ITRE Amendments on Single Market Regulation

Amendment 154

Giles Chichester Paragraph 1
Draft legislative resolution	Amendment
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;	1. Rejects the Commission proposal;

Amendment 155

Sabine Verheyen, Petra Kammerevert, Helga Trüpel, Doris Pack –
	Proposal for a rejection
	The European Parliament rejects [the Commission proposal].

Justification:
We support the Commission’s fundamental aims of promoting the internal market in the interests of consumers and the European economy. However, it is very doubtful whether this proposal for a regulation is well-suited to meet them. On the contrary we fear the proposal will have adverse effects on willingness to invest and on competition. Accordingly a coordinated review of the whole legal framework should be carried out in the next electoral period following a careful analysis and prior consultation of all stakeholders.

Amendment 156

Jens Rohde Citation 5 a (new)
Draft legislative resolution	Amendment
	- Having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 12 September 2013 on the Digital Agenda for Growth, Mobility and Employment: time to move up a gear, in which the European Parliament calls for the abolishment of roaming in 2015.

Amendment 157

Christian Ehler Recital 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Europe has to tap all sources of growth to exit the crisis, create jobs and regain its competitiveness. Restoring growth and job creation in the Union is the aim of the Europe 2020 Strategy. The 2013 Spring European Council stressed the importance of the digital single market for growth and called for concrete measures, in order to establish a single market in information and communications technology (ICT) as early as possible. In line with the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and with this call, this regulation aims at establishing a single market for electronic communications by completing and adapting the existing Union Regulatory Framework for Electronic Communications.	(1) Europe has to tap all sources of growth to exit the crisis, create jobs and regain its competitiveness. Restoring growth and job creation in the Union is the aim of the Europe 2020 Strategy. Furthermore the Digital Sphere has become a part of the public space where new forms of cross-border trade are established, and business opportunities for European companies in the global digital economy are being created along with innovative market development and social and cultural interaction. The 2013 Spring European Council stressed the importance of the digital single market for growth and called for concrete measures, in order to establish a single market in information and communications technology (ICT) as early as possible. In line with the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and with this call, this regulation aims at establishing a single market for electronic communications by completing and adapting the existing Union Regulatory Framework for Electronic Communications.

Justification:
In line with the Transatlantic Dialogue (TLD) Non-Paper "Cyber security and Internet issues - Establishing framework for Transatlantic action".

Amendment 158

Patrizia Toia Recital 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE), one of the flagship initiatives of Europe 2020 Strategy, has already recognised the role of ICT and network connectivity as an indispensable basis for the development of our economy and society. For Europe to reap the benefits of digital transformation, the Union needs a dynamic single market in electronic communications for all sectors and across all of Europe. Such a truly single communications market will be the backbone of an innovative and 'smart' digital economy and a foundation of the digital single market where online services can freely flow across borders.	(2) The Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE), one of the flagship initiatives of Europe 2020 Strategy, has already recognised the role of ICT and network connectivity as an indispensable basis for the development of our economy and society. For Europe to reap the benefits of digital transformation, the Union needs a dynamic single market in electronic communications for all sectors and across all of Europe. Such a truly single communications market will be the backbone of an innovative and 'smart' digital economy and a foundation of the digital single market where online services can freely flow across borders within a single, open, standardised and interoperable framework.

Amendment 159

Petra Kammerevert Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with national, rather than Union-wide general authorisation regimes, national spectrum assignment schemes, differences of access products available for electronic communications providers in different Member States, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and are often implemented in diverging ways by the Member States.	(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the right of each individual to access electronic communications networks and services in the Union, the freedom to provide these and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders.

Amendment 160

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with national, rather than Union-wide general authorisation regimes, national spectrum assignment schemes, differences of access products available for electronic communications providers in different Member States, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and are often implemented in diverging ways by the Member States.	(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders.

Amendment 161

András Gyürk Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with national, rather than Union-wide general authorisation regimes, national spectrum assignment schemes, differences of access products available for electronic communications providers in different Member States, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and are often implemented in diverging ways by the Member States.	(3) The freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with diverging national implementation of the general authorisation regime, national spectrum assignment schemes, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. For example, while the Authorisation Directive limits the type of information which may be required, 12 Member States demand additional detail such as a categorisation of the intended types of activities, the geographical scope of the activity, the targeted market, the company structure, including names of shareholders, and of shareholders of shareholders, Chamber of Commerce certification and a criminal records of the representative of the undertaking.

Amendment 162

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with national, rather than Union-wide general authorisation regimes, national spectrum assignment schemes, differences of access products available for electronic communications providers in different Member States, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and are often implemented in diverging ways by the Member States.	(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications needs to be harmonised and simplified to facilitate and speed up the completion of the digital single market. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and are often implemented in diverging ways by the Member States.

Amendment 163

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with national, rather than Union-wide general authorisation regimes, national spectrum assignment schemes, differences of access products available for electronic communications providers in different Member States, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and are often implemented in diverging ways by the Member States.	(3) In a seamless single market in electronic communications, the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services to every customer in the Union and the right of each end-user to choose the best offer available on the market should be ensured and should not be hindered by the fragmentation of markets along national borders. The current regulatory framework for electronic communications does not fully address such fragmentation, with national, rather than Union-wide general authorisation regimes, national spectrum assignment schemes, differences of access products available for electronic communications providers in different Member States, and different sets of sector-specific consumer rules applicable. The Union rules in many cases merely define a baseline, and the differences in the enforcement and implementation of the regulatory framework has led to higher costs for operators active in more than one country; thereby hindering investments and the development of a single market for telecoms

Amendment 164

Patrizia Toia, Francesco De Angelis Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) A truly single market for electronic communications should promote competition, investment and innovation in new and enhanced networks and services by fostering market integration and cross-border service offerings. It should thus help to achieve the ambitious high-speed broadband targets set out in the DAE. The growing availability of digital infrastructures and services should in turn increase consumer choice, quality of service and diversity of content, and contribute to territorial and social cohesion, as well as facilitating mobility across the Union.	(4) A truly single market for electronic communications should promote competition, investment and innovation in new and enhanced networks and services by fostering market integration and cross-border service offerings. It should thus help to achieve the ambitious high-speed broadband targets set out in the DAE and facilitate the emergence of services and applications that are able to exploit open data and formats in an interoperable, standardised and safe way, ensuring that they are available at the same functional and non-functional levels throughout the Union. The growing availability of digital infrastructures and services should in turn increase consumer choice, quality of service and diversity of content, and contribute to territorial and social cohesion, as well as facilitating mobility across the Union.

Amendment 165

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) A truly single market for electronic communications should promote competition, investment and innovation in new and enhanced networks and services by fostering market integration and cross-border service offerings. It should thus help to achieve the ambitious high-speed broadband targets set out in the DAE. The growing availability of digital infrastructures and services should in turn increase consumer choice, quality of service and diversity of content, and contribute to territorial and social cohesion, as well as facilitating mobility across the Union.	(4) A truly single market for electronic communications should promote competition, coordination, investment, innovation and more capacity in new and enhanced networks and services by fostering market integration and cross-border service offerings. It should thus help to achieve the ambitious high-speed broadband targets set out in the DAE. The growing availability of digital infrastructures and services should in turn increase consumer choice, quality of service and diversity of content, and contribute to territorial and social cohesion, as well as facilitating mobility across the Union.

Amendment 166

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) A truly single market for electronic communications should promote competition, investment and innovation in new and enhanced networks and services by fostering market integration and cross-border service offerings. It should thus help to achieve the ambitious high-speed broadband targets set out in the DAE. The growing availability of digital infrastructures and services should in turn increase consumer choice, quality of service and diversity of content, and contribute to territorial and social cohesion, as well as facilitating mobility across the Union.	(4) A truly single market for electronic communications should promote competition, investment and innovation in new and enhanced networks and services by fostering market integration and cross-border service offerings. It should thus help to achieve, and even surpass, the high-speed broadband targets set out in the DAE. The growing availability of digital infrastructures and services should in turn increase consumer choice, quality of service and diversity of content, and contribute to territorial and social cohesion, as well as facilitating mobility across the Union.

Amendment 167

Patrizia Toia, Francesco De Angelis Recital 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(5) The benefits arising from a single market for electronic communications should extend to the wider digital ecosystem that includes Union equipment manufacturers, content and application providers and the wider economy, covering sectors such as banking, automotive, logistics, retail, energy and transport, which rely on connectivity to enhance their productivity through, for example, ubiquitous cloud applications, connected objects and possibilities for integrated service provision for different parts of the company. Public administrations and the health sector should also benefit from a wider availability of e-government and e-health services. The offer of cultural content and services, and cultural diversity in general, may be also enhanced in a single market for electronic communications. The provision of connectivity through electronic communications networks and services is of such importance to the wider economy and society that unjustified sector-specific burdens, whether regulatory or otherwise, should be avoided.	(5) The benefits arising from a single market for electronic communications should extend to the wider digital ecosystem that includes Union equipment manufacturers, content and application providers and the wider economy, covering sectors such as banking, automotive, logistics, retail, energy, medicine, mobility and transport, and the intelligent management of emergencies and natural disasters, which rely on connectivity and broadband to enhance their productivity, quality and end-user provision through, for example, ubiquitous cloud applications, advanced analysis of big data from communications networks, connected and interoperable objects and possibilities for integrated cross-border service provision, against a background of open-standard system interoperability and open data. Public administrations and the health sector should also benefit from a wider availability of e-government and e-health services. The offer of cultural content and services, and cultural diversity in general, may be also enhanced in a single market for electronic communications. The provision of connectivity through electronic communications networks and services is of such importance to the wider economy and society and to the smart cities of the future that unjustified sector-specific burdens, whether regulatory or otherwise, should be avoided.

Amendment 168

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Recital 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(5) The benefits arising from a single market for electronic communications should extend to the wider digital ecosystem that includes Union equipment manufacturers, content and application providers and the wider economy, covering sectors such as banking, automotive, logistics, retail, energy and transport, which rely on connectivity to enhance their productivity through, for example, ubiquitous cloud applications, connected objects and possibilities for integrated service provision for different parts of the company. Public administrations and the health sector should also benefit from a wider availability of e-government and e-health services. The offer of cultural content and services, and cultural diversity in general, may be also enhanced in a single market for electronic communications. The provision of connectivity through electronic communications networks and services is of such importance to the wider economy and society that unjustified sector-specific burdens, whether regulatory or otherwise, should be avoided.	(5) The benefits arising from a single market for electronic communications should extend to the wider digital ecosystem that includes Union equipment manufacturers, content and application providers and the wider economy, covering sectors such as banking, automotive, logistics, retail, energy and transport, which rely on connectivity to enhance their productivity through, for example, ubiquitous cloud applications, connected objects and possibilities for integrated service provision for different parts of the company. Public administrations and the health sector should also benefit from a wider availability of e-government and e-health services. The offer of cultural and educational content and services, and cultural diversity in general, may be also enhanced in a single market for electronic communications. The provision of connectivity through electronic communications networks and services is of such importance to the wider economy and society that unjustified sector-specific burdens, whether regulatory or otherwise, should be avoided.

Amendment 169

Marisa Matias Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.	(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms to abolish roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union without being subject to additional charges over and above the tariffs which they pay in the Member State where their contract was concluded.

Amendment 170

Patrizia Toia Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.	(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services, traffic management and shared, common standards on end-user privacy and data protection and security, which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.

Amendment 171

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.	(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on harmonised and simplified regulations to ensure greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.

Amendment 172

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of end-users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect end-users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give end-users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.	(6) This Regulation aims at the completion of the single electronic communications market through action on three broad, inter-related axes. First, it should secure the freedom to provide electronic communications services across borders and networks in different Member States, building on the concept of a single EU authorisation which puts in place the conditions for ensuring greater consistency and predictability in the content and implementation of sector-specific regulation throughout the Union. Second, it is necessary to enable access on much more convergent terms and conditions to essential inputs for the cross-border provision of electronic communications networks and services, not only for wireless broadband communications, for which both licensed and unlicensed spectrum is key, but also for fixed line connectivity. Third, in the interests of aligning business conditions and building the digital confidence of citizens, this Regulation should harmonise rules on the protection of users, especially consumers. This includes rules on non-discrimination, contractual information, termination of contracts and switching, in addition to rules on access to online content, applications and services and on traffic management which not only protect users but simultaneously guarantee the continued functioning of the Internet ecosystem as an engine of innovation. In addition, further reforms in the field of roaming should give users the confidence to stay connected when they travel in the Union, and should become over time a driver of convergent pricing and other conditions in the Union.
	(This amendment applies to the whole text)

Justification:
We prefer the term "user" to "end-user", which gives a too restrictive, or passive aspect of the internet user. The internet user should also be entitledto provide applications and services on the internet, see our amendment on article 23-1. The freedoms on the internet requires us to remind that.

Amendment 173

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Recital 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(8a) To take account of the convergence of the once separate markets in traditional telecommunications services and information society services, the scope of this Regulation covers all services which mainly serve communications purposes or are primarily used by consumers for communication, in order to secure an appropriate level of consumer protection. Services which do not mainly serve communications purposes and are thus not essentially communicative in nature, such as online banking services or location-based services, will continue to be excluded from its scope.

Amendment 174

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) The provision of cross-border electronic communications is still subject to greater burdens than those confined to the national borders. In particular, cross-border providers still need to notify and pay fees in individual host Member States. Holders of a single EU authorisation should be subject to a single notification system in the Member State of their main establishment (home Member State), which will reduce the administrative burden for cross-border operators. The single EU authorisation should apply to any undertaking that provides or intends to provide electronic communications services and networks in more than one Member State, thereby entitling it to enjoy the rights attached to the freedom to provide electronic communications services and networks in accordance with this Regulation in any Member State. A single EU authorisation defining the legal framework applicable to electronic communications operators providing services across Member States on the basis of a general authorisation in the home Member State should ensure the effectiveness of the freedom to provide electronic communications services and networks in the whole Union.	(9) The provision of cross-border electronic communications is still subject to greater burdens than those confined to the national borders. Harmonised and simplified regulations need to be introduced on the format and content of the notifications that must be made by operators in each Member State where they wish to operate. The Commission should draw up the standard notification format after consulting all interested parties and with the support of BEREC.

Amendment 175

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10) The provision of electronic communications services or networks across borders may take different forms, depending on several factors such as the kind of network or services provided, the extent of the physical infrastructure needed or the number of subscribers in the different Member States. The intention to provide electronic communications services cross-border or to operate an electronic communications network in more than one Member State may be demonstrated by activities such as negotiation of agreements on access to networks in a given Member State or marketing via an internet site in the language of the targeted Member State.	(10) The provision of electronic communications services or networks across borders may take different forms, depending on several factors such as the kind of network or services provided, the extent of the physical infrastructure needed or the number of subscribers in the different Member States.

Amendment 176

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 11
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(11) Irrespective of how the provider chooses to operate electronic communications networks or provide electronic communications services across borders, the regulatory regime applicable to a European electronic communications provider should be neutral vis-à-vis the commercial choices which underlie the organisation of functions and activities across Member States. Therefore, regardless of the corporate structure of the undertaking, the home Member State of a European electronic communications provider should be considered to be the Member State where the strategic decisions concerning the provision of electronic communications networks or services are taken.	(11) Irrespective of how the provider chooses to operate electronic communications networks or provide electronic communications services across borders, the regulatory regime applicable to an electronic communications provider should be neutral vis-à-vis the commercial choices which underlie the organisation of functions and activities across Member States.

Amendment 177

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13) Most sector-specific conditions, for example concerning access to or security and integrity of networks or access to emergency services, are strongly linked to the place where such network is located or the service is provided. Consequently a European electronic communications provider may be subject to conditions applicable in the Member States where it operates, to the extent that this Regulation does not provide otherwise.	deleted

Amendment 178

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) Where Member States require contribution from the sector in order to finance universal service obligations and to the administrative costs of the national regulatory authorities, the criteria and procedures for apportioning contributions should be proportionate and non-discriminatory with regard to European electronic communications providers, so as not to hinder cross-border market entry, in particular of new entrants and smaller operators; individual undertakings’ contributions should therefore take into account the contributor’s market share in terms of turnover realised in the relevant Member State and should be subject to the application of a de minimis threshold.	deleted

Amendment 179

Salvador Sedó i Alabart Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) It is necessary to ensure that in similar circumstances there is no discrimination in the treatment of any European electronic communications provider by different Member States and that consistent regulatory practices are applied in the single market, in particular as regards measures falling within the scope of Articles 15 or 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC, or Articles 5 or 8 of Directive 2002/19/EC. European electronic communications providers should therefore have a right to equal treatment by the different Member States in objectively equivalent situations in order to enable more integrated multi-territorial operations. Furthermore, there should be specific procedures at Union level for the review of draft decisions on remedies within the meaning of Article 7a of Directive 2002/21/EC in such cases, in order to avoid unjustified divergences in obligations applicable to European electronic communications providers in different Member States.	(15) It is necessary to ensure that in similar circumstances there is no discrimination in the treatment of any European electronic communications provider by different Member States and that consistent regulatory practices are applied in the single market, in particular as regards measures falling within the scope of Articles 15 or 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC, or Articles 5 or 8 of Directive 2002/19/EC. European electronic communications providers should therefore have a right to equal treatment by the different Member States in objectively equivalent situations in order to enable more integrated multi-territorial operations.

Justification:
There are no grounds for this proposal by the Commission of power to veto the NRA's remedies in the case of European providers.

Amendment 180

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) It is necessary to ensure that in similar circumstances there is no discrimination in the treatment of any European electronic communications provider by different Member States and that consistent regulatory practices are applied in the single market, in particular as regards measures falling within the scope of Articles 15 or 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC, or Articles 5 or 8 of Directive 2002/19/EC. European electronic communications providers should therefore have a right to equal treatment by the different Member States in objectively equivalent situations in order to enable more integrated multi-territorial operations. Furthermore, there should be specific procedures at Union level for the review of draft decisions on remedies within the meaning of Article 7a of Directive 2002/21/EC in such cases, in order to avoid unjustified divergences in obligations applicable to European electronic communications providers in different Member States.	(15) It is necessary to ensure that in similar circumstances there is no discrimination in the treatment of any electronic communications provider by different Member States and that consistent regulatory practices are applied in the single market, in particular as regards measures falling within the scope of Articles 15 or 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC, or Articles 5 or 8 of Directive 2002/19/EC. Electronic communications providers should therefore have a right to equal treatment by the different Member States in objectively equivalent situations in order to enable more integrated multi-territorial operations. Furthermore, there should be specific procedures at Union level for the review of draft decisions on remedies within the meaning of Article 7a of Directive 2002/21/EC in such cases, in order to avoid unjustified divergences in obligations applicable to electronic communications providers in different Member States.

