Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social committee and the Committee of the Regions - EU spectrum policy priorities for the digital switchover in the context of the upcoming ITU Regional Radiocommunication Conference 2006 (RRC-06)
Date: 2005-09-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: International Telecommunication Union, digital technology, international meeting, radio telecommunications, technological change, waveband

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 29.9.2005 
COM(2005) 461 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

EU spectrum policy priorities for the digital switchover in the context of the upcoming 
ITU Regional Radiocommunication Conference 2006 (RRC-06) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
Table of contents 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

4. 

The RRC in the context of “digital switchover” .......................................................... 3 

Origin and scope of the RRC ....................................................................................... 3 

The broader broadcasting policy perspective............................................................... 4 

Achieving the full potential of the spectrum dividend................................................. 4 

Scope of the “spectrum dividend”................................................................................ 4 

A European perspective on the future use of the spectrum dividend........................... 5 

A consistent regulatory approach to the spectrum dividend ........................................ 6 

Advantage of an EU-wide harmonisation of parts of the dividend.............................. 7 

Specific impact of EU priorities on the RRC............................................................... 7 

The need for a “future-proof” approach to the RRC band planning ............................ 7 

Supporting a short transition period............................................................................. 8 

Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 9 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

EU spectrum policy priorities for the digital switchover in the context of the upcoming 
ITU Regional Radiocommunication Conference 2006 (RRC-06) 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

THE RRC IN THE CONTEXT OF “DIGITAL SWITCHOVER”  

This Communication aims at presenting EU priorities concerning radio spectrum availability 
in the context of the digital switchover and the upcoming ITU Regional Radiocommunication 
Conference 2006 (RRC-06). It contributes to the objectives of the i2010 initiative1, launched 
in relation to the Lisbon agenda, which highlights the importance of spectrum availability to 
boost innovation in ICT and of more flexibility in managing this resource so as to achieve a 
more efficient use of it. 

1.1. 

Origin and scope of the RRC 

The planning of radio and TV broadcasting frequencies has traditionally been coordinated at 
international level because of the high potential for long distance interference created by the 
transmission  of  broadcasting  signals  from  high  power  towers.  The  current  international 
frequency  plan  dates  back  to  the  Regional  Agreement  for  the  European  Broadcasting  Area 
(Stockholm 1961). 

In this context, the Regional Radiocommunication Conference (RRC)2 was established by 
the  International  Telecommunications  Union  (ITU)  to  plan  the  new  terrestrial  digital 
broadcasting  frequencies  (i.e.  the  bands  174-230  MHz  and  470-862  MHz).  The  new  plan 
will be applicable to the geographic territory of the negotiating parties, i.e. Europe, including 
the Russian Federation, Africa, and parts of the Middle East3 and will eventually replace the 
Stockholm plan mentioned above. The technical preparation of the Conference in Europe is 
supported  by  CEPT  which  adopts  European  Common  Positions,  i.e.  initial  technical 
negotiating positions, to coordinate the negotiating process.  

1 
2 

3 

COM(2005) 229. 
The  RRC  negotiation  process  is  divided  into  two  sessions:  the  first  session  took  place  in  May  2004 
(RRC-04),  where  the  technical  conditions  for  designing  a  new  plan  were  adopted  and  the  second 
session will take place in May 2006 (RRC-06) where the new plan frequency plan will be negotiated 
based on the actual demand for frequencies put forward by each negotiating country. 
Formally,  ITU  Region  1  which  includes  countries  situated  to  the  west  of  meridian  170°E  and  to  the 
north of parallel 40°S (except Mongolia) and the Islamic Republic of Iran ( 120 nations in total). The 
Member States are the legal negotiating parties in the RRC. The Commission is a non-voting delegation 
in the ITU negotiations, formally an ITU “sector member” (category: regional and Other International 
Organisations). 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
1.2. 

