2023/0046(COD) | [ParlTrack]

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)

(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. 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 present a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and the Council, addressing the occurred market failures.

Amendment 104 #

Proposal for a regulation
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, 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~~national security, safety, including road safety, historical, religious or natural value. In order to ensure public acceptance and sustainable deployment, network elements of very high capacity networks, in particular wireless networks, should have minimal visual impact.

Amendment 105 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Tomas TOBÉ, Seán KELLY, Markus PIEPER, Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA, Othmar KARAS, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
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 106 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) This Regulation should be without prejudice to any specific safeguard needed to ensure safety and public health, the security and integrity of the networks, in particular critical infrastructure, as defined by national law, and to ensure that the main service provided by the network operator is not affected, in particular in networks used for the provision of water intended for human consumption. However, general rules in national legislation prohibiting network operators from negotiating access to physical infrastructures by undertakings providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks or associated facilities could prevent creating a market for access to physical infrastructure. Such general rules should therefore be abolished. At the same time, the measures set out in this Regulation should not prevent Member States from incentivising utility operators to give access to infrastructure by excluding revenue generated from the access to their physical infrastructure when calculating end-user tariffs for their main activity or activities, in accordance with applicable Union law.

Amendment 107 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) This Regulation should be without prejudice to any specific national, regional or local safeguard needed to ensure safety and public health, the security and integrity of the networks, in particular critical infrastructure, as defined by national law, and to ensure that the main service provided by the network operator is not affected, in particular in networks used for the provision of water intended for human consumption. However, general rules in national legislation prohibiting network operators from negotiating access to physical infrastructures by undertakings providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks or associated facilities could prevent creating a market for access to physical infrastructure. Such general rules should therefore be abolished. At the same time, the measures set out in this Regulation should not prevent Member States from incentivising utility operators to give access to infrastructure by excluding revenue generated from the access to their physical infrastructure when calculating end-user tariffs for their main activity or activities, in accordance with applicable Union law.

Amendment 108 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) This Regulation should be without prejudice to any specific safeguard needed to ensure safety and public health, the security and integrity of the networks, in particular critical infrastructure, as defined by national law, and to ensure that the main service provided by the network operator or public sector body is not affected, in particular in networks used for the provision of water intended for human consumption. However, general rules in national legislation prohibiting network operators from negotiating access to physical infrastructures by undertakings providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks or associated facilities could prevent creating a market for access to physical infrastructure. Such general rules should therefore be abolished. At the same time, the measures set out in this Regulation should not prevent Member States from incentivising utility operators to give access to infrastructure by excluding revenue generated from the access to their physical infrastructure when calculating end-user tariffs for their main activity or activities, in accordance with applicable Union law.

Amendment 109 #

(19) In order to ensure legal certainty and avoid disproportionate burdens on network operators resulting from the simultaneous application of two distinct access regimes to the same physical infrastructure, physical infrastructure subject to access obligations imposed by national regulatory authorities pursuant to Directive (EU) 2018/1972 or access obligations resulting from the application of Union State aid rules should not be subject to access obligations set out in this Regulation for as long as such access obligations remain in place. However, this Regulation should be applicable where a national regulatory authority has imposed an access obligation under Directive (EU) 2018/1972 that limits the use that can be made of the physical infrastructure concerned. For instance, this could occur when an ~~operat~~undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications network planning to connect base stations requests access to existing physical infrastructure to which access obligations are imposed in the market for access to wholesale dedicated capacity37 . _________________ 37 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/2245 of 18 December 2020 on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation in accordance with Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Electronic Communications Code, 18.12.2020, C(2020) 8750, OJ L 439, 29.12.2020, p. 23.

Amendment 110 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In order to ensure legal certainty and avoid disproportionate burdens on network operators resulting from the simultaneous application of two distinct access regimes to the same physical infrastructure, physical infrastructure subject to access obligations imposed by national regulatory authorities or other competent authorities pursuant to Directive (EU) 2018/1972 or access obligations resulting from the application of Union State aid rules should not be subject to access obligations set out in this Regulation for as long as such access obligations remain in place. However, this Regulation should be applicable where a national regulatory authority ~~has~~or other competent authorities have imposed an access obligation under Directive (EU) 2018/1972 that limits the use that can be made of the physical infrastructure concerned. For instance, this could occur when an operator planning to connect base stations requests access to existing physical infrastructure to which access obligations are imposed in the market for access to wholesale dedicated capacity37 . _________________ 37 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/2245 of 18 December 2020 on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation in accordance with Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Electronic Communications Code, 18.12.2020, C(2020) 8750, OJ L 439, 29.12.2020, p. 23.

Amendment 111 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Seán KELLY, Markus PIEPER, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) To ensure proportionality ~~and~~, preserve investment incentives, especially for VHCN pioneers, and thus create an incentive for the rapid rollout of VHCNs to rural areas, a network operator or public sector body should have the right to refuse access to specific physical infrastructure for objective and justified reasons. In particular, a physical infrastructure for which access has been requested could be technically unsuitable due to specific circumstances, or because of lack of currently available space or future needs for space that are sufficiently demonstrated, for instance, in publicly available investment plans. To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body may refuse access to specific physical infrastructure. To avoid any potential distortion of competition or any possible abuse of the conditions to refuse access, any such refusal should be duly justified and based on objective and detailed reasons. For example such reasons would not be considered objective where an undertaking providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks has deployed physical infrastructure thanks to civil works coordination with a network operator other than an electronic communications network operator and refuses to grant access based on an alleged lack of availability of space to host the elements of very high capacity networks which results from decisions made by the undertaking under its control. In such case, a competition distortion could arise if there is no other VHCN in the area concerned by the access request. Similarly, in specific circumstances, sharing the infrastructure could jeopardise safety or public health, network integrity and security, including that of critical infrastructure, or could endanger the provision of services that are primarily provided over the same infrastructure. Moreover, where ~~the~~a network operator already provides a viable alternative means of wholesale ~~physical~~ access to electronic communications networks that would meet the needs of the access seeker, such as dark fibre or fibre unbundling, access to the underlying physical infrastructure, or to parallel physical infrastructure, could have an adverse economic impact on its business model, in particular that of wholesale-only operators, and on incentives to invest. It may also risk an inefficient duplication of network elements, which in particular shall be avoided until sufficient coverage of rural areas with VHCNs is achieved. The assessment of the fair and reasonable character of the terms and conditions for such alternative means of wholesale physical access should take into account, inter alia, the underlying business model of the undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks granting access and the need to avoid any reinforcement of the significant market power, if any, of either party.

