AMATEUR RADIO and LICENCE FEES

Transcription

1 A Submission to the Ministry of Economic Development, Radio Spectrum Management Group: AMATEUR RADIO and LICENCE FEES From Fred Johnson MNZM (ARC067) Introduction This Submission is in response to the Radio Spectrum Licence Fees Review document that appeared on the Ministry s web page during February 2007 and which invited a response: Submitted by: Fred Johnson, MNZM, FIPENZ, CEng, MIET, ZL2AMJ (ARC067) 15 Field Street UPPER HUTT 5019 Phone: fredj@clear.net.nz This submission may be freely copied, or summarised, or distributed to third parties, or placed on the Ministry s web site for download, as the Ministry wishes. Earlier submissions There have been many earlier submissions in response to the Ministry s various invitations about the fees charged for amateur radio licences. It is not proposed to here review the history of how the present unsatisfactory situation developed. In recent times the Amateur Radio community has been actively expressing the difficulties that the imposed system has presented. The present fees Schedule 6 of the Radiocommunications Regulations 2001 (replaced in 2005) sets the current licence fees. See: The fees for Amateur are now shown in one category: OA1 Beacon, repeater or fixed link: Engineering certification fee $300, Annual administration fee $50 The Engineering certification fee is charged by RSM when RSM performs the certification process for a prospective licensee. However, a radio amateur volunteer, qualified and recognised as an Approved Radio Engineer, has in the true spirit of Amateur Radio provided the external engineering certification required for these installations. The Amateur Radio community has been fortunate to receive this service with such expert skills for a fee of $0.00. The only licence fee for radio amateurs and the cause of the fees problem is the $50 fee for each installation. Appendix 1 shows the extent of the present installations. These 321 installations, spread throughout the country, present a total annual licence fee requirement of $(321x50) = $ Using the 10% discount for payment on-line, this can be reduced to $ In this submission, this will be rounded for purposes of discussion to $15k. For administrative efficiency purposes, over a period of more than a decade, and with the instigation and support of RSM s predecessors, the named licensee on the majority of the licences has been changed to New Zealand s recognised national body for radio amateurs, the New Zealand Association of Radio Transmitters Incorporated (NZART). Appendix 1 shows the named licensees. It was also the original intention that all licences have the same birthday.

2 How the fees problem arises 2 Membership of New Zealand s recognized national body for radio amateurs, NZART, is voluntary. It provides an impressive list of services for its members: Being a voluntary organization, not all of New Zealand s radio amateurs are members. Statistics from RSM s records and from NZART over a long period of time have shown that about 40% to 50% of New Zealand s radio amateurs are members, being 38.8% on 21 March Information obtained from the International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) web page show that this is high by international standards for a voluntary national amateur radio society. Some non-members have been identified as persons who have obtained an amateur radio qualification at a young age and now have other interests and responsibilities. They may return to amateur radio later in life. It is believed that most keen and active amateur operators are members of NZART but age, financial circumstances, and many other social influences and distractions have their effects on some. Radio amateurs group together to establish repeater and other installations for their local area. Such groups may be informal or may be local Branches of NZART. The repeaters themselves are deliberately kept open to all licensed amateurs in the spirit of encouraging amateur radio interest and activity. These installations are available and are actively used in the community interest by the Amateur Radio Emergency Communications group (AREC). AREC Sections are attached to NZART Branches and receive information and training to provide an effective emergency communications service. The detail is at: Local resources are used to establish and to set up repeater installations. Equipment, finance, access to sites, and more, are all arranged by local enthusiasts. Equipment costs, running costs, site expenses, electricity bills, are extensive. To this must now be added $50 for the annual licence fee for each machine. Operators who are not members of the local clubs, and non-members of NZART, free-loaders, can enjoy the results of these local efforts without making any contributions of time or money to help with expenses. In earlier days an annual licence fee for all operators, with free fees for repeaters existed. Now the system has changed so that the free-loaders pay nothing at all and continue with free access to these machines while the providers of the machines have to find an annual $50 for their licence fee. This situation was not created by radio amateurs. It was created by the reversal of the licence fee arrangement by RSM. Instead of billing every operator, every repeater is now billed. Cross-subsidy was seen as a bad thing when amateur licence fees were carrying free repeaters, but a cross-subsidy situation has been imposed where repeaters are now carrying amateurs. The previous system lasted for many years and had few if any problems. This new system has many problems and difficulties. It is administratively very simple for RSM with its SMART system to bill NZART for annual repeater fees. In turn, and looking from the outside, it seems administratively simple for NZART to collect fees from the many groups operating established repeaters. Human nature being like it is, this imposed system is not simple. The total sum required, about $15k, represents about $7.50 for each NZART member if lumped in with the annual subscription. Objection to such an impost is widespread and threatening to Association membership numbers. It does not collect any contributions from the freeloaders. Spread across New Zealand s 5000 radio amateurs (in round figures), $15k represents about $3.00 per head if everyone contributes.

