Supreme Court Act, 1959
R 385
Electronic Communications Act, 2005 (Act No. 36 of 2005)ICASANotice regarding Final Radio Frequency Assignment Plans for the IMT800 Band in terms of Regulation 3 of the Radio Frequency Spectrum Regulations, 20157. Coordination Requirements |
| 7.1 | Cross Border Frequency Coordination will abide by the Harmonised Calculation Method for Africa (HCM4A) Agreement. This follows the 3rd CRASA AGM that agreed that CRASA should implement the Cross Border Frequency Coordination Harmonised Calculation Method for Africa (HCM4A) Agreement. |
| 7.2 | The ECC had noted the need for greater understanding of the concept and need for harmonisation in the signing of the HCM4A Agreement by the SADC Member States if the implementation of the Agreement is to be effective. The ECC, therefore, agreed to convene a workshop on HCM4A and requested the CRASA Members to consider signing the agreement. These activities were part of the Frequency Planning Sub Committee (FPSC) Operations Plan 2015/16. |
| 7.3 | At the 5th CRASA AGM, Swakopmund, Namibia – 07-08 April 20162 the subject of Cross Border Frequency Coordination using the Harmonised Calculation Method for Africa (HCM4A) was discussed in detail, following similar efforts in Europe. The Resolution CRASA/AGM/15.16/07 stipulates, “The AGM urged CRASA Members to prioritise the motivation to their administrations who are yet to indicate their interest to sign the Harmonised Calculation Method for Africa (HCM4A), to do so as soon as possible”. |
| 7.3.1 | Therefore, coordination would follow the HCM4A as detailed in Sub-Saharan Africa Assessment Report on Harmonisation of ICT Policies in Sub-Saharan Africa2(HIPSSA). |
| 7.4 A | A harmonised calculation method (HCM4A) brings these benefits: |
| 7.4.1 | Based on HCM Agreement used in Europe; |
| 7.4.2 | Optimise spectrum usage; |
| 7.4.3 | Prevent harmful interferences; |
| 7.4.4 | Confer an adequate protection for stations; |
| 7.4.5 | Define technical provisions and administrative procedures; |
| 7.4.6 | Quick assignment of preferential frequencies; |
| 7.4.7 | Transparent decisions through agreed assessment procedures; |
| 7.4.8 | Quick assessment of interference through data exchange. |
| 7.5 | HCM4A involves all 4 sub regions of Africa. This means the HCM4A projects include performing a survey and a comparative analysis of existing administrative and technical procedures related to bilateral and multilateral cross-border frequency coordination agreements across the 4 geographical sub-regions as defined by the African Union (AU), namely: |
| 7.5.1 | Central Africa [Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Sao Tome, and Principe]; |
| 7.5.2 | East Africa [Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda]; |
| 7.5.3 | Southern Africa [Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe]; |
| 7.5.4 | West Africa [Benin, Burkina-Faso, Cape Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Togo]. |
| 7.6 | HCM4A also comes with a software tool for Sub-Saharan Africa3: |
| 7.6.1 | Optimise spectrum usage by accurate interference field strength calculations; |
| 7.6.2 | Establish general parameters, improvement, and supplementation of technical provisions, individual restrictions; |
| 7.6.3 | Establish models for computer-aided interference range calculations; |
| 7.6.4 | Harmonise parameters: objectively predictable towards transparent decisions. |
| 7.7 | Use of these frequency bands will require coordination with the neighbouring countries within the coordination zones of 6 kilometres in cases of LTE-to-LTE or 9 kilometres in cases of LTE-to-other technologies from the neighbouring country. The coordination distance is continuously being reviewed and these may be updated from time to time. |
| 7.8 | The following field strength thresholds have to be assured based on ECC/REC (11)04 for 790 - 862 MHz. Operator-to-operator coordination may be necessary to avoid interference |
FDD - In general, stations of FDD systems may be used without coordination with a neighbouring country if the mean field strength produced by the cell (all transmitters within the cell sector) does not exceed the value of 55 dBμV/m/5 MHz at a height of 3 m above ground at the border line between countries and does not exceed a value of 29 dBμV/m/5 MHz at a height of 3 m above ground at a distance of 9 km inside the neighbouring country.
LTE FDD - In the case that LTE is deployed on both sides of the border, the field strength levels can be increased to 59 dBμV/m/5 MHz at the border (0 km) and 41 dBμV/m/5 MHz at 6 km from the border line inside the neighbouring country for preferential PCI codes (discussed in Appendix C) or if centre frequencies are not aligned. For the use of non-preferential PCI codes and aligned centre frequencies, the trigger field strength level is 41 dBμV/m/5 MHz at the border.
It is not usually considered necessary to define preferential frequencies. If administrations / operators wish to agree on cross-border coordination based on preferential frequencies, while ensuring a fair treatment of different operators, then they can do so based on agreements / operator arrangements
The following table gives an overview of the trigger values of the field strength at a height of 3 m above ground for IMT FDD systems (“@” stands for “at a distance inside the neighbouring country”):
If neighbouring administrations wish to agree on frequency coordination based on preferential frequencies, whilst ensuring equitable treatment of different operators within a country, the Authority will add these to the mutual agreements.
Stations of IMT systems may be operated without coordination if the mean field strength produced by the cell (all transmitters within the sector) does not exceed the value of 15 dBμV/m/5 MHz at 10% time, 50% of locations at 3 metres above ground level at the border line.
| 7.9 | Technical analysis may be conducted by the Authority before an assignment is issued according to Appendix B based on an extract from ECC/REC (11)04. |
| 7.10 | Specific information regarding coordination may be found in Appendix C based on an extract from ECC/REC (11)05. |
| 7.11 | In the event of any interference, the Authority will require affected parties to carry out coordination. In the event that the interference continues to be unresolved after 24 hours, the affected parties may refer the matter to the Authority for a resolution. The Authority will decide the necessary modifications and schedule of modifications to resolve the dispute. The Authority will be guided by the Frequency Coordination Process as shown in Appendix D. |
| 7.12 | Assignment holders will take full advantage of interference mitigation techniques such as antenna discrimination, tilt, polarisation, frequency discrimination, shielding / blocking (introduce diffraction loss), site selection, and/or power control to facilitate the coordination of systems. |
__________________________________________________________
1 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi81bOFz6P2A hUwQUEAHe1YDIgQFnoECAIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fextranet.crasa.org%2Fzip-agm.php%3Fid%3D332&usg=AOvVaw1bVAuEnE8a2iJnP20F_b_2
2 https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Projects/ITU-EC-ACP/HIPSSA/Documents/FINAL%20DOCUMENTS/FINAL%20DOCS%20ENGLISH/hcm4a_agreeme nt.pdf.pdf
3PowerPoint Presentation (itu.int) https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Regional- Presence/AsiaPacific/Documents/Events/2017/May%20BKK/Presentations/HCM%20and%20HCM4A%20B KK%2020170504%20IB.pdf
4 Government Gazette Number 36000 (Notice 1070 of 2012)
