Table 1 : Responses Received Regarding Interference Cases in 2014

Working Group FM / Based on (Doc. FM(15)167)
Output WGFM#83
83rd Meeting
Dresden, Germany, 18-22 May 2015
Date issued: / 13 May 2015
Source: / FM 22
Subject: / Summary of the Questionnaire to CEPT Administrations on Interference Statisticsfor 2014

Group membership required to read? (Y/N)
Summary:
This document contains the summary and evaluation by FM22 of the answers received from 39CEPT administrations including a comparison with the results of the previous year to provide information on trends such as increase/decrease of the amount of interference in some categories. This evaluation can be utilised as background information for decision making. It may also help to indicate applications where more detailed investigations may be considered helpful.
WGFM#83 in May 2015 endorsed this summary.
The interference statistics questionnaire will be repeated in 2016 for the cases reported in 2015.
Background:
FM 22 work program. The questionnaire was sent out at the end of January 2015 and the deadline was set to early April giving administrations about 2 months to respond.

Introduction

The questionnaire was submitted to the 48 CEPT countries. Contributing countries are highlighted in bold letters in Table 1.

Albania
Andorra
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belarus
Belgium
Bosnia Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Liechtenstein / Lithuania
Luxembourg
Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)
Malta
Monaco
Montenegro
Moldova
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russian Federation
San Marino
Serbia
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
The Netherlands
The United Kingdom
Turkey
Ukraine
Vatican City

Table 1: Responses received regarding interference cases in 2014

39 CEPT administrations provided a response. This includes two additional countries which did not provide a response in 2013 (Turkey, Russian Federation). In addition, Kosovo*[1] (not a CEPT administration) provided a response (included in the Annex ‘responses’ for information).

Responses from the 39 CEPT administrations reporting about 22 168 interference cases in 2014 have been received. Comparing the responses of the 37 CEPT administrations who did provide a response in 2013 and 2014, there is a slight increase from about 18 500 to 19 000 interference cases (< 3%).

Reported number of cases

The spreadsheets in Attachments 1 and 2 show the number of reported cases (victims) and the number of sources of interference. The number of cases (victims) is also shown in Figure1.

Figure 1: Number of interference cases by radio services (victims) in 2014.

Figure 2: Number of interference cases by radio services (sources) in 2014.

Figure 3: Percentage of interference into public mobile networks in 2014, by country

Figure 4: Percentage of interference into terrestrial video broadcasting (UHF) in 2014, by country

Figure 5: Percentage of interference into terrestrial sound broadcasting in 2014, by country

Figure 6: Percentage of interference into land mobile (PMR), professional telecommand and telemetry systems

in 2014, by country

In 2014 the highest number of interference cases was in the category ‘public mobile networks’.

Reporting Year / 2012 interference case / 2013
interference cases / 2014
interference
cases
Broadcast Reception / 5919 / 4187 (about 30% decrease) / 5148 (includes Turkey and Russia)
(4954 for 37 CEPT countries (w/o Turkey and Russia) – comparison 2013-2014, i.e. about 18% increase)
Public Mobile Networks / 4621 / 4192 / 6212 (includes Turkey and Russia)
(4826 for 37 CEPT countries (w/o Turkey and Russia) – comparison 2013-2014, i.e. about 15% increase)

Table 2: Interference cases (top categories) in 2012, 2013 and2014

The increase in these two categories was largely compensated by less reported interference cases in other categories.

Excel Overview (Victims - 2014)

Excel Overview (Source - 2014)

About 19 650 interferences cases (source) were reported of which about 6 000 cases vanished / source remained unknown.

Victims / 2013
(37 countries w/o Turkey and Russia) / 2014
(37 countries w/o Turkey and Russia) / 2014
(39 countries)
Maritime including inland waterways (HF, VHF, UHF, EPIRB, AIS etc.) / 269 / 248 / 254
Fixed service / 595 / 575 / 1122
Land mobile (PMR), professional telecommand and telemetry systems / 2244 / 2091 / 2422
Public mobile networks (GSM/IMT/PAMR) / 4192 / 4826 / 6212
Terrestrial Video Broadcasting UHF / 1644 / 2609 / 2639
Terrestrial Video Broadcasting VHF / 582 / 59 / 168
Terrestrial Sound Broadcasting / 1840 / 2286 / 2341
Satellite broadcasting receivers / 121 / 101 / 114
Land and satellite navigation systems as well as radiolocation (civil) / 158 / 158 / 163
Aeronautical services (communication, navigation and surveillance) / 1823 / 1738 / 1875
Radio amateur service / 1266 / 1174 / 1220
SRD applications including PMSE (ERC Rec. 70-03) / 1333 / 1202 / 1214
Satellite services (MSS, FSS, not counting SAT Broadcasting to home) / 34 / 48 / 116
Others Radio applications / 1731 / 1567 / 1731
Illegal use of radio devices / N/A / N/A / N/A
Non radio devices (electric appliances) / 665 / 298 / 577
Total / 18497 / 18980 / 22168