3 3 It is not possible for NZART to bill every radio amateur in New Zealand, demanding $3 from each. The sum is trivial and the cost of collection would be comparable to the sum collected. But, and more important, there is no way, by legislation or otherwise, to enforce those who don t pay to do so. Donation systems are only partially successful. It seems that an equitable system for billing is not possible. It is clear that it would make no sense to return to the earlier system of billing-all-amateurs with an annual licence fee charge irrespective of what that fee might be, or what it might be called. Some possible solutions Several solutions and partial-solutions are possible and include: 1. The fees for amateur radio apparatus to be reduced to zero as in the United Kingdom and in Canada. This recognises the position of Amateur Radio in the community as an emergency communications resource. A nation-wide series of amateur radio repeaters is in existence in New Zealand, established by local enthusiasts using their own skills with their own technical and financial resources. This is worthy of government recognition and support by freedom from fees as a public good and recognition of its potential at times of emergency. See Appendix 1. Unlike other mobile networks which are already committed to provide radio communications for support to their own definite and distinct purposes, the amateur emergency networks are available and are not already unencumbered with other traffic. The International Telecommunication Union s Recommendation ITU-R M , Disaster communications in the amateur and amateur-satellite services, encourages administrations to support amateur communications systems. A copy is attached here in Appendix It may be possible for some other government body to find resources to meet the total annual fee (from Emergency Management perhaps). In the course of seeking support for change to the fees system for radio amateurs, the Minister of Communications responded in a letter dated 26 October 2006 and said: The level of financial assistance required to fund repeater annual fees is not large, and external funding could perhaps be sought to cover equipment and infrastructure costs. In these words the Minister expresses sympathy to payments coming from an external source. In the same letter he suggested that funding could perhaps be sought from emergency management. It is the experience of some amateur radio groups that community funding is possible for oneoff hardware and installation costs but not for on-going annual fees to be paid to a government body. NZART has made approaches to the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management but at this time without any announced success. 3. The fee per installed machine to be reduced to (say) $20 so that the total becomes manageable in the meantime. With the on-line discount, the total then becomes about $5800, which could be more easily found from donations sought for the purpose. This reduction is discussed below. 4. A government requirement is for RSM to continue the process of eliminating cross-subsidies between fee categories. Action on that approach is believed to be within the authority of RSM to implement. The development of a General User Radio Licence (GURL) for amateur radio repeaters would seem to now be appropriate in the evolution of the SMART system. There are many variations possible, but one possible model is a GURL for repeaters in the amateur 2-metre and 70-centimetre bands, where 249 of the 321 machines are found. This leaves 72 more specialised machines for which the normal SMART licensing procedures would be followed. The total of these fees to be met, approx. $3240, could be met by donation, perhaps by a small donation request with each NZART subscription.