Amendment 181

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16) An allocation of regulatory and supervisory competences should be established between the home and any host Member State of European electronic communications providers with a view to reducing the barriers to entry while ensuring that the applicable conditions for the provision of electronic communications services and networks by these providers are properly enforced. Therefore, while each national regulatory authority should supervise compliance with the conditions applicable in its territory in accordance with Union legislation, including by means of sanctions and interim measures, only the national regulatory authority in the home Member State should be entitled to suspend or withdraw the rights of a European electronic communications provider to provide electronic communications networks and services in the whole Union or part thereof.	deleted

Amendment 182

Petra Kammerevert Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.	(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an extremely scarce resource. It is vital for the achievement of a wide range of societal, cultural, social and economic objectives. The 2009 telecoms review specified that the Commission must take equal and appropriate account of all these aspects in the context of spectrum management. The requirements set out in the telecoms package thus form the basis for any radio spectrum policy in the European Union. For that reason, it is also vital that future radio spectrum policy should be consistent with that legal framework and with the principles laid down therein.
[23] Decision No 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme (OJ L 81, 21.3.2012, p. 7).
[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 183

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.	(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and a finite resource. Therefore it is of utmost importance to take account of the social, cultural and economic value of spectrum as a whole. As laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council, any additional spectrum for wireless broadband communications should be linked with the review of the use of spectrum in the whole UHF band. According to Article 6, paragraph 5 of the RSPP, the Commission will report to the European Parliament and the Council by 1 January 2015 on whether there is a need for action to harmonise additional frequency bands.
__________________	__________________
[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 184

Patrizia Toia Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.	(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. Several EU Member States have fallen behind other global regions, such as North America and parts of Asia, in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies, thereby holding the Union back from achieving such strategic goals. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council, testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.
__________________	__________________
[23] Decision 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012, establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme, OJ L 81 of 21.3.2012	[23]Decision 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012, establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme, OJ L 81 of 21.3.2012.
[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[24]Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 185

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.	(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, partly due to the fragmentation of the Union process for making available spectrum suitable for high speed wireless broadband access, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. The situation calls for improvement in Member States willingness and ability to implement already agreed rules, as well as in the Commission's exercise of its powers. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.
__________________	__________________
[23] Decision 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012, establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme, OJ L 81 of 21.3.2012.	[23] Decision 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012, establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme, OJ L 81 of 21.3.2012.
[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 186

Teresa Riera Madurell Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.	(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States having sought and been granted a derogation by the Commission or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.
__________________	__________________
[23] Decision 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012, establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme, OJ L 81 of 21.3.2012.	[23] Decision 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012, establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme, OJ L 81 of 21.3.2012
[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 187

Herbert Reul Recital 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband and satellite communications in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.	(17) Radio spectrum is a public good and an essential resource for the internal market for mobile, wireless broadband, satellite communications and broadcasting in the Union. Development of wireless broadband communications contributes to the implementation of the Digital Agenda for Europe and in particular to the aim of securing access to broadband at a speed of no less than 30 Mbps by 2020 for all Union citizens and of providing the Union with the highest possible broadband speed and capacity. However, the Union has fallen behind other major global regions - North America, Africa and parts of Asia - in terms of the roll-out and penetration of the latest generation of wireless broadband technologies that are necessary to achieve those policy goals. The piecemeal process of authorising and making available the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications, with over half of the Member States seeking a derogation or otherwise failing to do so by the deadline laid down in the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) Decision 243/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council,[23] testifies to the urgency of action even within the term of the current RSPP. Union measures to harmonise the conditions of availability and efficient use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[24] have not been sufficient to address this problem.
__________________	__________________
[23] Decision No 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme (OJ L 81, 21.3.2012, p. 7).	[23] Decision No 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme (OJ L 81, 21.3.2012, p. 7).
[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[24] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 188

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Recital 17 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(17 a) Trading and leasing of spectrum for wireless broadband communications should be further facilitated in order to create more flexible and efficient allocation of spectrum resources.

Amendment 189

Petra Kammerevert Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence.	(18) Radio spectrum serves the public interest in a wide range of areas in the Member States. In that connection, due account has to be taken of a host of specific national and regional characteristics. Member States should therefore also retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum which are required to carry out specific cultural and social tasks. Alongside terrestrial broadcasting and the cultural and creative sectors, this also includes public order, public security and defence purposes. In the event of disputes between Member States regarding the use of spectrum, the Commission plays a supplementary coordinating role in support of the Member States.

Amendment 190

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence.	(18) The EU Telecom Package as revised in 2009 establishes the principles for spectrum management. It recognizes Member States' competence with respect to cultural and audiovisual policies and generally leaves them the necessary scope for action. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should continue to endorse a dynamic approach to spectrum management, which recognizes Member States' competence in this field and respects the cultural, audiovisual and media policies of each Member State. Sufficient flexibility is needed to accommodate specific national requirements and Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence. In cases of disputes between Member States over spectrum use, the Commission may coordinate and support dispute settlement.

Amendment 191

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence.	(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. While, Member States may retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence, any new spectrum made available following the application of this regulation should be exclusively used for the internal market harmonisation.

Amendment 192

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Edit Herczog Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence.	(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence, or to pursue general interest objectives such as cultural diversity and media pluralism.

Amendment 193

Angelika Niebler Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence.	(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for purposes of public order, public security, safeguarding and promoting linguistic and cultural diversity and media pluralism, and defence.

Amendment 194

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence.	(18) The application of various national policies creates inconsistencies and fragmentation of the internal market which hamper the roll-out of Union-wide services and the completion of the internal market for wireless broadband communications. It could in particular create unequal conditions for access to such services, hamper competition between undertakings established in different Member States and stifle investments in more advanced networks and technologies and the emergence of innovative services, thereby depriving citizens and businesses of ubiquitous integrated high-quality services and wireless broadband operators of increased efficiency gains from large-scale more integrated operations. Therefore, action at Union level regarding certain aspects of radio spectrum assignment should accompany the development of wide integrated coverage of advanced wireless broadband communications services throughout the Union. At the same time, Member States should retain the right to adopt measures to organise their radio spectrum for public order, public security purposes and defence and to pursue general interest objectives, in particular in the context of audiovisual and media policies.

Or.

Amendment 195

Patrizia Toia Recital 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(19) Electronic communications services providers, including mobile operators or consortia of such operators, should be able to collectively organise the efficient and affordable coverage of a vast part of the Union's territory to the long-term benefit of end users, and therefore use radio spectrum across several Member States with similar conditions, procedures, costs, timing, duration in harmonised bands, and with complementary radio spectrum packages, such as a combination of lower and higher frequencies for coverage of densely and less densely populated areas. Initiatives in favour of greater coordination and consistency would also enhance the predictability of the network investment environment. Such predictability would also be greatly favoured by a clear policy in favour of long-term duration of rights of use related to radio spectrum, without prejudice to the indefinite character of such rights in some Member States, and linked in its turn to clear conditions for the transfer, lease or sharing of part of all of the radio spectrum subject to such an individual right of use.	(19) Electronic communications services providers, including mobile operators or consortia of such operators, should be able to collectively organise the efficient, technologically modern, advanced and affordable coverage of a vast part of the Union's territory to the long-term benefit of end users, and therefore use radio spectrum across several Member States with similar conditions, procedures, costs, timing, duration in harmonised bands, and with complementary radio spectrum packages, such as a combination of lower and higher frequencies for coverage of densely and less densely populated areas. Initiatives in favour of greater coordination and consistency would also enhance the predictability of the network investment environment. Such predictability would also be greatly favoured by a clear policy in favour of long-term duration of rights of use related to radio spectrum, without prejudice to the indefinite character of such rights in some Member States, and linked in its turn to clear conditions for the transfer, lease or sharing of part of all of the radio spectrum subject to such an individual right of use.

Amendment 196

Petra Kammerevert Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on "Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband" adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications under Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 197

Angelika Niebler Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on "Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband" adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications under Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 198

Herbert Reul Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on "Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband" adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications under Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 199

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on "Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband" adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It may also extend to bands harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications in accordance with Articles 8a and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 200

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on ‘Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband’ adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as laid down in Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 201

Giles Chichester Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on ‘Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband’ adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on ‘Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband’ adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz.

Amendment 202

Lambert van Nistelrooij Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on ‘Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband’ adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on 'Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband' adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz and 1.5 GHz bands.

Amendment 203

Claude Turmes Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in3Article (b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on "Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband" adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz, 1.5 GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands.	(20) Coordination and consistency of rights of use for radio spectrum should be improved, at least for the bands which have been harmonised for wireless fixed, nomadic and mobile broadband communications. This includes the bands identified at ITU level for International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) Advanced systems, as well as bands used for radio local area networks (RLAN) such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It should also extend to bands that may be harmonised in the future for wireless broadband communications, as envisaged in Article 3(b) of the RSPP and in the RSPG Opinion on "Strategic challenges facing Europe in addressing the growing radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband" adopted on 13 June 2013, such as, in the near future, the 700 MHz and 1.5 GHz bands.

Or.

Justification:

The Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) sets out a detailed roadmap. In particular, the Member States are required to authorise the use of the following harmonised bands by the end of 2012: 900/1800 MHz, 2.5-2.69 GHz and 3.4-3.8 GHz. Given that the debate on current band use is still ongoing, there is insufficient justification to expand beyond 3.8 GHz.

Amendment 204

Patrizia Toia Recital 21 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(21a) Consistency and clear sharing among the Member States of their levels of protection, privacy and security of customer data, in order to ensure high common standards as regards privacy and the protection and security of sensitive or private end-user data.

Amendment 205

Giles Chichester Recital 24
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(24) As regards the other main substantive conditions which may be attached to rights of use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband, the convergent application by individual Member States of the regulatory principles and criteria set down in this Regulation would be favoured by a coordination mechanism whereby the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States have an opportunity to comment in advance of the granting of rights of use by a given Member State and whereby the Commission has an opportunity, taking into account the views of the Member States, to forestall implementation of any proposal which appears to be non-compliant with Union law.	(24) The convergent application by individual Member States of the regulatory principles and criteria set down in the Union regulatory framework would be favoured by a coordination mechanism whereby the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States have an opportunity to comment in advance of the granting of rights of use by a given Member State.

Justification:
The Commission may participate in ensuring a higher level of consistency between the different national radio spectrum assignment procedures by commenting on draft measures proposed by national competent authorities. Providing the Commission with a veto power in this regard would be too far reaching and represent a transfer of powers from Member States to the Commission which is neither justified nor proportionate, impinging on the principle of subsidiarity.

Amendment 206

Petra Kammerevert Recital 24
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(24) As regards the other main substantive conditions which may be attached to rights of use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband, the convergent application by individual Member States of the regulatory principles and criteria set down in this Regulation would be favoured by a coordination mechanism whereby the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States have an opportunity to comment in advance of the granting of rights of use by a given Member State and whereby the Commission has an opportunity, taking into account the views of the Member States, to forestall implementation of any proposal which appears to be non-compliant with Union law.	(24) ) As regards the other main substantive conditions which may be attached to rights of use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband, the convergent application by individual Member States of the regulatory principles and criteria set down in this Regulation would be favoured by a coordination mechanism whereby the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States have an opportunity to comment in advance of the granting of rights of use by a given Member State.

Amendment 207

Patrizia Toia Recital 24
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(24) As regards the other main substantive conditions which may be attached to rights of use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband, the convergent application by individual Member States of the regulatory principles and criteria set down in this Regulation would be favoured by a coordination mechanism whereby the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States have an opportunity to comment in advance of the granting of rights of use by a given Member State and whereby the Commission has an opportunity, taking into account the views of the Member States, to forestall implementation of any proposal which appears to be non-compliant with Union law.	(24) The convergent application by individual Member States of the regulatory principles concerning the European single market for electronic communications would be favoured by a coordination mechanism whereby the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States have an opportunity to comment in advance of the granting of rights of use by a given Member State and whereby the Commission has an opportunity, taking into account the views of the Member States, to forestall implementation of any proposal which appears to be non-compliant with Union law.

Amendment 208

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Recital 24 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(24 a) The economic value of consistent spectrum usage rights over several territories granted to the same operator would be higher than the fragmented combination of individual licenses because of the possibilities for economies of scale, for integrated networks, and for the avoidance of cross-border interference issues. Multi-territorial spectrum authorisation procedures conducted jointly between Member States would allow mobile network operators to be granted spectrum usage rights across several Member States that are consistent or identical, for example with regard to their duration, the spectrum blocks assigned, and the related license conditions.

Amendment 209

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 24 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(24 b) Pan European licence auctions under BEREC supervision can stimulate the development of one single EU telecom market, without roaming.

Amendment 210

Edit Herczog Recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be promoted. This includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called ‘hotspots’ of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as ‘Wi-Fi’), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells).	(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be encouraged and not be prevented. This currently includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called 'hotspots' of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as 'Wi-Fi'), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells). Dynamic spectrum access, including on a licence-exempt basis and other innovative technologies and uses of spectrum should be encouraged and made possible.

Justification:
In the face of continued demand for wireless access to the Internet, new technologies enable dynamic, much more efficient use of spectrum, notably when on a licence-exempt basis. It is crucial that, faced with under-utilisation of spectrum in numerous frequencies, at least at certain times of day, innovative technologies and uses of spectrum be encouraged and made possible by EU Regulation and by national regulatory authorities.

Amendment 211

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be promoted. This includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called ‘hotspots’ of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as ‘Wi-Fi’), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells).	(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be actively promoted. This includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called ‘hotspots’ of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as ‘Wi-Fi’), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells). Furthermore, dynamic spectrum access and other innovative technologies and uses of spectrum should be promoted.

Amendment 212

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be promoted. This includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called ‘hotspots’ of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as ‘Wi-Fi’), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells).	(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be promoted. This includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small area operating range such as so called 'hotspots' of radio local area networks (RLAN), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells)

Amendment 213

Patrizia Toia Recital 25
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be promoted. This includes the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called 'hotspots' of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as 'Wi-Fi'), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells).	(25) Considering the massive growth in radio spectrum demand for wireless broadband, solutions for alternative spectrally efficient access to wireless broadband should be promoted. This includes, but is not restricted to, the use of low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as so called 'hotspots' of radio local area networks (RLAN, also known as 'Wi-Fi'), as well as networks of low-power small size cellular access points (also called femto-, pico- or metrocells).

Amendment 214

Patrizia Toia Recital 27
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(27) Most RLAN access points are so far used by private users as a local wireless extension of their fixed broadband connection. If end users, within the limits of their own internet subscription, choose to share access to their RLAN with others, the availability of a large number of such access points, particularly in densely populated areas, should maximise wireless data capacity through radio spectrum re-use and create a cost-effective complementary wireless broadband infrastructure accessible to other end users. Therefore, unnecessary restrictions for end users to share access to their own RLAN access points with other end users or to connect to such access points, should be removed or prevented.	(27) Most RLAN access points are so far used by private users as a local wireless extension of their fixed broadband connection. If end users, within the limits of their own internet subscription, choose to share access to their RLAN with others, the availability of a large number of such access points, particularly in densely populated areas, should maximise wireless data capacity through radio spectrum re-use and create a cost-effective complementary wireless broadband infrastructure accessible to other end users. Therefore, restrictions for end users to share access to their own RLAN access points with other end users or to connect to such access points, should be removed or prevented.

Amendment 215

Lambert van Nistelrooij Recital 30
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(30) Member States should ensure that the management of radio spectrum at national level does not prevent other Member States from using the radio spectrum to which they are entitled, or from complying with their obligations as regards bands for which the use is harmonised at Union level. Building on the existing activities of the RSPG, a coordination mechanism is necessary to ensure that each Member State has equitable access to radio spectrum and that the outcomes of coordination are consistent and enforceable.	(30) Member States should ensure that for bands harmonised at Union level for wireless broadband communications, the implementation of harmonised timetables and deadlines for the assignment of spectrum is not unduly delayed by coordination problems; in particular the management of radio spectrum at national level should not prevent other Member States from using the radio spectrum to which they are entitled, or from complying with their obligations as regards such bands. Building on the existing activities of the RSPG, a coordination mechanism is necessary to ensure that each Member State has equitable access to radio spectrum and that the outcomes of coordination are consistent and enforceable.

Amendment 216

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Recital 30
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(30) Member States should ensure that the management of radio spectrum at national level does not prevent other Member States from using the radio spectrum to which they are entitled, or from complying with their obligations as regards bands for which the use is harmonised at Union level. Building on the existing activities of the RSPG, a coordination mechanism is necessary to ensure that each Member State has equitable access to radio spectrum and that the outcomes of coordination are consistent and enforceable.	(30) Member States should ensure that for bands harmonised at Union level for wireless broadband communications, the implementation of harmonised timetables and deadlines for the assignment of spectrum is not unduly delayed by coordination problems; in particular the management of radio spectrum at national level should not prevent other Member States from using the radio spectrum to which they are entitled, or from complying with their obligations as regards such bands. Building on the existing activities of the RSPG, a coordination mechanism is necessary to ensure that each Member State has equitable access to radio spectrum and that the outcomes of coordination are consistent and enforceable.

Amendment 217

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Recital 30
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(30) Member States should ensure that the management of radio spectrum at national level does not prevent other Member States from using the radio spectrum to which they are entitled, or from complying with their obligations as regards bands for which the use is harmonised at Union level. Building on the existing activities of the RSPG, a coordination mechanism is necessary to ensure that each Member State has equitable access to radio spectrum and that the outcomes of coordination are consistent and enforceable.	(30) Member States should ensure that for bands harmonised at Union level for wireless broadband communications, the implementation of harmonised timetables and deadlines for the assignment of spectrum is not unduly delayed by coordination problems; in particular the management of radio spectrum at national level should not prevent other Member States from using the radio spectrum to which they are entitled, or from complying with their obligations as regards bands for which the use is harmonised at Union level. Building on the existing activities of the RSPG, a coordination mechanism is necessary to ensure that each Member State has equitable access to radio spectrum and that the outcomes of coordination are consistent and enforceable.

Amendment 218

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31) Experience in the implementation of the Union's regulatory framework indicates that existing provisions requiring the consistent application of regulatory measures together with the goal of contributing to the development of the internal market have not created sufficient incentives to design access products on the basis of harmonised standards and processes, in particular in relation to fixed networks. When operating in different Member States, operators have difficulties in finding access inputs with the right quality and network and service interoperability levels, and when they are available, such inputs exhibit different technical features. This increases costs and constitutes an obstacle to the provision of services across national borders.	deleted

Amendment 219

Christian Ehler Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31) Experience in the implementation of the Union's regulatory framework indicates that existing provisions requiring the consistent application of regulatory measures together with the goal of contributing to the development of the internal market have not created sufficient incentives to design access products on the basis of harmonised standards and processes, in particular in relation to fixed networks. When operating in different Member States, operators have difficulties in finding access inputs with the right quality and network and service interoperability levels, and when they are available, such inputs exhibit different technical features. This increases costs and constitutes an obstacle to the provision of services across national borders.	(31) Experience in the implementation of the Union's regulatory framework indicates that existing provisions requiring the consistent application of regulatory measures together with the goal of contributing to the development of the internal market have not created sufficient incentives to design access products on the basis of harmonised standards and processes, in particular in relation to fixed networks. When operating in different Member States, operators have difficulties in finding access inputs with the right quality and network and service interoperability levels, and when they are available, such inputs exhibit different technical features. This increases costs and constitutes an obstacle to the provision of services across national borders.
	Therefore, additionally to the provisions laid down in this regulation, a joint European research approach to define comprehensive and evidence based assessments of challenges and policy solutions, on the global, European and national level, is needed. Cooperation between European and international research and standardisation agencies should be further encouraged.

Justification:
In line with the Transatlantic Dialogue (TLD) Non-Paper "Cyber security and Internet issues - Establishing framework for Transatlantic action".

Amendment 220

Christian Ehler Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31) Experience in the implementation of the Union's regulatory framework indicates that existing provisions requiring the consistent application of regulatory measures together with the goal of contributing to the development of the internal market have not created sufficient incentives to design access products on the basis of harmonised standards and processes, in particular in relation to fixed networks. When operating in different Member States, operators have difficulties in finding access inputs with the right quality and network and service interoperability levels, and when they are available, such inputs exhibit different technical features. This increases costs and constitutes an obstacle to the provision of services across national borders.	(31) Experience in the implementation of the Union's regulatory framework indicates that existing provisions requiring the consistent application of regulatory measures together with the goal of contributing to the development of the internal market have not created sufficient incentives to design access products on the basis of harmonised standards and processes, in particular in relation to fixed networks. The lack of common standards and harmonized measures impairs the Union's competitiveness immensely: When operating in different Member States, operators have difficulties in finding access inputs with the right quality and network and service interoperability levels, and when they are available, such inputs exhibit different technical features. This increases costs and constitutes an obstacle to the provision of services across national borders.