The broader broadcasting policy perspective  

On 24 May 2005, the Commission adopted a Communication on “accelerating the transition 
from analogue to digital broadcasting”4 which sets out the Community policy objectives for 
the transition. It identifies spectrum gains as one of the major advantage of the switchover, in 
particular  the  “additional  spectrum  capacity  released  by  the  switch-off  of  analogue 
terrestrial television” and the fact that “it will be important to not constrain unduly the re-
use of these bands for new and innovative services”. 

The  scope  and  modalities  of  the  future  plan  to  be  developed  at  the  RRC  were  not 
systematically  assessed  in  comparison  to  other  possible  approaches  such  as  a  more 
decentralised  system  of  planning  and/or  a  limitation  of  the  central  planning  to  a  smaller 
portion  of  the  broadcasting  spectrum.  The  broader  policy  perspective  of  the  switchover 
process  must  therefore  be  reconciled  with  the  spectrum  planning  approach  of  the  RRC, 
keeping  in  mind  the  wider  context  of  the  “evolving  nature  of  broadcasting”  and  of  the 
phenomenon  of  “digital  convergence”.  In  particular,  it  is  necessary  to  address  the 
relationship  between  the  RRC  planning  approach  and  the  market  and  policy 
developments.  It  is  key  to  find  practical  arrangements  in  the  RRC  planning  to  meet  these 
challenges,  especially  when  considering  that  the  new  plan  is  expected  to  last  for  several 
decades. It should be further ensured that the plan will contribute to a truly internal market for 
goods and services, whilst giving the flexibility to allocate spectrum according to local market 
demand. 

2. 

ACHIEVING THE FULL POTENTIAL OF THE SPECTRUM DIVIDEND 

2.1. 

Scope of the “spectrum dividend” 

If analogue TV broadcasting is switched to digital transmission (same image resolution and 
size,  same number  of  channels),  three to six  times less  radio  spectrum  will be needed. This 
means that some 300 to 375 MHz of the current amount allocated to terrestrial broadcasting 
could be freed and become newly available. 

Even  taking  into  account  ancillary  factors  influencing  spectrum  use  such  as  the  need  for 
simultaneous  transmission  of  analogue  and  digital  channels,  possible  changes  in  coverage 
obligations5,  the  final  selection  of  transmission  standards,  and  the  substitution  of  terrestrial 
transmission  by  other  platforms  (e.g.  cable  and  satellite),  it  is  expected  that  there  will  be  a 
substantial amount of “unused” spectrum available at the end of the switchover process6. This 
is often referred to as the “spectrum dividend”. 

4 
5 

6 

COM(2005) 204, referred to in this document as the “Communication on digital switchover”. 
A  less  stringent  obligation  for  universal  coverage  would  reduce  significantly  the  amount  of  spectrum 
needed and therefore increase the potential dividend.. 
Ofcom  (UK)  for  example  has  already  projected  that  at  least  112  MHz  could  be  released  for  new 
services through switchover in the UK. This expected amount of released spectrum in the UK is only a 
part of the dividend as defined in this document as it covers only new services other than broadcasting 
services. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.2. 

A European perspective on the future use of the spectrum dividend  

Given  the  fast  evolution  of  broadcasting  services  and  the  increasing  effect  of  the  technical 
convergence, combined with technology development, to creating new service opportunities, 
it is not possible at this juncture to predict the relative weight of future demands on spectrum 
resources,  although  the  time  horizon  for  a  switch-off  of  analogue  TV  broadcasting  is  now 
increasingly clear. The Communication  on digital switchover set out a deadline of 2012 for 
analogue  switch-off.  This  means  that  the  usage  of  the  dividend  should  be  debated,  and 
decided, over the next six years. This calls for  a  quick  start of investigations  at  the  level of 
research and development, of market opportunities, and of necessary regulatory measures and 
planning  for  the  radio  resources.  The  Commission  intends  to  play  a  leading  role  in  this 
context  where  the  benefits  of  EU-wide  coordination  are  evident  and  to  seek  the  active 
collaboration of Member States in this process. 

