CELEX: 52013PC0147
Language: en
Date: 2013-03-26
Title: Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on measures to reduce the cost of deploying high-speed electronic communications networks

|
			
		
		
		52013PC0147
		
			Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on measures to reduce the cost of deploying high-speed electronic communications networks /* COM/2013/0147 final - 2013/0080 (COD) */
			
				
		
		
			
			   	EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
This explanatory memorandum presents the
proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on
measures to reduce the cost of deploying high-speed electronic communications
networks.
1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
1.1.        Objectives
of the Proposal
The objectives of the proposed Regulation
are to reduce the cost and enhance the efficiency of deploying high-speed
electronic communications infrastructure by scaling up existing best practices
across the EU, thus improving the conditions for the establishment and
functioning of the internal market in an area supporting the development of
virtually all sectors of the economy.
In fact it is widely agreed that civil
engineering works constitute the dominant part in overall network deployment
costs[1],
regardless of the technology used, with estimates as high as 80% for certain
technologies.
Providing a number of directly applicable
rights and obligations applicable across the various steps of infrastructure
deployment can lead to significant cost reductions. Barriers to investment and
market entry can be lowered by allowing for more intensive usage of existing
physical infrastructures, enhanced cooperation on planned civil works,
streamlining permit granting procedures and by removing obstacles to
high-speed-ready in-building infrastructure.
This initiative therefore addresses four
main problem areas: (1) inefficiencies or bottlenecks concerning the use of
existing physical infrastructure (such as, for example, ducts, conduits, manholes,
cabinets, poles, masts, antennae, towers and other supporting constructions),
(2) bottlenecks related to co-deployment, (3) inefficiencies regarding
administrative permit granting, and, finally (4) bottlenecks concerning
in-building deployment.
As each problem area is linked to a
specific step in the rollout process, tackling these problems areas together
will result in a set of coherent and mutually reinforcing actions. A study
estimates that if measures were taken to address the identified set of problem
areas, the potential Capex savings to operators are in the range of 20–30% of
total investment costs[2],
i.e. up to 63 billion € by 2020[3].
In order to maximise synergies across
networks, the regulation is addressed not only to electronic communications
network providers but to any owner of physical infrastructures, such as
electricity, gas, water and sewage, heating and transport services, suitable to
host electronic communications network elements, 
1.2.        General
context
According to the 2010 report on the Single
Market,[4]
telecommunications services and infrastructures in the EU are still highly
fragmented along national borders. A more recent report on the cost of
non-Europe in the electronic communications sector [5] has shown that the untapped
potential of the Single Market corresponds to a yearly amount of 0.9% GDP, or
110 billion euros. 
High-speed broadband infrastructure is the
backbone of the Digital Single Market and a precondition for worldwide
competitiveness, i.a. in the field of e-Commerce. As recalled in the Single
Market Act II Communication,[6]
a 10% increase in broadband penetration can result in a 1-1,5 % increase in the
GDP annually and 1,5% labour productivity gains,[7]
and broadband-induced innovation in companies creates
employment and has the potential to generate 2 million extra jobs by 2020.[8]
A significant fraction of this untapped
potential can be found at the level of network infrastructures: different
regulatory approaches to network roll-out increase the cost of access to
national markets, prevent the exploitation of economies of scale at services
and equipment level and hinder the development of innovative services which
could emerge on very high-speed networks running in a seamless fashion across
borders. While the deployment of access networks often involves provisions and
procedures administered at local level, such measures, including local
secondary legislation may indirectly affect the freedom to provide services and
justify Union intervention[9].
Furthermore, based on Article 114 of the TFEU, the Union has previously
legislated, in order to foster local network infrastructure deployment, through
unbundling of the local loop[10]

The Union cannot afford to leave citizens
and businesses outside the footprint of such infrastructures and has subscribed
to ambitious broadband targets of the Digital Agenda for Europe: by 2013, basic
broadband for all Europeans, and by 2020, (i) access to speeds of above 30 Mbps
for all Europeans, and (ii) subscription of internet connection above 100 Mbps for
50% or more of European households. These goals will only be achieved if the
infrastructure deployment costs are lowered across the EU. 
1.3.        Political
background 
The Digital Agenda for Europe is a flagship
initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy aimed at delivering sustainable
economic and social benefits from a digital single market based on fast and
ultra-fast Internet and interoperable applications. 
It identified in particular the need to
lower the costs of broadband deployment in the entire Union territory,
including by achieving proper planning and coordination and by reducing
administrative burdens.[11]
The European Council of 1 and 2 March 2012
called for action at the Union level to provide better broadband coverage,
including by reducing the cost of high-speed broadband infrastructure.[12] 
The Communication "Single Market Act
II: Together for new growth" identified the initiative as one of 12 key
actions that will boost growth, employment and confidence in the Single Market
and generate real effects on the ground[13].
In the Single Market Act II, adoption of the Commission proposal is foreseen
for the first quarter of 2013. The European Council of 13 and 14 December 2012
called on the Commission to present all key proposals by the spring of 2013.[14]
2.           RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE
INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT
2.1.        Public
consultation of interested parties
The Commission services held a public
consultation from 27 April to 20 July 2012, inviting interested parties to give
their views on five sets of questions, covering the entire chain of network
deployment, from the planning phase to the connection of end-users.[15] 
Over a hundred written replies were
submitted by different types of stakeholders from 26 countries across the EU
and EFTA. The largest categories of respondents were electronic communications
providers (27) and their trade associations (14) as well as public bodies,
including central (22, including 6 National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs)) and
local authorities (9). Other utilities (7) provided their input mainly via
trade associations. Equipment manufacturers (5) and engineering and ICT trade
associations (6) also replied. 
In general terms, the respondents
favourably received the Commission's intention for an initiative to address
civil engineering costs for broadband roll-out across the single market. A
majority of the respondents confirmed existing inefficiencies and bottlenecks
as well as the potential for cost reduction. The existence of problems and the
need for action were clearly admitted by stakeholders. Several solutions were
proposed, some very ambitious and some more moderate.
In addition to the public consultation, the
Commission services established an Internet discussion platform for
crowdsourcing ideas of interested parties.[16]
The Commission services have maintained
regular contacts with major stakeholders, both public and private, across the
sectors concerned.
2.2         Studies
and other sources of information
The Commission services commissioned two
studies, respectively, by Deloitte on cost reduction practices with regard to
broadband passive infrastructure roll-out,[17]
and by Analysys Mason to support an impact assessment to accompany the present
proposal.[18]
Furthermore, the Commission services drew
upon additional information sources, studies and national best practices
(including of Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden and United Kingdom)[19].
Detailed information was also collected by the responsible Commission services
via the National Regulatory Authorities.
2.3         Assessment
of the impact of the proposed Regulation
The Commission services have carried out an
impact assessment.[20]
Four policy options were chosen for further analysis: 
Option 1: Business as usual: maintaining
the current approach of monitoring, enforcement and guidance.
Option 2: Promote efficiency gains within
the telecom sector: recommending measures towards a more coherent and
harmonised application by National Regulatory Authorities of the regulatory framework
for electronic communications.
Option 3: Enable efficiency gains across
sectors: proposal for a Regulation aiming at unlocking the potential of
cross-sector cooperation (two sub-options, 3a and 3b, foresee, respectively, a
Regulation only and a combination of a Regulation and a Recommendation).
Option 4: Mandate efficiency gains:
proposal for legislation complementing the current regulatory framework to
mandate measures going beyond option 3, such as infrastructure atlases,
cost-oriented infrastructure access, mandated cooperation in civil engineering
works even when not financed by public means, and installation of
high-speed-ready infrastructure also in old buildings. 
The analysis of the options focuses in
particular on the costs and benefits incurred by direct stakeholders, the
expected effects on network investment and broadband rollout, and broader
macro-economic analysis of effects on consumer welfare, growth,
competitiveness, and the Single Market.
The Impact Assessment Report concludes that
option 3a is the best option available, given its effectiveness towards the
identified objects, costs-benefits analysis, efficiency and coherence of
exploiting the cost reduction potential with general EU policy objectives, in
accordance with proportionality and subsidiarity principles. 
For the choice of the proposed instrument,
see section 3.4, below.
3.           LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
3.1.        Legal
basis
The proposal is based on Article 114 of the
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This is justified by the
objectives of the proposal, which seek to improve the conditions for the
establishment and functioning of the internal market.
Furthermore, as confirmed by case law, this
article confers on the legislature of the Union the discretion, depending on
the general context and the specific circumstances of the matter to be
harmonised, as regards the harmonisation technique most appropriate for
achieving the desired result, in particular in fields that are characterised by
complex technical features.[21]
3.2.        Subsidiarity

