FINAL REPORT - Stakeholders - Ofcom

There appear to be no clear patterns from the data collected; even an assumption that
fees are generally intended to cover costs cannot be justified from the spread of values
obtained. In principle, the Consultant is of the opinion that AIP should ideally be applied to
all radiocommunication services in order to encourage the efficient and effective use of
spectrum. However in view of the international aspects of these systems including safety
and operational considerations as well as single market and European issues an
innovative approach would be required to achieve such a development in Europe.
In the case of the aeronautical and maritime sectors and maximising the spectrum
resource available to them, the key issues would seem to be safety, market issues, the
European regulatory framework, treaty obligations, standards, the introduction of new
technology and last but not least the possible use of incentive pricing to realise spectrum
efficiency gains within the sectors.
A study of the issues involved has led the Consultant to suggest a voluntary process for
consideration by the concerned parties, in this case Ofcom, the MCA, CAA and other
stakeholders. The concept needs to be constructed in such a way that all parties feel they
are gaining from the situation. A voluntary UK certification approach is suggested in
parallel with the introduction of AIP to the aeronautical and maritime communities. The
current UK interface requirement would be maintained but extended to include the
voluntary category of equipment (for the R&TTE Directive) or a licence condition which
met more strenuous spectral efficiency targets, thus attracting significant fees/charges
discounts. Industry would have the benefit of developing a new generation of equipment
with a subsequent increase in sales and likely mandatory carriage requirements in the
future. Ofcom may gain spectrum but will need to promote the voluntary approach within
Europe as a first step towards the formal revision of a standard and/or the issue of a
Commission mandate to the standards bodies.
Note that a number of general assumptions have been made in this report regarding the
costs for new or upgraded equipment:
• For aeronautical costs, the value of aircraft downtime in not considered since, in
common with most other cost benefit assessments carried out in the community,
it is assumed that new or upgraded equipment is provided during routine
maintenance. However, it is acknowledged that in some cases additional
downtime may be necessary although detailed consideration of this is beyond
the scope of the current work.
• Aeronautical costs for airborne equipment include the cost of the “service
bulletin”, which provides all the procedures and documentation changes
necessary to effect a certifiable equipment upgrade, but not “re-certification
costs” which are negligible in comparison.
Page 11