In line with the matters raised by the companies that replied to the consultation, the present analysis shall refer to the following aspects:
1) Spectrum usage fees;
2) Technical conditions and operational requirements.
1) Spectrum usage fees
As mentioned in the comments made regarding the draft decision in question, MCV services shall be offered on a non-interference and non-protected basis.
In addition, in accordance with the draft decision object of the present public consultation, the radiocommunication networks, which consist of associated base stations and mobile stations that guarantee MCV services on board vessels, will be exempt from radioelectric license, since the licensing to be attributed by the competent maritime authority represents an instrumemnt sufficiently capable of ensuring the final intended objectives regarding the dual responsibility laid out in Decree-Law no. 151-A/2000, of 20 July, amended by Decree-Law no. 264/2009, of 28 September and in Decree-Law no. 190/98, of 10 July, as amended by Decree-Law no. 73/2007, of 27 March.
All the other services that use the radioelectric spectrum on a non-interference and non-protected basis, as in, for example, the case of mobile communication services on board aircraft (MCA services), are exempt from spectrum usage fees. There are therefore no grounds to justify a different treatment for MCV services.
2) Technical conditions and operational requirements
With respect to the operational compatibility of MCV services, the European Commission established the technical and operational conditions to be met by the MCV systems in the territorial seas of the Member States of the European Union so as to avoid harmful interference with the terrestrial mobile communication networks, particularly the GSM and UMTS systems. In fact, in the studies conducted within the CEPT, various scenarios of potential interference in the networks currently implemented were developed and, through deterministic simulations and calculations, the constraints that avoid harmful interference - and which are laid down in Decision 2010/166/UE - were identified.
Accordingly, also taking into account the competences of the IPTM in this matter, ICP-ANACOM will supervise the usage of the radioelectric spectrum by the MCV systems in order to guarantee compliance with the conditions specified in the Annex to the Commission Decision 2010/166/UE, and implement the necessary measures to solve any possible harmful interference, alledgedly caused by the operation of the MCV systems.
With regards to the protection of the stations that implement “extended GSM/UMTS cells” techniques and the guarantee of undesired roaming , ICP-ANACOM highlights the specific technical conditions in the annex to the Decision 2010/166/EU, of 19 March 2010, namely the limitation of power, which will limit radio interference, and on the other hand, the limitation of “timing advance, which will limit the connections/roaming of the mobile terminals at vessel base stations.
With respect to the adoption of a system or regulatory instrument that guarantees compliance with the obligation of cessation of emissions, when the vessel is at a distance of less than 2 nautical miles from the base line defined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, consideration will have to be given to the competences of ICP-ANACOM and the IPTM. In this regard, it should be noted that the matter was extensively discussed within the European Commission and at the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT), where it was concluded that the implementation of the operational criteria/parameters of the system is the responsibility of the MCV service operators (operating based on a principle of non-interference and non-protection in relation to other systems).
On the other hand, it is important to mention that in the response report to the Commission Mandate, CEPT Report 28, the installation of a control system is assumed that, among other functions, will be responsible for the deactivation of the system when the vessel crosses the limits of the defined coastal area, which in this particular case is 2 nautical miles.
With regards to the provision of a list of MCV systems that wil operate in national territory, it is noteworthy that, in accordance with subsection e) of article 120 of Law no. 5/2004, of 10 February, ICP-ANACOM is responsible for providing and maintaining updated information regarding the registration of companies that offer electronic communication networks and services in national territory. As such, and similarly to other electronic communication services, this information can, among other ways, be consulted at www.anacom.pthttps://www.anacom.pt/render.jsp?categoryId=2958.
ICP-ANACOM shall not provide information regarding MCV service operators authorised by other Member States.
It is worth noting that no.8 of Recommendation 2010/167/UE establishes that Member States must stop requesting any additional authorisation, from March 2011 at the latest, for the usage of the spectrum provided for the offer of MCV services in its territorial seas if the usage of the spectrum by the MCV system in question has already been authorised by another Member State, in accordance with its authorisation regime and in conformity with the same Recommendation.
In addition, no. 9 of the same Recommendation indicates that Member States must consider the possibility of not requiring an additional authorisation for spectrum usage in its territorial seas for the offer of MCV services on board vessels that are of the nationality of a third country, provided the spectrum usage for the offer of MCV services on those vessels has already been authorised by those countries in question, under the same conditions as those established in Decision 2010/166/UE.
On the same subject, no. 11 of the same Recommendation establishes that Member States must cooperate actively, constructively and in a spirit of solidarity, using existing procedures when adequate, to address possible problems regarding harmful interference alledgedly caused by the operation of MCV systems. In turn, Member States that exercise jurisdiction over MCV sustems suspected of interfering in a harmful manner with services in the territory of another Member State, must respond and expeditiously settle the problem of possible interference.
With regards to the establishment of mechanisms of identification or registration that permit an effective supervision of all vessels equipped with MCV systems, namely in collaboration with the maritime authorities, it is important to mention that in accordance with the present draft decision, one of the conditions that MCV service operators will be subject to, without prejudice to the responsibilities of the IPTM, is the obligation to supply to ICP-ANACOM the relevant data regarding the vessels registered in Portugal in which the MCV system is operational (seeno. 3-h) of the draft decision under analysis).
On the other hand, as described in the draft decision in question, the installation of associated base stations and mobile stations that guarantee MCV services on board vessels will depend on the licensing act of the competent maritime authority (see no. 4 of the draft decision under analysis).
In these terms, ICP-ANACOM will defend the definition of procedures that promote the efficient usage of the spectrum, highlighting that such procedures shall also take into account the competences of the IPTM.
As such, it is important to note the understanding transmitted by the IPTM, which having no objection to the licensing exemption regime applicable to the associated base and mobile stations that guarantee MCV services on board vessels (as well as to the regime for other radiocomunication stations regarding which the opinion of that entity was also requested), has also informed that, in due time, it will prepare a circular regarding the conditions of usage and licensing, which it intends to previously submit to ICP-ANACOM for assessment.
Lisbon, 21 December 2010
