BoR (18) 237

Common Position on information to

consumers on mobile coverage

6 December 2018
 BoR (18) 237

Contents
1. Introduction and objective ........................................................................................................... 2
1.1. Context for informing consumers on mobile coverage ........................................................... 3
1.2. Key elements of mobile coverage information from consumer perspective ........................... 4
2. Technical specifications for providing relevant and comparable information on mobile
coverage to European consumers .............................................................................................. 5
2.1. The Common Position (CP1) .................................................................................................. 5
2.2. Further elaboration ................................................................................................................. 6
3. The use of signal predictions for mobile coverage estimation................................................ 8
3.1. The Common Position (CP2) .................................................................................................. 8
3.2. Further Elaboration ................................................................................................................. 8
4. Ensuring the accuracy of coverage information provided to the public .............................. 10
4.1. The Common Position (CP3) ................................................................................................ 10
4.2. Further Elaboration ............................................................................................................... 10
5. Availability and presentation of mobile coverage information .............................................. 11
5.1. The Common Position (CP4) ................................................................................................ 11
5.2. Further Elaboration ............................................................................................................... 12
Appendices .......................................................................................................................................... 14
Appendix 1. Summary of responses ............................................................................................. 14
Appendix 2. Thresholds used in European countries to qualify if there is outdoor coverage or not
(covered / not covered) ................................................................................................................. 30
Appendix 3. Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ 32

1
 BoR (18) 237

1. Introduction and objective

In fulfilling their duties, National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) and competent authorities
(CAs) monitor mobile coverage of licensed spectrum in bands identified for International
Mobile Telecommunications (IMT). Each NRA uses different means to provide information
on national mobile coverage, which may constitute an obstacle to a consistent approach in
presenting mobile coverage both for public policy and for consumer information. In the latter
case, there is a greater emphasis on accessibility of mobile coverage information via
different means (e.g. a map, apps, etc.). There are benefits to achieve a common
understanding on how mobile coverage can be defined and measured for information
purposes, see section 1.1.

In 2017, BEREC conducted a public consultation on a preliminary report in view of a

Common Position (CP) on monitoring mobile coverage. This report aimed at facilitating a
common understanding through better defining key concepts, baselines and accessibility of
information; and fostering a consistent approach on how mobile coverage information can be
made available and understandable among NRAs and to the public throughout Europe.

Following on from last year’s work and taking into account the comments received from the
public consultation, BEREC continued its initial work of 20171 with the aim of establishing a
set of future-looking CPs that achieve a common understanding on how to provide
information on mobile coverage, and how it can be defined, measured and reported.

In 2018 and to meet this aim, BEREC gathered expertise from European NRAs through a
survey entitled “Practices in Europe Regarding Monitoring Mobile Coverage”. BEREC
received the contribution of 33 NRAs which constitutes a solid basis that depicts a clear
picture of the current state of methods to monitor mobile coverage in Europe.

As the BEREC preliminary report (BoR (17) 186) 2 already stated the answers of the
consultation pointed out two main reasons why mobile coverage monitoring would be
necessary, namely,

- to assist in ensuring mobile network operators (MNOs) meet their coverage obligations.
Some NRAs monitor the level of mobile coverage provided by operators to assess if
they comply with any relevant coverage conditions and obligations set out in their
licences. This can help ensure that mobile spectrum is used to deliver greater
geographic and population coverage in particular in rural areas, which can have a
positive impact on the reduction of the digital divide.

1 BEREC launched a consultation on its draft Preliminary report on monitoring of mobile network coverage on 11
October, 2017, in which it sought input from stakeholders, particularly, on the list of characteristics for mobile
coverage and on the key features of maps identified in the draft Preliminary report.
2 https://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec/public_consultations/7300-draft-berec-
preliminary-report-in-view-of-a-common-position-on-monitoring-mobile-coverage

2
 BoR (18) 237

- to provide highly-accessible independent and reliable information on the state of mobile

coverage in their respective countries. Such information is often made available by the
NRAs to consumers; respective policy makers and/or national governments; the
European Commission; industry and wider public.

In this document, BEREC will focus on the latter, concentrating on facilitating the provision of
useful information to consumers, leaving the principles of mobile coverage obligations and
associated specification processes outside of its scope.

In order to achieve this goal and as an outcome from studying the range of current NRA
practices, BEREC provides in this document the following four common positions on
informing consumers about mobile coverage:

- CP1 – Technical specifications for providing relevant and comparable information on

mobile coverage to European consumers;

- CP2 – The use of signal predictions for mobile coverage estimation;

- CP3 – Ensuring the accuracy of coverage information provided to the public; and

- CP4 – Availability and presentation of mobile coverage information.

These CPs have been developed for outdoor coverage of mobile services only. They are
underpinned by the initial BEREC work of 2017.

1.1. Context for informing consumers on mobile coverage

Publication of mobile coverage information at regular intervals by the NRAs gives an
overview of the development of the different electronic communication services provided
over mobile networks. This greater transparency on the coverage provided by different
operators can help promote more competition between operators with regard to delivering
better coverage and possibly future investments in network coverage to the benefit of
consumers. Such publications are often in the form of numerical data usually contained in
report published by the NRAs on a regular basis (e.g. annually).

From consumer perspective, publishing easy-to-access, accurate, reliable and comparable

information increases transparency and helps consumers to know if they receive the service
they bought or to be empowered to make informed decisions before subscribing to a MNO –
these have an overall effect of promoting competition. To date, the use of coverage maps
has, for some NRA, been the preferred method of providing mobile coverage information.

In this context, mobile coverage can be predicted using the following two methods described
in a) and measured using b)

a) based on the received signal strength or service availability - estimating and

predicting mobile coverage: this is normally based on theoretical calculations and
the results are displayed in a specific map format (e.g. resolution, colour coding,
etc.) taking into account predetermined assumptions (e.g. technology, propagation

3
 BoR (18) 237

modelling, user specific parameters, pre-specified probability of successful service

reception)

b) Field measurements of signal and/or the service availability in specific location and
time taking into account equipment used to perform such measurement. This can
be done for example by using calibrated equipment. The results of the
measurements can also be represented in a specific map format.

1.2. Key elements of mobile coverage information from consumer

perspective
The following set of elements is of relevance to consumers from mobile coverage
information point of view.

