Resolution 80 again will be considered at the next World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-12), as it has since 1997. That resolution calls for recommendations on carrying out the international rules on use of satellite orbits and spectrum. The resolution has been amended a few times and remains on the 2012 agenda as item 8.1.3. It could be a springboard for reforms of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) satellite registration system but probably will lead to little fixes.

The resolution refers to Article 44 of the ITU constitution, which requires ITU members to minimize the number of frequencies they use. The constitution says countries should keep in mind that these frequencies and associated orbital positions are “limited natural resources” that must be used “rationally, efficiently and economically.” In particular, it says that this approach is required so that countries (or groups of countries) can have “equitable access” as well as “tak[e] account of the geographical situation of particular countries.”

Coming up with ways to comply with these broad goals is a tall order, as there are a lot of subtleties hidden in that language. What is “equitable access?” The meaning submerged in the phrase “geographical situations” deserves its own column. How can international rules interpret or require rational, efficient and economic treatment of scarce and immensely valuable natural resources?

The task is even greater because there are many other considerations to account for. For example, there is another entirely separate Resolution 2, revised at WRC in 2003, which refers to equitable use and says that all countries have “equal rights” to use frequencies and satellite orbits. What on Earth (or elsewhere) does that mean?

Each version of the resolution has called on ITU’s Radiocommunication Sector and the Radio Regulation Board (RRB) to consider how to carry out these basic principles. An annex to Resolution 80 dating back to 2000 lists difficulties that the RRB already had encountered in the registration process. Many of these remain, and the RRB has reported to each WRC on new measures for old problems.

In August, the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau (BR) issued a conference preparatory report that contains a page on actions taken under resolution 80. In December, the RRB issued its latest report to be considered at the upcoming WRC-12.

The BR noted that countries have guaranteed access to at least some orbital slots and frequencies through the planned bands set aside in RR annexes 30, 30A and 30B. It says that the sector has been working for 30 years to improve efficient use of the geostationary orbit, resulting in more than 200 operating communications satellites in orbit today. It also lists a number of improvements to the rules, ranging from improved sharing methodologies to revised station-keeping rules.

The RRB report goes more to the heart of due diligence issues. At the start, it refers to ongoing efforts to clean out the master international registry by deleting entries for satellites that exist only on paper. This effort comes out of RR 13.6, which calls on the BR to cancel recorded assignments when “reliable information” indicates that it has not been brought into use on time or is not being used at all in accordance with its claimed characteristics.

What precisely is reliable information? The RRB says that an internationally recognized monitoring system could help reconcile conflicting stories. This suggestion could help, but countries are not always eager for an external monitor to second guess their claims.

The RRB recognizes that the rules on how long a satellite must be located at a particular slot are nebulous but says that probably operating for a few months is good enough. This is not especially ambitious, but the RRB also says that establishing rigid criteria would result in more — rather than fewer — difficulties and appeals.

Another possible change is to tighten rules on when a country has to confess that its satellite is out of operation. The current requirement to notify the suspension of operation says only that it should be made as soon as possible.

A lot more could be said on the array of RRB suggestions and probably will be said at WRC-12. A fair prediction is that this resolution will reappear on the next WRC after that as the ITU searches for all the diligence that is due for satellite operations.

Gerry Oberst is a partner in the Hogan Lovells Brussels office.