The proposed European intervention to
reduce the cost of deploying high-speed electronic communications
infrastructure is justified by the subsidiarity principle. 
The subsidiarity principle pursues two
aims. On the one hand, it allows the Union to act if a problem cannot be
adequately settled by the Member States acting on their own. On the other hand,
it seeks to uphold the authority of the Member States in those areas that
cannot be dealt with more effectively by Union action. The purpose is to bring
decision-making within the Union as close to the citizen as possible.
The proposed Regulation focuses on the
definition of specific directly applicable rights and obligations in order to
facilitate the planning and execution of physical infrastructure rollout and
civil works, including ancillary provisions to ensure transparency of relevant
information and coordination of administrative procedures. In addition to this,
it provides requirements for in-building physical infrastructure for new buildings
and major renovations.
The envisaged measures build on existing
best practice in several Member States, such as those concerning the re-use of
existing physical infrastructures in Lithuania and Portugal, transparency of
existing infrastructure in Belgium and Germany, co-deployment in Finland and
Sweden, the streamlining of rights of way and administrative procedures in the
Netherlands and Poland, and high-speed broadband infrastructure in new
buildings in Spain and France[22].
Some Member States have introduced measures that to some extent go even beyond
the ones proposed, such as the one-stop-shop in Greece. The proposed Regulation
is without prejudice to such more detailed provisions set out by national law. 
The proposed Regulation is also without prejudice
to any specific regulatory measure, including the imposition of remedies on
undertakings having significant market power, taken by the national regulatory
authorities under the Union regulatory framework for electronic communications.

The proposed measures are necessary at the
level of the Union to improve the conditions for the establishment and
functioning of the internal market, in order to:
–                        
remove barriers to the functioning of the Single
Market caused by the patchwork of rules and administrative practices at
national and sub-national levels, which impedes the development and growth of
European companies, has a negative impact on European competitiveness, and
creates barriers to invest and operate cross-border, and thus obstructs the
freedom to provide electronic communications services and networks as
guaranteed under existing Union legislation. As an illustration, scattered and
non-transparent regulatory approaches to network rollout increase the cost of
access to each national market. Such fragmentation constitutes an obstacle for
multinational companies as well as national companies, willing to reach
economies of scale at European level in the face of increasingly global
competition. It also hinders the development of innovative services which could
emerge on very high-speed networks running in a seamless fashion across
borders. 
–                        
stimulate ubiquitous broadband coverage, which
is a pre-condition for the development of the Digital Single Market, thus
contributing to the removal of an important obstacle to the completion of the
Single Market while at the same time contributing to territorial cohesion.
These goals will only be achieved if the infrastructure deployment costs are
lowered across the EU;
–                        
turn into reality the significant untapped potential
of cost-reduction and facilitation of broadband rollout, including by scaling
up existing best practices across the EU whenever available.
–                        
streamline the efficient planning and investment
processes on a large scale, thus facilitating the development of pan-European
operators. 
–                        
ensure equal treatment and non-discrimination of
undertakings as well as of investors, in line with "those objectives and
tasks closely linked to the subject-matter"[23] of several instruments already
provided for in the EU law, in particular concerning the electronic
communications sector[24]
but also concerning other sectors (e.g. utility companies seeking to make
profit from their physical infrastructure, synergies in setting up smart
grids).
Several arrangements have been made for this
proposal to comply with the principle of subsidiarity. 
–                        
Firstly, Member States may maintain or adopt
more detailed provisions further specifying or complementing the obligations
provided for in the proposed Regulation, e.g. with regard to access to existing
infrastructures, coordination of civil works and co-deployment. 
–                        
Moreover, while the tasks created by the
proposed Regulation are assigned by default to the independent NRA under the
electronic communications regulatory framework, in view of its expertise and
independence, Member States may appoint different competent bodies in
accordance with the domestic constitutional system of attribution of
competences and powers[25],
at an optimal level of aggregation, where valuable efficiencies may be ensured
in view of the tasks assigned. This applies to all of the tasks foreseen under
the regulation: the information point on permit granting, transparency and
dispute resolution. 
–                        
Secondly, with regard to transparency of
existing physical infrastructure, while a number of Member States have put in
place different mapping initiatives, in the form of GIS (Geographic Information
Systems) applications covering in some Member States not only the electronic
communications infrastructure, but also physical infrastructure of other
utilities, this proposal does not require Member States to undertake such a
mapping exercise. Neither does it require that data is aggregated or stored at
a point of single contact. The obligation imposed upon Member States is to
'make available' such data at a single information point, which could be made
by providing hyperlinks to other locations. Similarly, the proposal does not
impose any general obligation of pre-notification of planned civil works. It
rather enables electronic communications providers to require this information
from network providers, in view of deploying high-speed electronic
communications networks.
–                        
Thirdly, with regard to permit granting, this
proposal does not affect the procedural autonomy of the Member States to allocate
competences internally. While information on different permit granting
procedures must be available and applications submitted via the contact point,
its role is limited to dispatching the different permits and coordinating the
permit granting process. Furthermore, the different deadlines are only
harmonised by default, while Member States are allowed to keep or introduce
their specific deadlines, without prejudice to other specific deadlines or
obligations laid down for the proper conduct of the procedure which are
applicable in accordance with national or EU law. 
–                        
Lastly, with regard to in-building equipment,
the proposed regulation allows Member States to adjust the obligations provided
by the Regulation to the national and local particularities, by exempting
categories of buildings, such as single-dwelling buildings or renovations from
its scope of application, in full compliance with the principles of
subsidiarity and proportionality. 
3.3.        Proportionality

The proposed measures are also justified on
grounds of proportionality. 
The proposed cost reduction measures focus
on increasing coordination and transparency, and on harmonising minimum tools,
enabling the relevant stakeholders to exploit synergies and reduce
inefficiencies in the rollout. Also, while the proposed measures aim at
reducing barriers to access to physical infrastructures, they do not unduly
impair ownership rights and preserve commercial negotiation in the first place.