1. The services:

a) Data services, which are split into two subcategories, namely

o Basic quality service sufficient to carry out web browsing, email, satnav,
Internet banking, audio download and social networks (excl. videos).

o Good quality service sufficient to carry out most data functions, video content
in social networks, video streaming and high-quality audio streaming.

b) Voice service (noting that voice is provided over data in some technologies)

2. The location where services are consumed:

a) Outdoor

b) Indoor 3 (home/office/shopping malls/etc.; within sight of a window or deep indoor).

c) While travelling (car/train/underground/tram/ferries/etc.)

3. The device 4:

a) Feature phone

b) Smartphone

c) Tablet

3 BEREC recognises that indoor coverage depends on the type of building material used and that other
connectivity solutions may be available to consumers indoors (e.g. native Wi-Fi calling or mobile repeaters, or
both).
4 BEREC recognises that along with the large number of consumer devices used for accessing mobile services,

different factors may affect consumer’s quality of experience such as handset sensitivity and performance by
radio frequency band. For example, one NRA published a technical report on the transmission performance of
71 handsets in its market, which also showed differences in performance between left-hand and right-hand
usage scenarios (ComReg Document 18/05, June 2017)

4
 BoR (18) 237

d) Mobile broadband device (e.g. 4G router)

However, in order to provide a data set which is easy to understand by consumers, coverage
information presented to consumers should be based on a limited number of combinations of
these elements that are deemed most relevant to consumers.

2. Technical specifications for providing relevant and

comparable information on mobile coverage to
European consumers

2.1. The Common Position (CP1)

BEREC recommends that, when providing coverage maps to consumers, NRAs use a
coverage definition based on service (e.g. voice or data) availability, i.e. the probability
of successful service reception: a given area is declared “in-coverage” if the service in that
area is available with a pre-specified minimum rate of success. Service availability has the
advantage of being more easily understandable for consumers and is expressed as a
percentage of the number of attempt to access a given service.

Service availability depends on many parameters such as signal strength, cell loading,
capacity, backhaul, etc.

Signal-strength is relatively easy to calculate and measure in the field. The metrics for
measuring signal power are dependent on the mobile technology and are as follows:

- RxLev (Received Signal Level) for GSM (also referred as 2G),

- RSCP (Received Signal Code Power) for UMTS (also referred as 3G), and
- RSRP (Reference Signal Received Power) for LTE (also referred as 4G).
Due to large variations in handset RF performance as shown by research 5 and the
dependency on other factors such as local market penetration, BEREC recommends that
NRAs use a neutral receiving device 6,7 when calculating coverage predictions using the
above metrics.

The other parameters which may have an impact on service availability can be more difficult
for NRAs to access and process. Mobile coverage maps based on service availability can be
produced by operators. When NRAs generate their own mobile coverage maps, they usually
estimate the mobile coverage by comparing the signal strength with pre-defined thresholds.
Further studies could be needed to clarify how NRAs could include all relevant parameters in

5
NRA’s research on handset performance:
- 2018, ComReg, Mobile handset performance - Voice and Mobile handset performance - Data.
- 2015, Ofcom, Mobile handset testing.
6 A neutral receiving device has the characteristics of 0 dBi RF gain at a height of 1.5m above ground level.
7 The use of a neutral receiving device will ensure comparability across different MNOs and different European

countries. This choice does not stop NRAs from accounting for handset gain/loss being on their maps

5
 BoR (18) 237

the calculation of service availability. In any case, the verification of coverage maps should
be based on the availability of the mobile services.

NRAs can provide consumers with a simple binary coverage information indicating whether
a given service in an area is available or not available. In this case, mobile coverage in a
given area could be considered available if the probability of successful service reception in
that area is greater than a specified percentage. The threshold could be set at a probability
of successful service reception of 95%.

In addition, it is also possible for NRAs to provide consumers with a multi-level coverage
information, where coverage in a given area can be defined with respect to a set of different
levels of probability values of successful service reception.

BEREC encourages NRAs to provide consumers with a multi-level coverage

information.

In order to improve the information on mobile coverage given to the public, NRAs may want
to consider specifying at least four levels of mobile coverage. Generally, the levels of mobile
coverage could be chosen to reflect the different probabilities of successful service reception
which equates to service availability. The following are two examples:

- ‘High likelihood of service availability’ which reflects a probability of successful service

reception of 95%, ‘Likely to get service’ which reflects a probability of successful service
reception of 70%, ‘Intermittent service availability’ which reflects a probability of
successful service reception of 50% and ‘Unlikely to get service’ which reflects a
probability of successful service reception of less than 50%, respectively.

- ‘Very good coverage’, ‘Good coverage’, ‘Limited coverage’, ‘No coverage’ where the
first three reflect a probability of successful service reception of 95% or higher, with a
20 dB attenuator to the consumer’s device, with a 10 dB attenuator, with no attenuator
respectively.

BEREC acknowledges that further studies would be required in order to develop suitable
ways of calculating and setting a minimum rate of success for service availability.

2.2. Further elaboration

Parameters that NRAs measure in the field are currently mainly linked to the verification of
national licence obligations, but some parameters also aim to objectively depict the quality of
service that mobile networks offer to the end users. Thus, for the time being, technology
dependent radio signal strength levels are the most commonly used criteria to define
whether a specific location is covered or not. The above mentioned methodology is used by
20 out of 33 NRAs surveyed. The received mobile signal power that underpins mobile
coverage of 2G/3G/4G networks is often based on RxLev, RSCP and RSRP for GSM,
UMTS and LTE respectively. The thresholds represent the required minimum received
mobile signal power that will deliver a pre-specified probability of successful reception of a
particular service (voice or data).

6
 BoR (18) 237

The outcome of the survey shows that 22 out of 33 NRAs define thresholds for the
classification of different levels of mobile coverage. It also shows that the reasons for
defining thresholds differ – the main reason concerns the definition and the verification of
coverage obligations, the other reason being the publication of a mobile coverage map by an
NRA at a later stage.

Out of the 22 NRAs defining thresholds, 18 NRAs define thresholds for RSRP, 18 for RSCP
and 17 for RxLev. Among those defining thresholds for RSRP are some that also define
thresholds for RSCP but not for RxLev. On the other hand, there are some NRAs that only
define thresholds for RxLev or which take into account other parameters, such as the level of
interference (Ec/Io).

The differentiation in practices can be explained by the fact that Member States have
imposed different coverage obligations to resolve the specific coverage issues they deal with
(national geographical and population specificities), or due to the requirements the NRs
themselves have specified in order to carry out measurements in the field. It is clear that
different coverage obligations may require different measurement metrics and measurement
methods to best assess MNO’s compliance with those obligations (BoR (17) 186).