One of the key questions in the context of the switchover will be how to best use the spectrum 
dividend. The Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) advised to distinguish three categories 
of spectrum demands7: 

•  Spectrum  needed  for  the  improvement  of  terrestrial  broadcasting  services:  e.g.  services 
with  higher  technical  quality  (notably  HDTV),  increased  number  of  programmes  and/or 
enhancement  of  TV  experience  (e.g.  multi-camera  angles  for  sports,  individual  news 
streams and other quasi-interactive options); 

•  Radio  resources  needed  for  “converged”  broadcasting  services  which  are  expected  to  be 

primarily “hybrids” of traditional broadcast and mobile communication services; 

•  Frequencies to be allocated to new “uses” which do not belong to the broadcasting family 
of  applications.  Some  of  these  potential  new  “uses”  of  the  spectrum  dividend  are  future 
services and applications which are not yet marketed and others are existing ones which do 
not  operate  yet  in  these  frequencies  (e.g.  extensions  of  3G  services,  short  range  radio 
applications). 

The Commission calls on Member States to support the launch of a debate on the usage of 
the spectrum dividend resulting from the digital switch-over, keeping in mind the proposals 
of the RSPG and the objective to secure the single market for equipment and services. 

The  Commission  will  accompany  this  process  by  setting  the  necessary  orientations  in  the 
relevant  research  areas  of  the  IST  work  programme,  so  that  new  and  innovative 
technologies  in  support  of  emerging  services  and  applications  making  use  of  the  spectrum 
dividend can be assessed and that spectrum needs can be quantified. 

7 

The  RSPG  Opinion  on  the  “Impact  on  spectrum  of  the  switchover  to  digital  broadcasting”,  ref. 
RSPG04-55, http://rspg.groups.eu.int 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
More generally, the Commission will take into account the reality of the spectrum dividend 
when defining future orientations of the radio spectrum policy. In the light of allowing for 
the market demand to determine the best usage of the spectrum dividend, the Commission has 
already mentioned the possibility to make the broadcasting bands tradable8 and will also 
analyse the relevance to provide access to some of the spectrum dividend for unlicensed use, 
and  possibly  to  allow  underlay  services  to  share  broadcasting  bands.  The  Commission  will 
seek the advice of the RSPG on specific issues in this context. 

2.3. 

A consistent regulatory approach to the spectrum dividend 

Member  States  have  an  obligation  to  ensure  that  the  RRC-06  will  not  create  undue 
obstacles to the strict application of the EU Framework and Authorisation Directives on 
Electronic Communications Services and other applicable EU legislation regarding future 
allocation  and  assignment  of  the  spectrum  dividend.  In  particular,  access  to  the  spectrum 
dividend will have to comply with Article 9 of the Framework Directive9 whereby “Member 
States shall ensure that the allocation and assignment of such radio frequencies by national 
regulatory  authorities  are  based  on  objective, 
transparent,  non-discriminatory  and 
proportionate criteria”. In addition, Article 7 of the Authorisation Directive10 imposes further 
requirements on the procedure for limiting the number of rights of use to be granted for radio 
frequencies when appropriate. 

In practical terms, a consistent application of EU regulations should avoid that the switchover 
creates  distortions  in  markets  which  are  underpinned  by  spectrum  availability.  In  order  to 
support  this  objective,  the  Commission  will  foster  a  debate  in  the  Radio  Spectrum  Policy 
Group  and  the  European  Regulators  Group  to  analyse  the  regulatory  implications  of  the 
future  re-farming  of  the  spectrum  dividend  in  order  to  identify,  and  address,  possible 
inconsistencies arising between national implementations of EU legislation. 

The Commission and the Member States should ensure that the regulatory treatment to be 
given  to  the  spectrum  dividend  complies  with  the  EU  framework  for  electronic 
communication services11 and is consistently applied across the EU. 

