Vastus selgitustaotlusele

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

1

Technology neutrality and State aid

implications

Madrid, 19 October 2017

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

CONTENTS

• Introduction

• Implications for the mapping exercise

• Implications for the competitive selection process

• Implications for wholesale access obligations

2

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

CONTENTS

• Introduction

• Implications for the mapping exercise

• Implications for the competitive selection process

• Implications for wholesale access obligations

3

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

1. Technology neutrality: the general principles A technology is a method to turn inputs into outputs and it competes for these inputs against other technologies. Technology neutrality : main objective = committing to not picking the winner in the competition between technologies. Technology neutrality is critical in encouraging innovation and efficiency by stimulating technology competition.

• Locking in certain technologies at the expense of other competing solutions may also be influenced by strong industry players who have the resources to lobby for a particular technological solution.

However, the principle does not per se forbid the consideration of technological differences.

4

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

2. Technologies & EU targets BASIC BROADBAND: • Definition: Download <30Mbps & very low upload speeds • Technologies: asymmetric digital subscriber lines (up to ADSL2+ networks), non-enhanced cable

(e.g. DOCSIS 2.0), mobile networks of third generation (UMTS) and satellite systems • DAE Target: 100% basic broadband coverage –largely achieved in 2016 NEXT GENERATION NETWORKS (NGN & NGA): • Definition: Download >30Mbps & significantly higher upload speeds (includes >100Mbps -1Gbps ;

superfast, ultrafast, HCN) • Technologies: FTTx (FTTN, FTTC, FTTs/DP, FTTB, FTTH); certain advanced fixed wireless (reliable

high speeds per subscriber & step change); certain Upgraded cable networks (min. DOCSIS 3.0) • DAE Targets: 100% 30Mbps coverage by 2020 (76% achieved in 2016) and 50% 100Mbps uptake by

2020 (11% achieved in 2016) • Gigabit Society Targets complement DAE: by 2025:

•schools, transport hubs, public service providers, digitally intensive enterprises: 1 Gbps upload/download •households, rural or urban: 100 Mbps download upgradable to 1 Gbps •urban areas, major roads & railways: uninterrupted 5G coverage, starting with 1 major city in each MS by 2020

5

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

CONTENTS

• Introduction

• Implications for the mapping exercise

• Implications for the competitive selection process

• Implications for wholesale access obligations

6

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

3. Implications for the mapping exercise An appropriate mapping exercise is key to secure the DAE target in the most efficient and targeted way. It allows to clearly identify the geographical area which will be covered by the support measure and minimize distortion of competition with existing providers and with those who already have investment plans for the near future Mapping of existing and planned infrastructure (not suppliers): next 3 years or adequate period Mapping only on download speeds (<30 Mbps; >30 Mbps). As result of the mapping exercise the area can be defined: • NGA White: no available NGA infrastructure • NGA Grey: only one NGA infrastructure • NGA Black: at least two NGA infrastructures The colour of the area impacts the way the public intervention can be carried out: • NGA White: public intervention can go ahead • NGA Grey: public intervention can go ahead only if step change is demonstrated • NGA Black: public intervention can go ahead only under certain conditions (no fibre network reaches end-users,

wholesale only, step change, expected demand, etc.)

7

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

4. What is an NGA network? NGA networks (>30Mbps) are access networks which rely wholly or partly on optical elements and which are capable of delivering broadband access services with enhanced characteristics as compared to existing basic broadband networks NGA networks are understood to have at least the following characteristics: • deliver services reliably at a very high speed (>30Mbps) per subscriber through optical (or

equivalent) technology • backhaul sufficiently close to user premises to guarantee the actual delivery of that very high

speed; • support a variety of advanced digital services including converged all-IP services • have substantially higher upload speeds (compared to basic broadband networks).

