| NOTAS: | "The overall objective of this study is to support the Commission in assessing the need to revise its current guidance to National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) regarding regulatory incentives for deploying Very High Capacity Networks (VHCN). Current guidance is primarily provided in the Next Generation Access (NGA) and the Non-discrimination and Costing Methodologies (NDCM) Recommendations. The results of this study can serve as an evidence base for the development of a new recommendation. The study employed a mixed-methods approach, based on desk research, surveys of EU NRAs and network operators, interviews, case studies in 10 Member States, and full-day workshops with NRAs and with other stakeholders. The study focuses on six key areas. The analysis of the approach towards pricing flexibility and price regulation shows that the costing methodology advocated in the NDCM Recommendation is widely supported by stakeholders. Cost orientation is imposed by many NRAs for access to one or more NGA wholesale products. However the use of the pricing flexibility, though still limited, is growing. There is substantial variation in the implementation of non-discrimination obligations, but very few NRAs perceive causal links between non-discrimination and incentives to invest in very high capacity network deployment. The scope of physical infrastructure access obligations imposed on operators with significant market power (SMP) varies across the EU, but the guidance on transparency and pricing seems to be followed by nearly all NRAs. Operators use a mix of cooperative arrangements and commercial agreements for wholesale broadband access. Most of these arrangements and agreements have been taken into account during the market reviews. The number of NRAs that differentiate remedies geographically is limited so far. Although the use of geographic differentiation varies greatly among NRAs, it is likely to be used increasingly for ‘fine tuning’ remedies. The NGA Recommendation brought consistency in the overall approach to migration from copper to fibre, but not in the details of its implementation. Our results suggest that many aspects of the current Access Recommendations remain fit for purpose, but that further refinement is needed. The study led to recommendations on a number of issues, including but not limited to: the use of pricing flexibility overall; the “copper anchor”; the Economic Replicability Test (ERT); volume discounts and long term pricing; flexibility and measures to protect facilities-based competition; the price band; pricing of SMP civil engineering infrastructure; calculation of the next generation access / VHCN risk premium; choosing between Equivalence of Input (EoI) and Equivalence of Output (EoO); the Technical Replicability Test (TRT); dealing with information asymmetry; effective access to legacy ducts; improving the quality of databases and ordering processes; aligning the successor recommendation with the Broadband Cost Reduction Directive (BCRD); conditions warranting an out-of-cycle review of the SMP obligations; NRA engagement in forming cooperative arrangements; geographically differentiated market definition versus differentiated remedies; the recommended notice period for migration to fibre; possible departure from the principle of cost-orientation for legacy services in the context of migration to fibre-based networks; and the degree to which NRAs should oversee the migration process." |
