles set out in the Com­
mission (draft) guidelines on the application of com­
petition rules in the telecommunications sector, as 
regards application of Articles 85 and 86 to satel­
lites: 
"... agreements between Telecommunications 
Organisations (TOs) concerning the operation of 
satellite systems in the broadest sense are caught by 
Article 85. As to space segment capacity, the TOs 
are each other's competitors, whether actual or 
potential. In pooling together totally or partly their 
sales of space segment capacity they may restrict 
competition between themselves... Restrictions on 
third parties' ability to compete are likely to exclude 
the possibility of ... an exemption. It should also be 
examined whether such agreements strengthen any 
individual or joint dominant position of the parties, 
which also exclude the granting of an exemption. 
This could be the case in particular if the agreement 
provides that the parties are exclusive distributors 
of the space segment capacity provided by the agree­
ment... 
An exemption is unlikely to be granted also when 
the agreement has the effect of reducing substan­
tially the supply in an oligopolistic market, and even 
more clearly when an effect of the agreement is to 
prevent the only potential competitor of a dominant 
provider in a given market from offering its services 
independently. This could amount to a violation of 
Article 86...'" 3.5.1. In the Commission's view (Satellite Green 
Paper page 111 English Version) the Member States 
should work towards a full review of the Eutelsat 
agreement and it is stated that: 
'Such a review should include, beyond the measures 
set out above, necessary revision to allow 
— direct access to the Eutelsat space segment, by 
far the largest one for use by domestic satellite 
services in Europe, 
— full commercial independence and direct mar­
keting of Eutelsat space segment to users, 
— adjustment of provisions for financing and 
membership, as required, 
— adjustment of the agreements to bring them fully 
in line with the obligations of the Member States 
under the Treaty [of Rome], in particular com­
petition rules—concerning notably the future 
treatment of the economic harm provision as 
well as the future handling of the technical coor­
dination procedures, and transparency with 
regard to cross-subsidization where it occurs.' 
3.5.2. With regard to the measures referred to in 
paragraph 3.5.1, it is the opinion of the Committee 
that: 
— direct access to the Eutelsat space segment should 
be permitted, 
— full commercial independence and direct marketing 
of Eutelsat space segment to users should be per­
mitted, 
— for the reaons identified by the Commission (for 
example, Satellite Green Paper pages 108-109 
English Version), there should be an urgent adjust­
ment of provisions for financing and membership 
of Eutelsat. Such an adjustment should be fair and 
equitable and must bear in mind the interests of 
those Member States with relatively small numbers 
of investment shares in Eutelsat. It is the Commit­
tee's view that the adjustment should take place 
within a relatively short but nevertheless realistic 
time period laid down by the Commission. In the 
absence of agreement between the members of 
Eutelsat at the expiry of that period, it is the opinion 
of the Committee that adjustments should be 
implemented by the relevant regulatory authority in 
each Member State (assuming requisite separation 
of regulatory and operational function has already 
been implemented), 
— furthermore, the process of adjustment of the rel­
evant convention and operating agreements of 
Eutelsat should be undertaken immediately having 
regard to the obligations of the Member States 
under the Treaty of Rome, in particular with regard 
to the competition rules thereunder. 
No C 159/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 6. 91 
3.6. With regard to the International Telecommuni­
cations Satellite Organization (Intelsat) and Inmarsat, 
the Committee is in agreement with the phased 
approach set out by the Commission (Satellite Green 
Paper pages 109-110 English Version). However, it is 
the Committee's opinion, consistent with the comments 
contained in paragraph 3.5.2 above, that action on these 
matters should take place in a relatively short but 
nevertheless realistic time period, especially with regard 
to those measures which the Commission has identified 
as immediate steps which could be undertaken within 
the framework of the existing conventions and 
operating agreements. 
4. Specific comments 
4.1. The Commission has proposed four major 
changes (Green Paper page 3 English Version): 
— Full liberalization of the earth segment, including 
both receive-only and transmit/receive terminals, 
subject to appropriate type approval and licensing 
procedures where justified to implement necessary-
regulatory safeguards. 
— Free (unrestricted) access to space segment capacity, 
subject to licensing procedures in order to safeguard 
those exclusive or special rights and regulatory pro­
visions set up by Member States in conformity with 
Community law and based on the consensus achiev­
ed in Community telecommunications policy. 
Access should be on an equitable, non-discriminat­
ory and cost oriented basis. 
— Full commercial freedom for space segment pro­
viders, including direct marketing of satellite 
capacity to service providers and users, subject to 
compliance with the licensing procedures mentioned 
above and in conformity with Community law, in 
particular competition rules. 
— Harmonization measures as far as required to facili­
tate the provision of Europe-wide services. This 
concerns in particular the mutual recognition of 
licensing and type approval procedures, frequency 
coordination and coordination with regard to Third 
Country providers. 