8

Technology neutrality – implication on mapping: all technologies matching these characteristic are considered to deliver NGA connectivity

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

5. Type of NGA networks Type of NGA networks • Wired: FTTx (FTTN, FTTC, FTTP, FTTB, FTTH); cable networks (min. DOCSIS 3.0) • Wireless: Fixed-Wireless & Mobile (LTE) under certain circumstances. Cautious on wireless: not always able to deliver reliable NGA services (the area may be considered white) -> Need for in depth scrutiny • The wireless medium is ‘shared’ (the speed per user depends on the number of connected users in

the area covered) • The number of users could include nomadic users • The medium is inherently subject to fluctuating environmental conditions  Fixed Wireless: need to use licensed spectrum with adequate bandwidth, density of deployment

and capacity planning, advanced configurations (such as directed and/or multiple antennas).  Mobile broadband (LTE): must also ensure the required quality of service level to users at a fixed

location while serving any other nomadic subscribers in the area of interest: e.g. as part of FWA (no case practice yet)

9

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

6. Fibre based NGA networks 1/2

10

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

7. Fibre based NGA networks 2/2 • FTTN: Fibre to the node (= local exchange or Main Distribution Point (MDF)

location • FTTC: Fibre to the cabinet, requires active components and power supply at the

cabinet locations • FTTS/dp: Fibre to the street/ distribution point requires distribution points

capable of hosting active network nodes (elec. power), handholes or small cabinets

• FTTB: Fibre to the building needs active network components, which are devises which require external power source, changing from fibre to in-house copper line communication, no need for in-house fibre cabling coordination

• FTTH: Fibre to the home, in any flat, with either point-to-point (PtP) fibre between home and MDF or point-to-multipoint (PtMP) fibre, where the end customer fibres will be aggregated to one single fibre to the MDF location by splitters at distribution points in the field

11

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

8. Copper based sub-loop For Copper based technologies need to take into account the sub-loop length

12

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

9. NGA networks: main features

13

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

10. Applications useing NGA networks

14

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

11. Technical criteria for the assessment of the step change

15

Interventions in grey areas: step-change demonstration needed Next to download speed, various technical criteria can be considered to assess the step change: • Upload speed • Jitter, Latency, Packet loss, etc. • Reliability and robustness • Future proof • ……

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

12. Strict step change for black NGA areas

16

Interventions in black areas: Only with >100Mbps -1Gbps (HCN); stricter step change requirements:

• Existing / planned NGA networks do not reach the end-user premises with

fibre networks • Market situation not evolving towards providing >100Mbps in the near

future by private investment • There is expected demand for such qualitative improvements (including

Gigabit targets) • Subsidised network has significant enhanced technological characteristics &

performance • Subsidised network is wholesale-only • No excessive distortion of competition regarding recent NGA investments by

private operators in same areas

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

CONTENTS

• Introduction

• Implications for the mapping exercise

• Implications for the competitive selection process

• Implications for wholesale access obligations

17

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

13. The principle of technology neutrality in the BBGLs (art. 78(e) BBGLs)

18

• As different technological solutions exist to provide broadband services, the

tender should not favour or exclude any particular technology or network platform. Bidders should be entitled to propose the provision of the required broadband services using or combining whatever technology they deem most suitable.

• On the basis of the objective tender criteria, the granting authority is then entitled to select the most suitable technological solution or mix of technology solutions. In principle, universal coverage of larger target areas can be reached with a mix of technologies.

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

14. Most economically advantageous offer (art.78(d) BBGLs)

19

• Within the context of a competitive tender procedure, the aid granting authority shall establish qualitative award criteria on which the submitted bids are assessed.

• Relevant award criteria may include, for instance, the achieved geographical coverage, sustainability of the technological approach or the impact of the proposed solution on competition.

• Such qualitative criteria have to be weighed against the required aid amount.

• ……………

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

15. Examples of additional criteria

20

Footnote 103 of BBGLs: • network topologies allowing full and effective unbundling could receive

more points. • a point-to-point topology is more conducive for long-term competition in

comparison with point-to-multipoint topology.

On aid to ultra-fast broadband networks (art.84(a) BBGLs): • the subsidised network exhibits significant enhanced technological

characteristics and performance compared to the verifiable characteristics and performance of existing or planned networks.

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

16. Technology neutrality in the proposal for an Electronic Communication Code COM(2016) 590 final

21

"The principle that Member States should apply EU law in a technologically neutral fashion … that is to say that a national regulatory or other competent authority neither imposes nor discriminates in favour of the use of a particular type of technology

……, it does not preclude taking into account that certain transmission media have physical characteristics and architectural features that can be superior in terms of quality of service, capacity, maintenance cost, energy efficiency, management flexibility, reliability, robustness and scalability, and ultimately in terms of performance, which can be reflected in actions taken in view of pursuing the various regulatory objectives."