Amendment 221

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 32
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(32) The integration of the single market for electronic communications would be accelerated through establishment of a framework to define certain key European virtual products, which are particularly important for providers of electronic communication services to provide cross-border services and to adopt a pan-Union strategy in an increasingly all-IP environment, based on key parameters and minimum characteristics.	deleted

Amendment 222

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 33
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(33) The operational needs served by various virtual products should be addressed. European virtual broadband access products should be available in cases where an operator with significant market power has been required under the terms of the Framework Directive and the Access Directive to provide access on regulated terms at a specific access point in its network. First, efficient cross-border entry should be facilitated by harmonised products that enable initial provision by cross-border providers of services to their end customers without delay and with a predictable and sufficient quality, including services to business customers with multiple sites in different Member States, where this would be necessary and proportionate pursuant to market analysis. These harmonised products should be available for a sufficient period in order to allow access seekers and providers to plan medium and long term investments.	deleted

Amendment 223

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 34
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(34) Secondly, sophisticated virtual access products that require a higher level of investment by access seekers and allow them a greater level of control and differentiation, particularly by providing access at a more local level, are key to creating the conditions for sustainable competition across the internal market. Hence, these key wholesale access products to next-generation access (NGA) networks should also be harmonised to facilitate cross-border investment. Such virtual broadband access products should be designed to have equivalent functionalities to physical unbundling, in order to broaden the range of potential wholesale remedies available for consideration by national regulatory authorities under the proportionality assessment pursuant to Directive 2002/19/EC.	deleted

Amendment 224

Catherine Trautmann Recital 35 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35 a) There is a need to harmonise the conditions for high-quality wholesale products used for the supply of business services to enable the provision of seamless services to cross-border and multi-national corporations across the European Union. Such harmonisation could play a significant role in terms of EU business competitiveness with regards to communications costs.

Amendment 225

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet, Doris Pack Recital 36
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(36) In a context of progressive migration to ‘all IP networks’, the lack of availability of connectivity products based on the IP protocol for different classes of services with assured service quality that enable communication paths across network domains and across network borders, both within and between Member States, hinders the development of applications that rely on access to other networks, thus limiting technological innovation. Moreover, this situation prevents the diffusion on a wider scale of efficiencies which are associated with the management and provision of IP-based networks and connectivity products with an assured service quality level, in particular enhanced security, reliability and flexibility, cost-effectiveness and faster provisioning, which benefit network operators, service providers and end users. A harmonised approach to the design and availability of these products is therefore necessary, on reasonable terms including, where requested, the possibility of cross-supply by the electronic communications undertakings concerned.	deleted

Amendment 226

Petra Kammerevert Recital 36
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(36) In a context of progressive migration to 'all IP networks', the lack of availability of connectivity products based on the IP protocol for different classes of services with assured service quality that enable communication paths across network domains and across network borders, both within and between Member States, hinders the development of applications that rely on access to other networks, thus limiting technological innovation. Moreover, this situation prevents the diffusion on a wider scale of efficiencies which are associated with the management and provision of IP-based networks and connectivity products with an assured service quality level, in particular enhanced security, reliability and flexibility, cost-effectiveness and faster provisioning, which benefit network operators, service providers and end users. A harmonised approach to the design and availability of these products is therefore necessary, on reasonable terms including, where requested, the possibility of cross-supply by the electronic communications undertakings concerned.	deleted

Amendment 227

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Recital 36
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(36) In a context of progressive migration to ‘all IP networks’, the lack of availability of connectivity products based on the IP protocol for different classes of services with assured service quality that enable communication paths across network domains and across network borders, both within and between Member States, hinders the development of applications that rely on access to other networks, thus limiting technological innovation. Moreover, this situation prevents the diffusion on a wider scale of efficiencies which are associated with the management and provision of IP-based networks and connectivity products with an assured service quality level, in particular enhanced security, reliability and flexibility, cost-effectiveness and faster provisioning, which benefit network operators, service providers and end users. A harmonised approach to the design and availability of these products is therefore necessary, on reasonable terms including, where requested, the possibility of cross-supply by the electronic communications undertakings concerned.	(36) In a context of progressive migration to 'all IP networks', the lack of availability of connectivity products based on the IP protocol for different classes of services with a defined quality of service within closed communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission control could hinder the development of services that rely on this defined quality in order to function adequately. A harmonised approach to the design and availability of these services is therefore necessary, including safeguards to guarantee that the enhanced quality is not functionally identical or to the detriment of the performance, affordability or quality of internet access services or undermines competition, innovation or net neutrality.

Amendment 228

Petra Kammerevert Recital 36 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(36a) Restrictions on the quality and accessibility of electronic communications content, applications and services can also result from providers’ requirements for specific terminal equipment. Such commercial practices are incompatible with the objective of a seamless single market and end-user rights.

Amendment 229

Marietje Schaake, Salvador Sedó i Alabart, Amelia Andersdotter Recital 37
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(37) The establishment of European virtual broadband access products under this Regulation should be reflected in the assessment by national regulatory authorities of the most appropriate access remedies to the networks of operators designated as having significant market power, while avoiding over-regulation through the unnecessary multiplication of wholesale access products, whether imposed pursuant to market analysis or provided under other conditions. In particular, the introduction of the European virtual access products should not, in and of itself, lead to an increase in the number of regulated access products imposed on a given operator. Moreover, the need for national regulatory authorities, following the adoption of this Regulation, to assess whether a European virtual broadband access product should be imposed instead of existing wholesale access remedies, and to assess the appropriateness of imposing a European virtual broadband access product in the context of future market reviews where they find significant market power, should not affect their responsibility to identify the most appropriate and proportionate remedy to address the identified competition problem in accordance with Article 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC.	(37) The establishment of European virtual broadband access products under this Regulation should be reflected in the assessment by national regulatory authorities of the most appropriate access remedies to the networks of operators designated as having significant market power. The possibility of the implementation of functional separation as an exceptional measure, and the implementation of full equivalence of access should be kept under constant review by national regulatory authorities. National regulatory authorities should avoid over-regulation through the unnecessary multiplication of wholesale access products, whether imposed pursuant to market analysis or provided under other conditions. In particular, the introduction of the European virtual access products should not, in and of itself, lead to an increase in the number of regulated access products imposed on a given operator. Moreover, the need for national regulatory authorities, following the adoption of this Regulation, to assess whether a European virtual broadband access product should be imposed instead of existing wholesale access remedies, and to assess the appropriateness of imposing a European virtual broadband access product in the context of future market reviews where they find significant market power, should not affect their responsibility to identify the most appropriate and proportionate remedy to address the identified competition problem in accordance with Article 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Justification:
BEREC’s “Guidance on functional separation under Articles 13a and 13b of the Access Directive and national procedures” offers useful guidance to NRAs on the legal and practical considerations that need to be kept under review. This will ensure that, when it is objectively necessary to ensure competition, innovation and lower prices, functional separation or equivalence of access could be implemented with minimum delays.

Amendment 230

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 38
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(38) In the interests of regulatory predictability, key elements of evolving decisional practice under the current legal framework which affect the conditions under which wholesale access products, including European virtual broadband access products, are made available for NGA networks, should also be reflected in the legislation. These should include provisions reflecting the importance, for the analysis of wholesale access markets and in particular of whether there is a need for price controls on such access to NGA networks, of the relationship between competitive constraints from alternative fixed and wireless infrastructures, effective guarantees of non-discriminatory access, and the existing level of competition in terms of price, choice and quality at retail level. The latter consideration ultimately determines the benefits to end users. For example, in the conduct of their case-by-case assessment pursuant to Article 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC and without prejudice to the assessment of significant market power and the application of EU competition rules, national regulatory authorities may consider that in the presence of two fixed NGA networks, market conditions are competitive enough to be able to drive network upgrades and to evolve towards the provision of ultra-fast services, which is one important parameter of retail competition.	deleted

Amendment 231

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 38
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(38) In the interests of regulatory predictability, key elements of evolving decisional practice under the current legal framework which affect the conditions under which wholesale access products, including European virtual broadband access products, are made available for NGA networks, should also be reflected in the legislation. These should include provisions reflecting the importance, for the analysis of wholesale access markets and in particular of whether there is a need for price controls on such access to NGA networks, of the relationship between competitive constraints from alternative fixed and wireless infrastructures, effective guarantees of non-discriminatory access, and the existing level of competition in terms of price, choice and quality at retail level. The latter consideration ultimately determines the benefits to end users. For example, in the conduct of their case-by-case assessment pursuant to Article 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC and without prejudice to the assessment of significant market power and the application of EU competition rules, national regulatory authorities may consider that in the presence of two fixed NGA networks, market conditions are competitive enough to be able to drive network upgrades and to evolve towards the provision of ultra-fast services, which is one important parameter of retail competition.	(38) In the interests of regulatory predictability, key elements of evolving decisional practice under the current legal framework which affect the conditions under which wholesale access products, including European virtual broadband access products, are made available for NGA networks, should also be reflected in the legislation. These should include provisions reflecting the importance, for the analysis of wholesale access markets and in particular of whether there is a need for price controls on such access to NGA networks, of the relationship between competitive constraints from alternative fixed and wireless infrastructures, effective guarantees of non-discriminatory access, and the existing level of competition in terms of price, choice and quality at retail level.

Amendment 232

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 39
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(39) It is to be expected that intensified competition in a single market will lead to a reduction over time in sector-specific regulation based on market analysis. Indeed, one of the results of completing the Single Market should be a greater tendency towards effective competition on relevant markets, with ex post application of competition law increasingly being seen as sufficient to ensure market functioning. In order to ensure legal clarity and predictability of regulatory approaches across borders, clear and binding criteria should be provided on how to assess whether a given market still justifies the imposition of ex-ante regulatory obligations, by reference to the durability of bottlenecks and the prospects of competition, in particular infrastructure-based competition, and the conditions of competition at retail level on parameters such as price, choice and quality, which are ultimately what is relevant to end users and to the global competitiveness of the EU economy. This should underpin successive reviews of the list of markets susceptible to ex ante regulation and help national regulators to focus their efforts where competition is not yet effective and to do so in a convergent manner. The establishment of a true single market for electronic communications may in addition affect the geographical scope of markets, for the purposes of both sector-specific regulation based on competition principles and the application of competition law itself.	deleted

Amendment 233

Giles Chichester Recital 39
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(39) It is to be expected that intensified competition in a single market will lead to a reduction over time in sector-specific regulation based on market analysis. Indeed, one of the results of completing the Single Market should be a greater tendency towards effective competition on relevant markets, with ex post application of competition law increasingly being seen as sufficient to ensure market functioning. In order to ensure legal clarity and predictability of regulatory approaches across borders, clear and binding criteria should be provided on how to assess whether a given market still justifies the imposition of ex-ante regulatory obligations, by reference to the durability of bottlenecks and the prospects of competition, in particular infrastructure-based competition, and the conditions of competition at retail level on parameters such as price, choice and quality, which are ultimately what is relevant to end users and to the global competitiveness of the EU economy. This should underpin successive reviews of the list of markets susceptible to ex ante regulation and help national regulators to focus their efforts where competition is not yet effective and to do so in a convergent manner. The establishment of a true single market for electronic communications may in addition affect the geographical scope of markets, for the purposes of both sector-specific regulation based on competition principles and the application of competition law itself.	deleted

Amendment 234

Francesco De Angelis Recital 39
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(39) It is to be expected that intensified competition in a single market will lead to a reduction over time in sector-specific regulation based on market analysis. Indeed, one of the results of completing the Single Market should be a greater tendency towards effective competition on relevant markets, with ex post application of competition law increasingly being seen as sufficient to ensure market functioning. In order to ensure legal clarity and predictability of regulatory approaches across borders, clear and binding criteria should be provided on how to assess whether a given market still justifies the imposition of ex-ante regulatory obligations, by reference to the durability of bottlenecks and the prospects of competition, in particular infrastructure-based competition, and the conditions of competition at retail level on parameters such as price, choice and quality, which are ultimately what is relevant to end users and to the global competitiveness of the EU economy. This should underpin successive reviews of the list of markets susceptible to ex ante regulation and help national regulators to focus their efforts where competition is not yet effective and to do so in a convergent manner. The establishment of a true single market for electronic communications may in addition affect the geographical scope of markets, for the purposes of both sector-specific regulation based on competition principles and the application of competition law itself.	deleted

Justification:
In order to prevent detrimental effects on end users, it is necessary to avoid a weakening of competition rules in the Member States.

Amendment 235

Christian Ehler Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40) Disparities in the national implementation of sector-specific end-user protection rules create significant barriers to the single digital market, in particular in the form of increased compliance costs for providers of electronic communications to the public wishing to offer services across Member States. Moreover, fragmentation and uncertainty as to the level of protection granted in different Member States undermines end-users' trust and dissuades them from purchasing electronic communications services abroad. In order to achieve the Union's objective to remove barriers to the internal market it is necessary to replace existing, divergent national legal measures with a single and fully harmonised set of sector-specific rules which create a high common level of end-user protection. Such full harmonisation of the legal provisions should not prevent providers of electronic communications to the public from offering end-users contractual arrangements which go beyond that level of protection.	(40) Disparities in the national implementation of sector-specific end-user protection rules create significant barriers to the single digital market, create uncertainty, in particular in the form of increased compliance costs for providers of electronic communications to the public wishing to offer services across Member States. Moreover, fragmentation and uncertainty as to the level of protection granted in different Member States undermines end-users' trust and dissuades them from purchasing electronic communications services abroad. In order to achieve the Union's objective to remove barriers to the internal market it is necessary to replace existing, divergent national legal measures with a single and fully harmonised set of sector-specific rules which create a high common level of end-user protection. Such full harmonisation of the legal provisions should not prevent providers of electronic communications to the public from offering end-users contractual arrangements which go beyond that level of protection.

Amendment 236

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Recital 42
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(42) Where the provisions in Chapters 4 and 5 of this Regulation refer to end-users, such provisions should apply not only to consumers but also to other categories of end-users, primarily micro enterprises. At their individual request, end-users other than consumers should be able to agree, by individual contract, to deviate from certain provisions.	deleted

Amendment 237

Petra Kammerevert Recital 42
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(42) Where the provisions in Chapters 4 and 5 of this Regulation refer to end-users, such provisions should apply not only to consumers but also to other categories of end-users, primarily micro enterprises. At their individual request, end-users other than consumers should be able to agree, by individual contract, to deviate from certain provisions.	deleted

Amendment 238

Petra Kammerevert Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. Fundamentally equal treatment and non-discrimination in forwarding data packages, irrespective of content, service, application, origin or destination, must be safeguarded by law throughout the EU, to provide a lasting guarantee that all users of internet services have in principle access to all content, services or applications on the internet or can offer these themselves. Access network operators are subject to a general obligation to forward data packages by providing transfer services of an appropriate level of quality to users, regardless of origin and destination or the content, services and applications to be transferred. This level of quality must be continuously developed in line with technological progress. The open and non-discriminatory nature of the internet is the key driver of innovation and economic efficiency. These essential characteristics help secure the freedom and diversity of expression, the media and culture. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures. An open internet which works exclusively on the best-effort principle should not be undermined or have its future development hindered by the development of other products and services.

Amendment 239

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures. Indeed, as stated by the European Parliament resolution of 17 November 2011 on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe 2011/2866, the internet's open character has been a key driver of competitiveness, economic growth, social development and innovation – which has led to spectacular levels of development in online applications, content and services – and thus of growth in the offer of, and demand for, content and services, and has made it a vitally important accelerator in the free circulation of knowledge, ideas and information, including in countries where access to independent media is limited;

Amendment 240

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The key driver of the unprecedented innovation and economic activity in the digital age has been the fact that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application; conform the principle of net neutrality. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules to enshrine the principle of net neutrality in law at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

Amendment 241

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The open and non-discriminatory nature of the internet plays a key driving role in innovation and economic efficiency, but also in safeguarding the freedom and pluralism of the media, as well as cultural diversity. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures. The development of specialised services or of traffic offering a guaranteed quality of service should not undermine the open internet based on the ‘best effort’ principle. The open internet must remain the standard and not become the exception.

Or.

Amendment 242

Ivo Belet Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The openness and non-discriminatory features of the Internet are key drivers for innovation, economic efficiency as well as safeguards for media freedom, media pluralism and cultural diversity. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications, the risk for these practices being particular high for vertically integrated companies. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

Amendment 243

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. This ability is best ensured when all types of traffic are treated equally by providers of electronic communications to the public. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

Amendment 244

Patrizia Toia Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.	(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute data and information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

Amendment 245

Petra Kammerevert Recital 46
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(46) The freedom of end-users to access and distribute information and lawful content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the respect of Union and compatible national law. This Regulation defines the limits for any restrictions to this freedom by providers of electronic communications to the public but is without prejudice to other Union legislation, including copyright rules and Directive 2000/31/EC.	(46) The right of end-users to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the respect of Union and compatible national law.

Amendment 246

Françoise Castex Recital 46
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(46) The freedom of end-users to access and distribute information and lawful content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the respect of Union and compatible national law. This Regulation defines the limits for any restrictions to this freedom by providers of electronic communications to the public but is without prejudice to other Union legislation, including copyright rules and Directive 2000/31/EC.	(46) The freedom of end-users to access and distribute information and lawful content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the respect of Union and compatible national law. This Regulation defines the limits for any restrictions to this freedom by providers of electronic communications to the public but is without prejudice to other Union legislation, including copyright rules, Directive 1995/46, Directive 2002/58 and Directive 2000/31/EC.

Amendment 247

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 46
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(46) The freedom of end-users to access and distribute information and lawful content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the respect of Union and compatible national law. This Regulation defines the limits for any restrictions to this freedom by providers of electronic communications to the public but is without prejudice to other Union legislation, including copyright rules and Directive 2000/31/EC.	(46) The freedom of end-users to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the respect of Union and compatible national law. This Regulation defines the limits for any restrictions to this freedom by providers of electronic communications to the public but is without prejudice to other Union legislation, including copyright rules, Directive 1995/46, Directive 2002/58, and Directive 2000/31/EC.

Justification:
The reference to Directive 1995/46 and Directive 2002/58 define the limit to traffic management from data protection and privacy perspective

Amendment 248

András Gyürk Recital 46 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(46 a) The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires that limitations to the respect for private life, right of confidentiality of communications, right to data protection or freedom to receive or impart information must be provided for by law and respect the essence of those rights and freedoms. Union case law with respect to monitoring or filtering electronic communications confirms, that an imposition of an obligation on a provider of electronic communications or services to indiscriminately monitor communications constitutes not only a serious infringement on the freedom of the provider to conduct its business but also infringes the fundamental rights of the customers of the provider. Any scheme involving monitoring of communications or services should therefore either be specifically provided for by Union law, or national law adopted in conformity with union law, or, if based on a voluntary arrangement, be subject to court review.

Amendment 249

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 46 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(46 a) Non-discrimination of information in the sending, transmitting and receiving phase shall be ensured for encouraging innovation and eliminating entry barriers, as stated by the European Parliament in its implementation report on the regulatory framework for electronic communications 2013/2080;

Amendment 250

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 46 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(46 b) Potential anti-competitive and discriminative behaviour in traffic management would be contrary to the principle of net neutrality and the open internet, and should be therefore prevented, as also stated by the European Parliament in its initiative report 2013/2080;

Amendment 251

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 46 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(46 c) According to the European Parliament in its resolutions of 17th November 2011 on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe 2011/2866, and of 11th December 2012 on a digital freedom strategy in EU foreign policy 2012/2098, internet service providers should not block, discriminate against, impair or degrade the ability of any person to use a service to access, use, send, post, receive or offer any content, application or service of their choice, irrespective of source or target.

Amendment 252

Petra Kammerevert Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public ought not to delete, block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a number of reasonable traffic management measures that are clearly defined in this Regulation and individually justified. Such measures must be transparent, necessary and proportionate.

Amendment 253

Edit Herczog Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open Internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for Internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be relevant, efficient, transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory, and in accordance with existing laws including, inter alia, privacy and data protection. Preserving the integrity and security of the network and minimising the effects of network congestion through traffic management measures should be considered reasonable provided that it occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances and provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Justification:
The language ‘and the general characteristics of the service’ could be misused as a loophole to offer products to consumers which do not in fact enable them to access and use the content, applications and services of their choice on the Internet. The only limitations to the open Internet, bar reasonable traffic management, should concern data volumes and speeds. The scope of what is deemed reasonable traffic management should also be more clearly caveated, in line with BEREC and EDPS guidance, to reflect notably the acceptable use of traffic management to handle genuine network security and congestion problems as they arise, and in full respect of data protection and privacy.

Amendment 254

Catherine Trautmann, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services and the general characteristics of the service, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances and if, upon request from the competent national authorities, the provider can demonstrate that equal treatment of traffic would be substantially less efficient.
	When a provider of electronic communications takes such measures, it should also inform the content, applications and services providers which are affected.

Amendment 255

Seán Kelly Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be efficient, appropriate, transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory and in line with existing laws, including, inter alia, data protection. Reasonable traffic management encompasses the prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Preserving the integrity and security of the network and minimising the effects of network congestion through traffic management measures should be considered reasonable provided that it occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances and provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Justification:
The meaning of reasonable traffic management should be refined and tightened, in line with the guidelines and opinions of BEREC and EDPS, such as the acceptable use of traffic management to handle genuine network security and congestion problems, all the while respecting data privacy requirements.

Amendment 256

Teresa Riera Madurell Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate to the legitimate goal to be attained and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances and that the provider is able to demonstrate at the request of the national competent authority that impartial traffic management would prove less efficient.
	When taking such measures providers of electronic communications should inform the content, applications and services providers concerned.

Amendment 257

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be relevant, transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes and should be in accordance with existing laws including, inter alia, privacy and data protection. Preserving the integrity and security of the network and minimising the effects of network congestion through traffic management measures should be considered reasonable provided that it occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.

Amendment 258

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Any price discrimination or discriminatory conditions relating to data volumes and speeds in respect of specific content, applications or services should be prohibited. Reasonable traffic management measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances. As soon as they implement such measures, providers of electronic communications to the public must notify the providers of content, applications or services.

Or.

Amendment 259

Sabine Verheyen Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable in demonstrated temporary cases of acute traffic congestion, provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Amendment 260

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of technically-reasonable, non-commercially based, traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.

Justification:
Defining technical measures should only be done through objective criteria and excluding any subjective one such as "voluntary actions and commercial agreements of providers".

Amendment 261

Françoise Castex Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.

Amendment 262

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management encompasses prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography. Minimising the effects of network congestion should be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.	(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public should not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of clearly defined reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures should be transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management could encompass voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography, subject to judicial review.. Minimising the effects of network congestion could be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.

Amendment 263

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 47 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(47 a) The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires that limitations to the respect for private life, right of confidentiality of communications, right to data protection or freedom to receive or impart information must be provided for by law and respect the essence of those rights and freedoms. In the context of traffic management measures, the CJEU in Case C-70/10, SABAM v. Tiscali (Scarlet), with respect to general monitoring of electronic communications, states that an imposition of an obligation on an Internet service provider of electronic communications or services to indiscriminately monitor communications would constitutes not only a serious infringement on the freedom of the provider to conduct its business, but may also infringe the fundamental rights of the customers of the provider. Any scheme involving general monitoring of communications by providers of electronic communications or services should therefore be specifically provided for by Union law, or national law adopted in conformity with Union law;

Amendment 264

Petra Kammerevert Recital 47 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(47a) This Regulation is without prejudice to Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (E-Privacy Directive).

Amendment 265

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 48
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(48) Volume-based tariffs should be considered compatible with the principle of an open internet as long as they allow end-users to choose the tariff corresponding to their normal data consumption based on transparent information about the conditions and implications of such choice. At the same time, such tariffs should enable providers of electronic communications to the public to better adapt network capacities to expected data volumes. It is essential that end-users are fully informed before agreeing to any data volume or speed limitations and the tariffs applicable, that they can continuously monitor their consumption and easily acquire extensions of the available data volumes if desired.	(48) Volume-based tariffs should be considered compatible with the principle of an open internet as long as they allow end-users to choose the tariff corresponding to their normal data consumption based on transparent information about the conditions and implications of such choice. At the same time, such tariffs should enable providers of electronic communications to the public to better adapt network capacities to expected data volumes. In order to customize their offers to meet end-user demand for specific content, services or applications, providers of electronic communications may provide offers where the conveyance of data for such content, services or applications is not deducted from the customers data allowance. It is essential that end-users are fully informed before agreeing to any data volume or speed limitations and the tariffs applicable, that they can continuously monitor their consumption and easily acquire extensions of the available data volumes if desired.

Amendment 266

Teresa Riera Madurell Recital 48
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(48) Volume-based tariffs should be considered compatible with the principle of an open internet as long as they allow end-users to choose the tariff corresponding to their normal data consumption based on transparent information about the conditions and implications of such choice. At the same time, such tariffs should enable providers of electronic communications to the public to better adapt network capacities to expected data volumes. It is essential that end-users are fully informed before agreeing to any data volume or speed limitations and the tariffs applicable, that they can continuously monitor their consumption and easily acquire extensions of the available data volumes if desired.	(48) Volume-based tariffs should be considered compatible with the principle of an open internet as long as they allow end-users to choose the tariff corresponding to their normal data consumption based on clear, transparent and explicit information about the conditions and implications of such choice. At the same time, such tariffs should enable providers of electronic communications to the public to better adapt network capacities to expected data volumes. It is essential that end-users are fully informed before agreeing to any data volume or speed limitations and the tariffs applicable, that they can continuously monitor their consumption and easily acquire extensions of the available data volumes if desired.

Amendment 267

Seán Kelly Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) Services and applications delivered with an enhanced level of assured service quality can be offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of such specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. Where such agreements are concluded with the internet access provider, the provider should ensure that the enhanced quality service does not diminish the general quality of internet access. Take-up by end-users and application and commercial service providers of specialised services should thus be on a voluntary and non-discriminatory basis.

Justification:
Having regard to BEREC’s conclusion that user control should prevail wherever possible, it is important that the Regulation clarifies that end-users and application and commercial service providers are not faced with suboptimal conditions and quality of internet access such that they are obliged to agree a contract for specialised services. Take-up of specialised services should thus be absolutely voluntary.

Amendment 268

Lambert van Nistelrooij Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. The provision of such specialised services should not impair the general quality of internet access. Furthermore, traffic management measures should not be applied in such a way as to discriminate against specialised services competing with those offered by the provider of internet access either directly or in partnership with other undertakings unless there is an objective justification.

Amendment 269

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring optimisations in order to ensure adequate service characteristics offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an optimised quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. Where such agreements are implemented alongside Internet access services, the responsible providers should ensure that the optimised quality service does not impair the general quality of internet access.

Amendment 270

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. Take-up by end-users or by providers of content, applications and services of commercial offers for specialised services should be on a voluntary and non-discriminatory basis.

Amendment 271

Ivo Belet Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. However these specialised services should remain the exception and should not be marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;

Amendment 272

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services. It should be ensured that such agreements do not impair the general quality of internet access and lead to a two speed Internet.

Amendment 273

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 49
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public or by content, applications or service providers. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with either providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.	(49) There is also end-user demand for services and applications requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality offered by providers of electronic communications to the public. Such services may comprise inter alia broadcasting via Internet Protocol (IP-TV), video-conferencing and certain health applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with providers of electronic communications to the public.

Amendment 274

Petra Kammerevert Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on quality parameters. For the provision of specialised services in closed networks, it is necessary that content, applications and service providers have the opportunity to negotiate such a specific quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public for a limited group of users. This is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. Specialised services must not impair the quality of open internet access services nor be marketed as a substitute for the internet or used as such. They are permissible only if there is a demonstrable technical and specific need for them, beyond economic self-interest, as a means of providing real-time-critical applications, or applications at a particular level of quality. If specialised services are offered or marketed by access network providers, the latter have an obligation to also offer an open internet access service within the meaning of recital 45. All open internet services are subject to the best-effort principle.

Amendment 275

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public could foster the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such defined levels of quality are technically necessary for the functionality of the service and these agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

Amendment 276

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services. In that respect, the dymanic allocation of the capacity not used for specialised services, when they are switched off, to the internet access service contributes to its overall quality;

Amendment 277

Françoise Castex Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public could serve to the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such quality characteristics are technically necessary for the functionality of the service and agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services.

Amendment 278

Amelia Andersdotter Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public could be used for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such quality characteristics are technically necessary for the functionality of the service and agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services.

Justification:
A specialised service must not be considered as an arbitrary way for Internet Service Providers and Internet Access Providers to be completely free to enter with each other into commercial agreements, by passing “open internet” provisions, violating both freedom of communication as well as competition and innovation in the digital economy. For this reason, it is mandatory to specify that specialised services shall be distinct from Internet access services, and they shall not replicate an already-existing service already accessible on the internet.

Amendment 279

Teresa Riera Madurell Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public opens the door to the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services.

Amendment 280

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services.

Amendment 281

Catherine Trautmann Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.	(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public may be necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services.

Amendment 282

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Recital 51
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.	(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. National regulatory authorities should establish clear and comprehensible notification and redress mechanisms for end-users subjected to discrimination, restriction or interference of online content, services or applications. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.

Amendment 283

Giles Chichester Recital 51
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.	(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with enhanced quality services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services or to safeguard the ability of end users to access and distribute content or information or to run applications and services of their choice.

Amendment 284

Petra Kammerevert Recital 51
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.	(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise the right to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.

Amendment 285

Patrizia Toia Recital 57
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(57) With respect to terminal equipment, contracts should specify any restrictions imposed by the provider on the use of the equipment, for example by way of ‘SIM-locking’ mobile devices, and any charges due on termination of the contract prior to the agreed expiry date. No charges should be due after expiry of the agreed contract duration.	(57) With respect to terminal equipment, contracts should specify, clearly and comprehensibly, any restrictions imposed by the provider on the use of the equipment, for example by way of ‘SIM-locking’ mobile devices, and any charges due on termination of the contract prior to the agreed expiry date. No charges should be due after expiry of the agreed contract duration.

Amendment 286

Patrizia Toia Recital 58
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(58) In order to avoid bill shocks, end-users should be able to define maximum financial limits for the charges related to their usage of calls and internet access services. This facility should be available free of charge, with an appropriate notification that can be consulted again subsequently, when the limit is being approached. Upon reaching the maximum limit, end-users should no longer receive or be charged for those services unless they specifically request the continued provision as agreed with the provider.	(58) In order to avoid bill shocks, end-users should be able to define maximum financial limits for the charges related to their usage of calls and internet access services. This facility should be available free of charge and involve simple procedures, with an appropriate notification that can be consulted again subsequently, when the limit is being approached. Upon reaching the maximum limit, end-users should no longer receive or be charged for those services unless they specifically request the continued provision as agreed with the provider.

Amendment 287

Teresa Riera Madurell Recital 59
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(59) Experience from Member States and from a recent study commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health has shown that long contract periods and automatic or tacit extensions of contracts constitute significant obstacles to changing a provider. It is thus desirable that end-users should be able to terminate, without incurring any costs, a contract six months after its conclusion. In such a case, end-users may be requested to compensate their providers for the residual value of subsidised terminal equipment or for the pro rata temporis value of any other promotions. Contracts which have been tacitly extended should be subject to termination with a one-month notice period.	(59) Experience from Member States and from a recent study commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health has shown that long contract periods and automatic or tacit extensions of contracts constitute significant obstacles to changing a provider. It is thus desirable that end-users should be able to terminate a contract with a one-month notice period without incurring any costs. In such a case, end-users may be requested to compensate their providers for the residual value of subsidised terminal equipment or for the pro rata temporis value of any other promotions.

Amendment 288

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Recital 62
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(62) In order to take full advantage of the competitive environment, end-users should be able to make informed choices and switch providers when it is in their interests. End-users should therefore be able to switch without being hindered by legal, technical or procedural obstacles, including contractual conditions and charges. Number portability is a key facilitator of consumer choice and effective competition. It should be implemented within a minimum delay so that the number is effectively activated within one working day of concluding an agreement to port a number. Settlement of outstanding bills should not be a condition for execution of a porting request.	(62) In order to take full advantage of the competitive environment, end-users should be able to make informed choices and switch providers when it is in their interests. End-users should therefore be able to switch without being hindered by legal, technical or procedural obstacles, including contractual conditions and charges. Number portability is a key facilitator of consumer choice and effective competition. It should be implemented within a minimum delay so that the number is effectively activated within one working day of concluding an agreement to port a number. Settlement of outstanding bills should not be a condition for execution of a porting request. Furthermore, options for cross-border number portability, in case of relocation to other parts of the EU, should be examined.

Amendment 289

Sabine Verheyen Recital 68
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(68) In order to take account of market and technical developments, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of adapting the Annexes. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.	deleted

Amendment 290

Petra Kammerevert Recital 68
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(68) In order to take account of market and technical developments, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of adapting the Annexes. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.	deleted

Amendment 291

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 72
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(72) The mobile communications market remains fragmented in the Union, with no mobile network covering all Member States. As a consequence, in order to provide mobile communications services to their domestic customers travelling within the Union, roaming providers have to purchase wholesale roaming services from operators in a visited Member State. These wholesale charges constitute an important impediment to providing roaming services at price levels corresponding to domestic mobile services. Therefore further measures should be adopted to facilitate lowering these charges. Commercial or technical agreements among roaming providers which allow a virtual extension of their network coverage across the Union provide a means to internalise wholesale costs. To provide appropriate incentives, certain regulatory obligations laid down in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council[26] should be adapted. In particular, when roaming providers, through their own networks or through bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements ensure that all customers in the Union are offered by default roaming tariffs at the level of domestic tariffs, the obligation of domestic providers to enable their customers to access voice, SMS and data roaming services of any alternative roaming provider should not apply to such providers, subject to a transitional period where such access has already been granted.	deleted
__________________
[26] Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 June 2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (OJ L 172, 30.6.2012, p. 10).

Amendment 292

Herbert Reul Recital 72
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(72) The mobile communications market remains fragmented in the Union, with no mobile network covering all Member States. As a consequence, in order to provide mobile communications services to their domestic customers travelling within the Union, roaming providers have to purchase wholesale roaming services from operators in a visited Member State. These wholesale charges constitute an important impediment to providing roaming services at price levels corresponding to domestic mobile services. Therefore further measures should be adopted to facilitate lowering these charges. Commercial or technical agreements among roaming providers which allow a virtual extension of their network coverage across the Union provide a means to internalise wholesale costs. To provide appropriate incentives, certain regulatory obligations laid down in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council[26] should be adapted. In particular, when roaming providers, through their own networks or through bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements ensure that all customers in the Union are offered by default roaming tariffs at the level of domestic tariffs, the obligation of domestic providers to enable their customers to access voice, SMS and data roaming services of any alternative roaming provider should not apply to such providers, subject to a transitional period where such access has already been granted.	deleted
__________________
[26] Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 June 2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (OJ L 172, 30.6.2012, p. 10).

Amendment 293

Christian Ehler Recital 72
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(72) The mobile communications market remains fragmented in the Union, with no mobile network covering all Member States. As a consequence, in order to provide mobile communications services to their domestic customers travelling within the Union, roaming providers have to purchase wholesale roaming services from operators in a visited Member State. These wholesale charges constitute an important impediment to providing roaming services at price levels corresponding to domestic mobile services. Therefore further measures should be adopted to facilitate lowering these charges. Commercial or technical agreements among roaming providers which allow a virtual extension of their network coverage across the Union provide a means to internalise wholesale costs. To provide appropriate incentives, certain regulatory obligations laid down in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council[26] should be adapted. In particular, when roaming providers, through their own networks or through bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements ensure that all customers in the Union are offered by default roaming tariffs at the level of domestic tariffs, the obligation of domestic providers to enable their customers to access voice, SMS and data roaming services of any alternative roaming provider should not apply to such providers, subject to a transitional period where such access has already been granted.	(72) The mobile communications market remains fragmented in the Union, with no mobile network covering all Member States. As a consequence, in order to provide mobile communications services to their domestic customers travelling within the Union, roaming providers have to purchase wholesale roaming services from operators in a visited Member State. These wholesale charges constitute an important impediment to providing roaming services at price levels corresponding to domestic mobile services. Therefore further measures should be adopted to facilitate lowering these charges, ensure legal certainty and a help to stabilize the market Commercial or technical agreements among roaming providers which allow a virtual extension of their network coverage across the Union provide a means to internalise wholesale costs. To provide appropriate incentives, certain regulatory obligations laid down in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council[26] should be adapted. In particular, when roaming providers, through their own networks or through bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements ensure that all customers in the Union are offered by default roaming tariffs at the level of domestic tariffs, the obligation of domestic providers to enable their customers to access voice, SMS and data roaming services of any alternative roaming provider should not apply to such providers, subject to a transitional period where such access has already been granted.
__________________	__________________
[26] Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 June 2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (OJ L 172, 30.6.2012, p. 10).	[26] Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 June 2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union (OJ L 172, 30.6.2012, p. 10).

Amendment 294

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 73
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(73) Bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements can allow a mobile operator to treat roaming by its domestic customers on the networks of partners as being to a significant degree equivalent to providing services to such customers on its own networks, with consequential effects on its retail pricing for such virtual on-net coverage across the Union. Such an arrangement at the wholesale level could allow the development of new roaming products and therefore increase choice and competition at retail level.	deleted

Amendment 295

Herbert Reul Recital 73
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(73) Bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements can allow a mobile operator to treat roaming by its domestic customers on the networks of partners as being to a significant degree equivalent to providing services to such customers on its own networks, with consequential effects on its retail pricing for such virtual on-net coverage across the Union. Such an arrangement at the wholesale level could allow the development of new roaming products and therefore increase choice and competition at retail level.	deleted

Amendment 296

Lambert van Nistelrooij Recital 73
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(73) Bilateral or multilateral roaming agreements can allow a mobile operator to treat roaming by its domestic customers on the networks of partners as being to a significant degree equivalent to providing services to such customers on its own networks, with consequential effects on its retail pricing for such virtual on-net coverage across the Union. Such an arrangement at the wholesale level could allow the development of new roaming products and therefore increase choice and competition at retail level.	(73) Commercial or technical roaming agreements can allow a mobile operator to treat roaming by its domestic customers on the networks of partners as being to a significant degree equivalent to providing services to such customers on its own networks, with consequential effects on its retail pricing for such virtual on-net coverage across the Union. Such an arrangement at the wholesale level could allow the development of new roaming products and therefore increase choice and competition at retail level.

Amendment 297

Jürgen Creutzmann Recital 74
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(74) The Digital Agenda for Europe and Regulation No 531/2012 establish the policy objective that the difference between roaming and domestic tariffs should approach zero. In practical terms, this requires that consumers falling into any of the broad observable categories of domestic consumption, identified by reference to a party's various domestic retail packages, should be in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union, without additional costs to those incurred in a domestic setting. Such broad categories may be identified from current commercial practice by reference, for example, to the differentiation in domestic retail packages between pre-paid and post-paid customers; GSM-only packages (i.e. voice, SMS); packages adapted for different volumes of consumption; packages for business and consumer use respectively; retail packages with prices per unit consumed and those which provide ‘buckets’ of units (e.g. voice minutes, megabytes of data) for a standard fee, irrespective of actual consumption. The diversity of retail tariff plans and packages available to customers in domestic mobile markets across the Union accommodates varying user demands associated with a competitive market. That flexibility in domestic markets should also be reflected in the intra-Union roaming environment, while bearing in mind that the need of roaming providers for wholesale inputs from independent network operators in different Member States may still justify the imposition of limits by reference to reasonable use if domestic tariffs are applied to such roaming consumption.	(74) The Digital Agenda for Europe and Regulation No 531/2012 establish the policy objective that the difference between roaming and domestic tariffs should approach zero. In practical terms, this requires that consumers falling into any of the broad observable categories of domestic consumption, identified by reference to a party's various domestic retail packages, should be in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union, without additional costs to those incurred in a domestic setting. Such broad categories may be identified from current commercial practice by reference, for example, to the differentiation in domestic retail packages between pre-paid and post-paid customers; GSM-only packages (i.e. voice, SMS); packages adapted for different volumes of consumption; packages for business and consumer use respectively; retail packages with prices per unit consumed and those which provide ‘buckets’ of units (e.g. voice minutes, megabytes of data) for a standard fee, irrespective of actual consumption. The diversity of retail tariff plans and packages available to customers in domestic mobile markets across the Union accommodates varying user demands associated with a competitive market. That flexibility in domestic markets should also be reflected in the intra-Union roaming environment, while bearing in mind that the need of roaming providers for wholesale inputs from independent network operators in different Member States may still justify the imposition of limits by reference to reasonable use if domestic tariffs are applied to such roaming consumption. In particular, usage going beyond normal roaming consumption and arbitrage effects should be prevented as otherwise competitive domestic markets and incentives for infrastructure investment could be negatively impacted.

Justification:
It should be ensured that users do not replace their domestic provider with a roaming provider who has not invested in the users' member state infrastructure. Therefore there should be fair usage limits to roaming consumption to avoid arbitrage effects, which could otherwise pose a significant risk for providers and hamper investment in new infrastructure.

Amendment 298

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 74
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(74) The Digital Agenda for Europe and Regulation No 531/2012 establish the policy objective that the difference between roaming and domestic tariffs should approach zero. In practical terms, this requires that consumers falling into any of the broad observable categories of domestic consumption, identified by reference to a party's various domestic retail packages, should be in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union, without additional costs to those incurred in a domestic setting. Such broad categories may be identified from current commercial practice by reference, for example, to the differentiation in domestic retail packages between pre-paid and post-paid customers; GSM-only packages (i.e. voice, SMS); packages adapted for different volumes of consumption; packages for business and consumer use respectively; retail packages with prices per unit consumed and those which provide ‘buckets’ of units (e.g. voice minutes, megabytes of data) for a standard fee, irrespective of actual consumption. The diversity of retail tariff plans and packages available to customers in domestic mobile markets across the Union accommodates varying user demands associated with a competitive market. That flexibility in domestic markets should also be reflected in the intra-Union roaming environment, while bearing in mind that the need of roaming providers for wholesale inputs from independent network operators in different Member States may still justify the imposition of limits by reference to reasonable use if domestic tariffs are applied to such roaming consumption.	(74) The Digital Agenda for Europe and Regulation No 531/2012 establish the policy objective that the difference between roaming and domestic tariffs should approach zero. In practical terms, this requires that consumers falling into any of the broad observable categories of domestic consumption, identified by reference to a party's various domestic retail packages, should be in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union, without additional costs to those incurred in a domestic setting. Such broad categories may be identified from current commercial practice by reference, for example, to the differentiation in domestic retail packages between pre-paid and post-paid customers; GSM-only packages (i.e. voice, SMS); packages adapted for different volumes of consumption; packages for business and consumer use respectively; retail packages with prices per unit consumed and those which provide ‘buckets’ of units (e.g. voice minutes, megabytes of data) for a standard fee, irrespective of actual consumption. The diversity of retail tariff plans and packages available to customers in domestic mobile markets across the Union accommodates varying user demands associated with a competitive market. That flexibility in domestic markets should also be reflected in the intra-Union roaming environment, while bearing in mind that the need of roaming providers for wholesale inputs from independent network operators in different Member States may still justify the imposition of limits by reference to reasonable use if domestic tariffs are applied to such roaming consumption. This is to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage as well as arbitrage scenarios which could have an impact on competitive domestic markets.

Amendment 299

Herbert Reul Recital 74
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(74) The Digital Agenda for Europe and Regulation No 531/2012 establish the policy objective that the difference between roaming and domestic tariffs should approach zero. In practical terms, this requires that consumers falling into any of the broad observable categories of domestic consumption, identified by reference to a party's various domestic retail packages, should be in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union, without additional costs to those incurred in a domestic setting. Such broad categories may be identified from current commercial practice by reference, for example, to the differentiation in domestic retail packages between pre-paid and post-paid customers; GSM-only packages (i.e. voice, SMS); packages adapted for different volumes of consumption; packages for business and consumer use respectively; retail packages with prices per unit consumed and those which provide "buckets" of units (e.g. voice minutes, megabytes of data) for a standard fee, irrespective of actual consumption. The diversity of retail tariff plans and packages available to customers in domestic mobile markets across the Union accommodates varying user demands associated with a competitive market. That flexibility in domestic markets should also be reflected in the intra-Union roaming environment, while bearing in mind that the need of roaming providers for wholesale inputs from independent network operators in different Member States may still justify the imposition of limits by reference to reasonable use if domestic tariffs are applied to such roaming consumption.	(74) The Digital Agenda for Europe and Regulation No 531/2012 establish the policy objective that the difference between roaming and domestic tariffs should approach zero. In practical terms, this requires that consumers falling into any of the broad observable categories of domestic consumption, identified by reference to a party's various domestic retail packages, should be in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union, without additional costs to those incurred in a domestic setting. Such broad categories may be identified from current commercial practice by reference, for example, tothe differentiation in domestic retail packages between pre-paid and post-paid customers;GSM-only packages (i.e. voice, SMS); packages adapted for different volumes of consumption; packages for business and consumer use respectively; retail packages with prices per unit consumed and those which provide "buckets" of units (e.g. voice minutes, megabytes of data) for a standard fee, irrespective of actual consumption. The diversity of retail tariff plans and packages available to customers in domestic mobile markets across the Union accommodates varying user demands associated with a competitive market. That flexibility in domestic markets should also be reflected in the intra-Union roaming environment, while bearing in mind that the need of roaming providers for wholesale inputs from independent network operators in different Member States may still justify the imposition of limits by reference to reasonable use if domestic tariffs are applied to such roaming consumption. This serves to prevent abuses which would have an adverse effect on national competition.

Amendment 300

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 74 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(74 a) The structural measures provided for in regulation (EU) No 531/2012 aiming at increasing the competition in the roaming market such as the local break out solution and the decoupling mechanism is an important step to abolish retail roaming charges. The phasing out of retail roaming charges must be subject to lower wholesale caps creating a level playing field between all operators in the union and the Commission shall therefore by 1 July 2015 present the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers with proposals in this respect.

Amendment 301

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 74 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(74 b) With a view to creating a level playing field for all market operators, wholesale roaming access should be provided on non-discriminatory terms and conditions without making a distinction between domestic and foreign operators, including the terms and conditions of wholesale access provided for domestic mobile services.

Amendment 302

Jean-Pierre Audy Recital 75
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(75) While it is in the first place for roaming providers to assess themselves the reasonable character of the volumes of roaming voice calls, SMS and data to be covered at domestic rates under their various retail packages, national regulatory authorities should supervise the application by roaming providers of such reasonable use limits and ensure that they are specifically defined by reference to detailed quantified information in the contracts in terms which are clear and transparent to customers. In so doing, national regulatory authorities should take utmost account of relevant guidance from BEREC. In its guidance, BEREC should identify various usage patterns substantiated by the underlying voice, data and SMS usage trends at the Union level, and the evolution of expectations as regards in particular wireless data consumption.	(75) While it is in the first place for roaming providers to assess themselves the reasonable character of the volumes of roaming voice calls, SMS and data to be covered at domestic rates under their various retail packages, national regulatory authorities should supervise the application by roaming providers of such reasonable use limits and ensure that they are specifically defined by reference to detailed quantified information in the contracts in terms which are clear and transparent to customers. In so doing, national regulatory authorities should take utmost account of relevant guidance from BEREC. In its guidance, BEREC should –based on the results of a prior public consultation - identify various usage patterns substantiated by the underlying voice, data and SMS usage trends at the Union level, and the evolution of expectations as regards in particular wireless data consumption.

Amendment 303

Herbert Reul Recital 75
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(75) While it is in the first place for roaming providers to assess themselves the reasonable character of the volumes of roaming voice calls, SMS and data to be covered at domestic rates under their various retail packages, national regulatory authorities should supervise the application by roaming providers of such reasonable use limits and ensure that they are specifically defined by reference to detailed quantified information in the contracts in terms which are clear and transparent to customers. In so doing, national regulatory authorities should take utmost account of relevant guidance from BEREC. In its guidance, BEREC should identify various usage patterns substantiated by the underlying voice, data and SMS usage trends at the Union level, and the evolution of expectations as regards in particular wireless data consumption.	(75) While it is in the first place for roaming providers to assess themselves the reasonable character of the volumes of roaming voice calls, SMS and data to be covered at domestic rates under their various retail packages, national regulatory authorities should supervise the application by roaming providers of such reasonable use limits and ensure that they are specifically defined by reference to detailed quantified information in the contracts in terms which are clear and transparent to customers.In so doing, national regulatory authorities should take utmost account of relevant guidance from BEREC, based on the results of a public consultation. In its guidance, BEREC should identify various usage patterns substantiated by the underlying voice, data and SMS usage trends at the Union level, and the evolution of expectations as regards in particular wireless data consumption.

Amendment 304

Jürgen Creutzmann Recital 75
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(75) While it is in the first place for roaming providers to assess themselves the reasonable character of the volumes of roaming voice calls, SMS and data to be covered at domestic rates under their various retail packages, national regulatory authorities should supervise the application by roaming providers of such reasonable use limits and ensure that they are specifically defined by reference to detailed quantified information in the contracts in terms which are clear and transparent to customers. In so doing, national regulatory authorities should take utmost account of relevant guidance from BEREC. In its guidance, BEREC should identify various usage patterns substantiated by the underlying voice, data and SMS usage trends at the Union level, and the evolution of expectations as regards in particular wireless data consumption.	(75) While it is in the first place for roaming providers to assess themselves the reasonable character of the volumes of roaming voice calls, SMS and data to be covered at domestic rates under their various retail packages, national regulatory authorities should supervise the application by roaming providers of such reasonable use limits and ensure that they are specifically defined by reference to detailed quantified information in the contracts in terms which are clear and transparent to customers. In so doing, national regulatory authorities should take utmost account of relevant guidance from BEREC. In its guidance, BEREC should, following consultation of all relevant stakeholders, identify various usage patterns substantiated by the underlying voice, data and SMS usage trends at the Union level, and the evolution of expectations as regards in particular wireless data consumption.

Amendment 305

Jens Rohde Recital 75 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(75 a) While the Roaming III Regulation with its structural measures will inject greater competition into the market it is not expected of its own to create a situation where customers can confidently replicate their consumption behaviour in their home Member State when travelling abroad and thereby to end roaming surcharges overall in Europe. Article 37, therefore, builds on the Roaming Regulation, providing incentives to operators to provide roaming at domestic price levels. The proposal modifies the wholesale roaming caps entering into force on 1 July 2014 and introduces a further reduction of the wholesale roaming caps on 1 July 2015 in such a manner as to enable all domestic providers to internalise the wholesale roaming costs and to gradually introduce roaming services at domestic price levels from 1 July 2014 The proposed regime is designed to induce the pass-on of reduced wholesale roaming charges to consumers through the provision of roaming services at domestic price levels, under conditions which ensure that roaming throughout the Union is covered and that consumers throughout the Union benefit in due course from such offers. At the same time, the proposal provides the necessary balance to allow operators to adjust their retail offers and to gradually ensure all of their customer base benefits from them. Without the proposed reduction of wholesale roaming charges it is unrealistic to imagine that an operator alone would be able to provide roaming at domestic price levels throughout the whole Union in the envisaged time frame.

Justification:
This amendment enables 'roam like at home' retail offers to emerge from 1 July 2014 and enables the provision of 'roam like at home' to all mobile users in the EU from 1 July 2015.

Amendment 306

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 75 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(75 a) Together with the Commission, BEREC should be responsible for ensuring that any phasing out of retail roaming charges does not lead to higher prices in domestic markets

Amendment 307

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Recital 76
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(76) In addition, the significant reduction in mobile termination rates throughout the Union in the recent past should now allow the elimination of additional roaming charges for incoming calls.	(76) In order to provide clarity and legal certainty, a date should be set for the final phasing out of retail roaming surcharges which reduction began with Regulation (EC) No 717/2007. In advance of that final abolition of retail surcharges, the wholesale rates should be further decreased and mobile termination rates should be harmonised on a very low level, throughout the EU, in order to allow for a true level playing field for telecom operators.

Justification:
In a number of Member States average domestic price is below EUR 0,05. Keeping wholesale price for voice roaming at current level - EUR 0,05 after 1/07/2016, when operators will be obliged to charge roaming customers identically as domestic ones, would create serious distortions on the market. As mobile operators will compete from 1 July 2016 on a European market, mobile termination rates should be harmonised in order to level playing field for all companies.

Amendment 308

Gunnar Hökmark Recital 76
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(76) In addition, the significant reduction in mobile termination rates throughout the Union in the recent past should now allow the elimination of additional roaming charges for incoming calls.	(76) In addition, while some Member States have lowered mobile termination rates (MTR) drastically the level of MTRs still varies greatly between Member States and future binding legislation might therefore be needed.

Amendment 309

Christian Ehler Recital 77
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(77) In order to provide stability and strategic leadership to BEREC activities, BEREC Board of Regulators should be represented by a full-time Chairperson appointed by the Board of Regulators, on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of electronic communication market participants and markets, and of experience relevant to supervision and regulation, following an open selection procedure organised and managed by the Board of Regulators assisted by the Commission. For the designation of the first Chairperson of the Board of Regulators, the Commission should, inter alia, draw up a shortlist of candidates on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of electronic communication market participants and markets, and of experience relevant to supervision and regulation. For the subsequent designations, the opportunity of having a shortlist drawn up by the Commission should be reviewed in a report to be established pursuant to this Regulation. The Office of BEREC should therefore comprise the Chairperson of the Board of Regulators, a Management Committee and an Administrative Manager.	(77) In order to provide stability and strategic leadership to BEREC activities, BEREC Board of Regulators should be represented by a full-time Chairperson appointed by the Board of Regulators, for a limited period of time on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of electronic communication market participants and markets, and of experience relevant to supervision and regulation, following an open selection procedure organised and managed by the Board of Regulators assisted by the Commission. For the designation of the first Chairperson of the Board of Regulators, the Commission should, inter alia, draw up a shortlist of candidates on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of electronic communication market participants and markets, and of experience relevant to supervision and regulation. For the subsequent designations, the opportunity of having a shortlist drawn up by the Commission should be reviewed in a report to be established pursuant to this Regulation. The Office of BEREC should therefore comprise the Chairperson of the Board of Regulators, a Management Committee and an Administrative Manager.

Amendment 310

Patrizia Toia Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) providers of electronic communications services and networks have the right, the ability and the incentive to develop, extend and operate their networks and to provide services irrespective of where the provider is established or its customers are situated in the Union,	(a) providers of electronic communications services and networks have the right, the ability and the incentive to develop, extend and operate their networks and to provide interoperable services at European level, based on standardised open data and formats, irrespective of where the provider is established or its customers are situated in the Union,

Amendment 311

Gunnar Hökmark Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) providers of electronic communications services and networks have the right, the ability and the incentive to develop, extend and operate their networks and to provide services irrespective of where the provider is established or its customers are situated in the Union,	(a) providers of electronic communications services and networks have the right, the ability and the incentive to develop, extend and operate their networks cross-border on a pan European scale and to provide services irrespective of where the provider is established or its customers are situated in the Union,

Amendment 312

Patrizia Toia Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) citizens and businesses have the right and the possibility to access competitive, secure and reliable electronic communications services, irrespective of where they are provided from in the Union, without being hampered by cross-border restrictions or unjustified additional costs.	(b) citizens and businesses have the right and the possibility to access competitive, secure and reliable electronic communications services, with common rules to guarantee high standards of protection, privacy and security of their personal data, irrespective of where they are provided from in the Union, without being hampered by cross-border restrictions or unjustified additional costs.

Amendment 313

Giles Chichester Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(b a) to address the phasing out of surcharges for roaming communications within the Union.

Amendment 314

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
a) to secure simplified, predictable and convergent regulatory conditions regarding key administrative and commercial parameters, including as regards the proportionality of individual obligations which may be imposed pursuant to market analysis;	deleted

Amendment 315

Salvador Sedó i Alabart Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) to promote sustainable competition within the single market and the global competitiveness of the Union, and to reduce sector-specific market regulation accordingly as and when these objectives are achieved;	(b) to promote sustainable competition within the single market and to reduce sector-specific market regulation accordingly as and when these objectives are achieved;

Justification:
Giving the EU regulation the new objective of promoting the EU's global competitiveness will increase legal uncertainty.

Amendment 316

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
b) to promote sustainable competition within the single market and the global competitiveness of the Union, and to reduce sector-specific market regulation accordingly as and when these objectives are achieved;	b) to promote the global competitiveness of the Union, and to reduce sector-specific market regulation with respect to the achievement of sustainable competition within the single market.

Amendment 317

Patrizia Toia, Francesco De Angelis Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) to facilitate innovative and high-quality service provision;	(d) to facilitate innovative and high-quality service provision, through, for instance, open data in standard interoperable formats held by the operators themselves in aggregate forms that cannot be traced back to individual users, in order to promote the emergence of new value-added services and applications, to develop, for example, ‘smart cities’ in keeping with the objectives of the Digital Agenda for Europe.

Amendment 318

Françoise Castex Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
d) to facilitate innovative and high-quality service provision;	d) to facilitate both innovative and high-quality service provision and affordable access to broadband communications, having regard in particular to the contribution and needs of small and medium-sized enterprises as well as not-for-profit sector operators providing Internet access services;

Amendment 319

Teresa Riera Madurell Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) to facilitate innovative and high-quality service provision;	(d) to facilitate innovative and high-quality service provision and reasonable access to broadband;

Amendment 320

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	d a) to promote sustainable competition within the single market and to ensure a level playing field for all the actors in competition on this market with respect to rules and regulation

Amendment 321

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	d b) to secure simplified, predictable and convergent regulatory conditions regarding key administrative and commercial parameters, including as regards the proportionality of individual obligations which may be imposed pursuant to market analysis;

Amendment 322

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch, Amelia Andersdotter Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	e a) to ensure that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

Amendment 323

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) to secure uniform starting conditions and conditions of competition between providers of electronic communication services and providers of information society services.

Amendment 324

Angelika Niebler Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) to create a fair conditions of competition between providers of electronic communication services and providers of information society services.

Justification:
In view of increasing convergence, there needs to be a level playing field between regulated telecom service providers and internet service providers.

Amendment 325

Paul Rübig Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. to construct a common legal framework for both electronic communication service providers and information service providers;

Amendment 326

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) a single EU authorisation for European electronic communications providers;	(a) the introduction of a single EU standard notification form that will provide each Member State with all theinformation necessary for the authorisation procedure;

Amendment 327

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) further convergence of regulatory conditions as regards the necessity and proportionality of remedies imposed by national regulatory authorities on European electronic communications providers;	(b) further convergence of regulatory conditions as regards the necessity and proportionality of remedies imposed by national regulatory authorities on electronic communications providers;

Amendment 328

Marisa Matias Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) the phasing out of unjustified surcharges for intra-Union communications and roaming communications within the Union.	(f) the phasing out of roaming within the Union.

Amendment 329

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. "single EU authorisation" means the legal framework applicable to a European electronic communications provider in the whole Union based on the general authorisation in the home Member State and in accordance with this Regulation;	deleted

Amendment 330

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. "home Member State" means the Member State where the European electronic communications provider has its main establishment;	deleted

Amendment 331

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. "main establishment" means the place of establishment in the Member State where the main decisions are taken as to the investments in and conduct of the provision of electronic communications services or networks in the Union;	deleted

Amendment 332

Angelika Niebler Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, in particular pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;	(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level through the allocation of a primary use, in accordance with the provisions and procedures of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;
__________________	__________________
[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 333

Petra Kammerevert Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, in particular pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;	(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level through the allocation of a primary use, in accordance with the provisions and procedures of Directive 2002/21/EC and pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,1 and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;
__________________	__________________
[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 334

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) ‘harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications’ means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, in particular pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;	(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability, efficiency and primary use are harmonised at Union level in accordance with Directive 2002/21/EC, and with Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;
__________________	__________________
[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 335

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, in particular pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;	(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability, efficiency and primary use are harmonised at Union level, in accordance with Directive 2002/21/EC and Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;
__________________	__________________
[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Or.

Amendment 336

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) ‘harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications’ means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, in particular pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;	(8) 'harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications' means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, according to the provisions and procedures as laid down in Directive 2002/21/EC and pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;
__________________	__________________
[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 337

Herbert Reul Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level, in particular pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;	(8) "harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications" means radio spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use are harmonised at Union level in accordance with Directive 2002/21/EC and pursuant to Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,[27] and which serves for electronic communications services other than broadcasting;
__________________	__________________
[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).	[27] Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community (Radio Spectrum Decision) (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).

Amendment 338

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) ‘small-area wireless access point’ means a low power wireless network access equipment of small size operating within a small range, which may or may not be part of a public terrestrial mobile communications network, and be equipped with one or more low visual impact antennas, which allows wireless access by the public to electronic communications networks regardless of the underlying network topology;	(9) "small-area wireless access point" means a low power wireless network access equipment of small size operating within a small range, using licensed spectrum or a combination of licensed and license-exempt spectrum, which may or may not be part of a public terrestrial mobile communications network, and be equipped with one or more low visual impact antennas, which allows wireless access by the public to electronic communications networks regardless of the underlying network topology;

Amendment 339

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10) ‘radio local area network’ (RLAN) means a low power wireless access system, operating within a small range, with a low risk of interference to other such systems deployed in close proximity by other users, using on a non-exclusive basis spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use for this purpose are harmonised at Union level;	(10) "radio local area network" (RLAN) means a low power wireless access system, operating within a small range, with a low risk of interference to other such systems deployed in close proximity by other users, using on a license-exempt basis spectrum for which the conditions of availability and efficient use for this purpose are harmonised at Union level, without prejudice to the license-exempt regime which includes no regulatory protection rights, nor rights to cause harmful interferences to licensed radio systems in band or in adjacent bands.

Amendment 340

Petra Kammerevert Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 11 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(11a) ‘Best effort principle’ means the assurance that requests for forwarding of data will be dealt with in chronological order of receipt as quickly as possible and irrespective of content, service, use, origin or destination;

Amendment 341

Ivo Belet Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) ‘assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product’ means a product that is made available at the internet protocol (IP) exchange, which enables customers to set up an IP communication link between a point of interconnection and one or several fixed network termination points, and enables defined levels of end to end network performance for the provision of specific services to end users on the basis of the delivery of a specified guaranteed quality of service, based on specified parameters;	deleted

Amendment 342

Catherine Trautmann, Teresa Riera Madurell Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) ‘assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product’ means a product that is made available at the internet protocol (IP) exchange, which enables customers to set up an IP communication link between a point of interconnection and one or several fixed network termination points, and enables defined levels of end to end network performance for the provision of specific services to end users on the basis of the delivery of a specified guaranteed quality of service, based on specified parameters;	deleted

Amendment 343

Marietje Schaake Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) ‘assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product’ means a product that is made available at the internet protocol (IP) exchange, which enables customers to set up an IP communication link between a point of interconnection and one or several fixed network termination points, and enables defined levels of end to end network performance for the provision of specific services to end users on the basis of the delivery of a specified guaranteed quality of service, based on specified parameters;	deleted

Amendment 344

Petra Kammerevert Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) "assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product" means a product that is made available at the internet protocol (IP) exchange, which enables customers to set up an IP communication link between a point of interconnection and one or several fixed network termination points, and enables defined levels of end to end network performance for the provision of specific services to end users on the basis of the delivery of a specified guaranteed quality of service, based on specified parameters;	deleted

Amendment 345

Petra Kammerevert Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12a) ‘justified traffic management’ means traffic management which, derogating from the best effort principle, is permissible where it is dictated by technical constraints and is in line with the general principles of necessity, reasonability, efficiency assurance, non-discrimination and transparency as well as the other conditions of this regulation;

Amendment 346

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch, Amelia Andersdotter Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12 a) "net neutrality" means the principle that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

Amendment 347

Petra Kammerevert Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) "internet access service" means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used; the Member States shall lay down appropriate minimum requirements for the quality of service of internet access services which shall continually be upgraded in line with technological developments; an internet access service enables end-users to use any internet-based application in accordance with the best effort principle; the only permissible derogation from this principle is proportionate, justified traffic management, in cases where the conditions for its use are clearly defined;

Amendment 348

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet, Doris Pack Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) 'open internet access service' means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet at a level of quality that reflects the advances in technology, and thereby allows for connectivity between all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used and without any restrictions to the legal content exchanged. It enables end-users to run any application utilising the electronic communication function of the Internet. Unrestricted Internet access service is based on the best efforts principle, the only exceptions allowed are proportionate technical traffic management measures or implementation of court order;

Amendment 349

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) "internet access service" means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) "internet access service" means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used. It allows end-users to run any application using an electronic communications network on the basis of the ‘best effort’ principle;

Or.

Amendment 350

Amelia Andersdotter Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used; It enables end-users to run any application utilising the electronic communications network of the internet.

Amendment 351

Catherine Trautmann Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and therewith connectivity between virtually all end points of the internet, irrespective of the network technologies used;

Amendment 352

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) ‘internet access service’ means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology used;	(14) 'internet access service' means a publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points connected to the internet, irrespective of the network technology or devices used;

Justification:
Further clarification with regards to different devices.

Amendment 353

Petra Kammerevert Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) "specialised service" means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) ʻspecialised serviceʼ means an electronic communications service or any other service that is provided and operated only within closed electronic communications networks and is not marketed or used as an internet substitute or functionally identical to the content, applications or services of the open internet. A specialised service shall be admissible only where there is a manifest technical and factual need, over and above economic self-interest, for particular real-time critical applications meeting certain quality criteria. It is characterised by clearly-defined, guaranteed and customised quality-of-service parameters which are subject to continuous end-to-end management up to the ‘last mile’ by the specialised service provider. A specialised service may not be limited to an endpoint controlled by the service provider.

Amendment 354

Amelia Andersdotter Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) 'specialised service' means an electronic communications service operated within closed electronic communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission control; and that is not marketed as a substitute for internet access service or functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service;

Justification:
based on the BEREC definition, which points out the idea that a specialised service cannot be operated on the best effort internet, but has to run separately from it, namely within “closed network with strict admission control”. Furthermore a specialised service must not replicate any service already existing on the internet or else it would simply circumvent Net Neutrality.

Amendment 355

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service, operated within closed electronic communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission control; and that is not marketed or used as a substitute for internet access service or functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service;

Amendment 356

Françoise Castex Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service operated within closed electronic communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission control and that is not marketed or used as a substitute for internet access service or functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service;

Amendment 357

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet, Doris Pack Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) 'specialised service' means an electronic communications service or any other service that is provided and operated within a closed electronic communications network using the internet protocol, relying on strict admission control and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;

Amendment 358

Angelika Niebler Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) "specialised service" means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send data to a determined number of parties or endpoints which are provided and operated in closed electronic communications networks using the Internet Protocol. These networks shall be subject to strict admissibility checks. A specialised service may not be used as a substitute for internet access service.

Amendment 359

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) 'specialised service' means an electronic communications service or any other service using the Internet Protocol that provides to a determined number of parties optimised access to specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and the technical characteristics of which are controlled using traffic management in order to ensure adequate service characteristics; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;

Justification:
End-to-end control of specialised services might not always be technically possible or, in certain cases, not even intended as e.g. only a part of the transmission route could be optimised. Also it is not clear whether a complete end-to-end control is feasible for mobile data connections. Furthermore, it has been explicitly mentioned that optimised access naturally involves traffic management.

Amendment 360

Catherine Trautmann, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access or use specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, in order to ensure adequate characteristics from end-to-end. A specialised service is operated within closed electronic communications networks and thus clearly separated from internet access services and is not marketed or used as a substitute for internet access service;

Amendment 361

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) "specialised service" means an electronic communications service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, that is subject to admission control and whose technical characteristics are controlled using traffic management in order to ensure adequate service characteristics or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service

Amendment 362

Giles Chichester Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;	(15) 'specialised service' means an electronic communications service or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute for internet access service;

Amendment 363

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Chapter 2 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Single EU authorisation	Harmonisation and simplification of authorisation regulations

Amendment 364

Lambert van Nistelrooij Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. A European electronic communications provider has the right to provide electronic communications networks and services in the whole Union and to exercise the rights linked to the provision of such networks and services in each Member State where it operates pursuant to a single EU authorisation which is subject only to the notification requirements provided in Article 4.	1. Any electronic communications provider established in the Union has the right to provide electronic communications networks and services in the whole Union and to exercise the rights linked to the provision of such networks and services in each Member State where it operates.

Amendment 365

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) A European electronic communications provider has the right to provide electronic communications networks and services in the whole Union and to exercise the rights linked to the provision of such networks and services in each Member State where it operates pursuant to a single EU authorisation which is subject only to the notification requirements provided in Article 4.	(1) An electronic communications provider has the right to provide electronic communications networks and services in the whole Union and to exercise the rights linked to the provision of such networks and services in each Member State where it operates pursuant to Article 3 of Directive 2002/20/EC as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC, on the basis of a notification for each Member State concerned. The notification format shall be a single EU standard format, in accordance with Article 4.

Amendment 366

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The European electronic communications provider is subject to the rules and conditions applied in each Member State concerned in compliance with Union law unless otherwise provided in this Regulation and without prejudice to Regulation (EU) No 531/2012.	(2) The European electronic communications provider is subject to the rules and conditions applied in each Member State concerned in compliance with Union law.

Amendment 367

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) By way of derogation from Article 12 of Directive 2002/20/EC, a European electronic communications provider may be subject to administrative charges applicable in the host Member State only if it has an annual turnover for electronic communications services in that Member State above 0,5% of the total national electronic communications turnover. In levying these charges only the turnover for electronic communications services in the Member State concerned shall be taken into account.	deleted

Amendment 368

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) By way of derogation from1Article 3(1)(b) of Directive 2002/22/EC a European electronic communications provider may be subject to the contributions imposed to share the net cost of universal service obligations in the host Member State only if it has an annual turnover for electronic communications services in that Member State above 3% of the total national electronic communications turnover. In levying any such contribution only the turnover in the Member State concerned shall be taken into account.	deleted

Amendment 369

Gunnar Hökmark Article 3 – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. A European electronic communications provider shall be entitled to equal treatment by the national regulatory authorities of different Member States in objectively equivalent situations.	5. National regulatory authorities shall treat electronic communications providers equally in comparable situations, irrespective of their Member State of establishment.

Amendment 370

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(5) A European electronic communications provider shall be entitled to equal treatment by the national regulatory authorities of different Member States in objectively equivalent situations.	(5) Electronic communications providers shall be entitled to equal treatment by the national regulatory authorities of different Member States in objectively equivalent situations.

Amendment 371

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) In the event of a dispute between undertakings involving a European electronic communications provider regarding obligations applicable in accordance with Directives 2002/19/EC, 2002/20/EC, 2002/21/EC and 2002/22/EC, this Regulation or Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 in a host Member State, the European electronic communications provider may consult the national regulatory authority in the home Member State, which may deliver an opinion with a view to ensuring the development of consistent regulatory practices. The national regulatory authority in the host Member State shall take utmost account of the opinion issued by the national regulatory authority of the home Member State when deciding the dispute.	deleted

Amendment 372

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 3 – paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7) European electronic communications providers who, at the date of entry into force of this Regulation, have the right to provide electronic communications networks and services in more than one Member State shall submit the notification provided for in Article 4 at the latest by 1 July 2016.	deleted

Amendment 373

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Notification procedure for European electronic communications providers	Standard notification format

Amendment 374

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) A European electronic communications provider shall submit a single notification in accordance with this Regulation to the national regulatory authority of the home Member State, before beginning activity in at least one Member State.	(1) The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to define the standard notification format no later than 30 December 2014, after consulting all interested parties and BEREC.

Amendment 375

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The notification shall contain a declaration of the provision or the intention to commence the provision of electronic communications networks and services and shall be accompanied by the following information only:	deleted
(a) the name of the provider, his legal status and form, registration number, where the provider is registered in trade or other similar public register, the geographical address of the main establishment, a contact person, a short description of the networks or services provided or intended to be provided, including identification of the home Member State;
(b) the host Member State(s) where the services and the networks are provided or intended to be provided directly or by subsidiaries and, in the latter case, the name, his legal status and form, geographical address, registration number, where the provider is registered in trade or other similar public register in the host Member State, and contact point of any subsidiary concerned and the respective operating areas. Where a subsidiary is controlled jointly by two or more electronic communications providers with their main establishments in different Member States the subsidiary shall indicate the relevant home Member State among those of the parent companies for the purpose of this Regulation and shall be notified by the parent company of that home Member State accordingly.

Amendment 376

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) Any change to the information submitted in accordance with paragraph 2 shall be made available to the national regulatory authority of the home Member State within one month following the change. In the event that the change to be notified concerns the intention to provide electronic communications networks or services in a host Member State that is not covered by a previous notification, the European electronic communications provider may begin activity in that host Member State upon notification.	deleted

Amendment 377

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) Non-compliance with the notification requirement laid down in this Article shall constitute a breach of the common conditions applicable to the European electronic communications provider in the home Member State.	deleted

Amendment 378

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national regulatory authority of the home Member State shall forward the information received in accordance with paragraph 2 and any change to that information in accordance with paragraph 3 to the national regulatory authorities of the concerned host Member States and to the BEREC Office within one week following reception of such information or any change.	deleted

Amendment 379

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) At the request of a European electronic communications provider, the national regulatory authority of the home Member State shall issue a declaration in accordance with Article 9 of Directive 2002/20/EC, specifying that the undertaking in question is subject to the single EU authorisation.	deleted

Amendment 380

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 4 – paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7) In the event that one or more national regulatory authorities in different Member States consider that the identification of the home Member State in a notification made in accordance with paragraph 2 or any change to the provided information made available in accordance with paragraph 3 does not correspond or no longer corresponds to the main establishment of the undertaking pursuant to this Regulation, it shall refer the issue to the Commission, substantiating the grounds on which it bases its assessment. A copy of the referral shall be communicated to the BEREC Office for information. The Commission, having given the relevant European electronic communications provider and the national regulatory authority of the disputed home Member State the opportunity to express their views, shall issue a decision determining the home Member State of the undertaking in question pursuant to this Regulation within three months following the referral of the issue.	deleted

Amendment 381

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 5	deleted
Compliance with the single EU authorisation
(1) The national regulatory authority of each concerned Member State shall monitor and ensure, in accordance with its national legislation implementing the procedures provided for in Article 10 of Directive 2002/20/EC, that European electronic communications providers comply with the rules and conditions applicable in its territory in accordance with Article 3.
(2) The national regulatory authority of a host Member State shall transmit to the national regulatory authority of the home Member State any relevant information concerning individual measures adopted in relation to a European electronic communications provider with a view to ensuring compliance with the rules and conditions applicable in its territory in accordance with Article 3.

Amendment 382

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 383

Teresa Riera Madurell Article 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 6 a
	Abolition of retail charges
	With effect from 1 July 2015, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming costumers in any Member State for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent, for any roaming MMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used or any general charge to enable the terminal equipment or service to be used abroad.

Amendment 384

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 7	deleted
Coordination of enforcement measures
(1) When applying Article 6, the national regulatory authority of the home Member State shall take supervisory or enforcement measures related to an electronic communications service or network provided in another Member State or which has caused damage in another Member State with the same diligence as if the electronic communications service or network concerned was provided in the home Member State.
(2) The Member States shall ensure that within their territories it is possible to serve the legal documents relating to measures taken in accordance with Articles 5 and 6.

Amendment 385

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications according to Directive 2009/140/EC and Decision No 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with due regard to the provisions as laid down in Article 8a and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 386

Catherine Trautmann Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications; its provisions shall be interpreted in accordance with the relevant parts of Directive 2002/21/EC (in particular Articles 8a and 9), as well as with the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme.

Amendment 387

Petra Kammerevert Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	(1) This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum within the meaning of Directives 2009/140/EC and 676/2002/EC for wireless broadband communications, subject to the provisions of Articles 8a and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 388

Angelika Niebler Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	(1) This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications, subject to the provisions of Articles 8a and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC (framework directive).

Amendment 389

Herbert Reul Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	(1) This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications, subject to the provisions of Articles 8a and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 390

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications, in accordance with Articles 8a and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Or.

Amendment 391

Giles Chichester Article 8 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications.	1. This section shall apply to harmonised radio spectrum.

Amendment 392

Petra Kammerevert Article 8 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence.	(2) This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security, defence and general interest purposes, such as promoting cultural and linguistic diversity and media diversity, e.g. by providing radio and TV programmes.

Amendment 393

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 8 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence.	2. This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence, taking into account general interest objectives such as cultural diversity and media pluralism, as well as the interests of all radio spectrum users.

Amendment 394

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 8 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence.	2. This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence, as well as to pursue general interest objectives, in particular in the context of audiovisual and media policies.

Or.

Amendment 395

Angelika Niebler Article 8 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence.	(2) This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence, and in addition to the pursuit of objectives of general interest, in particular regarding audio-visual and media policy.

Amendment 396

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Edit Herczog Article 8 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence.	2. This section shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to benefit from fees imposed to ensure the optimal use of radio spectrum resources in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC and to organise and use their radio spectrum for public order, public security and defence, or to pursue general interest objectives such as cultural diversity and media pluralism.

Amendment 397

Giles Chichester Article 8 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. In the exercise of powers conferred in this section, the Commission shall take utmost account of any relevant opinion issued by the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) established by Commission Decision 2002/622/EC[28] .	deleted
__________________
[28] Commission Decision 2002/622/EC of 26 July 2002 establishing a Radio Spectrum Policy Group (OJ L 198, 27.07.2002, p. 49).

Amendment 398

Patrizia Toia Article 8 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. In the exercise of powers conferred in this section, the Commission shall take utmost account of any relevant opinion issued by the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) established by Commission Decision 2002/622/EC[28].	3. In the exercise of powers conferred in this section, the Commission shall take utmost account of any relevant opinion issued by the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) established by Commission Decision 2002/622/EC[28] and of the indications and guidelines issued by BEREC on the matters within its competence.
__________________	__________________
[28] Commission Decision 2002/622/EC of 26 July 2002 establishing a Radio Spectrum Policy Group (OJ L 198, 27.07.2002, p. 49).	[28 ]Commission Decision 2002/622/EC of 26 July 2002 establishing a Radio Spectrum Policy Group (OJ L 198, 27.07.2002, p. 49).

Amendment 399

Giles Chichester Article 8 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. In the exercise of powers conferred in this section, the Commission shall take utmost account of any relevant opinion issued by the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) established by Commission Decision 2002/622/EC[28].	3. In the exercise of powers conferred in this section, the Commission shall take utmost account of any relevant opinion issued by BEREC.
__________________	__________________
[28] Commission Decision 2002/622/EC of 26 July 2002 establishing a Radio Spectrum Policy Group (OJ L 198, 27.07.2002, p. 49).

Amendment 400

Catherine Trautmann Article 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 8 a
	Harmonisation of certain aspects relating to transfer or lease of individual rights to use radio frequencies and their duration
	1. Without prejudice to Directive 2002/21/EC and to the application of competition rules to undertakings, the following shall apply with respect to the transfer or lease of rights of use of spectrum, or parts thereof, identified in Article 6(8) of Decision No 243/2012/EU:
	(a) Member States shall make current details of all such rights of use publicly available in a standardised electronic format;
	(b) Member States may not refuse to allow a transfer or lease to an existing holder of such rights of use;
	(c) in cases not covered by point (b), Member States may refuse a transfer only where it is found that there is a clear risk that the new holder would be unable to meet the existing conditions for the right of use;
	(d) in cases not covered by point (b), Member States may not refuse a lease where the transferor undertakes to remain liable for meeting the existing conditions for the right of use.
	2. Any administrative charge imposed on undertakings in connection with processing an application for the transfer or lease of spectrum shall, in total, cover only the administrative costs, including ancillary steps such as the issuance of a new right of use, incurred in processing the application. Any such charges shall be imposed in an objective, transparent and proportionate manner which minimises additional administrative costs and attendant charges. Article 12(2) of Directive 2002/20/EC shall apply to charges imposed under this paragraph.
	3. All rights of use of spectrum shall be granted with a minimum duration of 20 years, and in any case for a duration appropriate to incentivise investment and competition, and discourage the under-use or "hoarding" of spectrum. Member States may grant rights of use of indefinite duration.
	4. Member States may provide for proportionate and non-discriminatory withdrawal of rights in order to ensure the efficient use of spectrum including, but not limited to, spectrum management purposes; national security; breach of licence; harmonised change of use of a band; and non-payment of fees.
	5. The duration of all existing rights of use of spectrum is hereby extended to 20 years from their date of grant, without prejudice to other conditions attached to the right of use and to rights of use of indefinite duration.
	6. The introduction of minimum 20 year licence duration should not impede the ability of regulators to issue temporary licences and licences for secondary uses in a harmonised band.

Amendment 401

Francesco De Angelis, Patrizia Toia Article 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 8 a
	Harmonisation of certain aspects relating to transfer, lease or sharing of individual rights to use radio frequencies and their duration
	1. Without prejudice to the application of competition rules to undertakings, the following shall apply with respect to the transfer, lease or sharing of rights of use of spectrum, or parts thereof, identified in Article 6(8) of Decision No 243/2012/EU:
	(a) Member States shall make current details of all such rights of use publicly available in a standardised electronic format;
	(b) Member States may not refuse to allow a transfer or lease to an existing holder of such rights of use;
	(c) in cases not covered by point (b), Member States may refuse a transfer only where it is found that there is a clear risk that the new holder would be unable to meet the existing conditions for the right of use;
	(d) in cases not covered by point (b), Member States may not refuse a lease where the transferor undertakes to remain liable for meeting the existing conditions for the right of use.
	(e) Member States should promote licensed shared access to spectrum within the actual authorization regime. The sharing may be imposed by the member State in order to ensure efficient spectrum use.
	2. Any administrative charge imposed on undertakings in connection with processing an application for the transfer, lease or sharing of spectrum shall, in total, cover only the administrative costs, including ancillary steps such as the issuance of a new right of use, incurred in processing the application. Any such charges shall be imposed in an objective, transparent and proportionate manner which minimises additional administrative costs and attendant charges. Article 12(2) of Directive 2002/20/EC shall apply to charges imposed under this paragraph.

Justification:
Sharing of spectrum should be encouraged in order to inflate competition into the market and maximize consumers' benefit and innovation. For the same reason, excessive or indefinite duration of spectrum's licenses should be excluded.

Amendment 402

Giles Chichester Article 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 8 a
	Harmonisation of certain aspects relating to transfer or lease of individual rights to use radio frequencies and their duration
	1. Without prejudice to the application of competition rules to undertakings, the following shall apply with respect to the transfer or lease of rights of use of spectrum, or parts thereof, identified in Article 6(8) of Decision No 243/2012/EU, Member States shall make current details of all such rights of use publicly available in a standardised electronic format;
	2. Any administrative charge imposed on undertakings in connection with processing an application for the transfer or lease of spectrum shall, in total, cover only the administrative costs, including ancillary steps such as the issuance of a new right of use, incurred in processing the application. Any such charges shall be imposed in an objective, transparent and proportionate manner which minimises additional administrative costs and attendant charges. Article 12(2) of Directive 2002/20/EC shall apply to charges imposed under this paragraph.
	3. All rights of use of spectrum shall be granted with a minimum duration of 30 years. Member States may grant rights of use of indefinite duration.
	4. Member States may provide for proportionate and non-discriminatory withdrawal of rights, including those with a 30 year minimum duration, in order to ensure the efficient use of spectrum including, but not limited to, spectrum management purposes; national security; breach of licence; harmonised change of use of a band; and non-payment of fees.
	The duration of all existing rights of use of spectrum is hereby extended to 30 years from their date of grant, without prejudice to other conditions attached to the right of use and to rights of use of indefinite duration.
	5. The introduction of minimum 30 year licence duration should not impede the ability of regulators to issue temporary licences and licences for secondary uses in a harmonised band.

Justification:
It must still be possible to withdraw rights of use for legitimate reasons. Additionally the ability of regulators to issue temporary licences or licences for secondary uses in a harmonised band should not be undermined. This will ensure the efficient use of spectrum.

Amendment 403

Giles Chichester Article 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 404

Petra Kammerevert Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national competent authorities for radio spectrum shall contribute to the development of a wireless space where investment and competitive conditions for high-speed wireless broadband communications converge and which enables planning and provision of integrated multi-territorial networks and services and economies of scale, thereby fostering innovation, economic growth and the long-term benefit of end users.	Without prejudice to the protection of the common interest in accordance with Article 9(4) of Directive 2002/21/EC, the national competent authorities for radio spectrum shall contribute to the development of a wireless space where investment and competitive conditions for high-speed wireless broadband communications converge and which enables planning and provision of integrated multi-territorial networks and services and economies of scale, thereby fostering innovation, economic growth and the long-term benefit of end users. Due account shall be taken of the possibility of establishing multi-functional networks that combine broadcasting and mobile telephone technology on a single platform.

Amendment 405

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national competent authorities for radio spectrum shall contribute to the development of a wireless space where investment and competitive conditions for high-speed wireless broadband communications converge and which enables planning and provision of integrated multi-territorial networks and services and economies of scale, thereby fostering innovation, economic growth and the long-term benefit of end users.	Without prejudice to the safeguard of general interest objectives, the national competent authorities for radio spectrum shall contribute to the development of a wireless space where investment and competitive conditions for high-speed wireless broadband communications converge and which enables planning and provision of integrated multi-territorial networks and services and economies of scale, thereby fostering innovation, economic growth and the long-term benefit of end users.

Amendment 406

Patrizia Toia, Francesco De Angelis Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national competent authorities for radio spectrum shall contribute to the development of a wireless space where investment and competitive conditions for high-speed wireless broadband communications converge and which enables planning and provision of integrated multi-territorial networks and services and economies of scale, thereby fostering innovation, economic growth and the long-term benefit of end users.	The national competent authorities for radio spectrum shall contribute to the development of a wireless space where investment and competitive conditions for high-speed wireless broadband communications converge and which enables planning and provision of integrated, interoperable, open multi-territorial networks and services, based on shared standards, and economies of scale, thereby fostering innovation, economic growth and the long-term benefit of end users.

Amendment 407

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national competent authorities shall refrain from applying procedures or imposing conditions for the use of radio spectrum which may unduly impede European electronic communications providers from providing integrated electronic communications networks and services in several Member States or throughout the Union.	deleted

Amendment 408

Catherine Trautmann Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national competent authorities shall refrain from applying procedures or imposing conditions for the use of radio spectrum which may unduly impede European electronic communications providers from providing integrated electronic communications networks and services in several Member States or throughout the Union.	The national competent authorities shall refrain from applying procedures or imposing conditions for the use of radio spectrum which may unduly impede European electronic communications providers from providing integrated electronic communications networks and services in several Member States or throughout the Union and/or unduly impede, by creating interferences, the operation of existing services or applications in the concerned spectrum bands as well as in adjacent bands.

Amendment 409

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 9 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The national competent authorities shall apply the least onerous authorisation system possible for allowing the use of radio spectrum, on the basis of objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria, in such a way as to maximise flexibility and efficiency in radio spectrum use and to promote comparable conditions throughout the Union for integrated multi-territorial investments and operations by European electronic communications providers.	2. The national competent authorities shall apply a transparent process and apply the least onerous authorisation system possible offering all actors equal access conditions to the use of radio spectrum, on the basis of objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria, in such a way as to maximise flexibility and efficiency in radio spectrum use and to promote comparable conditions throughout the Union for integrated multi-territorial investments and operations by European electronic communications providers

Amendment 410

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 9 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The national competent authorities shall apply the least onerous authorisation system possible for allowing the use of radio spectrum, on the basis of objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria, in such a way as to maximise flexibility and efficiency in radio spectrum use and to promote comparable conditions throughout the Union for integrated multi-territorial investments and operations by European electronic communications providers.	(2) The national competent authorities shall apply the most efficient authorisation system possible for allowing the use of radio spectrum, on the basis of objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria, in such a way as to maximise flexibility and efficiency in radio spectrum use and to promote comparable conditions throughout the Union for integrated multi-territorial investments and operations by electronic communications providers.

Amendment 411

Catherine Trautmann Article 9 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.	3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.
	National competent authorities shall also ensure the coexistence between existing and new radio spectrum users. To this end, they should conduct a comprehensive impact assessment as well as consultations involving all stakeholders.

Amendment 412

Françoise Castex Article 9 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.	3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings. They shall also have regard to collective use of spectrum as well as shared and unlicensed use of spectrum.

Amendment 413

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 9 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.	3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to objective, transparent and non-discriminatory treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.

Amendment 414

Salvador Sedó i Alabart Article 9 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.	3. When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to objectivity, transparency and non-discriminatory treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.

Amendment 415

Werner Langen Article 9 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.	(3) When establishing authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, national competent authorities shall have regard in particular to transparent, non-discriminatory and objective equal treatment between existing and potential operators and between European electronic communications providers and other undertakings.

Amendment 416

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3 a. Member States should promote licensed shared access to spectrum within the actual authorization regime. The sharing may be imposed by the Member State in order to ensure efficient spectrum use.

Amendment 417

Catherine Trautmann Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
b) ensuring the most efficient use and effective management of radio spectrum;	b) ensuring the most efficient use and effective management of radio spectrum as well as availability of unlicensed spectrum;

Amendment 418

Werner Langen Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) ensuring predictable and comparable conditions to enable the planning of network investments and services on a multi-territorial basis and the achievement of scale economies;	(c) ensuring predictable and comparable conditions to enable long-term, sustainable network investments and services on a multi-territorial basis and the achievement of scale economies;

Amendment 419

Werner Langen Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
d) ensuring the necessity and proportionality of the conditions imposed, including through an objective assessment of whether it is justified to impose additional conditions which could be in favour of or to the detriment of certain operators;	d) ensuring the necessity and proportionality of the conditions imposed, including through a transparent, objective assessment of whether it is justified to impose additional conditions which could be in favour of or to the detriment of certain operators;

Amendment 420

Petra Kammerevert Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) ensuring wide territorial coverage of high-speed wireless broadband networks and a high level of penetration and consumption of related services.	deleted

Amendment 421

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
e) ensuring wide territorial coverage of high-speed wireless broadband networks and a high level of penetration and consumption of related services.	e) ensuring efficient use of spectrum to meet the increasing demand for high-speed wireless broadband networks, at the same time taking account of the public interest and the social, cultural and economic value of spectrum as a whole.

Amendment 422

Petra Kammerevert Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) preventing harmful interference, including the possibility of imposing obligations to resolve interference problems with other users and to assume the costs thereby incurred.

Amendment 423

Angelika Niebler Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) preventing harmful interference, including the possibility of imposing obligations to resolve instances of interference with other frequency users and to assume the costs incurred.

Amendment 424

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) preventing any harmful interference, including the possibility of imposing obligations to resolve interference with other radio spectrum users and to cover the costs incurred;

Or.

Amendment 425

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	e a) ensuring that any change in policy with regard to the efficient use of spectrum takes account of its impact on the public interest in terms of interference and costs.

Amendment 426

Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Edit Herczog Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	e a) preventing any harmful interference

Amendment 427

Salvador Sedó i Alabart Article 9 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. National competent authorities shall ensure that information is available on authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, and allow stakeholders to present their views during the process.

Amendment 428

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 9 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5 a. National competent authorities shall ensure that timely information is available on authorisation conditions and procedures for the use of radio spectrum, and allow interested parties to submit their views in the process.

Amendment 429

Giles Chichester Article 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 430

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. When determining the amount and type of radio spectrum to be assigned in a given procedure for granting rights of use for radio spectrum, the national competent authorities shall have regard to the following:	1. When determining the amount and type of radio spectrum to be assigned in a given procedure for granting rights of use for radio spectrum, the national competent authorities shall have regard to the technical characteristics of different available radio spectrum bands.

Amendment 431

Petra Kammerevert Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the technical characteristics of different available radio spectrum bands,	(a) the technical characteristics and the current and planned use of different available radio spectrum bands;

Amendment 432

Herbert Reul Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the technical characteristics of different available radio spectrum bands,	(a) the technical characteristics and the current and planned use of different available radio spectrum bands;

Amendment 433

Petra Kammerevert Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) the efficient use of radio spectrum bands already allocated for use by mobile broadband;

Amendment 434

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the possible combination in a single procedure of complementary bands; and	deleted

Amendment 435

Herbert Reul Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the efficient use of radio spectrum bands already allocated for mobile broadband;

Amendment 436

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the relevance of coherent portfolios of radio spectrum rights of use in different Member States to the provision of networks or services to the entire Union market or a significant part thereof.	deleted

Amendment 437

Petra Kammerevert Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the most efficient use of the radio spectrum in accordance with Article 9(4)(b), taking into account the characteristics of the band or bands concerned;	(a) the most efficient use of the radio spectrum in accordance with Article 9(4)(b), taking into account the characteristics of the band or bands concerned and their current and planned use;

Amendment 438

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the most efficient use of the radio spectrum in accordance with9Article (4)(b), taking into account the characteristics of the band or bands concerned;	(a) the most efficient use of the radio spectrum in accordance with Article 9(4)(b), taking into account the characteristics and current and planned use of the band or bands concerned;

Or.

Amendment 439

Petra Kammerevert Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) that the costs incurred by the existing user in clearing the spectrum range are taken into consideration;

Amendment 440

Herbert Reul Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) taking into account the costs incurred by the user in clearing the spectrum range.

Amendment 441

Werner Langen Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
National competent authorities shall ensure that the fees for rights of use for radio spectrum, if any:	National competent authorities shall ensure that the fees for rights of use for radio spectrum which serve to balance excess demand and shortages (by means of auctions or administratively), if any:

Amendment 442

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
National competent authorities shall ensure that the fees for rights of use for radio spectrum, if any:	National competent authorities shall ensure that the fees for rights of use for radio Spectrum of all types, if any

Amendment 443

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) appropriately reflect the social and economic value of the radio spectrum, including beneficial externalities;	(a) appropriately reflect the social, cultural and economic value of the radio spectrum, including beneficial externalities, and do not exceed market value;

Amendment 444

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) appropriately reflect the social and economic value of the radio spectrum, including beneficial externalities;	(a) appropriately reflect the social and economic value of the radio spectrum, including beneficial externalities, and do not exceed the market value;

Amendment 445

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) take into account the costs entailed in evicting current radio spectrum users, where applicable;

Amendment 446

Catherine Trautmann Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) achieve an optimal distribution between immediate and, if any, periodic payments, having regard in particular to the need to incentivise rapid network roll-out and radio spectrum utilisation in accordance with Article 9(4)(b) and (e).	(d) achieve an optimal distribution between upfront and, preferably, periodic payments, having regard in particular to the need to incentivise rapid network roll-out and radio spectrum utilisation in accordance with Article 9(4)(b) and (e).

Amendment 447

Werner Langen Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) must be paid only when providers actually use radio spectrum. Where radio spectrum is assigned by auction, its technical and regulatory conditions must be determined before the start of the auction. Preliminary technical tests may be necessary in certain cases.

Amendment 448

Catherine Trautmann Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(d a) are paid not more than one year before operators can start using the radio spectrum

Amendment 449

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(d a) are due to be paid when operators are effectively able to exploit the spectrum.

Amendment 450

Catherine Trautmann Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The technical and regulatory conditions attached to the rights of use for radio spectrum are defined and available to the operators and stakeholders prior the start of the auction process;

Amendment 451

Werner Langen Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This paragraph shall be without prejudice to the application of paragraph 5 as regards any conditions resulting in differentiated fees between operators which are laid down with a view to promoting effective competition.	deleted

Amendment 452

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This paragraph shall be without prejudice to the application of paragraph 5 as regards any conditions resulting in differentiated fees between operators which are laid down with a view to promoting effective competition.	deleted

Amendment 453

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This paragraph shall be without prejudice to the application of paragraph 5 as regards any conditions resulting in differentiated fees between operators which are laid down with a view to promoting effective competition.	deleted

Amendment 454

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 10 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) National competent authorities may impose obligations to reach minimum territorial coverage only when they are necessary and proportionate, in accordance with9Article (4)(d), to achieve specific objectives of general interest determined at national level. When imposing such obligations, the national competent authorities shall have regard to the following:	(4) National competent authorities may impose obligations to reach minimum territorial coverage, to achieve specific objectives of general interest determined at national level. When imposing such obligations, the national competent authorities shall have regard to the following:

Amendment 455

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the minimisation of the number of operators potentially subject to such obligations;	deleted

Amendment 456

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	When deciding whether to apply restrictions for mobile access obligations, national authorities must justify their decisions by means of a comprehensive evaluation of market characteristics and provide proof of market failure. In addition, the decision must precede an impact assessment of the network operators’ investments; there must be regular reviews of commitments undertaken.