The proposed measures do not impose
specific business models. They also leave open the possibility for Member
States to adopt more detailed provisions, and thus will rather complement than
affect on-going national initiatives. In contrast, they will allow Member
States to build on their current measures and select the organisation of any
existing or new measure which best suits their particularities, without
necessarily imposing further costs. 
While the proposed regulation affects
ownership rights to some extent, this is done in respect of the principle of
proportionality. 
The proposal enables commercial
negotiations for access to the physical infrastructure, without mandating
access at pre-defined or cost-oriented terms and conditions. It provides for
indicative reasons where the refusal to grant access may be deemed reasonable,
such as the technical suitability of the physical infrastructure to which
access has been requested to host any of the elements of electronic
communications networks, the lack of availability of space to host the
elements, or network integrity and security. 
While it provides for dispute resolution in
case of unreasonable denial of access, it takes into consideration several
parameters in setting the price for access, such as the impact of the requested
access on the business plan underpinning the investments made by the network
operator, in particular in case of recently built physical infrastructures used
for the provision of high-speed electronic communications services.
With regard to transparency of existing
physical infrastructure, the proposal concerns infrastructure which is suitable
for high-speed network deployment and not any physical infrastructure in
general. It also allows Member States to provide for general exemptions for
infrastructures which are technically unsuitable. Furthermore, the proposal
seeks to make available information at the lowest cost. For this reason, it
includes gradual obligations, allowing organising access to already available
information and resorting to surveys only when this information is not readily
available with public authorities or the electronic communications providers.
Concerning co-ordination of civil
engineering works, the proposal does not limit the economic freedom of
undertakings – in particular, it does not mandate co-deployment by parties that
have not chosen this commercial model, unless publicly financed. On the
contrary, it seeks to enable commercial co-deployment arrangements, by enabling
a better dissemination of information on future civil engineering works. 
With regard to in-building physical
infrastructure, the obligation to equip buildings with high-speed-ready
physical infrastructure is limited to new and majorly renovated buildings. This
is because in these cases the cost is incremental, compared to the high cost of
retrofitting existing, unequipped buildings with passive infrastructure and
likely to be compensated by the higher value of the asset. Moreover, the
proposal further reduces the scope of application of this obligation to major
renovations necessitating a building permit. General exemptions by the Member
States for proportionality reason are also foreseen. 
3.4 Fundamental Rights 
The impact on fundamental rights of the
proposed measures has been analysed. 
While the obligation of network operators
to meet all reasonable requests for access to their physical infrastructure
could restrict their right to conduct a business as well as their property
right, the adverse effect in this respect is however mitigated by the provision
that such access should be granted on fair terms and conditions, including
price. Furthermore, this limitation must be considered justified and
proportionate to the aim of reducing the cost of deploying high-speed
electronic communications networks since it would reduce the need to perform
civil engineering works, which account for almost 80% of the cost of network
deployment. With regard to the obligation on network operators to provide
minimum information on existing infrastructures, safeguards as concerns the
right to privacy and the protection of business secrets are provided through
the provision of exemptions for the purpose of operating and business secrets.
The obligation on undertakings performing
civil works fully or partially financed by public means, to meet any reasonable
request for access in view of deploying elements of high-speed electronic
communications networks, could restrict their right to conduct a business as
well as their property right. However, any such obligation would only apply if
it would not entail any additional costs for the initially envisaged civil
works and if the request to coordinate is filed as soon as possible and in any
case at least one month before the submission of the final project to the
competent authorities for permit granting. Furthermore, this limitation must be
considered justified and proportionate to the aim of reducing the cost of
deploying high-speed electronic communications networks since it would
allow electronic communications network operators to cover only part of the
cost of the civil engineering works.
The obligation to equip all newly
constructed buildings, with a high-speed-ready in-building physical
infrastructure could have an impact on the property rights of the owners of the
property concerned. This limitation must be considered justified and proportionate
to the aim of reducing the cost of deploying high-speed electronic
communications networks since it would exclude any need for retrofitting
buildings with physical infrastructure. 
The right of a provider of public
communications networks to terminate its network at the concentration point in
view of accessing the high-speed-ready in-building physical infrastructure,
could have an impact on the right of property of the owners of private property
concerned. Such restrictions are however limited by the obligation on the
public communications network providers to minimise the impact on the private
property and to cover any costs incurred. Furthermore, this limitation must be
considered justified and proportionate to the aim of reducing the cost of deploying
high-speed electronic communications networks since it would allow electronic
communications operators to achieve economies of scale, when they deploy their
networks.
The right of public communications network
providers to access any existing high-speed-ready in-building physical
infrastructure could affect the property rights of the holder of the right to
use the in-building physical infrastructure. This restriction is however
limited since such access would have to be granted on reasonable terms and as
it would only apply in cases where duplication is technically impossible or
economically inefficient.
The right to an effective remedy for the
parties concerned by the limitations outlined above are guaranteed by the
possibility of referral to a competent national dispute settlement body, which
should be without prejudice to the right of any of the parties to refer the
case to a court. 
3.5.        Choice
of instrument 
The Commission proposes a Regulation as it
presents the guarantee of a comprehensive, directly applicable solution,
including for all permits necessary to rollout networks. It ensures the rapid
availability of cost reduction tools, in keeping with the momentum of the
targets in the Digital Agenda for Europe due to be achieved by 2020. 
Contrary to a Directive, which would imply
granting additional time for transposition by Member States, the regulation
will rapidly install the basic rights and obligations for network deployment
throughout the single market. Moreover, a directive would by its nature allow a
significant degree of differentiation in the implementation of those rights and
obligations hence perpetuating the emerging patchwork. In contrast a directly
applicable legal instrument will reduce existing and prevent further
fragmentation, by focusing on removing a selected number of barriers to the
development of a single market for electronic communications networks, building
on best practices but leaving organisational issues very much to the discretion
of Member States. Providers need to be granted a set of directly applicable
rights in relation to all phases of planning and rolling out a network, which
they can invoke before the national courts, not only against Member States, but
also against other private parties, such as owners of infrastructure. 
Having in mind that the core of the
proposal is the definition of rights and obligation directly applicable across
the Single Market, a Regulation rather than a Directive appears to be the
preferable legal instrument since it has clear advantages in terms of
efficiency and effectiveness and creates a level playing field for citizens and
business, with greater potential for private enforcement[26]. Accordingly, a directly
applicable Regulation, unlike a Directive that requires national transposition,
better guarantees the immediate impact needed in order to contribute to the
Digital Agenda objectives on broadband availability by 2020.
The considerable advantages of the cost
reduction measures, both in terms of economic benefit as in societal advantages,
far outweigh any administrative burden. 
3.6.        Structure
of the proposal and main rights and obligations
Article 1 –
Objective and scope
–                        
Article 1 specifies the objective and scope of
the Regulation.
Article 2 –
Definitions
–                        
This Article contains definitions in addition to
those contained in the EU regulatory framework for electronic communications.
Article 3 –
Access to existing physical infrastructure
–                        
Article 3 establishes a general right of network
operators to offer access to their physical infrastructure and an obligation
for network operators to meet reasonable requests for access to their physical
infrastructure in view of deploying elements of electronic communications
networks under fair terms and conditions.
–                        
A dispute settlement body is foreseen to review
any refusal or dispute on terms and conditions – this function would be
entrusted, by default, to the National Regulatory Authority (NRA).
Article 4 –
Transparency of physical infrastructure
–                        
Article 4 provides for a right to access a set
of minimum information concerning existing physical infrastructure(s) as well
as planned civil works.
–                        
This is accompanied by an obligation for network
operators to meet reasonable requests for in-site surveys of specific elements
of their physical infrastructure.
–                        
Dispute resolution regarding in-site surveys or
access to information would be entrusted to a dispute settlement body, by
default the NRA. 
Article 5 –
Coordination of civil works
–                        
This Article contains a right to negotiate
coordination of civil works.
–                        
In addition, it imposes an obligation for
undertakings performing civil works financed by public means to meet reasonable
requests for civil works coordination agreements on transparent and
non-discriminatory terms.
Article 6 –
Permit granting
–                        
This Article contains a right to access, by
electronic means and via a single information point, any information concerning
the conditions and procedures applicable to specific civil works as well as a
right to submit applications for permits by electronic means via that point.
The information point facilitates and coordinates the permit granting process
and monitors compliance with deadlines.
–                        
In addition it sets a general maximum deadline
if a deadline is not provided in national or EU legislation as well as a right
to receive a timely decision in relation to applications for permits.
Articles 7-8 –
In-building equipment
–                        
Article 7 establishes an obligation to equip new
buildings, as well as buildings that undergo extensive renovation, with
high-speed-ready in-building physical infrastructure, and an obligation to
provide new multi-dwelling buildings, as well as old ones that undergo
extensive renovation, with a concentration point located in or outside the
building.
–                        
Article 8 constitutes a right for electronic
communications network providers to terminate their network equipment at the
concentration point of buildings, a right for electronic communication
operators to negotiate access to any existing high-speed-ready in-building
physical infrastructure and, in the absence of high-speed-ready in-house
infrastructure, a right to terminate their network equipment in the private
premise of the subscriber provided that it minimises the impact on the private
property and at its own costs.
Articles 9 –
11
–                        
These Articles contain final provisions,
including the designation of competent bodies and an obligation for review of
the regulation within three years after its entry into force.
4.           BUDGETARY IMPLICATION
The proposed Regulation has no implications
for the budget of the Union.
2013/0080 (COD)
Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL
on measures to reduce the cost of
deploying high-speed electronic communications networks 
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the
European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative
act to the national Parliaments,
Having regard to the opinion of the
European Economic and Social Committee[27],
Having regard to the opinion of the
Committee of the Regions[28],
Acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure, 
Whereas:
(1)       The digital economy is
changing the Single Market profoundly. With its innovation, speed and reach
across borders it has the potential to take Single Market integration to a new
level. The Union's vision is a digital economy that delivers sustainable
economic and social benefits based on modern online services and fast Internet
connections. A high quality digital infrastructure underpins virtually all
sectors of a modern and innovative economy and is of strategic importance to
social and territorial cohesion. Therefore, all citizens and businesses must
have the opportunity to be part of the digital economy. 
(2)       Acknowledging the
importance of high-speed broadband rollout, Member States have endorsed the
ambitious broadband targets set out in Communication from the Commission to the
European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee
and the Committee of the Regions "The Digital Agenda for Europe- Driving
European growth digitally"[29]
("the Digital Agenda"): 100% broadband coverage by 2013 and increased
speeds of 30MBps for all households, with at least 50% of the households
subscribing to Internet connections above 100MBps by 2020.
(3)       The Digital Agenda has
also identified the need for policies to lower the costs of broadband
deployment in the entire territory of the Union, including proper planning and
coordination and reducing administrative burdens.
(4)       Taking into account the
need for action at the EU level to provide better broadband coverage, including
by reducing the cost of high-speed broadband infrastructure[30], the Single Market Act II[31] stresses the need for
additional efforts in order to achieve quickly the objectives set in the
Digital Agenda for Europe by inter alia addressing the high-speed
network investment challenge. 
(5)       The rolling out of
high-speed fixed and wireless electronic communications networks across the Union requires substantial investments a significant portion of which is represented by the
cost of civil engineering works. 
(6)       A major part of these
costs can be attributed to inefficiencies in the rollout process related to the
use of existing passive infrastructure (such as ducts, conduits, manholes,
cabinets, poles, masts, antenna installations, towers and other supporting
constructions), bottlenecks related to co-ordination of civil works, burdensome
administrative permit granting procedures, and bottlenecks concerning
in-building deployment of networks.
(7)       Measures aiming at
increasing efficiency in the use of existing infrastructures and at reducing
costs and obstacles in carrying out new civil engineering works should provide
a substantial contribution to ensure a fast and extensive deployment of
high-speed electronic communications networks while maintaining effective
competition. 
(8)       Some Member States have
adopted measures intended to reduce the costs of broadband rollout. Scaling up
these best practices across the Union could significantly contribute to the
establishment of a digital single market. However those practices remain scarce
and scattered. Moreover differences in regulatory requirements sometimes
prevent cooperation across utilities and may raise barriers to entry for new
network operators and new business opportunities, hindering the development of
a single market for use and deployment of physical infrastructures for high-speed
electronic communications networks. Finally, the initiatives at Member State level do not always seem to be holistic, whereas it is essential to take
action across the whole rollout process, and across sectors, in order to
achieve a coherent and significant impact. 
(9)       This Regulation aims at
providing some minimum rights and obligations applicable across the Union in order to facilitate the rollout of high-speed electronic communications networks
and cross-sector coordination. While ensuring a minimum level playing field,
this should be without prejudice to existing best practices and measures
adopted at national and local level entailing more detailed provisions and
conditions as well as additional measures complementing those rights and
obligations, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle. 
(10)     In light of the lex
specialis principle, when more specific regulatory measures in conformity
with EU law apply, these should prevail over the minimum rights and obligations
provided for in this Regulation. Therefore this Regulation should be without
prejudice to EU law and in
particular to any specific regulatory measure, including the imposition of
remedies on undertakings having significant market power, applied in accordance
with the Union regulatory framework for electronic communications (Directive
2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a
common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services
(Framework Directive)[32],
Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March
2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services
(Authorisation Directive)[33],
Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March
2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks
and associated facilities (Access Directive)[34],
Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March
2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications
networks and services (Universal Service Directive)[35] and Commission Directive
2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic
communications networks and services[36]).

(11)     It can be significantly
more efficient for electronic communications network operators, in particular
new entrants, to re-use existing physical infrastructures, including those of
other utilities, in order to roll-out electronic communications networks, in
particular in areas where no suitable electronic communications network is
available or where it may not be economically feasible to build-up a new
physical infrastructure. Moreover, synergies across sectors may significantly
reduce the need for civil works due to the deployment of electronic communications
networks and therefore also the social and environmental costs linked to them,
such as pollution, nuisances and traffic congestion. Therefore this Regulation
should be applicable not only to electronic communications network providers
but to any owner or holder of rights to use extensive and ubiquitous physical
infrastructures suitable to host electronic communications network elements,
such as physical networks for the provision of electricity, gas, water and
sewage, heating and transport services. 
(12)     In view of their low degree
of differentiation, physical facilities of such networks can often host at the
same time a wide range of electronic communications network elements, including
those capable of delivering broadband access services at speeds of at least 30
Mbps in line with the technological neutrality principle, without affecting the
main service conveyed and with minimum adaptation costs. Therefore a physical
infrastructure that is intended to only host other elements of a network without
becoming itself an active network element, can be in principle used to
accommodate electronic communications cables, equipment or any other element of
electronic communications networks, regardless of its actual use or its
ownership. Without prejudice to the pursuit of the specific general interest
linked to the provision of the main service, synergies across network operators
should be encouraged in order to contribute at the same time to achieving the
targets of the Digital Agenda.
(13)     While this Regulation
should be also without prejudice to any specific safeguard needed to ensure the
security and integrity of the networks as well as to ensure that the main
service provided by the network operator is not affected, general rules in
national legislation prohibiting network operators to negotiate access to
physical infrastructures by electronic communications network providers could
prevent the establishment of a market for access to physical infrastructures
and should therefore be abolished. At the same time, the measures provided in
this Regulation are without prejudice to the possibility of the Member States
to render the provision of infrastructure access by utilities operators more
attractive by excluding revenues stemming from this service from the basis for
the calculation of end-users tariffs for their main activity or activities, in
accordance with applicable EU law. 
(14)     A network operator may
refuse access to specific physical infrastructures due to objective reasons. In
particular, a physical infrastructure may not be technically suitable in view
of specific circumstances concerning infrastructures for which access has been
requested, including lack of available space. Similarly, in specific
circumstances, sharing the infrastructure may jeopardise network integrity and
security or may endanger the provision of services that are primarily provided
over the same infrastructure. Moreover, when the network operator already
provides wholesale physical network infrastructure access that would meet the needs
of the access seeker, access to the underlying physical infrastructure may have
an adverse economic impact on its business model and incentives to invest while
possibly entailing an inefficient duplication of network elements. At the same
time in the case of physical infrastructure access obligations imposed pursuant
to the Union regulatory framework for electronic communications, such as those
on undertakings having significant market power, this would be already covered
by specific regulatory obligations that should not be affected by this
Regulation. 
(15)     When electronic
communications networks providers request access in a specified area, network
operators should make available an offer for the shared use of their facilities
under fair terms and conditions, including price, unless access is refused
based on objective reasons. Depending on circumstances, several elements could
influence the conditions under which such access is granted, such as: any
additional maintenance and adaptation costs; any preventive safeguards to be
adopted to limit adverse impacts on network security and integrity; any
specific liability arrangements in the event of damages; the use of any public
subsidy granted for the construction of the infrastructure, including specific terms
and conditions attached to the subsidy or provided under national law in
compliance with Union law; any constraints stemming from national provisions
aiming at protecting the environment, public health, public security or to meet
town and country planning objectives. 
(16)     In the event of
disagreement in commercial negotiation on technical and commercial terms and
conditions each party should be able to call on a dispute resolution body at
national level to impose a solution to the parties, in order to avoid
unjustified refusals to deal or the imposition of unreasonable conditions. When
determining prices for granting access, the dispute resolution body should take
into account the investments made on the physical infrastructure. In the
specific case of access to physical infrastructures of electronic
communications network operators, the investments made in this infrastructure
may directly contribute to the objectives of the Digital Agenda for Europe and
downstream competition may be influenced by free-riding. Hence, any access
obligation should take into account the economic viability of these investments
based on any time schedule for the return on investment, any impact of access
on downstream competition, any depreciation of the network assets at the time
of the access request, any business case underpinning the investment done, in
particular in recently built physical infrastructures used for the provision of
high-speed electronic communications services, and any possibility offered to
the access seeker to co-deploy.
(17)     In order to effectively
plan the deployment of high-speed electronic communications networks and to
ensure the most effective use of existing infrastructures suitable for rolling
out electronic communications networks, undertakings authorised to provide
electronic communications networks should be able to have access to minimum
information concerning physical infrastructures available in the area of
deployment. Such minimum information should allow for the assessment of the
potential for using existing infrastructure in a specific area as well as to
reduce damages to any existing physical infrastructures. In view of the number
of stakeholders involved and in order to facilitate access to that information,
also across sectors and borders, such minimum information should be made
available via a single information point. That information point should allow
access to minimum information already available in electronic form subject to
limitations to ensure network security and integrity or to safeguard legitimate
operating and business secrets. 
(18)     While not imposing any new
mapping obligation on Member States, this Regulation provides that minimum
information already collected by public sector bodies and available in
electronic form pursuant to national initiatives as well as under Union law
(such as Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the
European Community (INSPIRE)[37])
should be made available , e.g. via hyperlink, to a single information point
with a view to allow a coordinated access to information on physical
infrastructures for electronic communications network providers while at the
same time ensuring the security and integrity of any such information. Such
provision of information should be without prejudice to the transparency
requirements already applicable to the re-use of public sector information
pursuant to Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 17 November 2003 on the re-use of public sector information[38]. Where information available
to the public sector does not ensure adequate knowledge of the existing
physical infrastructures in a specific area or of a certain type, network
operators should make the information available to the single information point
upon request. 
(19)     Where minimum information
is not available via a single information point, the possibility of electronic
communications network operators to directly request such specific information
from any network operator in the area concerned should be nevertheless ensured.
In addition to that, if the request is reasonable, in particular if needed in
view of the possibility to share existing physical infrastructures or to
coordinate civil works, electronic communications network operators should be
granted the possibility to make in-site surveys and to request information
concerning planned civil works under transparent, proportionate and
non-discriminatory conditions and without prejudice to the safeguards adopted
to ensure network security and integrity as well as protecting operating and
business secrets. Advanced transparency of planned civil works by network
operators themselves, or by proactive single information points empowered to request
such information, should be incentivised, in particular for areas of greatest
utility, by redirecting authorised operators to such information whenever
available.
(20)     Where disputes concerning
access to the information on the physical infrastructures in view of deploying
high-speed electronic communications networks arise, the single information
point should be able to solve such disputes by means of a binding decision,
without prejudice to the possibility of any party to refer the case to a court.

