The 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference: Technology and Policy Implications Page: 59

                                
Chapter 2-Outcomes and Implications for U.S. Radio Technology I 59

Table 2-1-WARC-92 High-Frequency Broadcasting Allocations
Frequency           Amount            Frequency          Amount
5900-5950 KHz          50 KHz         11600-11650 KHz        50 KHz
7300-7350 KHz          50 kHz         12050-12100 KHz        50 KHz
9400-9500 KHz         100 KHz         13570-13600 KHz        30 KHz
13800-13870 KHz        70 Khz
15600-15800 kHz       200 KHz
17480-17550 KHz        70 KHz
18900-19020 KHz       120 KHz
200 KHz                               590 KHz
SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1993.

Second, WARC-92 prohibited use of these
additional bands until a process for planning the
HF broadcasting spectrum has been completed.
This restriction is defined in Resolution 523,
which also calls for a WARC to establish
planning procedures. However, United States HF
broadcasters believe that planning will be mean-
ingless until more spectrum is allocated, The
United States entered a formal reservation in the
Final Acts of WARC-92 to protest the small
amount of spectrum allocated to HF broadcasting
and other limitations put on use of the bands.13
On its other HF proposals, the United States
was more successful. WARC-92 did agree that all
new bands should be required to use SSB
transmission, but did not accept the U.S. proposal
to advance the date for conversion of all HF
broadcasting to SSB from 2015 to 2007. The
conference did, however, adopt Recommendation
519, which recommends that the next WARC
again consider advancing the date for replacing
current double-sideband transmissions with more
spectrum-efficient SSB techniques. WARC-92
did not accept the U.S. proposal for aligning the
world's HF broadcasting bands around 7 MHz,
but Recommendation 718, proposed by Mexico
and supported by the United States, was adopted
that calls for a future conference to address the

issue. Finally, WARC-92 accepted U.S. propos-
als for reaccommodation procedures and second-
ary status for freed and mobile users in the HF
bands. WARC-92 also adopted Recommendation
520 that member governments take steps to shut
down HF broadcasters who are using frequencies
outside the designated HF broadcasting bands.
1 Discussion
DOMESTIC ISSUES
In the domestic preparation process for HF
broadcasting, the primary issue was how much
additional spectrum the United States should
propose to be reallocated for HF broadcasting
uses. This debate pitted private broadcasters and
several agencies of the Federal Government (U.S.
Information Agency (USIA)/VOA and Radio
Free Europe/Radio Liberty) against other U.S.
Government users, including the Departments of
Treasury (Coast Guard) and Justice (Federal
Bureau of Investigation).
During the preparations process, the FCC's
Industry Advisory Committee (IAC) recommended
that 2455 kHz of additional spectrum be allocated
for HF broadcasting. Defense and other gover-
nment HF users proposed far smaller amounts, and
a compromise of 1325 kHz was tentatively

13 "In the view of the United States of America, this Conference failed to make adequate provision for the HF needs of the broadcasting
service, particularly below 10 MHz, despite an earnest effort to do so. The IFRB's Report to the Conference shows that broadcasters'
requirements far outnumber the channels available in the bands between 6 and 11 MHz (where spectrum is urgently needed) and that planning
will not work effectively without additional and adequate HF spectrum. Therefore, the United States of America reserves the right to take the
necessary steps to meet the HF needs of i:s broadcasting service. ' International Telecommunication Union, *'Declarations," WARC-92
Document 389-E, Malaga-Torremolinos, Spain, Mar. 3, 1992, p. 29.