4 4 A study of the 2m and 70cm amateur bands shows that in New Zealand the Amateur Service can be considered to be a primary service in each of these bands with almost negligible effect on all other services. Documents used to reach this conclusion are: Article 5 of the International Radio Regulations, plus the following which are available from the Ministry s web site: PIB21: AMATEUR with limited government services. PIB21: RADIOLOCATION and Amateur MHz - with some other services secondary too. POLDOC Spectrum Band Plans 003 Issue 2: Only amateur, amateur satellite and radiolocation services will be supported in the band MHz. PIB 38: Not applicable, but Note 1: If amateur bands are shared with other services that are also subject to other agency recommendation provisions, a recommendation from the other agency is also required. Such a GURL would recognise the government s requirement to continue the process of eliminating cross-subsidies between fee categories. Actioning this approach is believed to be within the present authority of RSM. Such action is desirable until eventually the elimination of all fees for radio amateurs is attained, an action not possible by RSM itself, but one that requires the action of government, a separate matter for the attention of the Amateur Radio community. Considerations - a GURL for Amateur Radio Repeaters Preliminary studies have shown that a General User Radio Licence (GURL) for Amateur Radio repeaters is possible. There are a lot of points to be considered and there are many interactions where one decision reflects on several others. If a GURL is desirable, it is a decision for MED RSM, as is the model and the form of the GURL to be adopted. Here is one set of suggestions, it is just one of several possible models: 1. The GURL to provide for amateur radio repeaters on the 2m ( MHz) and 70cm ( MHz) bands only. 2. Repeaters to meet the requirements of a widely-publicised bandplan for each band. See: This can be developed to include suggestions following below. 3. Repeaters authorized by this GURL to be publicly-listed with their technical details (format etc. to be decided). 4. The list to be a page on the MED website (for reasons following below). 5. Control of the page (and hence recognition and authorisation) to be given to an RSM-selected ARC or ARE. This to be a person or organization external to the RSM and its staff. The NZART Frequency Management and Technical Advisory Group (FMTAG) is recommended in view of its effective and responsible long record-keeping history with the technical coordination of amateur-band repeaters. Note the apparatus standards expected at: (PIB 38 recognises NZART as an Agency. Presumably that Agency s bandplans are recognised as the national document. Presumably FMTAG is recognised as the national coordination centre.) It is understood that some of the RSM s international pages are externally administered so this concept of external-control of a page is not new. 6. Having only one RSM-authorised listing ensures that there is only one national New Zealand 2m and 70cm repeater coordination process which is determined by the RSM-selection for

5 5 maintenance of the web page. The list and the page are therefore externally maintained. All apparatus concerned must comply irrespective of ownership or name of the licensee of the apparatus. 7. The procedure for listing a repeater to be that already developed, well-tried and established by FMTAG and shown at: 8. Amateur-band fixed apparatus other than 2m and 70cm repeaters to also be coordinated by FMTAG and to be licensed by SMART entry. An annual licence fee will apply as may an initial engineering fee for the licensing service. 9. Provision to be made for short-term special-purpose (STSP) repeaters. (Further explanation follows below.) Provision to be made for (say) two two-frequency pairs on each band, 2m and 70cm, for any amateur to use on a non-interference ad-hoc and temporary basis for short-term repeaters including cross-band repeaters. 10. Failure to maintain a repeater in an acceptable working order will lead to it being removed from the list and hence no longer covered by the GURL, i.e. no longer licensed. 11. The list to be down-loadable in a printable form to be the information source for all users of amateur radio repeaters. There are some housekeeping issues to be brought forward: 12. Persons qualified to meet the requirements of the Radiocommunications Regulations (General User Radio Licence for Amateur Radio Operators) may use amateur radio repeaters i.e. visitors to NZ are included. 13. An entry additional to (8) in the General User Radio Licence for Amateur Radio Operators seems to be necessary to now permit the operation of repeater stations, i.e. permission is hereby given by this new GURL for repeaters to be established provided the additional details here are met. 14. In accordance with Article 3 of the International Radio Regulations, amateur repeaters must, as far as is compatible with practical considerations, comply with the latest ITU-R recommendations to the extent applicable to the amateur service. i.e. the same standards are required for repeaters as are required of amateur stations. No mention need be made of modes to be used or power levels. The Amateur Operator GURL and the ITU-R requirements may be catch-all to bring forward the same Operator requirements to apply to working with repeaters. Unwanted emission requirements to be brought forward. 15. Finally, repeaters are expected to comply with good practice and circumstances for mode and power level and exhibit same. Considerations the impact of a GURL for Amateur Radio Repeaters As shown in Appendix 1, a GURL of this model could apply to 249 existing repeaters. This in effect advances the government s desire for cross-subsidy to be further minimised. The fee burden on those who establish the 2m and 70cm repeaters is made the same as the free-loaders who inevitably use them. This leaves some 72 more specialised machines for which the normal SMART licensing procedures would be followed. The total of the fees for these machines is more readily obtainable than the present fees total and could be met by the promoters of the machines or by donations or by further actions considered below.