Figure 1 gives the range of thresholds reported by the NRAs.

Figure 1: Number of NRA using given thresholds for GSM, UMTS and LTE

GSM UMTS LTE

10 10 10
Number of NRA
Number of NRA

Number of NRA

8 8 8
6 6 6
4 4 4
2 2 2
0 0 0 -95
-130
-125
-120
-115
-110
-105
-100
-95
-90
-85
-80

-95
-90
-85
-115
-110
-105
-100

-120
-115
-110
-105
-100

RxLev threshold in dBm RSCP threshold in dBm RSRP threshold in dBm

Further, 7 out of 33 NRAs use multi-level thresholds to define coverage. BEREC estimates
that this practice gives more accurate and useful information to consumers. Considering this,
BEREC recommends NRAs to choose a multi-level thresholding approach.

7
 BoR (18) 237

3. The use of signal predictions for mobile coverage

estimation

3.1. The Common Position (CP2)

BEREC recognizes that mobile signal prediction enables the estimation of mobile coverage
over the whole of the geographic surface of a given country. The NRAs should note that
signal predictions are a statistical representation of the coverage achieved in practice.

NRAs should base coverage estimation (numerical data or maps) on coverage

calculations/predictions, whenever it is not economically or technically possible to
carry out field measurements of the whole country. Such predictions may be generated
from modelling a number of relevant input parameters 8 to predict the level of available
mobile signal power or service accessible in any given area.

An NRA may elect to:

1. generate coverage predictions and publish information themselves (maps and/or

metrics about mobile coverage);

2. obtain the results of predictions from the operators and publish information themselves
(maps and/or metrics about mobile coverage); or

3. use a third party to generate the coverage predictions and publish information (maps
and/or metrics about mobile coverage).

In all cases, the NRA should be confident of the accuracy of the mobile signal predictions
they use – see CP3.

3.2. Further Elaboration

The answers to the survey showed that 10 out of 33 NRAs use their own mobile signal
prediction software which they combine with network data that is mainly provided by the
mobile operators (e.g. base station locations, antenna parameters, frequencies). The
software predicts mobile coverage, whose output can be referred to as theoretical mobile
coverage, or mobile signal predictions.

These are mainly used to verify whether coverage obligations are being fulfilled by the
operator. More generally, this approach allows the verification of national population or
geographic area being covered by a pre-defined service parameter.

23 out of 33 NRAs surveyed do not perform calculations of mobile coverage by themselves.

Here, the mobile operators provide the coverage mainly based on estimation/simulation tool.

8 Such as models of signal propagation for different bands, terrain information, network topology, geographic
topology, etc.

8
 BoR (18) 237

This theoretical mobile coverage which is sent to the NRA, can then be used in a similar way
as above.

It is clear that in the majority of countries each operator or NRA has its own way of
calculating mobile coverage. Whether the NRA performs the calculation itself or obtain the
coverage information from the operators, it should ensure the accuracy of the information.
This would help ensure comparability between the operators. See CP3.

It is worth noting that theoretical/predication-based mobile coverage information is the only

known methodology that enables NRAs to derive an estimate of mobile coverage over 100%
of their country land mass. Thus, theoretical/predication-based mobile coverage information
should be used unless field measurements are feasible over 100% of the geography.

The constraints referred above concerning theoretical mobile coverage are related to the
following:

- the digital terrain model which can have different resolutions and sources,

- the digital terrain clutter which can have different classes and sources,

- the software tool that can be from different providers,

- the propagation model (e.g. ITU.R P.1812, Okumura-hata, Crosswave model, ray
tracing) than can be different and configured in different ways (e.g. the diffraction model
+ sub-path attenuation),

- the radiation pattern of the antennas,

- the sensitivity (received signal power) per service and respective link budget, and

- other planning parameters (e.g. penetration losses, body loss, height gain, coverage
reliability, fading margins, etc.).

All these requirements have varying impact on theoretical mobile coverage information and
may benefit from a more harmonised approach in the future.

A theoretical mobile coverage, by itself, should be understood as an estimation. To obtain

the theoretical mobile coverage there is a need to specify the mobile coverage in terms of a
particular target, which may be received signal power, percentage successful voice service
or data service of certain downlink data rate. Variations exist amongst the NRAs whether
coverage is estimated on a QoS or QoE basis.

9
 BoR (18) 237

4. Ensuring the accuracy of coverage information

provided to the public

4.1. The Common Position (CP3)

NRAs should verify the reliability of mobile coverage information using, where
appropriate, field measurements, noting that for technical and resourcing reasons it may
not be possible to make widespread measurements 9. Measurements by drive-testing offer
an effective method of testing the accuracy of mobile signal predictions and verifying the
availability of mobile services. NRAs should ensure statistical robustness of the
measurement methodology and of the measurement processing and analysis.

4.2. Further Elaboration

The outcome of the survey 10 shows that NRAs can have similar reasons for using field
measurements. Indeed, the NRAs carry out measurements 11 to:

- verify that MNOs comply with their license obligations on mobile coverage,

- safeguard the end users’ rights to have transparent information on mobile networks’
coverage and performance. In several countries, NRAs measure mobile coverage as
part of resolving consumer complaints with respect to the mobile networks performance,
and

- verify the reliability of the mobile coverage maps provided or/and published by the
MNOs by collecting in-field measurements through drive testing across a representative
sample of a given country where appropriate. This kind of measurements can act as
incentive and strengthen the competition between operators because informing
consumers helps them choosing the right service on their living area. Thus, publishing
maps displaying mobile coverage of each of the MNOs in a market pushes them to
constantly improve their networks.

It is clear that the radio signal level and its quality do not guarantee that a mobile user can
effectively access and use mobile services. Therefore, approximately half of the NRAs
determine whether a location is covered, by measuring parameters that are more related to
the QoS/QoE provided at that specific location. In few countries, NRAs aligned with MNOs
on the exact set of parameters to be measured in the field, nonetheless these parameters
differ across European states.

9 For example, it may not appropriate to carry out field measurements at indoor locations for reasons of
accessibility.
10 BEREC Survey: Practices in Europe regarding monitoring mobile coverage, February 2018; 33 NRAs

responded (26 from EU countries and 7 from non-EU countries);

11 29 out of 33 NRAs stated that they perform field measurements of the mobile coverage;

10
 BoR (18) 237

Drive testing is a standard method that should be used to monitor mobile coverage in the
field – it may inform the level of mobile coverage (end/or service availability) along routes or
at specific locations and may provide an opportunity to reflect the end users’ perception and
experience of the mobile networks. Drive testing refers to the outdoor measurements,
performed as static or in-move measurements. They typically include vehicle(s) equipped
with at least a RF scanning equipment. Besides, this method ensures that all MVNOs are
measured at the same time in a same location and, thus, gives a comparable picture of
MNOs.

One NRA reported using crowdsourcing for providing some form of testing of coverage
maps.

5. Availability and presentation of mobile coverage

information

5.1. The Common Position (CP4)

To realize the benefit of dissemination of mobile coverage information, NRAs should strive
to provide easy-to-access accurate mobile coverage information to the widest
possible range of consumers. The information published would be in particular useful for
consumers to be able to compare the coverage provided by the operators and therefore to
compare their services in order to make an informed decision when choosing their provider.

NRAs should consider a range of methods of access such as via their own and third-party
website and apps, with the aim of maximization of coverage information accessibility by the
widest range of consumers possible. Providing the information on mobile coverage in open
data would be in particular beneficial as it can easily be widely reused by external parties.
Third-party publication of NRAs’ coverage information should reference the source and
whether the information has been tested for accuracy.

When NRAs publish coverage maps, they should consider the following:

1. Provide for consumer confidence in the maps by:

- stating if the data used to create the maps were provided by the MNOs or by the NRA
itself.

- stating if the data used for the creation of the maps were tested for accuracy.

- describing the method used to test the data for accuracy (theoretical calculation and/or
drive tests etc.), as well as the extent to which the data were tested for accuracy.

2. Increase the effectiveness of information conveyed by the maps by:

- providing consumers with the choice to select/unselect the available services and/or
technology.

11
 BoR (18) 237

- displaying layers for different levels of coverage by exploiting the notion of multi-
thresholding.

- providing a coverage map resolution of 100m or lower.

NRAs mobile coverage maps are also meant to complement and feed the EU Mapping
Platform which collects data about mapping broadband coverage and quality of service (for
fixed and mobile services). The platform is carried out in close cooperation with relevant
Member State administrations (ministries) and with BEREC.

Furthermore, it may be possible to complement information provided to consumers by NRAs

on mobile coverage maps with information on the quality of mobile internet access services
generated with a measurement tool provided by NRAs. It is expected that, as of late 2019,
NRAs can implement the BEREC Net neutrality measurement tool 12 to this extent.

5.2. Further Elaboration

With regard to the publication of information on the state of mobile coverage, BEREC
considers that publishing coverage maps is beneficial for consumers and very easy way to
portray mobile coverage. BEREC notices that – for the time being – less than half 13 of the
NRAs publish their own coverage maps based on data they collected themselves or data
they received from MNOs (which were tested for accuracy by the NRA). The reasons for this
situation range from copyright issues to competence issues up to budgetary matters.

Nonetheless, NRAs which do not publish their own coverage maps may also have data on
mobile coverage available]. Some NRAs might not be free to publish this data for legal
reasons. For example, when – according to national law – MNOs can only be obliged to
relay data for the purpose of verification of coverage obligations and when doing so explicitly
limit the usage of this data to this purpose. Even aggregating data from published coverage
maps of the MNOs might be confronted with legal restrictions. Thus, the degree of data that
each NRA is free to publish differs between Member States.

This calls for a measured approach encouraging NRAs to publish on their website any
information on mobile coverage that they have available and are free to share. This may
include coverage maps compiled by NRAs, links to coverage maps of MNOs or other
government agencies. Further to this, it may be useful to include information explaining (a)
who is responsible nationally for the monitoring of mobile coverage and (b) if there is an
organization they can turn to for more information or if they encounter coverage issues, thus
enabling consumers to inform themselves accordingly.

12 Under development at the time of writing this document,

https://berec.europa.eu/eng/news_and_publications/whats_new/5045-net-neutrality-measurement-tool-result-of-
the-tender
13
14 out of 33 NRAs declared they publish own coverage maps based on data they collected themselves or data
they received from

12
 BoR (18) 237

Concerning the distinction between levels of mobile coverage, several NRAs (BIPT, Arcep,
EETT, RRT, NKOM, ANACOM, OFCOM, CRC, CTO, AEC, ANCOM, PTS, RATEL, and
NMHH) define more than two levels of mobile coverage (covered/not covered) for the
purpose of mobile coverage maps publication.

ComReg does not currently publish maps, but its proposal “[…] is to make available a
composite national coverage map on its consumer website from comprehensive network
architecture data provided by MNOs” 14 15.

In some countries, one or several MNOs decided to publish maps showing several layers.
For example:

- in Finland, one MNO publishes maps with 4 levels of coverage: no coverage / basic
coverage / Good coverage / very good coverage,

- in Iceland, one MNO shows 3 levels,

- in Montenegro, one MNO distinguishes indoor/outdoor/no coverage, and

- in Malta, some MNOs have published several layers maps: excellent/variable (+limited
for one of the MNOs).

These layers usually derive from combinations of elements of section 1.2 describing
consumers’ situations in accessing a mobile network that are deemed relevant to consumers
by the NRA. Such combinations include but are not limited to outdoor coverage using mobile
handset for voice services and outdoor coverage using mobile handset for data services.

14 ComReg’s answer to the BEREC Survey: Practices in Europe regarding monitoring mobile coverage, February
2018; 33 NRAs responded (26 from EU countries and 7 from non-EU countries).
15
Until further studies are performed to calculate and predict probability of successful service reception and in
the absence of information on parameters (including, amongst others, cell load, backhaul, capacity) required to
calculate service availability, ComReg as a first step intends to use signal strength to estimate service availability
as follows: Very good coverage’, ‘Good coverage’, ‘Fair coverage’, ‘Fringe coverage’ which reflect multiple
threshold values based on RxLev, RSCP, RSRP for respective technologies. Where Fringe coverage can be
based on using values set out in section 2.2 (Figure 1), areas below this base threshold are deemed 'unlikely' to
have coverage. The remaining intermediate threshold levels can be produced by employing incremental steps of
10 dB above the base threshold minimum level for each graduation.

13
 BoR (18) 237

Appendices

Appendix 1. Summary of responses

This table summarises answers provided by NRAs and it provides information about monitoring practices in place.

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
AT Only for the purpose of NO NO NO YES YES (1) RTR uses a mobile app to measure a sample of statistically significant locations in
Austria verifying coverage (1) (2) order to predict the coverage of mobile networks to verify the coverage obligations.
(RTR) obligations (2) The RTR-NetTest informs users about the current service quality (including upload,
download, ping, signal strength) of their Internet connection. In addition, a map view
and statistics of previous tests can be accessed. (Source: https://www.netztest.at/en/)
The NetTest data is not used to check the coverage obligations. Although, it is a good
source to check the plausibility of the results.

14
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
BE Inform consumers and NO YES NO Not Not (1) Currently, only outdoor signal strength is measured (scanner).
Belgium public authorities (1) yet yet – drive testing project (QoS2) :
(BIPT) Verify coverage (2) Quality of the calls :
obligations compliance – Coverage
– Network availability
– Dropped call rate
– Blocked rate
– Transmission quality
– Call setup time
Quality of data services :
– Coverage
– Success rate “transfer d’un fichier” (en upload et download)
– Débit de données (UL/DL)
– Streaming quality
– Time to transfer a file (UL/DL)
– Network unavailability
– Occupancy rate in spectrum allocation
Success rate to download a webpage in 10 sec.

(2) Expected in Q3 2018

Project: measure signal strength, delay, DL/ UL speeds
Indoor + outdoor

15
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
BG Verify the reliability of YES YES NO NO NO (1) Calculation of the coverage from network data (e.g. base station locations, antenna
Bulgaria coverage maps (only in (1) (2) parameters, frequencies). The data is provided by the undertakings.
(CRC) case of complaints)
No verification
But no verification of calculation.

(2) In case of complaints, measurements are made at fixed point for comparison
between declared mobile coverage on the web-site of the MNO and the real mobile
coverage.
– drive tests with a UE terminal, with which call attempts are made to auto-
answering stationary phone line of the measured mobile operator.
– RxLev for GSM networks, RSCP for UMTS networks and RSRP for LTE
networks.
The other mobile benchmarking parameter is call statistics of successful calls - with
more than 90% of the total number of call attempts for GSM, and more than 95% of
calls made - for UMTS.
CH NO NO NO NO NO NO
Switzerland
(BAKOM)
CY NO. Competency of NO NO NO NO (1) (1) Consumers can use OCECPR’s tool called NET2MAP that was developed to view
Cyprus Department of mobile networks coverage Field measurement of mobile coverage.
(OECPR) Electronic (http://geomatic.com.cy/geomaps/?map=geriet )
Communications of the
Ministry of Transport,
Communications and
Works.

16
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
CZ Verify coverage YES YES NO NO YES (1) CTU uses coverage calculation software
Czech obligations compliance (1) (2) (Not To find out whether the coverage obligations are executed.
Republic availa To provide coverage maps
(CTU) ble)
(2) CTU measures the parameters related to signal (e.g. RSRP, SINR) and those
representing QoS (download, upload).
cars with special equipment (ROMES, QualiPoc, TSMW)
DE BNetzA measures NO YES NO NO NO (1) The BNetzA does not check the services. The coverage is checked according to the
Germany coverage in order to (1) parameters RxLEV at GSM, RSCP at UMTS and RSRP at LTE.
(BNetzA) verify maps provided A sample gets defined and BNetzA’s radio monitoring and inspection service (Prüf- und
by MNOs. MNOs are Messdienst, PMD) drives along the roads in the sample area and measures the
obliged to provide coverage.
coverage maps in The parameters are recorded outside with a scanner. The measuring vehicle is a van
context with coverage with a roof height of 3 m.
obligations following
the tender of spectrum.

the Federal Ministry of

Transport and Digital
Infrastructure (MoT) is
responsible for the
maps
DK provide information to NO NO NO NO NO (1) The mobile operators provide information on the mobile coverage. They have
Denmark the public (1) agreed on a common model for how coverage calculations should be done, so the
(DBA) results are comparable between the operators.
EE Verify coverage NO YES NO NO NO (1) - drive testing method prevails
Estonia obligations compliance (1) Signal strength (2G=RxLev/3G=RSCP/4G=RSRP) measurements are carried out by
(ETRA) drive test method on driving lanes (outdoors). And we have used ordinary customer
equipments (dongles, smartphones), which were equipped with measuring software.

17
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
FI verify the reliability of NO YES NO NO NO (1) Rhode&Schwarz TSMW network scanner and 3 x Samsung Galaxy Note 4
Finland the coverage maps (1) measurement phones with Nemo Handy software. Measurement is handled by Nemo
(FICORA) provided by the Outdoor software and analysed with Nemo Analyze software.
operators Field strength (GSM: Rxlev (threshold - 90 dBm); UMTS: RSCP (threshold -100 dBm);
Investigate complaints LTE: RSRP (threshold -110 dBm). With the measurement phones FICORA measures
from the consumers. only Ping-values to verify that the connection is working properly.
FR To verify coverage NO YES NO NO NO (1) However Arcep uses coverage calculation software in order to extract metrics from
France obligation compliance (1) (2) (3) (4) the mobile coverage maps provided by the MNOs.
(Arcep) To inform consumers
(2) Drive testing are conducted
– each time there is a deadline date for coverage obligation
– every year to check the reliability of coverage maps (through tests of the
availability of service : outdoor, phone calls / downloading files, user oriented)
Every year to evaluate QoS/QoE (UL/DL, Streaming, web surfing, quality of voice,…)

(3) However Arcep uses walk testing to assess mobile quality of service

(4) Not yet but we intend to use crowdsourcing in the near future, essentially as a
complement to our drive testing measures.
FYROM To verify coverage No YES No No No (1) Same measuring equipment and measuring terminals are used for all operators.
Former obligations compliance (1) Service quality measuring voice and data = methods are user oriented
Yugoslav To verify the reliability
Republic of of a coverage map
Macedonia provide by operator on
(AEC) its website
To inform consumers
and push the operators
to constantly improve
their networks

18
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
GR To inform the end NO YES NO NO NO (1) During 2016 and 2017, EETT conducted drive test campaigns. The measured
Greece users objectively (1) parameters were divided in two categories:
(EETT) regarding the existing – Category 1: Radio network availability (RxLev at GSM /RSCP at UMTS /RSRP
mobile coverage and at LTE)
service quality Category 2: Quality of Services (voice / data)
To verify mobile
coverage of an
operator is according to
obligations
to investigate
consumers’ complains
(indirectly) this kind of
measurements can
strengthen the
competition between
operators
HR to verify coverage NO YES NO NO YES (1) It was used to verify licence coverage obligation
Croatia obligations compliance. MOR (2) (3)
(HAKOM) To inform consumers E (1) (2) HAKOM measures mobile coverage (signal strength) in the field in order to verify
coverage data submitted by operators.
Measurements are performed as drive tests with Rohde & Schwarz ROMES platform

(3) To inform consumers

19
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
HU to verify the coverage NO YES NO NO NO (1) To check coverage based on contract between Authority and Operators NMHH uses
Hungary maps of the MNOs (1) calibrated receivers (scanners). These are Rohde&Schwarz TSMW and TSME
(NMHH) to give reliable and scanners.
independent To give information about data transfer, NMHH uses SwissQual Diversity Benchmarker
information about system with mobile phones followed the technology upgrade on mobile network (at this
technology and service moment, phones are HTC10)
availability to help
inform customers
choosing the right
service on their living
area
IE to assess the mobile YES YES YES NO Event (1) Radio network planning tool from Forsk called Atoll is currently being used to predict
Ireland network operators’ (1) (2) ually mobile coverage.
(ComReg) compliance with the Propagation model tuned with all the network architecture data including, base station
obligations locations, antenna details, powers etc.
+ coverage calculation software uses data collected from field measurements (to tune
the propagation models)

(2) Bi-annual Drive Tests in winter and summer are carried out by an independent
contractor to validate ComReg’s predicted coverage maps/licence obligations. (MNOs’
maps are not verified)
These drive tests cover all primary and secondary national routes in full.
Outdoor mobile signal strength, quality and download and upload speeds are
measured.
IS To verify coverage YES YES No No No (1) In order to publish coverage maps.
Iceland obligation compliance (1) (2) Coverage calculation (predication) is compared to field measurements on short roads.
(PFS) To look into were
coverage is not good. (2) Measurements on the field (signal strength) are done with a scanner from Rohde
and Schwarz (TSMW) and Romes Software in order to verify the maps (calculated with
a software)

20
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
IT To ensure an efficient YES YES NO NO YES (1) Coverage data provided by MNOs are verified (sample checks) by Agcom
Italy use of spectrum (1) (2) (3) (supported by FUB) using a software simulator (implementing the same models used
(AGCOM) resources by MNOs).
To guarantee a
minimum coverage (2) With the support of Fondazione Ugo Bordoni (FUB) measurement campaigns on the
beyond the coverage field based on drive tests (both static and dynamic)
level that is the result Outdoor measurements (drive tests) are carried out by means of a vehicle equipped
of market forces (e.g. with SwissQual Diversity Benchmarker.
in rural areas) The following service level KPI are measured (reflecting the user's perception and
To ensure that users experience):
derive maximum – service accessibility rate;
benefits in terms of – throughput (both DL and UL);
choice, price and – delay (Round Trip Time);
quality. – jitter;
– packet loss;
data transmission failure rate.

(3) Users of BB map can report errors (there is a dedicated section on

www.agcom.it/broadbandmap), so the app-based results (crowdsourcing) are also used
as additional checking.

21
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
LT For fine-tuning of the YES YES NO NO NO (1) Mobile operators are obliged to register base stations before putting them into
Lithuania theoretical coverage (1) (2) operation. For this reason they provide all technical data to regulator.
(RRT) calculation models;
To verify reliability of (2) Drive tests/stationary measurements; outdoors;
coverage in A car with roof mounted omni-directional antennas;
problematic areas universal radio network analyser (Rohde & Schwarz ROMES)
To verify if the base
stations registration measurements (drive tests) for tuning of a propagation method which is used for
information, provided coverage calculations.
by operators to our
institution is correct or
if these stations are
working at all.
LV NO NO NO NO NO NO
Latvia
(SPRK)

22
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
ME To verify coverage YES YES NO NO NO (1) For internal studies: EKIP uses Calculation software for calculation of mobile
Montenegro obligations compliance (1) (2) coverage, verification of fulfilment operator obligation from license etc.
(EKIP) To inform customers Calculation software uses data from tech documentation of base station (location, eirp,
azimuths, elevation angle, antenna model etc.) + EKIP uses data from field
measurements for tuning of propagation model and terrain clutter.

(2) Every two years approximately EKIP conducts measurements of QoS and
benchmark test of three mobile networks.
Outdoor drive test measurement (cities and roads) with a Rohde & Schwarz equipment
(+Samsung Galaxy S3 mobile phones)
Services independent: Radio Network Unavailability, Attach Failure Ratio, PDP Context
Activation Failure Ratio, PDP Context Cut-off Ratio, Default EPS Bearer Context
Activation Failure Ratio, Dedicated EPS Bearer Context Activation Failure Ratio
Voice: Telephony Service Non-Accessibility; Telephony Setup Time, Telephony Speech
Quality on Call Basis, Telephony Cut-off Call Ratio, Technology used
Data: FTP {DL/UL} IP-Service Access Failure Ratio; FTP {DL/UL} Mean Data Rate,
FTP {UL/UL} Data Transfer Cut-off Ratio, HTTP IP-Service Access Failure Ratio, HTTP
Mean Data Rate, HTTP Data Transfer Cut-off Ratio
MT To ensure that the NO YES NO NO NO (1) MCA makes use of spectrum planning software which is primarily used to carryout
Malta stipulated licence (1) (2) interference related analysis (example LTE - DVB-T interference) but not for mobile
(MCA) conditions are met. coverage assessments.
2018: To provide better
visibility to consumers (2) Field measurements are carried out to verify the MNOs’ compliance with their
with regards to licence conditions concerning coverage.
coverage and quality. Test of the service availability: a connectivity check is performed at every test point,
using terminals that are available on the market (that reflects user experience)

2G -> Voice / 3G (HSDPA) -> Voice / Data Access / 4G -> Data Access.

23
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
NL To check probability of NO YES NO NO NO (1) Measures from a user perspective. This means that the parameter that we use is
Netherlands a successful (1) (2) the percentage of succeeded and failed connections to the network. (active
(ACM / connection with the connections outdoor with average consumer smartphones)
Radiocom- 112 emergency
munications number For network scanning/logging, the Radiocommunications Agency uses equipment of
Agency) To check coverage to Rohde & Schwarz ROMES.
solve problems in
municipalities where Maps are not assessed, but At the moment The Netherlands is testing with drive tests
people experience no (projects for dialogue in local municipalities).
or a low coverage
Monitor licencing (2) An app-based tool owned by the Radiocommunications Agency is in early
conditions of putting development
into service obligations
with a certain
geographical coverage
within certain
timeframes

24
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
NO To verify mobile YES YES NO NO YES (1) To verify coverage stated by mobile operators.
Norway coverage obligations (1) (2) (3) Digital terrain model + clutter
(NKOM) To monitor objectively
the development of (2) NKOM uses measurements of signal strength (coverage, and downlink capacities)
cellular coverage over for validating coverage, obligations in the 800 MHz band licenses and for validating
time theoretical simulations.
To check the coverage
level made available to Outdoor drive measurements using the 3 most commonly sold terminals (cellphones)
the public. on each mobile network to measure download speeds, but also signal power and signal
quality. Measurements is also performed with a dedicated spectrum analyser and
antenna for reference measurements of signal power and signal quality.

NO verification process for coverage maps.

(3) Nettfart app provides a speedtest for DL/UL capacity and latency (ping), several
QoS-tests, which combined informs the user about the available quality of their Internet
connection.
The tests include reachability of well-known TCP- and UDP-ports, a VoIP/jitter
emulation test, tests for intermediate proxies and DNS tests. The Nettfart mobile app
provides a map view of all test results with filter options for test parameters, statistics,
operator, and time.

25
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
PL To investigate and NO YES NO NO NO (1) Drive tests, outdoor, with a scanner Rohde&Schwarz ROMES.
Poland solve users’ problems (1)
(UKE) To verify operators’
coverage obligations.
In the past UKE
monitored mobile
coverage to provide
information to
consumers but doesn’t
continue to do so.
PT To verify if the mobile YES YES NO NO YES (1) ANACOM implemented a methodology to assess if the mobile operators are fulfilling
Portugal operators are fulfilling (1) (2) (3) their mobile coverage obligations.
(ANACOM) their coverage The theoretical studies are performed with a mobile planning tool called XG-PLANNER
obligations. (please consult http://www.lstelcom.com/en/).
To provide users Based in the information provided by the MNOs ANACOM defines thresholds
information on QoS (sensitivity level per service) to define the level above which there is coverage by
from a user’s service – in UMTS networks the load factor is also considered. Additionally, the limits
perspective defined for field measurements can also be used as thresholds, to define coverage
based in quality criteria.

(2) ANACOM conducts periodical drive-tests on GSM/UMTS/LTE mobile

communication systems, based on which it publishes reports with the outcome of the
evaluation of the quality of mobile voice and data services and of the network coverage.

Reports available at
https://www.anacom.pt/render.jsp?categoryId=293535&languageId=1

(3) Net.mede, available at https://www.netmede.pt/ for users checking some Internet

QoS parameters. It does not include signal strength.

26
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
RO To verify coverage YES YES NO NO NO (1) To calculate mobile coverage
Romania obligations compliance (1) (2)
(ANCOM) with the licenses. (2) ANCOM measures mobile coverage in the field in order to calculate the mobile
coverage and verify coverage obligations compliance.

– Verification of the radio parameters:

outdoor drive tests => Rohde&Schwarz Romes software controls a TSMW scanner and
four Qualcomm terminals.
indoor measurements a portable ensemble it is used. It has a R&S TSMW scanner, two
quad band antennas, GPS antenna and a power supply system based on batteries.
– Verification of the quality of voice and data services
SE To ensure that the NO NO YES NO NO (1) Once a year, PTS verifies the speech coverage that the MNO states and the
Sweden MNO’s coverage maps (1) parameters that are related to coverage. For 4G the downlink speed is verified on some
(PTS) on their webpages fixed locations since one of the MNO working in the 800MHz have obligations to deliver
correspond to the end at least 1mbit/s.
user experience
To imitate the end user the best way PTS measures in dedicated mode at a low speed
~ 5km/h. (E.g. by walking along a poor covered road with the phones (Swissqual)) and
maps the samples against the coverage map provided by the operators.
RS To verify the maps NO YES YES NO YES (1) To verify the maps: outdoor drive test measurements (measuring large cities, small
Serbia delivered by mobile (1) (2) (3) cities and roads). The equipment used is Rohde & Schwarz (scanner, chassis,
(RATEL) operators (//to check Samsung Galaxy S4/Note4 mobile phones).
the coverage made
available to the public.) (2) Walk testing is used to check QoS parameters, not to verify coverage maps.

(3) Crowdsourcing app RATEL NetTest is used to check internet QoS parameters, but
not to verify coverage maps.

27
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
SK To verify the reliability YES (2) NO NO NO (1) The distribution of populations units can be obtained from the Statistical Office of
Slovakia of a coverage (1) the Slovak Republic. Technical parameters of base stations are provided by mobile
(RU) calculation. operators for each BTS.

(2)
– Field strength measurements
– Outdoor
Scanner (“analyzator of spectrum”)
SI To verify the fulfilment YES YES YES NO YES (1) AKOS calculates the prediction of mobile coverage according to the network data
Slovenia of obligation from (1) (2) (3) (4) submitted by MNOs and compares them with coverage submitted by operators and
(AKOS) issued licenses with actual field measurements.
To verify the actual
situation on the field (2) Field measurements results are only used as additional checking of the calculated
and compering with the prediction of mobile coverage.
calculated coverage.
To calculate and AKOS uses calibrated receivers (scanners) from Rohde & Schwarz (TSMW). The
monitor 700MHz & 800 measurement antenna is installed on the roof of the vehicle at a height of about 2
MHz coverage meters.
obligations For end-to-end measurements, which cannot be conducted with a scanner, commercial
mobile phones (with unmodified hardware and modified firmware) are used.

– For radio coverage: Signal Levels in 2G, 3G, 4G frequency bands. Coverage is
checked according to RxLEV at GSM, RSCP at UMTS and RSRP at LTE.
For data connections: downlink data rates, uplink data rates, network latency – ping,
jitter and packet loss

(3) In some special circumstances

(4) Crowdsourcing results are only used as additional checking of the calculated
prediction of mobile coverage.

28
 BoR (18) 237

Reasons to

Theoretical
calculation

App-based

App-based
competent
Authority)

sourcing)
Country

(Crowd-
(NRA or

Testing

Testing

(Panel)
monitor or/and

Drive

Walk
measure mobile Comments
coverage of maps
and metrics
TR To verify the reliability NO YES NO NO NO (1) ICTA measures the signal strength by drive test method with related benchmark
Turkey of operators’ coverage (1) equipment for outdoor and transport locations.
(ICTA) information
– planned or unplanned inspections
– For 2G and 3G technologies the signal strength parameter is measured. 4.5G
obligations have not been determined yet.
UK To verify coverage NO YES YES NO NO Ofcom uses MNO supplied coverage predictions in order to monitor coverage in the
United obligations and provide UK. Ofcom also bases its published coverage maps on the same set of MNO supplied
Kingdom consumer information converge predictions.
(OFCOM) Ofcom uses drive testing to establish confidence in the MNO supplied coverage
predictions.

29
 BoR (18) 237

Appendix 2. Thresholds used in European countries to qualify if

there is outdoor coverage or not (covered / not covered)
No Country GSM UMTS LTE
1 BE Satisfying -105 dBm Satisfying -115 dBm
Belgium (Good -95 dBm / Very (Good -105 dBm /
(BIPT) good -85 dBm) Very good -95 dBm)
2 BG RxLev ≥ - 100 dBm RSCP ≥ -105 dBm RSRP ≥ -110 dBm
Bulgaria
(CRC)
3 HR RxLev > -95 dBm CPICH RSCP RSRP > -115 dBm
Croatia > -114 dBm
(HAKOM)
4 CZ Depends on the Depends on the Depends on the
Czech Republic frequency band : frequency band : frequency band :
(CTU) 900 MHz: 2100 MHz: 800-900 MHz:
RxLev > -93 dBm RSCP > -86 dBm RSRP > -109 dBm
1800 MHz: 1800 MHz:
RxLev > -91 dBm RSRP > -107 dBm
2100 MHz:
RSRP > -106 dBm
2600 MHz:
RSRP > -105 dBm
5 FI Rxlev ≥ -90 dBm RSCP ≥ -100 dBm RSRP ≥ -110 dBm
Finland
(FICORA)
6 DE According to a
Germany BNetzA ruling
(BNetzA) chamber decision of
2015 a minimum data
rate of 50 Mbit/s in the
antenna sector was
defined:
RSRP ≥ -104 dBm for
LTE@10 MHz,
RSRP ≥ -109 dBm for
LTE@15 MHz,
RSRP ≥ -114 dBm for
LTE@20 MHz
7 ET RxLev > -110 dBm RSCP > -115 dBm RSRP > -125 dBm
Greece
(EETT)
8 HU RxLev > -93 dBm RSCP > -96 dBm RSRP > -110 dBm
Hungary
(NMHH)
9 IS RxLev UMTS (RSCP) LTE (RSRP)
Iceland -75 dBm in towns in -85 dBm in towns -85 dBm in towns
(PTA) 95% measurement -100 dBm in rural area -100 dBm in rural area
-95 dBm in rural area
in 95% measurement
10 LT RxLev > -95 dBm RSCP > -105 dBm RSRP > -115 dBm
Lithuania
(RRT)

30
 BoR (18) 237

No Country GSM UMTS LTE

11 FYROM RxLev> -95 dBm RSCP>-105 dBm RSRP > -110 dBm
Former Yugoslav
Republic of
Macedonia
(AEC)
12 NO RxLev >- 90 dBm, RSCP > -100 dBm RSRP > -110 dBm
Norway
(NKOM)
13 PT RxLev > -105 dBm RSCP > -115 dBm RSRP > -125 dBm
Portugal
(ANACOM)
14 RO RxLev > -92 dBm RSCP > -107 dBm RSRP > -112 dBm
Romania
(ANCOM)
15 RS RxLev > -95 dBm RSCP > -105 dBm RSRP > -110 dBm*
Serbia *will be added in 2018
(RATEL)
16 SI RxLev > -93 dBm RSCP > -96 dBm RSRP > -108 dBm
Slovenia
(AKOS)
17 SE RxLev > -99 dBm RSCP > -104 dBm RSRP > -111 dBm
Sweden
(PTS)
18 TR RxLev > -104 dBm RSCP > -110 dBm
Turkey
(ICTA)
19 UK RxLev > -81 dBm RSCP > -100 dBm RSRP > -105 dBm
United Kingdom
(OFCOM)
Range (-75 dBm) (-85 dBm) (-85 dBm)
-81 dBm > RxLev -86 dBm > RSCP -100 dBm > RSRP
> -110 dBm > -115 dBm > -125 dBm

31
 BoR (18) 237

Appendix 3. Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
ACM Authority for Consumers and Markets
AEC Agency for Electronic Communications
AGCOM Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni
AKOS Agency for Communication Networks and Services of the Republic of Slovenia
ANACOM Autoridade Nacional de Comunicações
ANCOM National Authority for Management and Regulation in Communications of Romania
Arcep Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes
BAKOM Federal Office of Communications
BEREC Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications
BIPT Institut Belge des Postes et Télécommunications
BTS Base transceiver station
ComReg Commission for Communications Regulation
CPICH Common Pilot Channel
CRC National Markets and Competition Commission
CTU Czech Telecommunication Office
DBA Danish Business Authority
DNS Domain Name System
DVB Digital Video Broadcasting
EETT National Telecommunications and Post Commission of Greece
EKIP Agency for Electronic Communications and Postal Services
EPS Evolved Packet System
ETRA Estonian Technical Regulatory Authority
EWG Expert Working Group
FICORA Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority
FTP File Transfer Protocol
FUB Fondazione Ugo Bordoni
GPS Global Positioning System
GSM Global System for Mobile communications
HAKOM Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries
HSDPA High Speed Downlink Packet Access
HTTP Hypertext Transfer Protocol
ICTA Information and Communication Technologies Authority
ITU International Telecommunications Union
KPI Key Performance Indicators
LTE Long Term Evaluation
MCA Malta Communications Authority
MNO Mobile Network Operator
NKOM Norwegian Communications Authority
NMHH Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság
NRA National regulatory authority
OECPR Office of the Commissioner of Electronic Telecommunications and Postal Regulation
OFCOM Office of Communications
PDP Packet Data Protocol
PMD Prüf- und Messdienst
PTA Post and Telecom Administration
PTS Swedish Post & Telecommunications Agency
RATEL Republic Agency for Electronic Communications and Postal Services (Serbia)
RRT Communications Regulatory Authority
RSCP Received Signal Code Power
RSRP Reference Signal Received Power
RxLev Received Signal Level
RTR Regulatory Authority for Broadcasting and Telecommunications (Austria)
SINR Signal to interference plus noise ratio

32
 BoR (18) 237

Acronym Definition
SPRK Public Utilities Commission (Electronic Communications and Post Dpt)
TCP Transmission Control Protocol
UDP User Datagram Protocol
UKE Office of Electronic Telecommunications
UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System

33