Harmful Interference Charges Between U.S., Cuba Flare at ITU
GENEVA - Counterclaims of harmful interference involving the U.S. and Cuba resurfaced at the ITU Radio Regulations Board meeting here. Also on the agenda are 2 satellite issues.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Allegations of harmful interference by both nations are being considered, RRB Chmn. Aboubakar Zourmba said. In papers filed to the RRB and in statements at the Nov. ITU quadrennial conference, Cuba said U.S. military craft in international airspace have created interference on frequencies Cuba listed in the international master frequency register, sources said. The U.S. used the same forums and mechanisms to complain of repeated, ongoing and long-standing harmful interference to U.S. stations’ HF broadcasts by Cuba, sources said.
The U.S. asked ITU-R for aid on the alleged Cuban harmful interference, Zourmba said. ITU-R asked Cuba for technical details. The RRB is waiting for those, perhaps available for the next meeting. The RRB will make recommendations on how addressing the interference, sources said. The RRB agreed this week to write to the U.S. administration encouraging it to continue to collaborate with Cuba and to provide results of the studies underway in the U.S. for alternative ways to deal with the alleged interference, Zourmba said.
Interference cases usually are resolved between administrations, which can ask ITU-R for technical assistance. If additional detail doesn’t solve them, cases go to the RRB, officials said. ITU-R has fielded 14 new charges of harmful interference since the last RRB meeting, sources said. Only 2 older cases went to the RRB: Cuba/U.S. and Italy/Slovenia, sources said. Both cases are terrestrial, involving sound and TV broadcast, Zourmba said.
Retention of a 7-year limit on launching a satellite after filing an advance publication information (API) is being considered at the meeting, Zourmba said. Nations offer varied reasons for not respecting the 7-year limit, asking RRB for extensions, sources said. For example, Indonesia must submit due diligence data to make sure one satellite isn’t a paper satellite. Last meeting, Indonesia said it didn’t send due diligence data, causing the ITU-R to decide to cancel the network. Indonesia brought a case before the RRB, which said because the satellite is for safety purposes, ITU-R can accept the due diligence data late. That adversely affected a Thai satellite. Thailand asked the current RRB meeting to cancel a previous decision to allow Indonesia’s late diligence data, requiring Thailand to coordinate with Indonesia.
A case between the U.K. and Argentina likely will go to the World Radio Conference (WRC), among 4 or 5 to referred to the WRC, officials said. The RRB, which meets through Feb. 16, also will do administrative work and prepare for the WRC.
Venezuela failed to respond to requests to transfer the notifying administration for the Assn. of Andean Satellites to Colombia. Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru replaced Venezuela with Colombia as the notifying administration to the ITU for coordination and notification by the Assn. in Aug., Zourmba said. The problem is that both Colombia and Venezuela have to inform ITU-R about the change, and Venezuela hasn’t, so Columbia can’t be recognized as notifying administration for that satellite network, sources said.
Via, ITU-R, the RRB wrote to Venezuela in Dec., sources said. The problem landed in the RRB because ITU-R can’t solve it, and the issue is ongoing, sources said. No decision will be reached this week on recognizing Colombia, but discussions in the RRB meeting focus on a follow-up letter and whether RRB can fix a delay to Venezuelan administration, Zourmba said. Allowing Venezuela a fixed delay to respond might let the RRB act, but no specific provision either in the Radio Regulations or the ITU constitution or convention seems to justify giving an administration a delay, sources said.