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

17. Technology neutrality principle in the context of the selection procedure: take-away concept

22

.

Among the criteria to define the performance goal are:

quality of service, capacity, maintenance cost, energy efficiency, management flexibility, reliability, robustness and scalability, future proof, latency, jitter, download/upload speed, competition (e.g. wholesale access)…

The granting authority in designing the selection procedure and the award criteria should specify the performance goal to be achieved but should then leave the bidders free to offer any technology that they find appropriate to achieve it.

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

CONTENTS

• Introduction

• Implications for the mapping exercise

• Implications for the competitive selection process

• Implications for wholesale access obligations

23

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

18. Technology neutrality: implication for the wholesale access obligations

24

Wholesale access: Due to the economics of NGAs, it is of utmost importance to ensure effective wholesale access for third-party operators. Especially in areas in which there are already competing basic broadband operators, in which it has to be ensured that the competitive market situation which existed before the intervention is preserved.…. The subsidised network must therefore offer access under fair and non- discriminatory conditions to all operators who request it and will provide them with the possibility of effective and full unbundling.

European Commission, DG Competition, State aid Unit - C4

25

Thank you!

Suur-Ameerika 1 / 10122 Tallinn / +372 620 8100 / [email protected]/ www.justdigi.ee Registrikood 70000898

Tõnis Palts Levikom Eesti OÜ [email protected] Vastus selgitustaotlusele Austatud Tõnis Palts Alljärgnevalt vastame Teie poolt selgitustaotluses esitatud küsimustele. 1. Millistele Euroopa Liidu õigusaktidele, Euroopa Komisjoni suunistele või muudele siduvatele seisukohtadele tugineb seletuskirjas esitatud järeldus, et väga suure läbilaskevõimega võrgu (VHCN) nõuetele vastava raadiolahenduse puhul on teenuse kvaliteedi tagamiseks vältimatult nõutav operaatori ainukasutuses olev sagedusluba? Seletuskirjas esitatud järeldus tugineb Justiits- ja Digiministeeriumi seisukohale, et ainult sagedusloaga raadiolahendus lubab seda kasutaval operaatoril tagada oma võrgus sideühenduse kvaliteet. Justiits- ja Digiministeeriumi seisukoht on kujundatud toetudes Euroopa Liidu elektroonilise side koodeksile, Euroopa reguleerivate asutuste ameti (BEREC) suunistele VHCNi defineerimiseks ja Euroopa Komisjoni suunistele lairibavõrkude jaoks antava riigiabi kohta. Kuigi Euroopa Liidu õigus ei sätesta detailselt konkreetseid sagedushalduse vorme, rõhutavad nii Euroopa elektroonilise side seadustik kui 2022. aasta riigiabi suunised, et liikmesriigid peavad tagama VHCN võrgu kõrge kvaliteedi, töökindluse, stabiilsuse ja võrdse ligipääsu. Nende eesmärkide täitmine eeldab turvalist ja häireteta raadiosageduste kasutamist, mida vabasagedused oma olemuselt ei võimalda. Kuigi antud dokumendid ei nimeta konkreetselt “ainukasutuses olevat sagedusluba”, võimaldavad kvaliteedi, töökindluse ja sagedushalduse eesmärgid teha järelduse, et ainult litsentseeritud sageduste kasutamine võimaldab VHCN nõudeid reaalselt täita, mistõttu on selline järeldus õiguslikult põhjendatav. Riigiabi suunised lubavad liikmesriigil kehtestada kriteeriumid, millele riigi toetusega võrk peab vastama. Kvalitatiivsete kriteeriumite hulgas on Justiits- ja Digiministeerium otsustanud, et raadiolahenduste puhul peab olema tegemist sagedusloaga tehnoloogiaga. Selleks, et tagada nõutava kvaliteediga teenust, peavad raadiolahendusega võrgud kasutama lõppkasutajaga ühendamiseks sagedusloaga sagedusi, kuna ainult operaatori ainukasutuses olevad sagedused tagavad operaatorile võimaluse tagada oma võrgus kindel kvaliteet ilma häireteta.

