In response to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India?s (TRAI) recommendations on the Auction of Spectrum, the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) has questioned the rationale behind the recommendations. It has said that the guidelines favor dual technology license holders, thus distorting the level playing field with GSM operators in particular and perpetuating discrimination in the industry.
A statement issued by the industry body stated, ?The Supreme Court order dated February 2, 2012 clearly observed all the decisions taken during September 2007 ? March 2008 to be arbitrary, rendering them illegal. In spite of this order, while declaring the available spectrum for auction, TRAI has not included the GSM spectrum (1800 MHz) wrongfully allocated to the dual technology operators, without a public auction pursuant to a decision of October 19, 2007, which falls in the same period of September 2007 ? March 2008. The very decision on part of the regulator has resulted in further narrowing the spectrum available for auction and demonstrates discrimination and injustice towards the GSM players.?
?COAI had pointed out that the allocation of dual spectrum during the September 2007 to March 2008 is tantamount to allocation of second license to these companies in the same service area which otherwise is not allowed as per cross holding restrictions. The decision to allow the dual technology spectrum also falls in the same category for which the licenses have been struck down by the Supreme Court as it not only enabled the CDMA operators to obtain the startup GSM spectrum at Rs 16.58 billion, but also ignores the fact that those operators were not allowed to obtain the GSM spectrum by the way of separate license.?
?Therefore, the latest TRAI recommendations, not only has the GSM spectrum (1800 MHz) granted to dual spectrum operators not been included for cancellation, but their position is sought to be further legitimised by giving them a further 1.25MHz GSM spectrum.?
?Further, while the new operators will now have to pay over Rs 180 billion for the GSM spectrum, the dual spectrum players will continue to hold the same GSM spectrum at ten times a lower price, despite the fact that both were granted the spectrum pursuant to the same decision making process of DoT between the period September 2007 to March 2008.?
?COAI notes that on the one hand TRAI concludes that spectrum is technology specific but on the other hand notes that CDMA operators are offering 3G EVDO services. As TRAI is mandated under the Act to enforce terms and conditions of license, it is surprising that TRAI continues to overlook this ?illegality? being committed by the CDMA operators. COAI has repeatedly pointed out the huge commercial advantage being enjoyed by the dual spectrum operators, which have been estimated at around Rs 519.77 billion.?
?It is also a matter of deep concern that while TRAI is espousing the cause of ?technology neutrality? in the use of spectrum, it continues to discriminate against the GSM operators by allowing dual spectrum Operators to pay separate spectrum usage charges in 800MHz (for CDMA) and 1800MHz (for GSM) respectively. This is despite TRAI itself having recommended earlier that the spectrum should have been clubbed for the purpose of paying spectrum usage charges. COAI states that this discriminatory pricing can be expected to cost the government at least around Rs 250 billion-300 billion over a potential 20 year license period.?
?COAI would like to strongly state that the licenses have been technology neutral since 1999 when the mobile operators were released from being mandated to use only GSM technology and could use any other technology in their allocated spectrum. This was amply clarified by DoT in 2001 when it stated that ?The cellular services are to be operated by the existing licensees in designated cellular mobile telephone service band i.e., 890-915 MHz paired with 935-960 MHz. The operators have been permitted to operate the cellular mobile telephone service in any technology, however, the technology shall be digital and has to operate in the designated frequency band.? Thus the very basis and reasoning of TRAI to recommend ?refarming? to allow liberalized use is misplaced.?
?COAI believes that these recommendations by the TRAI would create serious problems of non-level playing field between GSM and dual technology operators and seeks to legitimise the discriminatory regime now in practice. The industry is at a critical stage and it is imperative that fair and unbiased policies are put into place, so as to help develop an industry that is key to the country?s socio-economic development and a significant contributor to the national exchequer.?