Table 3: Interference cases in 2013and2014 (victims)

Particularities by administrations

Belarus / Only 7 cases of interference have been reported.
Belgium / 40 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
The figures of cases and the figures of sources are nearly identical.
Bulgaria / 59 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
Croatia / 60 % of the reported cases concern terrestrial sound broadcasting
530 times was terrestrial sound broadcasting the sources of interference.
Czech Republic / 71 % of the reported cases concern terrestrial video broadcasting (UHF) – 1276 cases. This is the main reason for the changes in distribution of interferences cases amongst the terrestrial broadcasting (UHF, VHF, sound) compared to 2013.
43 % of the interference cases reported by all administrations in the category ‘satellite broadcasting receivers’ can be found in Czech Republic.
Denmark / Did only provide a total number of interference cases for the terrestrial broadcast categories (Note: ECO distributed this in approximate proportions for the statistics).
France / 57 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
29 % of the reported cases concern broadcasting
Germany / 24 % of all interference cases throughout CEPT and 38 % of cases in the category ‘professional land mobile (PMR), telecommand and telemetry systems’ throughout CEPT were reported by Germany.
Greece / 37 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
26% of the reported cases concern aeronautical services
sources were illegal use of radio devices
Hungary / 48 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
36 % of the reported sources were illegal use of radio devices
Latvia / 60 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
Malta / The figures of cases and the figures of sources are identical.
Moldova / 27 out of 37 of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
Montenegro / 72% of reported cases concern public mobile networks
The Netherlands / 21 % of the reported cases concern radio amateurs
Portugal / 36 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
49 % of the reported sources were public mobile networks
Romania / 68 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
Russian Federation / 48% of all reported cases in fixed services category throughput CEPT
Serbia / 72 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
Spain / 1121 cases were reported but only 17 sources of interference
60 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
Sweden / 61 % of the reported cases concern public mobile networks
UK / 40 % of the all reported cases (source) throughout CEPT on radio amateurs
Ukraine / 51 % of the reported cases concern the fixed service

Table 4: Particularitiesby administrations

Particularities by radio services

Maritime including inland waterways (HF, VHF, UHF, EPIRB, AIS etc.) / HOL, D, BEL and NOR: 64% of all interference cases (62% in 2013)
Fixed service / UKR, HOL and RUS: 86 % of all interference cases
Land mobile (PMR), professional telecommand and telemetry systems / D: 38 % of all interference cases (51% in 2013 – decrease due to Russian response)
Public mobile networks (GSM/IMT/PAMR) / Biggest category, 28 % of all interference cases
Terrestrial Video Broadcasting UHF / CZE, F, D, I and E: 51 % of all interference cases. Unusual high number in Czech Republic. (2013: 71%)
Croatia and Italy (and also Malta) suffer from the lack of coordination.
Terrestrial Video Broadcasting VHF / RUS65 % of all interference cases
Terrestrial Sound Broadcasting / D and G: 50 % of all interference cases
Croatia and Italy (and also Malta) suffer from the lack of coordination.
Satellite broadcasting receivers / Very low number of cases in total (114 cases)
Land and satellite navigation systems as well as radiolocation (civil) / CZE: 65 % of all interference cases due to permanent interference into weather radars at 5.6 GHz (see also ECC Report 192) (2013: 68%)
Aeronautical services (communication, navigation and surveillance) / D and G: 67 % of all interference cases (2013: 62%)
The high number in Germany is mainly because of unintentionally activated emergency location transmitters.
Radio amateur service / D, NL and G with higher number of interference cases (70% of all cases)
SRD applications including PMSE (ERC Rec. 70-03) / D: 54 % of all interference cases (2013: 42%)
Satellite services (MSS, FSS, not counting SAT Broadcasting to home) / Very low number of cases in total (116 cases)
Others Radio applications / D: 69 % of all interference cases, mainlyinterference into cable TV and into other telecommunications networks (2013: 70%)
Illegal use of radio devices / 1989 cases were reported as source of interference (2013: 866). Russia reported 817 cases but total figure in 2014 suggests a certain increase of about 35% (37 countries comparison 2013-2014)

Table 5: Particularities by radio services

Question 2: Specific interference cases?