4.1.1. The Committee agrees with the above four 
major changes proposed by the Commission. 
4.2. With regard to the Council Directive on the co­
ordination of certain provisions laid down by law, 
regulation or administrative action in Member States 
concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activi­
ties (85/552/EEC) (known as the Television Without 
Frontiers Directive), the Commission states (Satellite 
Green Paper page 134, point 13, English Version) that: 
'Satellite broadcasting to the general public—in­
cluding both applications in terms of the definition used in the Radio Regulations for Broadcasting-
Satellite Services, as well as broadcasting appli­
cations operating in the framework of the Fixed-
Satellite Services—will continue to be subject to the 
specific regulations set up by Member States in 
conformity with Community law, as defined in par­
ticular by Directive 89/552/EEC (the Television 
Without Frontiers Directive).' 
The Committee agrees with this statement, and notes 
that the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) 
will give consideration to these matters in 1992 and 
further notes that the Commission and Member States 
are already considering these matters at present. 
4.3. The Commission has identified a number of 
important issues with regard to transmission standards 
(Satellite Green Paper page 134, point 14, English Ver­
sion) and states that: 
'Transmission standards requirements in this area 
are vital to ensure basic interoperability. As regards 
direct broadcasting applications, Directive 86/529/ 
EEC(1) has identified the MAC family of trans­
mission techniques as the standard to be used. 
The development of concepts for the next gener­
ation direct Broadcasting-Satellites should ensure 
compatibility with ongoing activities in the field of 
High Definition Television (HDTV) and its Europe-
wide harmonized introduction. This should be tak­
en into account in future actions regarding trans­
mission techniques in this area, particularly in the 
actions succeeding the current MAC-packet Direc­
tive mentioned above, which expires on 31 Decem­
ber 1991.' 
4.4. With regard to transmission standards require­
ments and in particular the MAC-packet Directive, the 
Committee looks forward to giving its detailed views 
on what measures are appropriate to replace the MAC-
packet Directive and the relationship with the develop­
ment of HDTV in the Opinion which it will be called 
on to give on the specific Commission proposals. 
4.4.1. Similar considerations apply to the harmoniza­
tion of standards for conditional access, such as pay-
TV. 
5. Further specific comments 
5.1. The Commission has proposed six measures for 
facilitating trans-Europe services (Satellite Green Paper 
pages 135 to 137 English Version): 
(') Council Directive on the adoption of common technical speci­
fication of the MAC/packet family of standards for direct 
satellite television broadcasting (86/529/EEC) (known as the 
MAC/packet Directive). 
17. 6. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/27 
1) 'Mutual recognition of type approval for satellite 
communications terminal equipment...'; 
2) 'A Community scheme concerning the mutual recog­
nition of licences for satellite terminal networks...'; 
3) 'Strengthened frequency co-ordination related to sat­
ellite communications...'; 
4) 'Strengthened co-ordination of Member States with 
regard to services to/from non-Community 
countries...'; 
5) 'Specific definition of Open Network Provision 
(ONP) concerning the connection of satellite terminal 
networks...'; 
6) 'Harmonisation of identified future transmission 
technique for satellite broadcasting to the general 
public...'. 
5.1.1. The Committee is in agreement with the six 
measures above proposed by the Commission. 
5.2. The Committee is in agreement with the pro­
posal to initiate lines of actions (Satellite Green Paper 
pages 138-140 English Version) with regard to: 
1) 'Working towards a review of the Eutelsat conven­
tion and its operating agreement...'; 
2) 'Defining a common position in the international 
fora related to satellite communications, in particular 
with regard to Intelsat and Inmarsat'; 
Done at Brussels, 24 April 1991. 3) 'Accelerating standardization work in the European 
Telecommunications Standards Institute with regard to 
satellite communications equipment'; 
4) 'Promoting the full use of satellite technology in 
applications, by service providers and by telecommuni­
cations organizations...'. 
6. Conclusions 
6.1. In conclusion, the Committee is of the opinion 
that continued co-operation between Member States to 
implement the proposals contained in the 1987 Green 
Paper, the Satellite Green Paper and related measures, 
is imperative for facilitating and encouraging the full 
use of the potential of satellite communications in Euro­
pe. Therefore, the Committee is of the opinion that a 
realistic timetable for this implementation, particularly 
separation of operational and regulatory functions, 
should be established by the Commission which should 
take an active role in seeing that the timetable is met. 
The Committee suggests to the Commission that if the 
timetable is unlikely to be met by all Member States, 
that it should consider how best to achieve the subject 
matter of the timetable including whether there is a 
need for the Member States to vest authority for and 
responsibility to carry out implementation in an organ­
ization especially charged with appropriate responsi­
bilities and authority. Such an organization should be 
centrally located with power to cooperate with and to 
liaise with the telecommunications administrations and 
organizations in each of the Member States and also 
with the Commission. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN