19 Amendments of Tomas TOBÉ related to 2023/0046(COD)
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) To achieve those targets, there is a need for policies to speed up and lower the costs of the deployment of very high- capacity fixed and wireless networks across the Union, including proper planning, coordination and the reduction of administrative burdens, while keeping costs for public authorities low.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation aims to strengthen and harmonise rights and obligations applicable across the Union to accelerate the roll-out of very high capacity networks and cross-sector coordination, while respecting the different constitutional structures of Member States, including regional and local self-government and the principle of procedural autonomy of Member States. Due to the persistent fragmentation of electronic communications markets in individual national markets, undertakings providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks are unable to achieve economies of scale. This can have a strong downstream effect on cross-border trade and services provision, since many services can only be provided where an adequately performant network is in place across the Union. While ensuring an improved level playing field, this Regulation does not prevent national measures in compliance with Union law that serve to promote the joint use of existing physical infrastructure or enable a more efficient deployment of new physical infrastructure by complementing the rights and obligations laid down in this Regulation. For example, Member States could extend provisions on civil works coordination also to privately funded projects or require that more information on physical infrastructure or planned civil works is provided to a single information point in electronic format, provided that they do not violate Union law including the provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) To ensure legal certainty, including regarding specific regulatory measures imposed under Directive (EU) 2018/1972, under Title II, Chapters II to IV and Directive 2002/77/EC36 , the provisions of these directives and their national implementations should prevail over this Regulation. _________________ 36 Commission Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services (OJ L 249, 17.9.2002, p. 21).
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In particular, taking into account the fast development of providers of wireless physical infrastructure such as ‘tower companies’, and their increasingly significant role as providers of access to physical infrastructure suitable to install elements of wireless electronic communications networks, such as 5G, the definition of ‘network operator’ should be extended beyond undertakings providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks and operators of other types of networks, such as transport, gas or electricity, to include undertakings providing associated facilities, which thus become subject to all the obligations and benefits set out inshall also fall under the scope of theis Regulation, except the provisions regarding in-building physical infrastructure and access.
Amendment 102 #
(15a) According to the basic principle of the market economy, regulatory intervention is only necessary in the event of a market failure. Since the emergence of providers of wireless physical infrastructure such as ‘tower companies’, and their uptake of their increasingly significant role as providers of access to physical infrastructure suitable to install elements of wireless electronic communications networks, such as 5G, no significant phenomena occurred that would indicate a market failure. Their business model, the fees they charge for the provision of their infrastructure and their pricing models have not been subject to any regulation so far. Therefore, the Commission, supported by BEREC and the national regulators, should conduct a market analysis to determine whether there is a market failure in relation to providers of wireless physical infrastructure such as ‘tower companies’ . Should this be the case, the Commission shall, by means of a delegated act, subject the providers of wireless physical infrastructure such as ‘tower companies’ to all the obligations and benefits set out in the Regulation, except the provisions regarding in-building physical infrastructure and access. Until then, their business model should remain unregulated.
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In the absence of a justified exception, physical infrastructure elements owned or controlled by public sector bodies, even when they are not part of a network, can also host electronic communications network elements and should be made accessible to facilitate installing network elements of very high capacity networks, in particular wireless networks. Examples of physical infrastructure elements are buildings, including rooftops, entries to buildings, and any other asset, including street furniture, such as light poles, street signs, traffic lights, billboards, bus and tramway stops and metro stations. It is for Member States to identify specific buildings owned or controlled by public sector bodies in their territories where access obligations cannot apply, for example, for reasons of architectural, historical, religious or natural value.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Operators should have access to minimum information on physical infrastructure and planned civil works in the area of deployment. This will enable them to effectively plan deploying very high capacity networks and ensure the most effective use of existing physical infrastructure, suitable for rolling out such networks, and planned civil works. Such minimum information is a pre-requisite to assess the potential for using existing physical infrastructure or coordinating the planned civil works in a specific area, as well as to reduce damage to any existing physical infrastructures. In view of the number of stakeholders involved (covering publicly and privately financed civil works as well as existing or planned physical infrastructure) and to facilitate access to that information (across sectors and borders), the network operators and public sector bodies subject to transparency obligations should, where feasible, proactively (rather than upon request) provide and maintain such minimum information via a single information point. This will simplify managing requests to access such information and enable operators to express their interest in accessing physical infrastructure or coordinating civil works, for which timing is critical. The minimum information on planned civil works should be provided via a single information point as soon as the information is available to the network operator concerned and, in any event and where permits are required, no later than 3 months before the permit application is first submitted to the competent authorities.