Country / Are there specific interference cases for which you would like to provide additional explanations or you would like to highlight special aspects with regard to the reported interference cases? If yes, please inform/explain specific interference problems here. Please include as much as possible information about the source and the interference scenario.
Austria / Cases of cordless telephones, fully harmonized (EU) DECT Standard, CE certificated – sudden dysfunctional frequency shifting, after working correctly for some years, up to the national UMTS frequency spaces caused interference problems with mobile communication companies in UMTS frequency space.
Belgium / Our dB system is not able to get statistics on the interference sources
Bosnia and Herzegovina / PMR systems causing problems on CATV channels.
Video surveillance equipment is causing problems in UMTS range
Bulgaria / The most specific interference cases during 2014 were in the frequency bands of one of the Bulgarian mobile operator from DECT 6.0 telephones, bought in USA and Canada. The specific in these cases was that finally the working frequency range by the licence of that operator was changed at the request of the operator.
Croatia / .We would like to highlight ongoing problem with long lasting interferences form Italy along coast line on terrestrial video VHF/UHF and sound broadcasting bands. During 2014 we have reported 87 interference sources to terrestrial video broadcasting on UHF and 525 interference sources to terrestrial sound broadcasting in VHF.
Czech Republic / 1. Using frequencies of meteorological radars by WiFi devices (see Land navigation systems and radiolocation) without DFS.
2. Unwanted radiation of active television antennas of different types (Strong, Sencor, Skymaster, Hama, Vivanco, Elvolve).
Finland / Eight (8) cases of distress and safety services interference were reported and investigated in the year 2014. Of these five (5) were treated as urgent.
800 MHz band operators have obligations in the network concession to remove interference to terrestrial tv-reception. The operators have removed 6000 cases of interference mainly by installing filters to the consumers' antenna systems.
Illegal mobile repeaters have been an interference source also in 2014. Five cases of interference due to illegal repeaters were reported to the police.
Wireless weather stations are often the source of other SRD device interference.
France / In France, the interferences sources identified into public mobile networks are mainly:
- Indoor and outdoor TV antenna amplifiers (over 30 %) ;
- CE and non CE marked DECT phones (over 25 %) ;
- Repeaters causing disruptions into these mobile networks (over 15 %).
The total number of cases of electromagnetic compatibility default (antenna amplifier TV, cable network and other non-radio systems) represent 45 % of the identified sources of interference in mainland France.
French meteorology
The number of cases of interference in the 5 GHz radar meteorology band remains constant compared to the previous year. Some twenty cases have been reported. But their instructions by the technical services take longer due to non-permanent disturbances observed in 2014.
Most of interference due to malfunctions WLAN network equipment is related to setting and activation of the DFS. Note that spurious emissions from equipment ODU (OutDoor Unit) radio links were the cause of two cases of interference.
French Civil aviation
The majority of the fifteen cases of jamming the VHF band of Civil Aviation in France is located in the southern part of the territory. The filtering of FM transmitters is the recommended solution to end this type of disturbance. Defaulting aeronautical fixed transmitters on airports are also the source of the interference of the VHF band.
FYROM / Department for frequency control and monitoring received two reports form Aeronautical service M-NAV Macedonia that two channels 119.375MHz and 120.015MHz had interference. Department for frequency control and monitoring find out that interference source channel frequency 119.375MHz comes from neighbour country Albania(intermodulation product from Radio Emanuel city Korca).The colleague form Albania collaborated professionally and they remove the interference time effectively. The interference source channel frequency 120.015MHz comes from neighbour country Greece(intermodulation product from Radio Kanali 3 FM city Florina).The colleague form Albania not collaborated and they remove the interference by ITU-Terrestrial department suggestion.
Germany / The difference between the sum of “Number of reported cases (victims)” and the “Total number of cases” is mainly due to interference into cable TV and into other telecommunications networks.
Interference caused by Aeronautical services (communication, navigation and surveillance) mainly because of unintentionally activated emergency location Transmitters.