(21)     Coordination of civil works
concerning physical infrastructures may ensure significant savings and minimise
inconvenience to the area affected by the deployment of new electronic
communications networks. For this reason, regulatory constraints preventing as
a general rule the negotiation among network operators with a view to
coordinate such works in order to deploy also high-speed electronic
communications networks should be prohibited. In the event of civil works not
financed by public means, however, this should be without prejudice for the
stakeholders to conclude civil works coordination agreements according to their
own investment and business plans and their preferred timing.
(22)     Civil works fully or
partially financed by public means should aim at maximising the positive
collective outcome, by exploiting the positive externalities of these works
across sectors and ensuring equal opportunities to share the available and
planned physical infrastructure in view of deploying electronic communications
networks. While this should not negatively affect the main purpose of the civil
works financed by public means, timely and reasonable requests to coordinate
deployment of elements of high-speed electronic communications networks,
ensuring for example the coverage of any additional costs and the minimisation
of changes to the original plans, should be met by the undertaking carrying out
the civil works concerned under proportionate, non-discriminatory and
transparent terms, without prejudice to applicable State aid rules. Specific
settlement procedures should be available to ensure the rapid resolution of
disputes concerning the negotiation of these coordination agreements under
reasonable, proportionate, non-discriminatory and transparent terms. Such provisions
should be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to reserve
capacity for electronic communications networks even in the absence of specific
requests, in view of meeting future demand for physical infrastructures to
maximise the value of civil works, or to adopt measures entailing similar
rights to coordinate civil works for operators of other types of networks, such
as gas or electricity. 
(23)     A number of different
permits concerning the deployment of electronic communications networks or new
network elements may be necessary, including building, town planning,
environmental and other permits, in order to protect national and Union general
interests. The number of permits required for the deployment of different types
of electronic communications networks and the local character of the deployment
may entail the application of a variety of procedures and conditions. While
preserving the right of each competent authority to be involved and maintain
its decision making prerogatives in accordance with the subsidiarity principle,
the establishment of a single point providing information about all procedures
and general conditions applicable to civil works could reduce complexity and
increase efficiency and transparency, in particular for new entrants or smaller
operators not active in that area. Moreover undertakings deploying electronic
communications networks should have the right to submit their permit request
through a single contact point, entrusted with the responsibility of
coordinating the different procedures and monitoring whether the decisions are
adopted within the legal deadlines. Such a contact point should act as a
one-stop-shop, without necessarily exercising decision-making powers unless so
entrusted by national law 
(24)     To ensure that permit
granting procedures do not act as barriers to investment, and that they do not
have an adverse effect on the single market, a decision on whether or not to
grant permit requests should be in any case available at the latest within six
months, without prejudice to other specific deadlines or obligations laid down
for the proper conduct of the procedure which are applicable to the permit
granting procedure in accordance with national or Union law. Such decision may
be tacit or explicit in character according to the applicable legal provisions.
Moreover, any delay in deciding on permits granting should trigger the right of
compensation to undertakings that have requested such permits if they can prove
that they have suffered damages due to such a delay. Such a right should be
exercised in accordance with the procedural and substantive safeguards provided
in national laws. 
(25)     In order to ensure that
such permits granting procedures are completed within reasonable deadlines,
Member States may establish several safeguards, such as tacit approval, or take
measures to simplify granting procedures by inter alia reducing the
number of permits needed to deploy electronic communications networks or by
exempting certain categories of small or standardised civil works from permit
granting. Authorities, at national, regional or local level, should justify any
refusal to grant such permits in their competence, on basis of transparent,
non-discriminatory, objective and proportionate criteria and conditions. This
should be without prejudice to any measure adopted by the Member States, in
view of exempting certain elements of electronic communications networks,
whether passive or active, from permit granting. 
(26)     Achieving the targets of
the Digital Agenda requires that the infrastructure rollout is brought close to
the end-users location, while fully respecting the principle of proportionality
as regards any limitation brought to the right of property in view of the
general interest pursued. Existence of high-speed electronic communications
networks up to the end-user should be facilitated while ensuring at the same
time technological neutrality, in particular by high-speed-ready in-building
physical infrastructure. In view of the fact that providing for mini-ducts
during the construction of the building has only a limited incremental cost
while retrofitting buildings with high-speed infrastructure may represent a
significant part of the cost of high-speed network deployment, all new or
majorly renovated buildings should be equipped with physical infrastructure,
allowing the connection of end-users with high-speed networks. In order to
roll-out high-speed electronic communications network, moreover, new
multi-dwelling buildings, as well as majorly renovated multi-dwelling buildings
should be equipped with an access or concentration point, by which the provider
may access the in-building network. In practice, this would mean that building
developers should foresee that empty ducts are provided from every dwelling to
a concentration point, located in or outside the building. There may be cases
such as new single dwellings or categories of major renovation works in
isolated areas where the prospect of high-speed connection is considered, on
objective grounds, too remote to justify the additional costs of deploying
in-house high-speed-ready physical infrastructures and/or a concentration
point.
(27)     When providers of public
communications networks deploy high-speed networks in a specific area, there
are significant economies of scale if they can terminate their network to the
building concentration point, irrespective of whether the owners, condominium
or residents have expressed explicit interest for the service at that moment in
time, but provided that impact on private property is minimised, by using
existing physical infrastructure and restoring the affected area. Once the
network is terminated at the concentration point, the connection of an
additional customer is possible at a significantly lower cost, in particular by
means of access to a high-speed-ready vertical segment inside the building,
where it already exists.
(28)     In view of the social
benefits stemming from digital inclusion and taking into account the economics
of deployment of high-speed electronic communications networks, where there is
neither existing passive or active high-speed-ready infrastructure serving
end-users premises nor alternatives to provide high-speed electronic
communications networks to end-users, any provider of public communications networks
provider should have a right to terminate its network to a private premise at
its own costs, when it has obtained the agreement of the subscriber, and
provided that it minimises the impact on private property, for example, when
possible, by reusing existing physical infrastructure available in the building
or ensuring full restoration of the affected areas. 
(29)     Without prejudice to the
tasks entrusted to national regulatory authorities provided under the Union
regulatory framework for electronic communications, in the absence of specific
designations by Member States, in order to ensure consistent dispute settlement
decisions, such functions provided for in this Regulation should be assigned to
the authorities fulfilling the tasks provided in Article 20 of Directive
2002/21/EC, taking into account the expertise available and the guarantees of
independence and impartiality. However, in line with the principle of
subsidiarity, this Regulation should be without prejudice to the possibility of
Member States to allocate the regulatory tasks provided herewith to authorities
better suited to fulfil them in accordance with the domestic constitutional
system of attribution of competences and powers and with the requirements set
forth in this Regulation. 
(30)     Whatever body be designated
by the Member State for dispute settlement, it should ensure impartiality and
independence vis-à-vis the parties involved. Also, the designated
authorities should have appropriate resources and sanctioning powers in the
event of lack of compliance with the decisions adopted. 
(31)     In order to ensure
effectiveness of the information points provided for in this Regulation, Member
States deciding to appoint different bodies from the national regulatory
authority fulfilling the tasks provided in Article 20 of Directive 2002/21/EC
should ensure adequate resources as well as that the relevant information
concerning a specific area is made available at such information points at an optimal level of aggregation where valuable
efficiencies may be ensured in view of the tasks assigned (such as the
cadastre). In this regard, Member States may consider the possible synergies
and economies of scope with the Points of Single Contact within the meaning of
Article 6 of Directive 2006/123/EC of 12 December 2006 on services in the
internal market (the Services Directive), with a view to build on existing
structures and maximising the benefits for end-users. 
(32)     Since the objectives of the
proposed action aiming at facilitating the deployment of physical
infrastructures suitable for high-speed electronic communications networks
across the Union cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can
therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the action, be better achieved
at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle
of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the
principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does
not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
(33)     This Regulation respects
the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by
the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and notably the right
to privacy and the protection of business secrets, the freedom to conduct
business, the right to property and the right to an effective remedy. This
Regulation has to be applied by the Member States in accordance with those
rights and principles.
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Subject matter and scope
1. This Regulation aims to facilitate and
incentivise the roll-out of high-speed electronic communications networks by promoting
joint use of existing and enabling more efficient deployment of new physical
infrastructure so that such networks can be rolled out at lower cost. 
2. This Regulation shall apply to all civil
works and physical infrastructure, as defined in Article 2. 
3. This Regulation is without prejudice to
the rights of Member States to maintain or introduce measures in conformity
with Union law which contain more detailed provisions than those set out in
this Regulation.
4. This Regulation is without prejudice to
Directive 2002/21/EC, Directive 2002/20/EC, Directive 2002/19/EC, Directive
2002/22/EC and Directive 2002/77/EC.
Article 2
Definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, the
definitions set out in Directives 2002/21/EC, 2002/20/EC, 2002/19/EC,
2002/22/EC and 2002/77/EC shall apply.
The following definitions shall also apply:
(1) "network operator" means an
electronic communications network provider as well as an undertaking providing
a physical infrastructure intended to provide: a service of production,
transport or distribution of gas, electricity, including public lighting,
heating, water, including disposal or treatment of waste water and sewage;
transport services, including railways, roads, ports and airports;
(2) "physical infrastructure"
means any element of a network which is not active such as pipes, masts, ducts,
inspection chambers, manholes, cabinets, buildings or entries to buildings,
antenna installations, towers and poles and their associated facilities;
(3) “high-speed electronic communications
network” means an electronic communication network which is capable of
delivering broadband access services at speeds of at least 30 Mbps.
(4) "civil works" every outcome
of building or civil engineering works taken as a whole which is sufficient of
itself to fulfil an economic or technical function and entails one or more
elements of a physical infrastructure;
(5) "public sector body" means a
State, regional or local authority, a body governed by public law or an
association formed by one or several such authorities or one or several such
bodies governed by public law;
(6) "body governed by public law"
means any body:
(a) established for the specific purpose of
meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial or commercial
character;
(b) having legal personality;
(c) financed, in full or for the most part, by
the State, or regional or local authorities, or other bodies governed by public
law; or subject to management supervision by such authorities or bodies; or
having an administrative, managerial or supervisory board, more than half of
whose members are appointed by the State, regional or local authorities or by
other bodies governed by public law;
(7) "in-building physical
infrastructure" means physical infrastructure at the end-user's location,
including elements under joint ownership, intended to host wired and/or
wireless access networks, where such access networks are capable of delivering
electronic communications services and connecting the building concentration
point with the network termination point;
(8) "high-speed-ready in-building
physical infrastructure" means in-building physical infrastructure
intended to host elements of high-speed electronic communications networks; 
(9) "major renovation works"
means building or civil engineering works at the end user's location
encompassing structural modifications of the in-building physical infrastructure
and requiring a building permit;
(10) "permit" means a formal or
implied decision of a competent authority following any procedure under which a
person is required to take steps in order to legally execute building or civil
engineering works 
Article 3
Access to existing physical infrastructure
1. Every network operator shall have the
right to offer access to its physical infrastructure in view of deployment of
elements of high-speed electronic communications networks. 
2. Upon specific written request of an
undertaking authorised to provide electronic communications networks, any
network operator shall have the obligation to meet all reasonable requests for
access to its physical infrastructure under fair terms and conditions,
including price, in view of deploying elements of high-speed electronic
communications networks. 
3. Every refusal of access shall be based
on objective criteria, which may relate in particular to:
(a) the technical suitability of the
physical infrastructure to which access has been requested to host any of the
elements of electronic communications networks referred to in paragraph 2; 
(b) availability of space to host the
elements referred to in point (a); 
(c) integrity and security of any network
already deployed; 
(d) the risk of serious interferences of
the planned electronic communications services with the provision of other
services over the same physical infrastructure;
(e) the availability of alternative means
of wholesale physical network infrastructure access provided by the network
operator and suitable for the provision of high-speed electronic communications
networks. 
The network operator shall state the
reasons for any refusal within one month from the written request for access.
4. Where access is refused or agreement on
specific terms and conditions, including price, has not been reached within two
months from the written request for access, either party is entitled to refer
the issue to the competent national dispute settlement body. 
5. The national dispute settlement body
referred to in paragraph 4 shall, taking full account of the principle of
proportionality, issue a binding decision to resolve the dispute initiated
pursuant to paragraph 4, including the determination of fair terms, conditions
and prices where appropriate, within the shortest possible time frame and in
any case within four months, without prejudice to the possibility of any party
to refer the case to a court. Any price set by the dispute settlement body
shall take into account the impact of the requested access on the business plan
underpinning the investments made by the network operator to whom access is
requested, in particular in case of recently built physical infrastructures
used for the provision of high-speed electronic communications services. 
Article 4
Transparency concerning physical infrastructure 