In addition, the introduction of new services which do not belong to the broadcasting service 
category  (as  per  the  ITU  Radio  Regulations)  in  the  frequency  bands  subject  to  the  RRC 
process may require a proper re-allocation, or co-allocation, procedure at the ITU/WRC level, 
in particular where such services could cause interference to broadcasting services outside of 
the territory of the EU. 

The  Commission  will  work  with  Member  States  to  identify  any  action  required  at 
Community level in preparation of WRC-0712, as well as in WRC negotiations, in order to 
ensure “equitable access” to the spectrum dividend by all potential spectrum users. 

8 
9 
10 
11 
12 

COM(2005) 400. 
Directive 2002/21/EC on a regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services. 
Directive 2002/20/EC on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services. 
As well as with any future legislation resulting from the current review of the regulatory framework.  
ITU World Radiocommunication Conference 2007. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.4. 

Advantage of an EU-wide harmonisation of parts of the dividend 

The spectrum dividend creates an opportunity to identify frequencies for new pan-European 
services. Many of these future services are expected to contribute to EU policy objectives set 
in the i2010 initiative13, in particular building an Information Society that is more inclusive, 
promotes  quality  of  life,  and  reduces  the  regional  divides.  Consequently,  the  Commission’s 
view is that a part of the spectrum dividend should be earmarked for harmonisation14 on 
European  level.  Given  the  fact  that  the  dividend  will  occur  in  the  Member  States  at  a 
different  pace  and  will  be  driven  by  varying  interests,  a  certain  degree  of  coordination  at 
European  level  is  necessary.  It  is  too  early  to  predict  the  amount  of  harmonised  spectrum 
needed,  as  well  as  which  services  should  be  operated  in  the  harmonised  bands  and  when. 
However, it is of key importance to start already now a common reflection across the EU in 
order to avoid fragmentation and the emergence of “legacy” situations which would prevent 
the later establishment of an EU harmonised dividend.  

The Commission and Member States should ensure a sufficient level of harmonisation of 
approaches regarding the spectrum dividend, in particular to be able to satisfy a future 
demand for pan-European services. In order to prepare this, the Member States and the 
Commission should: 

–  -  confirm  the  benefits  and  the  feasibility  of  harmonising  some  frequency  bands  of  the 

spectrum dividend; 

–  -  analyse  the  key  characteristics  of  such  harmonised  bands  in  order  to  maximise  their 

economic and societal value, and 

–  - develop a common strategy to support the objective of a harmonised dividend. 

3. 

SPECIFIC IMPACT OF EU PRIORITIES ON THE RRC 

3.1. 

The need for a “future-proof” approach to the RRC band planning 

Since  the  details  of  the  future  demand  for  each  of  the  potential  services  and  modes  of 
operation  in  the  spectrum  dividend  cannot  be  predicted  with  sufficient  certainty,  the  RRC 
planning should offer sufficient technical flexibility to cope with a wide variety of future 
broadcasting services and to allow potential alternative use of the same spectrum by other 
technologies and services15. The objective of flexibility was already partially addressed at the 
RRC-04. However, there are still some technical aspects included in the planning modalities 
which risk hampering future technology developments16. It should be further ensured that the 

13 
14 

15 

16 

See footnote 1. 
The  term  “harmonistation”  should  be  understood  in  the  wider  context  of  enabling  the  deployment  of 
pan-European  services,  including  the  common  adoption  of  flexible  approaches  for  spectrum 
management such as spectrum trading and unlicensed use. 
This objective is also supported by the Radio Spectrum Policy Group. Please also refer to the Opinion 
mentioned in footnote 6. 
E.g.  restrictive  “channelization”  requirements,  assumption  of  network  topologies  based  on  “high 
tower/high power” transmitters. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
technical  planning  modalities  are  not  conflicting  with  Community  law,  in  particular  the 
R&TTE Directive17. 