6 6 Considerations Short-term Special purpose (STSP) Repeaters STSP Repeaters are portable repeaters designed for rapid deployment and re-location to supplement Amateur Radio Emergency Communications (AREC) operations. There are some 29 Short-Term Special-Purpose (STSP) portable amateur repeaters licensed in NZ. All are licensed in the name of NZART. All are owned by AREC. The regulatory control and frequency provision for STSP Repeaters is a task of the NZART FMTAG. The operation, the location and the operating frequency selection of STSP Repeaters are tasks for AREC. Five sets of repeater frequencies have been set aside for STSP repeaters on the 2m band, with another five on the 70 cm band. These STSP machines spend most of their life in storage but are brought out and used by AREC in real events and in exercises. Because of the portable nature of these machines, and because they are for use in totally unexpected events and sites, they have not been coordinated with any fixed or permanent installations. But they use known and discrete frequencies. It should be noted here that individual items of general amateur radio transmitting apparatus are not themselves licensed. While an STSP machine is switched-off or disconnected, or in a decommissioned state, it seems clear that it does not require a licence any more than does any box of radio bits. The question of necessity or otherwise for a licence for an STSP machine only arises when the device is set up and transmitting. It only transmits under controlled conditions and then by its nature and purpose its whole operation is closely monitored. There are several points that lead to the conclusion that these AREC STSP machines could exist without each requiring a licence: None of them are installed at hill-top sites, so the engineering calculations required for licensing, in PIB38, shouldn't apply. The General User Radio Licence" for Amateur Radio Operators makes this provision: (7) In accordance with Article 25 of the International Radio Regulations, amateur operators are encouraged to prepare for, and meet the communication needs of, national and international disaster relief. However, the same GURL also includes the provision: (8) Amateur beacons, repeaters and fixed links may not be established pursuant to this licence. As more than one frequency is involved, and as there are many machines for temporary use at unexpected sites nation-wide; and as these are not coordinated with any other spectrum users; and as the machines spend most of their life in an off condition in storage, and when in use are closely supervised and monitored during the whole of their operating time; it seems more appropriate that they be considered as just another amateur radio transmitter, i.e. no licence being required for such individual hardware items. STSPs may use only STSP-designated frequencies in accordance with the published Band Plans. Permanent Fixed Location Repeaters are not to be established on these STSP-designated frequencies. The designated frequency selections not withstanding, and recognising their total portability, a proviso could be that STSP repeaters should not be used within 100m of permanently-fixed radiocommunication facilities.

7 Considerations - Cross-band repeaters 7 These are very simple light-weight devices and can be a single dual-band hand-held transceiver with suitable talk-through characteristics supported at pole-top height. They too require separate consideration. A description of cross-band repeaters can be found at: and at: As these two references show, these devices have been in use since the early-90 s, and because of their particular nature, being easily-implemented and their very infrequent operation, have never been licensed. There have been no known regulatory difficulties with these machines nor any reason for them to be brought to attention. It is not immediately known how many or where in NZ these devices are located because they can be easily fabricated at short notice. Again, their special characteristics and siting do not make any form of engineering coordination with other installations or services necessary. A cross-band repeater can be viewed as just another STSP repeater. With some AREC-used repeaters already licensed (STSP), and some not licensed (cross-band), the suggestion is convincing for licences for all repeaters in AREC service to not require licences. Indeed the suggestion is compelling for all amateur repeaters to be brought under a new GURL for amateur repeaters. Coordination of the repeaters under the GURL to generally be to the same technical requirements as SMART. Another long-standing matter could be solved by this proposed GURL. Two (say) repeater pairs on each band could be available for any amateur to use at any time for temporary and local repeater experiments and purposes, on a non-interference basis, without notification or FMTAG coordination. An authority may be needed for NZART or FMTAG to publish rules for repeaters including the temporary use of these [two] identified repeater pairs on the two bands. The published bandplans may require minor revision. About cross-subsidies The present unfortunate fees situation was not created by radio amateurs. It was created by the reversal of the licence fee arrangement by RSM. Instead of billing operators, repeaters are now billed. Cross-subsidy was seen as a bad thing when amateur licence fees were carrying free repeaters, but a cross-subsidy situation has been imposed where repeaters are now carrying amateurs. The previous system lasted for many years and had few if any problems. This new system has many problems and difficulties. A purpose of the 2006 RSM Cost Allocation Study is stated to identify fee options and to continue the process of eliminating cross-subsidies between fee categories. We now have radio amateurs who establish repeaters being expected to pay licence fees with no practical and equitable means for reclaiming such fees from the wider Amateur Radio community who are the users of them. Reducing the fee level With the present unbalanced all-fees-income-from-repeaters licences, any increase in the $50 licence fee at this time would be seen to exacerbate the matter and be contrary to the government s wishes of cross-subsidy minimising. A reduction in the fee, however, to (say) $20, would be seen to