1. In order to request access to physical
infrastructure in accordance with Article 3, every undertaking authorised to
provide electronic communications networks shall have the right to access, upon
request, via a single information point, the following set of minimum
information concerning the existing physical infrastructure of any network
operator:
(a) location, route and geo-reference
coordinates; 
(b) size, type and current use of the
infrastructure;
(c) name of the owner or of the holder of
rights to use physical infrastructure and a contact point. 
The undertaking requesting access shall
specify the area concerned in view of deploying elements of high-speed
electronic communications networks. 
Access to the minimum information for the
specified area shall be granted forthwith in electronic form under
proportionate, non-discriminatory and transparent terms. Access to the minimum
information may be limited by the single information point only when considered
necessary in view of the security of the networks and their integrity or
operating and business secrets. 
The single information point shall ensure
that access to the minimum information pursuant to this paragraph is available
by [Publications Office: please insert the exact date: entry into force of
this Regulation + 12 months] at the latest.
2. Every public sector body holding in
electronic format the minimum information referred to in paragraph 1 concerning
the physical infrastructure of a network operator by reason of its tasks shall
make it available to the single information point by electronic means before [Publications
Office: please insert the exact date: entry into force of this Regulation + 6
months]. Any update to this information and any new minimum information
referred to in paragraph 1 received by the public sector body shall be made
available to the single information point within one month from the receipt. 
3. Where the minimum information referred
to in paragraph 1 is not held by public sector bodies in accordance with
paragraph 2, any network operator shall make available upon specific request of
the single information point the minimum information referred to in paragraph 1
on its physical infrastructure in electronic format within one month from the
request. The network operator shall make available to the single information
point any update of the minimum information provided within one month from the
actual modification of the physical network which changes that minimum
information. 
4. Where minimum information referred to in
paragraph 1 is not available via the single information point, network
operators shall provide access to such information upon specific written
request of an undertaking authorised to provide electronic communications
networks. The request shall specify the area concerned in view of deploying
elements of high-speed electronic communications networks. Access to
information shall be granted within one month from the written request under
proportionate, non-discriminatory and transparent terms, without prejudice to
limitations pursuant to paragraph 1.
5. Upon specific written request of an
undertaking authorised to provide electronic communications networks, network
operators shall meet reasonable requests for in-site surveys of specific
elements of their physical infrastructure. The request shall specify the
elements of the network concerned in view of deploying elements of high-speed
electronic communications networks. In-site surveys of the specified network
elements shall be granted under proportionate, non-discriminatory and
transparent terms within one month from the written request, without prejudice
to limitations pursuant to paragraph 1. 
6. Upon specific written request of an
undertaking authorised to provide electronic communications networks, any
network operator shall make available the following set of minimum information
concerning on-going or planned civil works related to its physical
infrastructure for which a permit has been granted, a permit granting procedure
is pending or first submission to the competent authorities for permit granting
is envisaged in the following six months: 
(a) the location and the type of works; 
(b) the network elements involved;
(c) the estimated date for starting the
works and their duration;
(d) a contact point. 
The request of an undertaking authorised to
provide electronic communications networks shall specify the area concerned in
view of deploying elements of high-speed electronic communications networks.
Within two weeks from the written request, network operators shall provide the
requested information under proportionate, non-discriminatory and transparent
terms, without prejudice to limitations pursuant to paragraph 1. 
7. The network operator may refuse the
request pursuant to paragraph 6 if:
- it has made the requested information
publicly available in electronic format or 
- access to such information is ensured via
a single information point.
8. Upon specific request any network
operator shall make available to a single information point the set of minimum
information referred to in paragraph 6.
9. In the event of a dispute arising in
connection with the rights and obligations provided for in paragraphs 4 to 7,
either party shall be entitled to refer it to a national dispute settlement
body. The body in charge of dispute settlement shall, taking full account of
the principle of proportionality, issue a binding decision to resolve the
dispute within the shortest possible time frame and in any case within two
months, without prejudice to the possibility of any party to refer the case to
a court. 
10. Member States may provide for
exemptions from the obligations provided for in paragraphs 1 to 5 in the case
of existing physical infrastructures considered not technically suitable to
deploy high-speed electronic communications networks. Such measures shall be
duly motivated in this regard. The interested parties shall be given the
opportunity to comment on the draft measures within a reasonable period. Any
such measure shall be notified to the Commission. 
Article 5
Coordination of civil works
1. Every network operator shall have the
right to negotiate agreements concerning coordination of civil works with
undertakings authorised to provide electronic communications networks in view
of deploying elements of high-speed electronic communications networks. 
2. Every undertaking performing civil works
fully or partially financed by public means shall meet any reasonable request
from undertakings authorised to provide electronic communications networks in
view of deploying elements of high-speed electronic communications networks for
civil works coordination agreement on transparent and non-discriminatory terms,
provided that this does not entail any additional costs for the initially
envisaged civil works and that the request to coordinate is filed as soon as
possible and in any case at least one month before the submission of the final
project to the competent authorities for permit granting.
3. Where agreement on coordination of civil
works pursuant to paragraph 2 is not achieved within one month from the formal
request to negotiate, any party is entitled to refer the issue to the competent
national dispute settlement body. 
4. The national dispute settlement body
referred to in paragraph 3 shall, taking full account of the principle of
proportionality, issue a binding decision to resolve the dispute initiated
pursuant to paragraph 3, including the determination of fair and
non-discriminatory terms, conditions and charges where appropriate, within the
shortest possible time frame and in any case within two months, without
prejudice to the possibility of any party to refer the case to a court. 
5. Member States may provide for exemptions
from the obligations provided for in this Article for civil works of
insignificant value. Such measures shall be duly motivated in this regard. The
interested parties shall be given the opportunity to comment on the draft
measures within a reasonable period. Any such measure shall be notified to the
Commission. 
Article 6
Permit granting
1. Every
undertaking authorised to provide electronic
communications networks shall have the right to access by electronic means via a single information point, upon request, any information concerning
the conditions and procedures applicable for granting permits for civil works
needed in view of deploying elements of high-speed electronic communications
networks, including any exemptions applicable to such elements as regards some
or all permits required under national law.
2. Every undertaking authorised to provide
electronic communications networks shall have the right to submit, by
electronic means via the single information point, applications for permits
required for civil works needed in view of deploying elements of high-speed
electronic communications networks. The single information point shall
facilitate and coordinate the permit granting process. In particular it shall
ensure that the applications are forwarded to any competent authorities
involved in granting the permits applicable to the civil works at stake as well
as monitor compliance with the deadlines applicable in accordance with
paragraph 3. 
3. The competent authorities shall grant or
refuse permits within six months from receiving a request, without prejudice to other specific deadlines or obligations laid
down for the proper conduct of the procedure which are applicable to the permit
granting procedure in accordance with national or Union law. Any refusal shall be duly justified on the basis of objective,
transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria.
4. Every undertaking authorised to provide
electronic communications networks which has suffered damage as a result of
non-compliance with the deadlines applicable under paragraph 3 shall have
the right to receive compensation from the competent authority for the damage
suffered, in accordance with national law. 
Article 7
In-building equipment 
1. All newly constructed buildings at the end-user's location, including elements under joint
ownership, for which applications for building permits
have been submitted after [Publications Office:
please insert the exact date of the entry into force of this Regulation],
shall be equipped with a high-speed-ready in-building
physical infrastructure, up to the network termination points. The same
obligation applies in the event of major renovation works for which
applications for building permits have been submitted after [Publications
Office: please insert the exact date of the entry into force of this Regulation].