Spectrum  for  digital  radio  is  also  part  of  the  RRC  planning  and  whilst  the  support  for  a 
transition  towards  digital  radio  broadcasting  is  less  pronounced  at  this  point  in  time,  it  is 
nonetheless  important  that  radio  broadcasting  services  obtain  the  spectrum  required  for  a 
smooth migration to the digital infrastructure18 and for the various possible standards without 
excluding any future options19. 

The Commission calls on Member States to perform a review of the technical bases of the 
RRC  planning  to  identify  unnecessary  restrictive  requirements  which  could  undermine 
the principles of “flexibility” and “technology neutrality”20. This should facilitate cooperation 
between Member States and the Commission in the RRC negotiations in order to minimise 
the effect of such restrictive requirements.  

3.2. 

Supporting a short transition period 

In  its  Communication  on  digital  switchover  the  Commission  has  expressed  its  commitment 
for a swift “switchover”. It indicated the beginning of 2012 as the deadline for the switch-off 
of analogue TV for the Member States and therefore as the end of the transition period in the 
European Union.  

In a broader context, the RRC will have to decide when the current allocations for analogue 
broadcasting will cease to be legally protected against interference. For Europe, the end of the 
protection of analogue channels should ideally coincide with the proposed analogue switch-
off  date,  i.e.  2012.  In  case  of  a  much  longer  protection  period  for  analogue  transmissions 
requested  by  their  non-EU  neighbours,  Member  States  which  have  borders  with  non-EU 
countries might be at a disadvantage. However, two scenarios have already been retained at 
the first session of RRC negotiations (RRC-04): one scenario is based on a deadline of 2015 
for  the  end  protection  against  interference  of  analogue  broadcasting  channels,  and  the  other 
one  is  based  on  a  date  of  2030  or  beyond.  As  a  result,  the  Commission  recommends  that 
Member  States  agree  on  a  common  negotiating  position  in  the  RRC  to  support  the  retained 
scenario  based  on  the  end  date  which  is  the  closest  to  2012,  namely  2015  for  the  end  of 
general protection of analogue channels transmitting from outside the EU.  

The  Commission  calls  on  Member  States  to  adopt  a  common  position  in  the  RRC 
negotiations to ensure that the end of the transition period, namely the end of general legal 
protection  of  analogue  channels  will  take  place  at  the  earliest  proposed  date,  as  close  as 
possible to 2012. 

17 

18 

19 
20 

Any  specifications  in  the  RRC  of  elements  covered  by  this  Directive  (e.g.  out-of-band  emissions, 
spurious emissions, receive characteristics) should be avoided. 
In some markets, there is an increased risk of spectrum scarcity for digital radio because some of the 
frequencies  initially  earmarked  for  digital  radio  have  already  been  used  for  deploying  other  services 
(such as mobile applications relying on the DMB standard). 
The currently RRC modalities include provisions for the T-DAB standard only. 
This technical review could be conducted in the context of the CEPT preparation for RRC-06. It should 
include both TV and radio services. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4. 

CONCLUSION 

The  switchover  to  digital  broadcasting  is  as  much  a  political  issue  as  it  is  a  technical  one. 
Technical  decisions  taken  at  RRC-06  may  significantly  influence  the  transition  process 
towards  digital  broadcasting,  with  a  risk  of  limiting  the  range  of  options  which  should  be 
available in the future to regulators and policy makers in the light of the changing context of 
broadcasting, technical development and convergence.  

In  addition,  the  European  perspective  should  be  fully  taken  into  account.  Member  States 
should  maximise  their  “negotiating”  weight  by  adopting  common  positions  and  common 
negotiating  strategies  whenever  possible,  starting  from  a  genuine  agreement  on  the  way  to 
take the main policy priorities into account. Consequently, Member States are urged to jointly 
address the outstanding issues presented in this Communication and coordinate their action. 

The Commission calls for the political support of the Council and the European Parliament to 
achieve the goals set out in this Communication.  

EN 

9 

   EN