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) A number of different permits for deploying elements of electronic communications networks or associated facilities may be necessary in order to protect national and Union general interests. These can include digging, building, town planning, environmental and other permits as well as rights of way. The number of permits and rights of way required for deploying different types of electronic communications networks or associated facilities and the local character of the deployment could involve applying different procedures and conditions, which can cause difficulties in the network deployment. Therefore, to facilitate deployment, all rules on the conditions and procedures applicable to granting permits and rights of way should be streamlined and consistent at national level, while respecting the constitutional structure of every Member State. While preserving the right of each competent authority to be involved and maintain its decision-making prerogatives in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, all information on the procedures and general conditions applicable to granting permits for civil works and rights of way should be available via single information points. This could reduce complexity and increase efficiency and transparency for all operators and particularly new entrants and smaller operators not active in that area. Moreover, operators should have the right to submit their requests for permits and rights of way in electronic format via a single information point. Those undertakings should also be able to retrieve information in electronic format about the status of their requests and whether they have been granted or refused.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Permit-granting procedures should not be barriers to investment or harm the internal market. Member States should therefore ensure that a decision on whether or not to grant permits on the deployment of elements of very high capacity networks or associated facilities is made available within 4 months from the receipt of a complete permit requestthe deadlines set in their national laws. This is 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. Competent authorities should not restrict, hinder or make the deployment of very high capacity networks or associated facilities economically less attractive. Specifically, they should not prevent procedures for granting permits and rights of way from proceeding in parallel, where possible, or require operators to obtain one type of authorisation before they can apply for other types of authorisations. Competent authorities should justify any refusal to grant permits or rights of way under their competence, based on objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate conditions. Whenever a competent authority doesn't respond within the deadlines set for the granting procedure, it should inform the applicant about the delay and its reasons on its own motion. Member States should introduce incentives in their national legislation for competent authorities to grant permits faster than required by law.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) To avoid undue delays, competent authorities must determine the completeness of the permit request within 15 days from its receiptout unnecessary delay. The permit request should be deemed complete as soon as possible unless the competent authority invites the applicant to provide any missing information within that period. For reasons of equal treatment and transparency, the competent authorities should not consider permit requests for civil works to be admissible if the minimum information required under this Regulation has not been made available via a single information point within 3 months before the first permit request is submitted to the competent authorities. Where, in addition to permits, rights of way are required for deploying elements of very high capacity networks, competent authorities should, by way of derogation from Article 43 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972, grant such rights of way within 4 months from the receipt of the requestwithout unnecessary delay. Other rights of way not needed in conjunction with permits for civil works should continue to be granted within 6 months in accordance with Article 43 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972. Operators that suffer damage due to the delay of a competent authority to grant permits or rights of way within the applicable deadlines should have the right to compensation.
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In order to ensure that the procedures for granting such permits and rights of way are completed within reasonable deadlines, as appears from certain modernising and good administrative practices at national level, it is necessary to draw up principles for administrative simplification. This should include inter alia limiting the obligation of prior authorisation to cases in which it is essential and introducing tacit approval by the competent authorities after a certain period of time has elapsed. Moreover, the categories of deployments exempted from permits under Union law should no longer be subject to permits under national law.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point b – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point b – point ii
(ii) transport services, including railways, roads, tunnels, ports and airports;
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) the availability of open, non- discriminating access to electronic communications networks of wholesale only operators owned or controlled by public sector bodies suitable for the provision of very high capacity networks covering the area of the infrastructure access was requested to.
Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. The competent authorities shall, within 15 working days from its receiptout unnecessary delay, reject applications for permits, including for rights of way, for which the minimum information has not been made available via a singlethe dedicated information point, pursuant to Article 6(1) first subparagraph, by the same operator which applies for that permit., if this operator has an obligation to allow coordination for those civil works pursuant to Article 5 second paragraph;
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The competent authorities shall grant or refuse permits, other than rights of way, within 4 months from the date ofout unnecessary delay following the receipt of a complete permit application in accordance with national law.
Amendment 339 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The completeness of the application for permits or rights of way shall be determined by the competent authorities within 15 days from the receipt of the application. Unless the competent authorities invited the applicant to provide any missing information within that period, the application shall be deemed completeout unnecessary delay and in accordance with national law.
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. By way of derogation from Article 43(1), point (a) of Directive (EU) 2018/1972, where rights of way over or under public or private property are required for the deployment of elements of very high capacity networks or associated facilities in addition to permits, competent authorities shall grant such rights of way within the 4 month period from the date ofout necessary delay following the receipt of the application.
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. In the absence of a response from the competent authority within the 4- month deadline referred to in paragraphs 5 first subparagraph, and unless such deadline is extended pursuant to paragraph 5 fourth subparagraph, the permit shall be deemed to have been granted. This shall also apply in the case of rights of way referred to in paragraph 6deadlines of administrative procedures laid down on national level the competent authority shall justify the delay to the applicant on its own motion. This article shall be without prejudice to the possibility of Member States to introduce further incentives for competent authorities to speed up the permit granting procedure.