Amendment 112 #

Massimiliano SALINI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body should have the right to refuse access to specific physical infrastructure for objective and justified reasons. In particular, a physical infrastructure for which access has been requested could be technically unsuitable due to specific circumstances, or because of lack of currently available space or future needs for space that are sufficiently demonstrated, for instance, in publicly available investment plans. To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body may refuse access to specific physical infrastructure. To avoid any potential distortion of competition or any possible abuse of the conditions to refuse access, any such refusal should be duly justified and based on objective and detailed reasons. For example such reasons would not be considered objective where an undertaking providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks has deployed physical infrastructure thanks to civil works coordination with a network operator other than an electronic communications network operator and refuses to grant access based on an alleged lack of availability of space to host the elements of very high capacity networks which results from decisions made by the undertaking under its control. In such case, a competition distortion could arise if there is no other VHCN in the area concerned by the access request. Similarly, in specific circumstances, sharing the infrastructure could jeopardise safety or public health, network integrity and security, including that of critical infrastructure, or could endanger the provision of services that are primarily provided over the same infrastructure. Moreover, where the network operator already provides a viable alternative means of wholesale physical access to electronic communications networks that would meet the needs of the access seeker, such as dark fibre or fibre unbundling, access to the underlying physical infrastructure could have an adverse economic impact on its business model, in particular that of wholesale-only operators, and incentives to invest. It may also risk an inefficient duplication of network elements. The assessment of the fair and reasonable character of the terms and conditions for such alternative means of wholesale physical access should take into account, inter alia, the underlying business model of the undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks granting access and the need to avoid any reinforcement of the significant market power, if any, of either party, and the necessity for a fair return on investment, matching market conditions and business model, for associated facility providers.

Amendment 113 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body should have the right to refuse access to specific physical infrastructure for objective and justified reasons. In particular, a physical infrastructure for which access has been requested could be technically unsuitable due to specific circumstances, or because of lack of currently available space or future needs for space that are sufficiently demonstrated, for instance, in publicly available investment plans. To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body may refuse access to specific physical infrastructure. To avoid any potential distortion of competition or any possible abuse of the conditions to refuse access, any such refusal should be duly justified and based on objective and detailed reasons. For example such reasons would not be considered objective where an undertaking providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks has deployed physical infrastructure thanks to civil works coordination with a network operator other than an electronic communications network operator and refuses to grant access based on an alleged lack of availability of space to host the elements of very high capacity networks which results from decisions made by the undertaking under its control. In such case, a competition distortion could arise if there is no other VHCN in the area concerned by the access request. Similarly, in specific circumstances, sharing the infrastructure could jeopardise safety or public health, network integrity and security, including that of critical infrastructure, or could endanger the provision of services that are primarily provided over the same infrastructure. Moreover, where the network operator already provides a viable alternative means of wholesale physical access to electronic communications networks that would meet the needs of the access seeker, such as dark fibre or fibre unbundling, access to the underlying physical infrastructure could have an adverse economic impact on its business model, in particular that of wholesale-only operators, and incentives to invest. It may also risk an inefficient duplication of network elements. The assessment of the fair and reasonable character of the terms and conditions for such alternative means of wholesale physical access should take into account, inter alia, ~~the underlying business model of the undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks granting access and~~ the need to avoid any reinforcement of the significant market power, if any, of either party.

Amendment 114 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body should have the right to refuse access to specific physical infrastructure for objective and justified reasons. In particular, a physical infrastructure for which access has been requested could be technically unsuitable due to specific circumstances, or because of lack of currently available space or future needs for space that are sufficiently demonstrated, for instance, in publicly available investment plans. To ensure proportionality and preserve investment incentives, a network operator or public sector body may refuse access to specific physical infrastructure. To avoid any potential distortion of competition or any possible abuse of the conditions to refuse access, any such refusal should be duly justified and based on objective and detailed reasons. For example such reasons would not be considered objective where an undertaking providing or authorised to provide electronic communications networks has deployed physical infrastructure thanks to civil works coordination with a network operator other than an electronic communications network operator and refuses to grant access based on an alleged lack of availability of space to host the elements of very high capacity networks which results from decisions made by the undertaking under its control. In such case, a competition distortion could arise if there is no other VHCN in the area concerned by the access request. Similarly, in specific circumstances, sharing the infrastructure could jeopardise safety or public health, network integrity and security, including that of critical infrastructure, or could endanger the provision of services that are primarily provided over the same infrastructure. Moreover, where the network operator already provides a viable alternative means of wholesale ~~physical~~ access to electronic communications networks that would meet the needs of the access seeker, such as dark fibre or fibre unbundling, access to the underlying physical infrastructure could have an adverse economic impact on its business model, in particular that of wholesale-only operators, and incentives to invest. It may also risk an inefficient duplication of network elements. The assessment of the fair and reasonable character of the terms and conditions for such alternative means of wholesale ~~physical~~ access should take into account, inter alia, the underlying business model of the undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks granting access and the need to avoid any reinforcement of the significant market power, if any, of either party.

Amendment 115 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) To facilitate the reuse of existing physical infrastructure, where ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks request access in a specified area, network operators and public sector bodies that own or control physical infrastructure should make an offer for the shared use of their facilities under fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including price, unless access is refused for objective and justified reasons. Public sector bodies should also be required to offer access under non- discriminatory terms and conditions. Depending on the circumstances, several factors could influence the conditions under which such access is granted. These include: (i) any additional maintenance and adaptation costs; (ii) any preventive safeguards to be adopted to limit adverse effects on network safety, security and integrity; (iii) any specific liability arrangements in the event of damages; (iv) 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; (v) the ability to deliver or provide infrastructure capacity to meet public service obligations; and (vi) any constraints stemming from national provisions aiming to protect the environment, public health, public security or to meet town and country planning objectives.

Amendment 116 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) To facilitate the reuse of existing physical infrastructure, where operators request access in a specified area, network operators and public sector bodies that own or control physical infrastructure should make an offer for the shared use of their facilities under fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including price, unless access is refused for objective and justified reasons. Public sector bodies should also be required to offer access under non- discriminatory terms and conditions. Depending on the circumstances, several factors could influence the conditions under which such access is granted. These include: (i) any additional maintenance and adaptation costs; (ii) any preventive safeguards to be adopted to ~~limit~~avoid adverse effects on network safety, security and integrity; (iii) any specific liability arrangements in the event of damages; (iv) 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; (v) the ability to deliver or provide infrastructure capacity to meet public service obligations; and (vi) any requirements constraints stemming from national provisions aiming to protect the environment, public health, public security or to meet town and country planning objectives.

Amendment 117 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) To facilitate the reuse of existing physical infrastructure, where operators request access in a specified area, network operators and public sector bodies that own or control physical infrastructure should make an offer for the shared use of their facilities under fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including price, unless access is refused for objective and justified reasons. Public sector bodies should also be ~~requir~~incentivised to offer access under non- discriminatory terms and conditions. Depending on the circumstances, several factors could influence the conditions under which such access is granted. These include: (i) any additional maintenance and adaptation costs; (ii) any preventive safeguards to be adopted to limit adverse effects on network safety, security and integrity; (iii) any specific liability arrangements in the event of damages; (iv) 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; (v) the ability to deliver or provide infrastructure capacity to meet public service obligations; and (vi) any constraints stemming from national provisions aiming to protect the environment, public health, public security or to meet town and country planning objectives.

Amendment 118 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Public sector bodies that own or control physical infrastructure may lack sufficient resources, experience or the necessary technical knowledge to engage in negotiations with ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks on access. To facilitate access to these public sector bodies’ physical infrastructure, a body could be appointed to coordinate the access requests, provide legal and technical advice for negotiating access terms and conditions, and make relevant information on such physical infrastructure available via a single information point. The coordinating body could also support public sector bodies in preparing model contracts and monitor the outcome and the length of time of the access requests process. The body could also help if disputes arise on access to physical infrastructure that public sector bodies own or control.

Amendment 119 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Public sector bodies that own or control physical infrastructure may lack sufficient resources, experience or the necessary technical knowledge to engage in negotiations with operators on access. TIn such case, in order to facilitate access to these public sector bodies’ physical infrastructure, a body cshould be appointed to coordinate the access requests, provide legal and technical advice for negotiating access terms and conditions, and make relevant information on such physical infrastructure available via a single information point. The coordinating body could also support public sector bodies in preparing model contracts and monitor the outcome and the length of time of the access requests process. The body could also help if disputes arise on access to physical infrastructure that public sector bodies own or control.

Amendment 120 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) To ensure consistency of approaches among Member States, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC), cshould provide guidance, by at least six months before the date of application of this Regulation, on applying the provisions on access to physical infrastructure, including but not only on the application of fair and reasonable conditions. The views of stakeholders, national authorities and national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance. With a view to limit market disruption and an unintended reduction of a potential investment, the Commission, when formulating the guidelines on fair and reasonable price, should take into account the characteristics of the network operators and their business model, such as providers of associated facilities. Considering the level of flexibility recognised to Member States in the application of these provisions, and in order to be efficient, the European Commission guidance should provide the appropriate level of granularity.

Amendment 121 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) To ensure consistency of approaches among Member States while taking into account the divergent situation across Member States, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC), could provide guidance on applying the provisions on access to physical infrastructure, including but not only on the application of fair and reasonable conditions. The views of stakeholders and in particular of national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance to ensure as best as possible that such guidance would not be disruptive to well established principles, does not violate national dispute settlement bodies procedural rules, and would not be harmful for further very high capacity networks roll out.

Amendment 122 #

Massimiliano SALINI

(24) To ensure consistency of approaches among Member States, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC), could provide guidance on applying the provisions on access to physical infrastructure, including but not only on the application of fair and reasonable conditions. The views of stakeholders and national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance. In setting the criteria for a fair and reasonable price, the Commission should take into account the characteristics of network operators and their business model, such as tower companies or wholesale-only operators, especially when leasing infrastructure to third parties, in order to avoid market disruptions and negative effects on investment.

Amendment 123 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) ~~Operat~~Undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks 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 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 ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks 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 124 #

Proposal for a regulation
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 ~~proactively (rather than upon request)~~ provide and maintain such minimum information via a single information point and to proactively ensure that the minimum information they make available via a single information point is correct and up to date. 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 125 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Tomas TOBÉ, Seán KELLY, Markus PIEPER, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Othmar KARAS, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
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 126 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) The minimum information should be made available promptly via the single information point under proportionate, non-discriminatory and transparent terms so that ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks can submit their requests for information. The single information point should consist of a repository of information in electronic format, where information can be accessed and requests can be made online using digital tools, such as webpages, digital applications, and digital platforms. The information made available may be limited to ensure network security and integrity, in particular that of critical infrastructure, national security, or to safeguard legitimate operating and business secrets. The single information point does not have to host the information as long as it ensures that links are available to other digital tools, such as web portals, digital platforms or digital applications, where the information is stored. The single information point may provide additional functionalities, such as access to additional information or support to the process of requests for access to existing physical infrastructure or to coordinate civil works.

Amendment 127 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) In addition, if the request is reasonable, in particular if needed to share existing physical infrastructures or coordinate civil works, ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks should be granted the possibility to make on-site surveys and request information on planned civil works under transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory conditions and without prejudice to the safeguards adopted to ensure network security and integrity, protection of confidentiality, as well as operating and business secrets.

Amendment 128 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) Advanced transparency of planned civil works via single information points should be incentivised. This can be done by easily redirecting ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks to such information whenever available. Transparency should also be enforced by making permit-granting applications subject to prior publication of information on planned civil works via a single information point.

Amendment 129 #

(30) To ensure proportionality and security, the requirement to provide information on existing physical infrastructure via the single information point need not apply for the same reasons as those justifying a refusal of an access request. In addition, providing information on existing physical infrastructure via the single information point could, in very specific cases, be burdensome or disproportionate for network operators and public sector bodies. This could arise, for example, where the mapping of relevant assets is not yet available and it would be very costly to map or where access requests are expected to be very low in certain areas of a Member State or in respect to certain specific physical infrastructure. Where it appears that providing information is disproportionate based on a detailed cost-benefit analysis, network operators and public sector bodies should not be obliged to provide such information. Member States should conduct such detailed cost-benefit analysis based on a consultation with stakeholders on demand for access to existing physical infrastructure, and the analysis should be updated regularly. The consultation process and its outcome should be made public, and the criteria and conditions used to exempt specific physical infrastructure ~~to be exempted~~ from this obligation should be notified to the Commission.

Amendment 130 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) To ensure consistency, the competent bodies performing the functions of the single information point, the national regulatory authorities or other competent authorities fulfilling their tasks under Directive (EU) 2018/1972 or other competent authorities, such as national, regional or local authorities in charge of cadastre or the implementation of Directive 2007/2/EC (INSPIRE), as appropriate, should consult and cooperate with each other. The purpose of such cooperation should be to minimise the efforts in complying with transparency obligations on network operators and public sector bodies, including the undertakings designated with significant market power (‘SMP’ operators), to make information available about their physical infrastructure; Where a different data set on physical infrastructure of the SMP operator is required such cooperation should result in establishing useful interlinks and synergies between the SMP- related database and the single information point and proportionate common practices of data collection and data provision to deliver results that are easily comparable. Cooperation should also aim at facilitating access to information on physical infrastructure, in light of national circumstances. If regulatory obligations are modified or withdrawn, the parties affected should be able to agree on the best solutions to adapt the collection and provision of physical infrastructure data to the newly applicable regulatory requirements.

Amendment 131 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32

(32) The transparency obligation for the coordination of civil works need not apply to civil works for reasons of national security or in an emergency. This could be the case, for civil works performed if there is a risk of public danger as a result of degradation processes to civil engineering works and their associated installations, which are caused by destructive natural or human factors and are needed to ensure their safety or their demolition. ~~For reasons of transparency, Member States should notify the types of civil works falling under those circumstances to the Commission and publish them via a single information point.~~

Amendment 132 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34

(34) Member States should maximise the results of civil works fully or partially financed by public means, by exploiting the positive externalities of those works across sectors and ensuring equal opportunities to share the available and planned physical infrastructure to deploy very high capacity networks. The main purpose of civil works financed by public means should not be adversely affected. However, timely and reasonable requests to coordinate the deployment of elements of very high capacity networks should be met by the network operator carrying out the civil works concerned directly or indirectly (for example, through a sub- contractor) under proportionate, non- discriminatory and transparent terms. For example, the requesting ~~operat~~undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications network should cover any additional costs, including those caused by delays and keep changes to the original plans to a minimum Such provisions should not affect the right of Member States to reserve capacity for electronic communications networks even in the absence of specific requests. This will enable Member States to meet future demand for physical infrastructures to maximise the value of civil works or to adopt measures giving similar rights to operators of other types of networks, such as transport, gas or electricity, to coordinate civil works.

Amendment 133 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36

(36) To ensure consistency of approaches while taking into account the divergent situation across Member States, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Body of European Regulators (BEREC), could provide guidance on applying the provisions on civil work coordination, including but not only on apportioning of costs. The views of stakeholders and particularly of national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance to ensure as best as possible that such guidance would not be disruptive to well established principles, does not violate national dispute settlement bodies procedural rules, and would not be harmful for further very high capacity networks roll out.

Amendment 134 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36

(36) To ensure consistency of approaches, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Body of European Regulators (BEREC), cshould provide guidance, by at least six months before the date of application of this Regulation, on applying the provisions on civil work coordination, including but not only on apportioning of costs. The views of stakeholders and national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance. Considering the level of flexibility recognised to Member States in the application of these provisions, and in order to be efficient, such guidance should provide an appropriate level of granularity.

Amendment 135 #

Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)

(37a) The deployment of cross-border corridors along transport paths will support an interconnected, interoperable, and sovereign digital single market. In order to increase the uptake of 5G corridor deployments in Europe and the use of already available funding (in particular CEF2), participation of all relevant stakeholders is necessary, including road and railway operators as well as undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks as owners of national radio spectrum. By end of 2025 all undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks in the Union should ensure that end-users enjoy seamless signal-handover at inner European borders as a prerequisite for effective 5G corridors and, thereby, contributing to the Digital Decade. Seamless connectivity, amongst other steps such as a true harmonised use of radio spectrum, will foster cross-border consolidation efforts by the mobile network industry. It will also deepen the integration of the single market and strengthen European champions leading the global technology race.

Amendment 136 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)

(37a) One cornerstone for a well- functioning, interconnected and interoperable digital single market is the deployment of cross-border corridors along transport paths. This will also require the update of deployments of 5G corridors within Member States and across borders. To achieve this and make use of existing funding, all relevant stakeholders, such as road and railway operators, and undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks, should actively participate in the deployment of cross- border corridors. By end of 2025, end- users should be able to enjoy seamless signal-handover at inner European borders.

Amendment 137 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
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 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 ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks and particularly new entrants and smaller ~~operator~~undertakings not active in that area. Moreover, ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks 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 138 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Tomas TOBÉ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
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 139 #

Proposal for a regulation
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 consis~~, consistent and harmonized, to the possible extent, at national level. 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 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Massimiliano SALINI, Tomas TOBÉ, Henna VIRKKUNEN

Proposal for a regulation
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 request~~the 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 141 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39

(39) Permit-granting procedures should not be unjustified 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 request. 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, or 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.

Amendment 142 #

Proposal for a regulation
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 request or within the time limits laid down in national law, whichever is shorter. 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.

Amendment 143 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA

Proposal for a regulation
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 request. 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 ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks 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.

Amendment 144 #

Proposal for a regulation
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 request. 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, such as the provisions set out in Article 57 of the Directive (EU) 2018/1972. 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.

Amendment 145 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Tomas TOBÉ, Henna VIRKKUNEN

Proposal for a regulation
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 43 months from the receipt of a complete permit request. 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.

Amendment 146 #

Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA

Proposal for a regulation
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 43 months from the receipt of a complete permit request. 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.

Amendment 147 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) To avoid undue delays, competent authorities must determine the completeness of the permit request with~~in 15 days from its receipt~~out 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 request~~without 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 148 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) To avoid undue delays, competent authorities must determine the completeness of the permit request within 15 days from its receipt. The permit request should be deemed complete 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 request. 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. ~~Operat~~Undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks 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 149 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) To avoid undue delays, competent authorities must determine the completeness of the permit request within ~~15 days~~one month from its receipt or within the time limit laid down in national law, whichever is shorter. The permit request should be deemed complete 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 request. 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 150 #

Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) To avoid undue delays, competent authorities must determine the completeness of the permit request within 15 days from its receipt. The permit request should be deemed complete 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 43 months from the receipt of the request. 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 151 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40

(40) To avoid undue delays, competent authorities must determine the completeness of the permit request within 15 days from its receipt. The permit request should be deemed complete 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 43 months from the receipt of the request. 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 152 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Massimiliano SALINI, Seán KELLY, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41

(41) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Article 7 of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . The exemptions from the requirement for permits set out at Union level by way of an implementing act, that could be applied to different categories of infrastructure (such as masts, antennae, poles and underground cables) under certain specified conditions, for which building permits, digging permits or other types of permits may be initially required. They could also be applied to technical upgrades of existing maintenance works or installations, small- scale civil works, such as trenching, and renewals of permits. The Commission should carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. _________________ 39 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

Amendment 153 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41

(41) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Article 7 of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . The exemptions from the requirement for permits set out at Union level by way of an implementing act,The Commission should after consulting relevant stakeholders, identify categories of deployment of elements of very high capacity networks or associated facilities that Member States should consider to exempt from any permit- granting procedure. The exemptions from the requirement for permits could be applied to different categories of infrastructure (such as masts, antennae, poles and underground cables) under certain specified conditions, for which building permits, digging permits or other types of permits may be initially required. They could also be applied to technical upgrades of existing maintenance works or installations, small- scale civil works, such as trenching, and renewals of permits. _________________ 39 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

Amendment 154 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41

(41) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Article 7 of this Regulation, ~~implementing~~delegated powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . The exemptions from the requirement for permits set out at Union level by way of an implementing acte minimum list of exemptions from the requirement for permits set out at Union level by way of a delegated act, without prejudice to additional exemptions that may be introduced by Member States, could be applied to different categories of infrastructure (such as masts, antennae, poles and underground cables) under certain specified conditions, for which building permits, digging permits or other types of permits may be initially required. They could also be applied to technical upgrades of existing maintenance works or installations, small- scale civil works, such as trenching, and renewals of permits. _________________ 39 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).

Amendment 155 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Tomas TOBÉ, Henna VIRKKUNEN

Proposal for a regulation
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 156 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO

Proposal for a regulation
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~~Additionally, Member States should be able to maintain or introduce simplified authorization procedure or prior communication procedures that may exist under national law, applicable to the deployment of any element of very high capacity networks or associated facilities. Moreover, the categories of deployments exempted from permits under Union law should no longer be subject to permits under national law.

Amendment 157 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43

(43) To facilitate the deployment of elements of very high capacity networks, any fee related to a permit, other than rights of way, should be limited to and take into account the administrative costs related to processing the permit request according to the principles established in Article 16 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972. In the case of rights of way, the provisions established in Articles 42 and 43 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 apply.

Amendment 158 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44

(44) Achieving the targets set out in Decision (EU) 2022/2481 requires that, by 2030, all end users at fixed locations are covered by a gigabit network up to a network termination point and all populated areas are covered by next- generation wireless high-speed networks with at least 5G-equivalent performance, in accordance with the principle of technological neutrality. Providing gigabit networks up to the end user should be facilitated, in particular through fibre-ready in-building physical infrastructure. Providing for mini-ducts during the construction of a building has only a limited incremental cost, while equipping buildings with gigabit infrastructure may represent a significant part of the cost of deploying a gigabit network. Therefore, all new buildings or buildings subject to reconstruction or a major renovation should be equipped with physical infrastructure and in-building fibre wiring, enabling the connection of end users to gigabit speeds. New multi- dwelling buildings and multi-dwelling buildings subject to major renovation should also be equipped with an access point, accessible to one or more undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks. Moreover, building developers should provide for empty ducts from every dwelling to the access point, located in or outside the multi-dwelling building. Major renovations of existing buildings at the end user’s location to enhance energy performance (pursuant to Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council40 ) provide an opportunity to also equip those buildings with fibre-ready in-building physical infrastructure, in-building fibre wiring and, for multi-dwelling buildings, an access point. _________________ 40 Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings (OJ L 153, 18.6.2010, p. 13).

Amendment 159 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45

(45) The prospect of equipping a building with ~~fibre~~gigabit-ready in-building physical infrastructure, an access point or in-building fibre wiring may be considered disproportionate in terms of costs, namely for new single dwellings or buildings undergoing major renovation works. This may be based on objective grounds, such as tailor-made cost estimates, economic reasons linked to the location, or urban heritage conservation or environmental reasons (for example, for specific categories of monuments).

Amendment 160 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46

(46) Prospective buyers and tenants should be able to identify buildings that are equipped with ~~fibre~~gigabit-ready in-building physical infrastructure, an access point and in-building fibre wiring and that therefore have considerable cost-saving potential. The fibre readiness of buildings should also be promoted. Member States should therefore develop a compulsory ‘~~fibre~~gigabit- ready’ label for buildings equipped with such infrastructure, an access point and in- building fibre wiring in accordance with this Regulation.

Amendment 161 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47

(47) Undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks deploying gigabit networks in a specific area could achieve significant economies of scale if they could terminate their network to the building’s access point by using existing physical infrastructure and restoring the affected area. This should be possible irrespective of whether a subscriber has expressed explicit interest for the service at that moment in time and provided that the impact on private property is minimised, and property right is fully respected. Once the network is terminated at the access point, the connection of an additional customer is possible at a significantly lower cost, in particular by means of access to a fibre-ready vertical segment inside the building, where it already exists. That objective is also fulfilled when the building itself is already equipped with a gigabit network to which access is provided to any public communications network provider, which has an active subscriber in the building, under transparent, proportionate and non- discriminatory terms and conditions. That could in particular be the case in Member States that have taken measures under Article 44 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972.

Amendment 162 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48

(48) In order to contribute to ensuring availability of gigabit networks to end users, new buildings and majorly renovated buildings should be equipped with ~~fibre~~gigabit- ready in-building physical infrastructure, in-building fibre wiring and, in the case of multi-dwelling buildings, an access point. Member States should have a degree of flexibility to achieve this. This Regulation, therefore, does not seek to harmonise rules on related costs, including the recovery of costs of equipping buildings with ~~fibre~~gigabit- ready in-building physical infrastructure, in-building fibre wiring and an access point.

Amendment 163 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49

(49) In line with the subsidiarity principle and to take national circumstances into account, Member States should adopt the standards or technical specifications necessary for the purpose of equipping newly constructed or majorly renovated buildings with ~~fibre~~gigabit-ready in- building physical infrastructure and in- building fibre wiring; and new or majorly renovated multi-dwelling buildings with an access point. Those standards or technical specifications should set out at least: the building access point specifications; fibre interface specifications; cable specifications; socket specifications; specifications for pipes or micro-ducts; technical specifications needed to prevent interference with electrical cabling, and the minimum bend radius. Member States should make the issuance of building permits conditional on compliance of the relevant new building or major renovation works project requiring a building permit with the standards or technical specifications based on a certified test report. Member States should also set up certification schemes for the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the standards or technical specifications as well as for qualifying for the ‘~~fibre-~~gigabit- ready’ label. Moreover, to avoid an increase in red tape related to the certification scheme set up under this Regulation, Member States should take into account the procedural requirements applied to certification schemes pursuant to Directive 2010/31/EU and also consider the possibility to enable the combined launch of both request procedures.

Amendment 164 #

(50) In view of the social benefits stemming from digital inclusion and taking into account the economics of deploying very high capacity networks, where there is neither existing passive or active fibre- ready infrastructure serving end users’ premises nor alternatives to providing very high capacity networks to a subscriber, any public communications network provider should have the right to terminate its network to a private premise at its own cost, provided that the impact on private property is minimised and property right is fully respected, for example, if possible, by reusing the existing physical infrastructure available in the building or ensuring full restoration of the affected areas.

Amendment 165 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50

(50) In view of the social benefits stemming from digital inclusion and taking into account the economics of deploying very high capacity networks, where there is neither existing passive or active ~~fibre~~gigabit- ready infrastructure serving end users’ premises nor alternatives to providing very high capacity networks to a subscriber, any public communications network provider should have the right to terminate its network to a private premise at its own cost, provided that the impact on private property is minimised, for example, if possible, by reusing the existing physical infrastructure available in the building or ensuring full restoration of the affected areas.

Amendment 166 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52

(52) To ensure consistency of approaches while taking into account the divergent situation across Member States, the Commission, in close cooperation with BEREC, could provide guidance on the applications of provisions on access to in- building physical infrastructure, including but not only on the terms and conditions thereof. The views of stakeholders and particularly of national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance to ensure as best as possible that such guidance would not be disruptive to well established principles, does not violate national dispute settlement bodies procedural rules, and would not be harmful for further very high capacity networks roll out.

Amendment 167 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52

(52) To ensure consistency of approaches, the Commission, in close cooperation with BEREC, cshould provide guidance, by at least six months before the date of application of this Regulation, on the applications of provisions on access to in-building physical infrastructure, including but not only on the terms and conditions thereof. The views of stakeholders and national dispute settlement bodies should be duly taken into account in the preparation of the guidance. Considering the level of flexibility recognised to Member States in the application of these provisions, and in order to be efficient, such guidance should provide an appropriate level of granularity.

Amendment 168 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53

(53) To foster the modernisation and agility of administrative procedures and reduce the cost of and time spent on the procedures for deploying very high capacity networks, the services of single information points should be performed fully online. To that end, single information points should provide easy access to the necessary digital tools, such as web portals, digital platforms, and digital applications. The tools should give access in an efficient manner to the minimum information on existing physical infrastructure and planned civil works and the possibility to request information. Such digital tools should also give access to the electronic administrative procedures for granting permits and rights of way and related information on the applicable conditions and procedures. Where more than one single information point is set up in a Member State, all single information points should be easily and seamlessly accessible, by electronic means, via a single national digital entry point. This entry point should have a common user interface ensuring access to the online single information points. The single national digital entry point should facilitate interaction between ~~operat~~undertakings providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications networks and competent authorities performing the functions of the single information points.

Amendment 169 #

Adam JARUBAS, Janusz LEWANDOWSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58

(58) To avoid delays in network deployments, the national dispute settlement body should settle the dispute in a timely manner and, in any event, at the latest within 43 months from receipt of the request to settle the dispute in the case of disputes on access to existing physical infrastructure and 1 month when it concerns transparency on physical infrastructure, coordination of planned civil works and transparency on planned civil works. Exceptional circumstances justifying a delay in the settlement of a dispute could be beyond the control of the dispute settlement bodies, such as insufficient information or documentation that is necessary to take a decision, including the views of other competent authorities that need to be consulted or the high complexity of the file.

Amendment 170 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Regulation aims to facilitate and stimulate the roll-out of very high capacity networks by promoting the joint use of existing physical infrastructure and by enabling a more efficient deployment of new physical infrastructure so that such networks can be rolled out faster and at a lower cost. However, the scope of this regulation shall not be limited to very high capacity networks.

Amendment 171 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Regulation aims to facilitate and stimulate the roll-out of very high capacity networks, including mobile networks, by promoting the joint use of existing physical infrastructure and by enabling a more efficient deployment of new physical infrastructure so that such networks can be rolled out faster and at a lower cost.

Amendment 172 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Seán KELLY, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. If any provision of this Regulation conflicts with a provision of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 or, Directive 2002/77/EC, Directive (EU) 2022/2555 or Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXXX [Cyber Resilience Act], the relevant provision of those ~~Directives~~pieces of legislation shall prevail.

Amendment 173 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. If ~~any provis~~in the implementation of ~~this~~ Regulation interpretation conflicts with a provision of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 or Directive 2002/77/EC occur, the relevant provision of those Directives shall prevail.

Amendment 174 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. If any provision of this Regulation conflicts with a more detailed or stringent relevant provision of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 or Directive 2002/77/EC, the ~~relevant provision of those Directives~~latter shall prevail.

Amendment 175 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3

3. Member States may maintain or introduce measures in conformity with Union law which contain more detailed and/or stringent provisions than those set out in this Regulation, such as cost- oriented prices, permit exemptions or other legal measures deriving from national law, where they serve to promote the joint use of existing physical infrastructure or enable a more efficient deployment of new physical infrastructure.

Amendment 176 #

Adam JARUBAS, Janusz LEWANDOWSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3

3. Member States may maintain or introduce measures in ~~conformity~~accordance with Union law, which ~~contain more detailed provisions than those~~provide solutions enabling better achievement of the objectives set out in this Rregulation, w~~here they serve to promote~~ith priority given to the relevant provisions enabling better achievement of the regulation's objectives, particularly the joint use of existing physical infrastructure or ~~enable~~ a more efficient deployment of new physical infrastructure.

Amendment 177 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3

3. Member States may maintain or introduce measures in conformity with Union law which co~~ntain more detailed provisions than those~~mplement or go beyond the rights and obligations set out in this Regulation where they serve to promote the joint use of existing physical infrastructure or enable a more efficient deployment of new physical infrastructure.

Amendment 178 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4

4. By way of exception to paragraph 3, Member States shall not maintain or introduce in their national law provisions diverging from those laid down in Article 3(3) and (6), Article 4(4), Article 5(2) and (4), Article 6(2) and Article 8(7) and (8). The exclusion of Article 5(2) shall not prevent Member States to extend provisions on civil works coordination also to privately finance civil works.

Amendment 179 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. The Member States' sovereign rights regarding national security are explicitly and fully respected by this Regulation.

Amendment 180 #

For the purposes of this Regulation, the definitions in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 apply., in particular: (1)a ‘Very high capacity network’ means a fixed or wireless network as defined in Article 2, point (2) of Directive (EU) 2018/1972;

Amendment 181 #

Markus PIEPER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point a

(a) an ~~operator as defined in Article 2, point (29), of Directive (EU) 2018/1972~~undertaking that is authorised to provide or effectively provides a public electronic communications network; ;

Amendment 182 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point a

(a) an ~~operator as defined in Article 2, point (29), of Directive (EU) 2018/1972~~undertaking providing or authorised to provide public electronic communications network;

Amendment 183 #

Angelika WINZIG, Sara SKYTTEDAL, Adam JARUBAS, Tomas TOBÉ, Seán KELLY, Markus PIEPER, Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA, Othmar KARAS, Angelika NIEBLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point b – point ii

(ii) transport services, including railways, roads, tunnels, ports and airports;

Amendment 184 #

Henna VIRKKUNEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point b – point ii a (new)

(iia) other physical infrastructure services related to electronic communications networks.

Amendment 185 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 – point b – point ii a (new)

(iia) (iii) other physical infrastructure services related to electronic communications networks

Amendment 186 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 1 a (new)

(1a) 'Very high capacity network' means a fixed or wireless network as defined in Article 2, point (2) of Directive (EU) 2018/1972;

Amendment 187 #

Ivars IJABS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) any element of a network that is intended to host other elements of a network without becoming an active element of the network itself, such as pipes, masts, ducts, inspection chambers, manholes, cabinets, antenna installations, towers and poles, as well as buildings or entries to buildings, and any other asset including rooftop or part of a façade, street furniture, such as light poles, street signs, traffic lights, billboards, bus and tramway stops and metro stations;

Amendment 188 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) any element of a network that is intended to host other elements of a network without becoming an active element of the network itself, such as pipes, masts, ducts, inspection chambers, manholes, cabinets, antenna installations, towers and poles, as well as buildings or entries to buildings, rooftops and any other asset including street furniture, such as light poles, street signs, traffic lights, billboards, bus and tramway stops and metro stations;

Amendment 189 #

Beatrice COVASSI, Carlos ZORRINHO, Matthias ECKE, Josianne CUTAJAR, Patrizia TOIA, Lina GÁLVEZ, Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) any element of a network that is intended to host other elements of a network without becoming an active element of the network itself, such as pipes, masts, ducts, inspection chambers, manholes, cabinets, antenna installations, towers and poles, as well as buildings or entries to buildings, rooftops and any other asset including street furniture, such as light poles, street signs, traffic lights, billboards, bus and tramway stops and metro stations;

Amendment 190 #

Dace MELBĀRDE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) where they are not part of a network and are owned or controlled by public sector bodies: buildings, including rooftops and walls, or 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.

Amendment 191 #

Andris AMERIKS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) where they are not part of a network and are owned or controlled by public sector bodies: buildings or entries to buildings, including rooftops, parts of the facade and any other asset including street furniture, such as light poles, street signs, traffic lights, billboards, bus and tramway stops and metro stations.

Amendment 192 #

Ivars IJABS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) where they are not part of a network and are owned or controlled by public sector bodies: buildings or entries to buildings, and any other asset including rooftop or part of a façade, street furniture, such as light poles, street signs, traffic lights, billboards, bus and tramway stops and metro stations.

Amendment 193 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) where they are not part of a network and are owned or controlled by public sector bodies: buildings or, including rooftops, and 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.

Amendment 194 #

Matthias ECKE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 2 a (new)

2a. ‘viable alternative’ means any infrastructure available immediately or within a reasonable period of time which is suitable for the provision of very high capacity networks for electronic communications and to which a network operator offers access on fair and reasonable terms and conditions; account being taken of intended use, viable alternatives may in particular be: (a) physical infrastructure, (b) dark fibre and (c) bit-stream access;

Amendment 195 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 3

(3) ‘civil works’ means every outcome of building or civil engineering works taken as a whole ~~that is sufficient in itself to fulfil an economic or technical function and entails~~ including construction, as well as works consisting of reconstruction, installation, renovatione, or ~~more elements of a physical infra~~demolition of a building structure;

Amendment 196 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 4

(4) ‘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 or any entity exclusively entrusted with performing tasks on their behalf which entails control directly or by delegation of the physical infrastructure ;

Amendment 197 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 5 – point b

(b) they have legal personality or are entitled to legal capacity according to the provisions of the law;

Amendment 198 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 6

(6) ‘in-building physical infrastructure’ means physical infrastructure or installations at the end user’s location, including elements under joint ownership e.g. tenants' co-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 access point with the network termination point;

Amendment 199 #

Dace MELBĀRDE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8

(8) ‘~~fibre-ready~~gigabit-capable in-building physical infrastructure’ means in-building physical infrastructure intended to host optical fibre, wireless or other elements;

Amendment 200 #

Andris AMERIKS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8

(8) ‘~~fibre-ready~~gigabit-capable in-building physical infrastructure’ means in-building physical infrastructure intended to host optical fibre or wireless elements;

Amendment 201 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8

(8) ‘~~fibre~~gigabit-ready in-building physical infrastructure’ means in-building physical infrastructure intended to host optical fibre or wireless elements;

Amendment 202 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 9

(9) ‘major renovation and reconstruction works’ means building or civil engineering works at the end user’s location encompassing structural modifications of the entire in- building physical infrastructure or a significant part thereof ~~and that require a building permit~~;

Amendment 203 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 10

(10) ‘permit’ means an explicit or implicit decision or set of decisions taken simultaneously or successively by one or several competent authorities that are needed for an ~~undertaking~~operator to carry out building or civil engineering works and, after completion in some cases, their use for the intended purpose, necessary for the deployment of elements of very high capacity networks;

Amendment 204 #