2. All newly constructed multi-dwelling
buildings, for which applications for building permits have been submitted
after [Publications Office: please insert the exact date of the entry into force of this Regulation], shall be equipped with a concentration point, located inside or
outside the building, and accessible to electronic communications networks
providers, whereby connection to the high-speed-ready in-building
infrastructure is made available. The same obligation applies in the event of
major renovation works concerning multi-dwelling buildings for which
applications for building permits have been submitted after [Publications
Office: please insert the exact date of the entry into force of this Regulation].

3. Member States may provide for exemptions
for categories of buildings, in particular single dwellings, or major
renovation works, from the obligations provided for paragraph 1 and 2, when the
cost of fulfilling those obligations is disproportionate. Such measures shall
be duly motivated. The interested parties shall be given the opportunity to
comment on the draft measures within a reasonable period. Any such measure
shall be notified to the Commission. 
Article 8 
Access to in-building equipment 
1. Every provider of public communications
networks shall have the right to terminate its network at the concentration
point, provided that it minimise the impact on the private property and at its
own costs, in view of accessing the high-speed-ready in-building physical
infrastructure. 
2. Every provider of public communications
networks shall have the right to access any existing high-speed-ready
in-building physical infrastructure on reasonable terms if duplication is
technically impossible or economically inefficient. The holder of a right to
use the in-building physical infrastructure shall grant access under
non-discriminatory terms and conditions. 
3. Where agreement on access pursuant to
paragraph 1 or 2 is not achieved within two months from the formal request of
access, each party shall have the right to refer the issue to the competent
national dispute settlement body in order to assess the compliance with the
requirements provided for in those paragraphs. This national dispute settlement
body shall, taking full account of the principle of proportionality, issue a
binding decision to resolve the dispute within the shortest possible time frame
and in any case within two months, without prejudice to the possibility of any
party to refer the case to a court. 
4. In the absence of available
high-speed-ready in-building infrastructure, every provider of public
communications networks shall have the right to terminate its network equipment
at the premise of a subscriber to a high-speed electronic communications
service, subject to its agreement, provided that it minimises the impact on the
private property and at its own costs. 
Article 9
Competent bodies
1. The national regulatory authority which
fulfils the tasks provided in Article 20 of Directive 2002/21/EC shall perform
the function of the national dispute settlement body referred to in Article 3
(4), Article 4 (9), Article 5 (4) and Article 8(3), unless the Member State
appoints other competent bodies. 
2. Any other national dispute settlement
body appointed by Member States pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be legally
distinct and functionally independent of all network operators. It shall have
the power to impose on network operators appropriate, effective, proportionate
and dissuasive sanctions in the event of breach of the obligations stemming
from the decisions adopted when deciding the dispute. 
3. The national regulatory authority which
fulfils the tasks provided in Article 20 of Directive 2002/21/EC shall perform
the functions of the single information point referred to in Article 4 and
Article 6, unless the Member State appoints other competent bodies. 
4. Any other single information point
appointed by Member States pursuant to paragraph 3 shall have the power to
impose on network operators appropriate, effective, proportionate and
dissuasive sanctions in the event of breach of the obligations stemming from
Article 4 (3) and (8).
5. Member States shall notify to the
Commission the identity of each competent body designated in accordance with
this Article for carrying out a task under this Regulation by [Publications
Office: please insert the exact date: entry into
force of this Regulation] and any modification
thereof, before such designation or modification enters into force. 
6. Any decisions taken by any of the competent
bodies referred to in this Article shall be subject to an appeal before a court
in accordance with national law. 
Article 10
Review
The Commission shall present a report to
the European Parliament and the Council by [Publications
Office: please insert the exact date: entry into
force of this Regulation + 3 years] at the latest on the implementation of
this Regulation. The report shall include a summary of the impact of the
measures provided by this Regulation and an assessment of the progress towards
achieving its objectives.
Article 11
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on
the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal
of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding
in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 
For the European Parliament                       For
the Council
The President                                                 The
President
[1]               Analysys Mason, 2008, Analysys Mason 2012, WIK, 2008
[2]               Analysys Mason, 2012, The estimation is based on the
following assumptions: 25% of the deployment is in existing ducts, saving 75%
in Capex for this part, 10% of the deployment connects the network to new
housing developments, and co-deployment with other operators/utility companies
is used, saving 15–60%, and 5% of the deployment connects the network to
pre-wired multi-dwelling units, saving 20–60%. In addition, there will also be
social, environmental, and economic benefits.
[3]                      The estimate is based on an investment scenario calculated as part
of an extensive study by Analysys Mason and Tech4i2 ("The socio-economic
impact of bandwidth", 2013). This study forecasts that the broadband DAE
targets would be reached only under a major intervention scenario, namely 211
billion euro of NGA investment. In order to obtain potential savings, the
indicated percentages were applied to his amount. 
[4]               A new Strategy for the Single Market, report by Mario
Monti to the President of the European Commission, 9 May 2010
[5]               Steps towards a truly Internal Market for
e-communications in the run-up to 2020, Ecorys, TU Delft and TNO, released on
February 2012
[6]               (COM (2012) 573)
[7]               Booz and Company, Maximising the impact of
Digitalisation, 2012
[8]               Commission estimate based on national studies
(Liebenau, J., Atkinson, R., Karrberg, P., Castro, D. and Ezell, S., 2009, The
UK Digital Road to Recovery; Katz R.L. et al , 2009, The Impact of
Broadband on Jobs and the German Economy).
[9]               The Court of Justice reminded in De Coster
(C-17/00, [2001] Rec. p. I-9445, n° 37) that any local secondary legislation
affecting the freedom to provide services must comply with the principle of
proportionality. On the same instance of satellite dishes, the Commission underlined
in its Communication on the general application of the principles of free
movement of goods and services – Articles 28 and 49 – concerning the use of
satellite dishes (COM(2001) 351 final), that although each Member State is
responsible for setting the conditions which must be met within its internal
legal system for installing and using satellite dishes, some national
regulations may nonetheless affect what can be received. Thus, indirectly, they
affect distribution of the wide range of services transmitted by satellite –
which, by their very nature, cross borders – such as television and radio
broadcasts, together with interactive services (“information society
services”). Such national measures must therefore comply with the fundamental
principles of the Treaty, such as the free movement of goods and the freedom to
provide services within the Single Market.
[10]             Regulation (EC) n° 2887/2000 of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on unbundled access to the local loop,
OJ, 30.12.2000, L336/4.
[11]             A Digital Agenda for Europe, Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2010)245 of 19.5.2010,
in particular section 2.4.1.
[12]             Conclusions of the European Council of 1/2 March 2012,
EUCO 4/2/12, http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/12/st00/st00004-re02.en12.pdf,
item 15.
[13]             Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions, COM(2012)573 of 3.10.2012, Key Action 9.
[14]             Conclusions of the European Council of 13/14 December
2012, EUCO 205/12, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/134353.pdf,
item 17. 
[15]             A report on the outcome of the public consultation can
be found as part of the Impact Assessment Report that is attached to this
proposal (Annex I to the Report).
[16]             See http://daa.ec.europa.eu/content/special/crowdsourcing.
[17]             A Report that builds on the study prepared by Deloitte,
as further cross-checked with other sources, can be found as part of the Impact
Assessment Report that is attached to this proposal (Annex II to the Report).
[18]             This Report can be found as part of the Impact
Assessment Report that is attached to this proposal (Annex III to the Report).
[19]             A complete list of these sources can be found in the
bibliography of the Impact Assessment Report.
[20]             The Impact Assessment Report is attached to this
proposal.
[21]             See Case C-66/04, paragraph 45,
and Case C-217/04, paragraph 43.
[22]             See Analysys Mason, Final report for the DG Information
Society and Media, European Commission Support for the preparation of an impact
assessment to accompany an EU initiative on reducing the costs of high-speed
broadband infrastructure deployment (SMART 2012/0013)
[23]             See Case C-217/04 paragraph 47.
[24]             See for example Recital 8 of the Better Regulation
Directive 2009/140/EC, Recital 22 of the Framework Directive, Recital 1 and 4
of Regulation 2887/2000/EC.
[25]             See Case 272/83 paragraphs 25 and 27.
[26]             European Parliament resolution of 14 June 2012 on "Single
Market Act: The Next Steps to Growth" (2012/2663(RSP)), point 10. 
[27]             OJ C , , p. .
[28]             OJ C , , p. .
[29]             COM (2010)245; see also see
also the Digital Agenda review, COM (2012) 784 final.
[30]             Conclusions of the European Council of 13/14 December
2012, EUCO 205/12, item 17.
[31]             COM(2012) 573 final.
[32]             OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33.
[33]             OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 21.
[34]             OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 7.
[35]             OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 51.
[36]             OJ L 249, 17.9.2002, p. 21.
[37]             OJ L 108, 25.4.2007, p. 1.
[38]             OJ L 345, 31.12.2003, p. 90.