Teie 15.12.2025 nr 01

Meie 22.12.2025 nr 8-4/10024-2

2

2. Kas ja millisel viisil on menetluses oleva määruse ettevalmistamisel hinnatud nimetatud piirangu kooskõla tehnoloogilise neutraalsuse põhimõttega, nagu see tuleneb Euroopa elektroonilise side koodeksist (direktiiv (EL) 2018/1972), eeskätt selle artiklist 3? Menetluses oleva määruse ettevalmistamisel on piirangu kooskõla tehnoloogilise neutraalsuse põhimõttega hinnatud vastavalt lairiba riigiabi suunistele. Lairiba suuniste kohaselt ei tohi riigi sekkumise puhul eelistada ega välja jätta ühtegi konkreetset tehnoloogiat. Samas ei piira tehnoloogiline neutraalsus liikmesriikide võimalust määrata kindlaks võrkude soovitud jõudlust ja muid parameetreid, mida menetletavas määruses on seda tehtud § 2 lõikes 2 ja §-is 12. 3. Kas Justiitsministeeriumi hinnangul on õiguspärane kehtestada toetusmeetme tingimustes tehnoloogiline piirang spektrikorralduse liigi alusel, olukorras, kus meetme eesmärk on sõnastatud tulemuspõhiselt (VHCN kvaliteedinõuete täitmine) ning sama eesmärgi saavutamist oleks võimalik hinnata objektiivsete ja tehnoloogianeutraalsete kvaliteedinäitajate kaudu? Jah, Justiits- ja Digiministeeriumi hinnangul on õiguspärane kehtestada piirang sagedushalduse alusel tagamaks VHCN võrgu kvaliteedinõuete täitmine. Selleks, et tagada nõutava kvaliteediga teenust, peavad raadiolahendusega võrgud kasutama lõppkasutajaga ühendamiseks sagedusloaga sagedusi, kuna ainult operaatori ainukasutuses olevad sagedused tagavad operaatorile võimaluse tagada oma võrgus kindel kvaliteet ilma häireteta. Ka Euroopa Komisjoni konkurentsi peadirektoraadi poolt Eestile juba 2017 aastal esimese lairiba toetusmeetme ettevalmistamisel edastatud info kohaselt (vt. lisatud slaide) peab raadiolahendusega võrk (tagamaks usaldusväärse lairibaühenduse) kasutama sagedusloaga sagedusi (lk 9), ehk häirekindlat sageduskasutust, mida loavabades sagedusalades kasutamiseks mõeldud tehnoloogiad ei võimalda. Ettevõtlus- ja infotehnoloogiaminister Urve Palo edasta selle info 2018. aastal ametliku kirjaga ka Levikom Eesti OÜ-le. Praegu menetluses oleva määruse eelnõu edastati käesoleva aasta suvel vastavalt Euroopa Liidu struktuurifondide kasutamise reeglitele kooskõlastamiseks Euroopa Komisjonile ning Euroopa Komisjonil ei olnud määruse eelnõu suhtes täiendavaid ettepanekuid ega etteheiteid. 4. Kas ja kuidas on määruse ettevalmistamisel arvestatud Euroopa Komisjoni 2022. aasta lairiba riigiabi suunistes kirjeldatud lähenemist, mille kohaselt peab riigiabi sekkumine olema tehnoloogianeutraalne ning suunatud olulise uue võrguvõimekuse (VHCN) loomisele, sõltumata kasutatavast tehnilisest lahendusest? Menetluses oleva määruse ettevalmistamisel on piirangu kooskõla tehnoloogilise neutraalsuse põhimõttega hinnatud vastavalt lairiba riigiabi suunistele. Lairiba suuniste kohaselt ei tohi riigi sekkumise puhul eelistada ega välja jätta ühtegi konkreetset tehnoloogiat. Samas ei piira tehnoloogiline neutraalsus liikmesriikide võimalust määrata kindlaks võrkude soovitud jõudlust ja muid parameetreid, mida menetletavas määruses on seda tehtud § 2 lõikes 2 ja §-is 12. Lugupidamisega (allkirjastatud digitaalselt) Tõnu Grünberg asekantsler

3

Raigo Iling [email protected]