Greece / During 2014 we had a big number of interference cases caused by DECT 6.0 phones (same problem as 2013)
Italy / Interferences to meteorological radar (frequency 5625 MHz) caused by R-LAN operating on the 5 GHz, not configured correctly.
Latvia / In the recent years Electronic Communications Office has been increasingly receiving applications concerning interference in the 1920 - 1940 MHz coverage zone of the UMTS mobile phone base station. The radio interferences are caused by radio equipment (cordless stationary phones and various computer appliances) that operates under the DECT 6.0 standard and is not designed for use in Europe (including Latvia), but in USA and Canada, which have a different distribution of radio frequency spectrum.
Lithuania / It was investigated more than 10 cases in which dozens of cars were blocked by nearby faulty car radio control security system. (433 MHz).
Malta / The interference source of the reported cases under Terrestiral Video Broadcasting UHF and Terrestrial Sound Broadcsting were uncoordinated foreign transmitting stations.
Norway / Most of the victims listed under "Others Radio applications" are metrological radars operating in the 5.5 GHz band. The source of interference is RLAN.
Romania / We still consider the mitigation techniques from ETSI EN 301893 series of standards quite not enough efficient, as we experience harmful interferences from 5.5 GHz HIPERLAN equipments on a meteorological radar since 2008 until present. Comment: DFS (Dynamic Frequency Selection, for example, is somehow a DIGITAL method, from the point of view it's based on a threshold criterium. In the meantime, the radar receiver has an ANALOG behaviour. Keeping in mind that the potential harmful links are randomly deployed, how can we suppose that the threshold criterium (which refers, in the standard, to a unique Rx level) will be satisfied by all HIPERLAN equipments at a time, so that they'll ALL shift from the radar channel when the radar bursts?
Serbia / Self-oscillated antenna preamplifiers for terrestrial video broadcasting UHF
Slovenia / A lot of radio interferences to weather radars in 5GHz band. The source of interference were wireless lan routers in 5GHz.
Spain / There is an increasing in interference cases on meteorological radars in 5 GHz band. The main interferences sources are RLANs (Radio Local Area Network)
Sweden / The trend in Sweden is that the number of interference cases related to Public Mobile Networks (cellular networks) increase and the number of interference cases related to Land Mobile systems decrease. According to the current Swedish regulation a mobile repeater can be used in a public mobile network in Sweden provided that an agreement with the relevant public mobile network operator has been established. Such agreement may include terms and conditions concerning what kind of repeater equipment that should be used and how it should be configured. During the last year interference cases related to public mobile networks are the main part of reported spectrum problems in Sweden. The public mobile network operators report new cases of interference into their networks to the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority several times every week. The technical investigations prove the causes to be approximately distributed as follows: 50% where mobile repeaters are not configured in a correct way and without a valid agreement with the licensee, i.e. the public mobile network operator. 25% where DECT telephones, which are technically malfunctioning or alternatively not destined for the European market (i.e. using a non-designated frequency range), are used. 25% other, e.g. self-oscillating tv antenna amplifiers in an adjacent frequency band.

Table 6: Specific interference cases

Question 3: Illegal Use

Country / What kind of illegal use has caused radio interference (name examples, main problems with illegal use, e.g. jammers, pirate broadcasting, other illegal use)?
Austria / Cases of private GSM/UMTS repeaters (caused interference problems with mobile communication companies to certain antenna sections).
Belgium / DECT 6
Bosnia and Herzegovina / Illegal use of DECT devices produced for the US market
Bulgaria / As it could be seen in the number of cases in the table above there were reported such cases of illegal use of radio devices (6), but according to the results of inspections everything was legal or unusable equipment left in the premises or on the roof.
Cyprus / The most common case of interferences are the GSM amplifiers and repeaters. At the audio broadcasting the interferences occur by illegal transmissions.
Czech Republic / There is inserted in the table the number (9x DECT6.0, 1x RLAN - 5140 MHz, 1x bugging device, 1x GSM jammer) of illegal use that caused interference.
Denmark / GSM Repeaters, Wireless DECT telephones imported from USA.