TIPOS DE FEMINICIDIO - TIPOLOGÍA

The French regulatory authority ARCEP has identified three major issues for FTTH deployment which are: (1) access to France Telecom’s civil engineering facilities, (2) sharing of the terminal part of FTTH and (3) intervention of local authorities as facilitators. ARCEP has commissioned studies from Avisem for the second and third issue. These studies are focused on urban and suburban regions of France where it is more likely that FTTH deployment will take place. It addresses technical feasibility of FTTH deployment while it does not consider legal issues such as property rights or restrictions on rights of way.

2.5.1 Sharing of the terminal part of FTTH

Scope

Avisem (2007a) considers how existing infrastructure could facilitate the entry into buildings for FTTH/FTTB. It describes the technical options for getting inside a building via eight different infrastructures and it evaluates the feasibility of leveraging them to install fibre access to the building. The infrastructures considered are those for supply of electricity, France Telecom infrastructure, cable TV, waste and fresh water infrastructure, gas, community heating, and street lighting. The study elaborates on five different methods of access to the building which are underground, overhead, façade, mix of overhead/underground and mix of underground/façade. In addition it differentiates between single family homes and multi-dwelling units. The study focuses on fundamental technical feasibility considerations and suggests measures to increase the ability for leveraging the analysed infrastructures. However, the study does not directly address the economics of utilizing each of the infrastructures.14

Results

• Utilizing ducts and other facilities of France Telecom’s network bears high potential. The study addresses duct sharing, underground chambers and further assets such as pole infrastructure. However, at the time of completion of the study, a commercial offer existed only for duct access. Otherwise stated, no offer was available regarding access to overhead infrastructures such as poles, to manholes independent of ducts and other elements that could be leveraged. • Elements of CATV networks could also become relevant assets. However,

according to the study there has been little agreement with France Telecom (FT)15 _{on using the CATV ducts (which are in many cases owned by France}

Telecom) to get access to the subscriber and even less for ducts between manholes, due to FT’s exclusive usage rights clause in the agreements with the CATV companies.

• Electricity networks could potentially be leveraged by sharing the use of poles (possible but with numerous limitations, e.g. currently only 2 operators may share pole infrastructure at a time), by sharing ducts for remote energy management (unlikely due to different problems) and façade mounting (as it is done by a CATV subsidiary of Electricité de France).

14 The only element of information is provided in the form of selected prices for accessing existing infrastructure (e.g. France Telecom’s current duct offer or pricing for Electricité de France’s overhead electricity infrastructure for deploying CATV).

15 The study details that 2/3 of French underground CATV networks have been deployed by France Telecom, using almost exclusively France Telecom’s existing assets without the need for further civil works. Only 1/3 have been deployed by independent operators requiring new civil works.

• FTTH deployment via sewage networks is technically possible both in accessible and non-accessible underground drains. In the latter case robots may aid in deploying cables. However, generally installations must address a number of potential issues (such as damages from floating material, deterioration, rodents, pressure…).

• In addition to the requirements of sewage networks, FTTH deployment in fresh water networks requires (among other issues) to circumvent valves, to respect specific deployment rules (e.g. regarding cable material) and to (3) take into account the interruption of water service.

• Exploitation of gas networks can be possible but must respect similar constraints as deployment in fresh water environment (vents, security).

• It appears difficult to use district heating networks for FTTH deployment due to the inherent high temperatures.

• Street lighting does not offer many assets as it does not provide building entry except for underground/overhead transitions to the building front.

The report suggests a number of measures to increase the potential offered by the different infrastructures. Examples include:

• Regarding (overhead) energy network infrastructure (EDF): No a priori and systematic limitation of the number of operators.16

• Regarding France Telecom or CATV infrastructure: Allow sharing of all relevant infrastructures.17 _{Provide municipalities with the same rights to access}

infrastructure as a telecommunications network operator.

• Regarding façade entry to buildings: Study technical and legal feasibility to deploy fibre attached to existing cabling taking account of the specific types of cables (electricity, telephone, cable TV).

• Regarding water and gas: Encourage the identification of plants that are not in use anymore and which could facilitate FTTH deployment.

16 The current guide regarding electricity networks (“guide pratique des appuis communs”) limits the number of operators which can have access to a pole to two.

2.5.2 Intervention of local authorities as facilitators

Avisem (2007b):

• Describes common public civil engineering with regard to types of work, current practice in sharing work (e.g. for jointly deploying water and electricity) and data on the volumes of work conducted in France.

• Describes the cases where deployment of ducts is not suitable (where commercial zones have already been connected, where CATV networks already exist, where accessible underground galleries exist).

• Clarifies requirements to facilitate deployment of a fibre-optic network via public civil engineering projects. In this context different FTTH architectures are described, the selection of number and size of cables is discussed as well as the need for placing manholes / cabinets and the issue of duct dimensioning for a given number of operators. Generic recommendations are issued for deploying ducts and dealing with underground manholes.18

• Highlights case studies for work done by public authorities with different backgrounds.

• Specifies which elements should be taken into account for civil works and what options exist for deploying ducts, manholes and duct access. Sample specifications are provided.

• Identifies and quantifies the primary cost of deploying ducts together with other infrastructure. These are ducts, manholes and trench-width-extensions (cost depends on allocation of the trench cost to telecom and the other infrastructure).

Table 1: Cost estimates for joint duct deployment together with other civil works according to Avisem

Element Typical Cost per m

Technical implementation studies 2 Euro

Ducts 3 Euro Manholes 10 Euro Trench-extension 10 Euro Total 25 Euro/ m Source: Avisem (2007b)

18 4 ducts at 30mm or better 40mm internal diameter or a single duct of 110mm diameter at minimum. Ideally 4-6 ducts of at least 60mm of which 2 are of larger type should be deployed.

• Assesses the opportunities and risks of deploying ducts together with other civil works and describes different strategies with increasing proactive involvement by public authorities.

• Describes the approach to implementation through 3 phases (definition, annual planning and concrete handling per civil works site).