Questions about the effectiveness of annual fees to keep satellite...

Questions about the effectiveness of annual fees to keep satellite network filings in the Master International Frequency Register (MIFR), possible implementation difficulties and the lack of any specific and detailed proposal were raised in a Russian analysis of a Radiocommunication Bureau (BR) proposal for annual fees to stem paper satellites, said a submission to the ITU Council meeting this week. The BR, in a report to the June meeting of the Radiocommunication Advisory Group, proposed the consideration of measures in addition to the ITU Council decision on cost recovery for satellite network filings (CD June 10 p14). There’s been no discussion of the proposal in the corridors outside the Council meeting, an official said. Cost recovery has to do with the expenses incurred in the processing of new satellite network filings up to the time at which the information is entered in the MIFR, said the Russian submission we obtained. There’s “no denying” the problem of paper satellites exists and “has to be resolved,” Russia said. The BR proposal is aimed at ruling out the presence of paper satellites in the MIFR, Russia said. The BR’s “proposal is for the introduction a new fee model related to the expenses involved in maintaining frequency assignments during the lifetime of a satellite network, with the fee to be collected on an annual basis,” Russia said. BR action since 2009 to “purge” the MIFR by deleting unused networks has resulted in the cancellation of some 90 networks, Russia said. It said the measures are generally supported by administrations. Some administrations are concerned about the possibility the BR is deleting some genuine networks from the MIFR as a result of shortcomings in certain provisions of the Radio Regulations, Russia said. With the BR sending cancellation notices, shortcomings in the regulations are leading operators to resort “increasingly to third-party services for the temporary location of satellites in other orbital positions for confirming their bringing into use,” Russia said. Monitoring satellite orbits and emissions could be considered, Russia said, and the definition of “regular operation” could also be refined. The BR proposal could result in the MIFR not reflecting “the actual use of the spectrum/orbit resource,” rather the financial prosperity of those paying for entries, Russia said. The mere fact of paying to maintain a frequency assignment does not ensure the removal of “paper” networks, Russia said. One alternative approach would be to levy a fee only with respect to unused frequency assignments and not on those that have been brought into use, Russia said.