8 8 help to relieve the present unfortunate circumstances while the whole matter can be more properly resolved by other recommendations made here below. Summary and unanswered consequences Based on the above reasoning, the present licence fee should be reduced to $20 while a General User Radio Licence (GURL) for amateur repeaters in the 2m and 70cm bands is introduced as suggested and while further separate approaches from the Amateur Radio community direct to government are made seeking zero fees for New Zealand s radio amateurs in line with the United Kingdom and Canada. There is fear in the Amateur Radio community that as the income to RSM from fees from radio amateurs decreases due to the introduction of another GURL, that there will be a consequential rise in the fees for licences for the residual machines, a rise that some think could be to prohibitive levels. Questions about this decrease-increase observation have been put to RSM staff and remain inadequately unexplained. It can only be confidently solved when the government introduces zero fees for New Zealand s radio amateurs in line with the United Kingdom and Canada. Recommendation That a General User Radio Licence (GURL) for amateur repeaters in the 2m and 70cm bands be introduced; with the fee for the remaining repeaters, beacons and links reduced to $20; while further separate and direct approaches to government are made seeking zero fees for New Zealand s radio amateurs in line with the United Kingdom and Canada. Appreciation The opportunity to make this submission on this important topic is appreciated. A meeting to discuss these issues will be welcome. Respectfully submitted, Fred Johnson, MNZM, FIPENZ, CEng, MIET, ZL2AMJ (ARC067) 9 March 2007 (Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 follow.)

9 9 Appendix 1 Amateur Radio Repeaters and Beacons (as at 26 February 2007): (Assumptions: Digipeaters included with Repeaters, ATV repeaters excluded, HF multi-band beacon entered once) Owner/licensee Device 2m 70cm Other Beacon Total Auckland VHF Group Beacon (3) 2m, 70cm, 23cm 3 3 Private Beacon (1) 10m 1 1 Private Repeater (2) 2m 2 2 New Plymouth Beacon (2) 2m, 70cm New Plymouth Repeater (2) 2m, 70cm NZART Beacon (27) 2 on HF, 5 on 2m, 4 on 70cm, 1 on 32cm, 2 on 23cm, 2 on 13cm, 2 on 9cm, 2 on 5cm, 1 on 3cm, 1 on 1.3cm NZART Digipeater (16) 2 on HF, 13 on 2m, 1 on 70cm NZART Repeater (3) 6m 3 3 NZART Repeater (114) 2m NZART Repeater (49) 70 cm NZART Repeater (58) 70 cm National System NZART Repeater (3) 23 cm 3 3 NZART Repeater (2) 70 cm ATV 2 2 NZART Repeater (30) 49 cm ATV Channel NZART Repeater (1) 23cm ATV 1 1 North Shore Digipeater (1) 2m 1 1 Otago Digipeater (1) 70 cm 1 1 Queenstown Digipeater (1) 2m 1 1 Queenstown Repeater (1) 2m 1 1 Te Puke Digipeater (1) 2m 1 1 Te Puke Repeater (2) 2m, 70cm Tararua Repeater (1) 2m 1 1 [e&oe] Total: Source: The Frequency Management and Technical Advisory Group (FMTAG) of the New Zealand Association of Radio Transmitters Incorporated (NZART). (Appendix 2 follows.)

10 10 Appendix 2 RECOMMENDATION ITU-R M Disaster communications in the amateur and amateur-satellite services (Question ITU-R 48/8) ( ) The ITU Radiocommunication Assembly, considering a) Resolution 36 of the Plenipotentiary Conference (Kyoto, 1994); b) Resolution 644 (Rev.WRC-2000) concerning telecommunications resources for disaster mitigation and relief operations; c) the adoption of the Tampere Convention on the provision of telecommunications resources for disaster mitigation and relief operations by the Intergovernmental Conference on Emergency Telecommunications from June 1998; d) ITU-D Resolution 34 (Istanbul, 2002) (WTDC-02) on telecommunication resources in the service of humanitarian assistance; e) ITU-D Recommendation 12 (Istanbul, 2002) (WTDC-02) regarding consideration of disaster telecommunication needs in telecommunication development activities, recommends 1 that administrations encourage the development of amateur service and amateursatellite service networks capable of providing communications in the event of natural disasters; 2 that such networks be robust, flexible and independent of other telecommunications services and capable of operating from emergency power; 3 that amateur organizations be encouraged to promote the design of robust systems capable of providing communication during disasters and relief operations; 4 that amateur organizations be allowed to exercise their networks periodically during normal non-disaster periods.