Amendment 457

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	When determining whether to impose any mobile access obligations, competent national authorities shall justify their decision by a thorough assessment of the market conditions showing a market failure and an impact assessment on investment made by network operators. They shall review any obligations imposed regularly.

Amendment 458

Gunnar Hökmark Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
National competent authorities shall determine conditions under which undertakings may transfer or lease part or all of their individual rights to use radio spectrum to other undertakings, including the sharing of such radio spectrum. When determining those conditions, national competent authorities shall have regard to the following:	National competent authorities shall within a year from the date of entry into force of this regulation determine conditions under which undertakings may transfer or lease part or all of their individual rights to use radio spectrum to other undertakings, including the sharing of such radio spectrum. When determining those conditions, national competent authorities shall have regard to the following:

Amendment 459

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 10 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7 a. Pursuant to the objective to allocate at least 1200 MHz suitable spectrum for wireless broadband as set out in decision no 243/2012, national competent authorities shall within a year from the date of entry into force of this regulation identify harmonised wireless spectrum suitable for liberalisation and determine the conditions under which undertakings in possession of rights of use for wireless spectrum may change the destination and use of such harmonised wireless spectrum.

Amendment 460

Giles Chichester Article 11
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 461

Angelika Niebler Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Where the technical conditions for the availability and efficient use of harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications make it possible to use the relevant radio spectrum under a general authorisation regime, national competent authorities shall avoid imposing any additional condition and shall prevent any alternative use from impeding the effective application of such harmonised regime.	(1) Where the technical conditions for the availability and efficient use of harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications make it possible to use the relevant radio spectrum under a general authorisation regime, national competent authorities shall avoid imposing any additional condition and shall prevent any alternative use from impeding the effective application of such harmonised regime. This shall be without prejudice to Article 2(2)(8).

Justification:
This is to ensure a focus on the use of spectrum designated as primary.

Amendment 462

Herbert Reul Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Where the technical conditions for the availability and efficient use of harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications make it possible to use the relevant radio spectrum under a general authorisation regime, national competent authorities shall avoid imposing any additional condition and shall prevent any alternative use from impeding the effective application of such harmonised regime.	(1) Where the technical conditions for the availability and efficient use of harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications make it possible to use the relevant radio spectrum under a general authorisation regime, national competent authorities shall avoid imposing any additional condition and shall prevent any alternative use from impeding the effective application of such harmonised regime. Article 2(2)(8) shall be excluded from this rule.

Amendment 463

Petra Kammerevert Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Where the technical conditions for the availability and efficient use of harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications make it possible to use the relevant radio spectrum under a general authorisation regime, national competent authorities shall avoid imposing any additional condition and shall prevent any alternative use from impeding the effective application of such harmonised regime.	(1) Where the technical conditions for the availability and efficient use of harmonised radio spectrum for wireless broadband communications make it possible to use the relevant radio spectrum under a general authorisation regime, national competent authorities shall avoid imposing any additional condition and shall prevent any alternative use from impeding the effective application of such harmonised regime. This shall be without prejudice to Article 2(2)(8).

Amendment 464

Werner Langen Article 11 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The national competent authorities shall consider the need to fix appropriate minimum technology performance levels for different bands in accordance with Article 6(3) of Decision No 243/2012/EC with a view to improving spectral efficiency and without prejudice to measures adopted under Decision No 676/2002.	The national competent authorities shall consider the need to fix appropriate minimum technology performance levels for different bands in accordance with Article 6(3) of Decision No 243/2012/EC, without prejudice to measures adopted under Decision No 676/2002/EC.

Amendment 465

Werner Langen Article 11 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) have regard to the cycles of technology development and of renewal of equipment, in particular terminal equipment; and	deleted

Amendment 466

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The duration of the rights of use or the dates for subsequent renewal shall be set well in advance of the relevant procedure included in the timetable referred to in the first subparagraph. The timetables, durations and renewal cycles shall take account of the need for a predictable investment environment, the effective possibility to release any relevant new radio spectrum bands harmonised for wireless broadband communications and of the period for amortisation of related investments under competitive conditions.	The duration of the rights of use or the dates for subsequent renewal shall be set well in advance of the relevant procedure included in the timetable referred to in the first subparagraph. The timetables, durations and renewal cycles shall take account of the need for a predictable investment environment, the effective possibility to release any relevant new radio spectrum bands harmonised for wireless broadband communications and of the period for amortisation of related investments under competitive conditions. National competent authorities shall apply a minimum duration of thirty (30) years for granting of radio spectrum.

Amendment 467

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The duration of the rights of use or the dates for subsequent renewal shall be set well in advance of the relevant procedure included in the timetable referred to in the first subparagraph. The timetables, durations and renewal cycles shall take account of the need for a predictable investment environment, the effective possibility to release any relevant new radio spectrum bands harmonised for wireless broadband communications and of the period for amortisation of related investments under competitive conditions.	Without prejudice to Article 8a(3), the duration of the rights of use or the dates for subsequent renewal shall be set well in advance of the relevant procedure included in the timetable referred to in the first subparagraph. The timetables, durations and renewal cycles shall take account of the need for a predictable investment environment, the effective possibility to release any relevant new radio spectrum bands harmonised for wireless broadband communications and of the period for amortisation of related investments under competitive conditions.

Amendment 468

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Member States may provide for proportionate and non-discriminatory withdrawal of rights, including those with a 30 year minimum duration, in order to prevent any accumulation of rights that might distort competition

Amendment 469

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The introduction of minimum 30 year licence duration should not impede the ability of regulators to issue temporary licences and licences for secondary uses in a harmonised band

Amendment 470

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to ensure a coherent implementation of paragraph 1 throughout the Union and in particular to enable the synchronised availability of wireless services within the Union, the Commission may, by way of implementing acts:	In order to ensure a coherent implementation of paragraph 1 throughout the Union and in particular to enable the synchronised availability of wireless services within the Union, the Commission shall, by way of implementing acts, the first of which shall be adopted within one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation:

Amendment 471

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to ensure a coherent implementation of paragraph 1 throughout the Union and in particular to enable the synchronised availability of wireless services within the Union, the Commission may, by way of implementing acts:	In order to ensure a coherent implementation of paragraph 1 throughout the Union and in particular to enable the synchronised availability of wireless services within the Union, the Commission may propose legislative measures for:

Amendment 472

Giles Chichester Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to ensure a coherent implementation of paragraph 1 throughout the Union and in particular to enable the synchronised availability of wireless services within the Union, the Commission may, by way of implementing acts:	In order to ensure a coherent implementation of paragraph 1 throughout the Union and in particular to enable the synchronised availability of wireless services within the Union, BEREC shall, by way of guidelines:

Amendment 473

Seán Kelly Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) establish a common timetable for the Union as a whole, or timetables appropriate to the circumstances of different categories of Member States, the date or dates by which individual rights of use for a harmonised band, or a combination of complementary harmonised bands, shall be granted and actual use of the radio spectrum shall be allowed for exclusive or shared provision of wireless broadband communications throughout the Union;	(a) establish a common deadline for the Union as a whole, or deadlines appropriate to the circumstances of different categories of Member States, the date or dates by which individual rights of use for a harmonised band, or a combination of complementary harmonised bands, shall be granted and actual use of the radio spectrum shall be allowed for exclusive or shared provision of wireless broadband communications throughout the Union;

Justification:
Whereas certain member states have specific requirements which complicate the release of certain bands of spectrum, nevertheless it is important to establish deadlines for release of spectrum in order to provide greater bandwidth, with derogations agreed with member states on an exceptional basis in recognition of their particular situation.

Amendment 474

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) establish a common timetable for the Union as a whole, or timetables appropriate to the circumstances of different categories of Member States, the date or dates by which individual rights of use for a harmonised band, or a combination of complementary harmonised bands, shall be granted and actual use of the radio spectrum shall be allowed for exclusive or shared provision of wireless broadband communications throughout the Union;	(a) a common timetable for the Union as a whole, or timetables appropriate to the circumstances of different categories of Member States, the date or dates by which individual rights of use for a harmonised band, or a combination of complementary harmonised bands, shall be granted and actual use of the radio spectrum shall be allowed for exclusive or shared provision of wireless broadband communications throughout the Union;

Amendment 475

Catherine Trautmann Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands;	(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands that is no less than 20 years, and in any case for a duration appropriate to incentivise investment and competition, and discourage the under-use or ‘hoarding’ of spectrum; or determine that the rights are to be granted for an indefinite duration.

Amendment 476

Seán Kelly Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands;	(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands with the most effective timescale for incentivising continued investment and competition, and which would discourage the under-use of spectrum by licence holders.

Justification:
National regulatory authorities should be able to balance the need to incentivise investment through optimal licence durations with ensuring that the spectrum will be used as efficiently and fully as possible in their licensing conditions and preventing the tendency to ‘hoard’ spectrum.

Amendment 477

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands;	(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands which will be appropriate to incentivise and speed up investment, innovation and competition, and discourage the under-use or ‘hoarding’ of spectrum by licence holders.

Amendment 478

Edit Herczog Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands;	(b) determine a duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands which will be appropriate to incentivise investment and competition, and discourage the under-use or ‘hoarding’ of spectrum by licence holders.

Justification:
In the current state of continued increase in the demand for spectrum for wireless broadband communications, it is of the utmost importance that spectrum is used fully, by licence holders and by those using unlicensed spectrum, and if not, that this spectrum is traded urgently so that it can be used by others to respond to the growing need for wireless Internet access. National regulatory authorities need to balance in their licensing conditions the need to incentivise investment through optimal license durations, while ensuring that the spectrum will be used as efficiently and fully as possible. Giving indefinite durations for licences can encourage ‘hoarding’ of spectrum, whereby the licence holder sees no incentive to maximise the use of the spectrum they hold, nor do they see an interest in trading unused spectrum, because not doing so would keep new market entrants and competitors at bay.

Amendment 479

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) determine a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands;	(b) a minimum duration for the rights granted in the harmonised bands;

Amendment 480

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) define the date of expiry of any existing rights of use of harmonised bands other than for wireless broadband communications, or, in the case of rights of indefinite duration, the date by which the right of use shall be amended, in order to allow the provision of wireless broadband communications.	deleted

Amendment 481

Petra Kammerevert Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) define the date of expiry of any existing rights of use of harmonised bands other than for wireless broadband communications, or, in the case of rights of indefinite duration, the date by which the right of use shall be amended, in order to allow the provision of wireless broadband communications.	deleted

Amendment 482

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) define the date of expiry of any existing rights of use of harmonised bands other than for wireless broadband communications, or, in the case of rights of indefinite duration, the date by which the right of use shall be amended, in order to allow the provision of wireless broadband communications.	(d) the date of expiry of any existing rights of use of harmonised bands other than for wireless broadband communications, or, in the case of rights of indefinite duration, the date by which the right of use shall be amended, in order to allow the provision of wireless broadband communications.

Amendment 483

Giles Chichester Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	deleted

Amendment 484

Catherine Trautmann Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2) as well as without prejudice to the provisions set in article 9 (3) and (4) of Directive 2002/21/EC

Amendment 485

Petra Kammerevert Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2a) Paragraph 2 shall not affect the provisions of Article 9(3) and (4) of Directive 2002/21/EC.

Amendment 486

Giles Chichester Article 12 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission may also adopt implementing acts harmonising the date of expiry or renewal of individual rights to use radio spectrum for wireless broadband in harmonised bands, which already exist at the date of adoption of such acts, with a view to synchronising throughout the Union the date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use for such bands, including possible synchronisation with the date of renewal or reassignment of other bands harmonised by implementing measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 or with this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	deleted
Where implementing acts provided for in this paragraph define a harmonised date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use of radio spectrum which falls after the date of expiry or renewal of any existing individual rights of use of such radio spectrum in any of the Member States, the national competent authorities shall extend the existing rights until the harmonised date under the same previously applicable substantive authorisation conditions, including any applicable periodic fees.
Where the extension period granted in accordance with the second subparagraph is significant in comparison with the original duration of the rights of use, national competent authorities may subject the extension of rights to any adaptations of the previously applicable authorisation conditions which are necessary in the light of the changed circumstances, including the imposition of additional fees. These additional fees shall be based on an application pro rata temporis of any initial fee for the original rights of use which was expressly calculated by reference to the originally foreseen duration.
The implementing acts provided for in this paragraph shall not require the shortening of the duration of existing rights of use in any Member State except in accordance with Article 14(2) of Directive 2002/20/EC and shall not apply to existing rights of indefinite duration.
Where the Commission adopts an implementing act pursuant to paragraph 2, it may apply the provisions of this paragraph mutatis mutandis to any rights of use of the harmonised band concerned for wireless broadband.

Amendment 487

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission may also adopt implementing acts harmonising the date of expiry or renewal of individual rights to use radio spectrum for wireless broadband in harmonised bands, which already exist at the date of adoption of such acts, with a view to synchronising throughout the Union the date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use for such bands, including possible synchronisation with the date of renewal or reassignment of other bands harmonised by implementing measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 or with this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	The Commission may also propose legislative action to harmonise the date of expiry or renewal of individual rights to use radio spectrum for wireless broadband in harmonised bands, which already exist at the date of adoption of such acts, with a view to synchronising throughout the Union the date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use for such bands, including possible synchronisation with the date of renewal or reassignment of other bands harmonised by implementing measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 or with this paragraph.

Amendment 488

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission may also adopt implementing acts harmonising the date of expiry or renewal of individual rights to use radio spectrum for wireless broadband in harmonised bands, which already exist at the date of adoption of such acts, with a view to synchronising throughout the Union the date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use for such bands, including possible synchronisation with the date of renewal or reassignment of other bands harmonised by implementing measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 or with this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	Subject to the second subparagraph of Article 8a(3), the Commission shall also adopt implementing acts where possible within one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, harmonising the date of expiry or renewal of individual rights to use radio spectrum for wireless broadband in harmonised bands, which already exist at the date of adoption of such acts, with a view to synchronising throughout the Union the date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use for such bands, including possible synchronisation with the date of renewal or reassignment of other bands harmonised by implementing measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 or with this paragraph. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

Amendment 489

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where implementing acts provided for in this paragraph define a harmonised date for renewal or reassignment of rights of use of radio spectrum which falls after the date of expiry or renewal of any existing individual rights of use of such radio spectrum in any of the Member States, the national competent authorities shall extend the existing rights until the harmonised date under the same previously applicable substantive authorisation conditions, including any applicable periodic fees.	deleted

Amendment 490

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the extension period granted in accordance with the second subparagraph is significant in comparison with the original duration of the rights of use, national competent authorities may subject the extension of rights to any adaptations of the previously applicable authorisation conditions which are necessary in the light of the changed circumstances, including the imposition of additional fees. These additional fees shall be based on an application pro rata temporis of any initial fee for the original rights of use which was expressly calculated by reference to the originally foreseen duration.	deleted

Amendment 491

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the extension period granted in accordance with the second subparagraph is significant in comparison with the original duration of the rights of use, national competent authorities may subject the extension of rights to any adaptations of the previously applicable authorisation conditions which are necessary in the light of the changed circumstances, including the imposition of additional fees. These additional fees shall be based on an application pro rata temporis of any initial fee for the original rights of use which was expressly calculated by reference to the originally foreseen duration.	Where the extension period granted in accordance with the second subparagraph is significant in comparison with the original duration of the rights of use, national competent authorities may subject the extension of rights to any adaptations of the previously applicable authorisation conditions which are necessary in the light of the changed circumstances. Where such adaptations include the imposition of additional fees, such fees shall not exceed an application pro rata temporis of any initial fee for the original rights of use which was expressly calculated by reference to the originally foreseen duration.

Amendment 492

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The implementing acts provided for in this paragraph shall not require the shortening of the duration of existing rights of use in any Member State except in accordance with Article 14(2) of Directive 2002/20/EC and shall not apply to existing rights of indefinite duration.	deleted

Amendment 493

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the Commission adopts an implementing act pursuant to paragraph 2, it may apply the provisions of this paragraph mutatis mutandis to any rights of use of the harmonised band concerned for wireless broadband.	deleted

Amendment 494

Giles Chichester Article 12 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. When adopting the implementing acts provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Commission shall have regard to:	deleted
(a) the regulatory principles set out in Article 9 ;
(b) objective variations across the Union in the needs for additional radio spectrum for wireless broadband provision, while taking into account common radio spectrum needs for integrated networks covering several Member States;
(c) the predictability of operating conditions for existing radio spectrum users;
(d) the take-up, development and investment cycles of successive generations of wireless broadband technologies;
(e) end-user demand for high-capacity wireless broadband communications.
In determining timetables for different categories of Member States which have not already granted individual rights of use and allowed actual use of the harmonised band in question, the Commission shall have due regard to any submissions made by Member States regarding the way radio spectrum rights have been historically granted, the grounds of restriction provided for in in Article 9(3) and (4) of Directive 2002/21/EC, the possible need to vacate the band in question, the effects on competition or geographical or technical constraints, taking into account the effect on the internal market. The Commission shall ensure that implementation is not unduly deferred and that any variation in timetables between Member States does not result in undue differences in the competitive or regulatory situations between Member States.

Amendment 495

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
When adopting the implementing acts provided for in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Commission shall have regard to:	When adopting the measures provided for in paragraph 2, the Commission shall have regard to:

Amendment 496

Giles Chichester Article 12 – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Paragraph 2 shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to grant rights of use for and to allow actual use of a harmonised band before the adoption of an implementing act in respect of that band, subject to compliance with the second subparagraph of this paragraph, or in advance of the harmonised date established by an implementing act for that band.	deleted
Where national competent authorities grant rights of use in a harmonised band before the adoption of an implementing act in respect of that band, they shall define the conditions of such grant, and in particular those relative to duration, in such a way that beneficiaries of the rights of use are made aware of the possibility that the Commission would adopt implementing acts in accordance with paragraph 2 establishing a minimum duration of such rights or a synchronised expiry or renewal cycle for the Union as a whole. This subparagraph shall not apply to the grant of rights of indefinite duration.

Amendment 497

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Paragraph 2 shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to grant rights of use for and to allow actual use of a harmonised band before the adoption of an implementing act in respect of that band, subject to compliance with the second subparagraph of this paragraph, or in advance of the harmonised date established by an implementing act for that band.	deleted

Amendment 498

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where national competent authorities grant rights of use in a harmonised band before the adoption of an implementing act in respect of that band, they shall define the conditions of such grant, and in particular those relative to duration, in such a way that beneficiaries of the rights of use are made aware of the possibility that the Commission would adopt implementing acts in accordance with paragraph 2 establishing a minimum duration of such rights or a synchronised expiry or renewal cycle for the Union as a whole. This subparagraph shall not apply to the grant of rights of indefinite duration.	deleted

Amendment 499

Giles Chichester Article 12 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	deleted
Where the Commission considers, upon reviewing such detailed plans provided by a Member State, that it is unlikely that the Member State in question will be able to comply with the timetable applicable to it, the Commission may adopt a decision by means of implementing act requiring that Member State to adapt its plans in an appropriate way to ensure such compliance.

Amendment 500

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information if possible within one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

Amendment 501

Werner Langen Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission should adopt implementing acts defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information within one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).

Amendment 502

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	For the harmonised bands for which a common timetable for granting rights of use and allowing actual use has been established in an implementing act adopted in accordance with paragraph 2, national competent authorities shall provide timely and sufficiently detailed information to the Commission on their plans to ensure compliance. The Commission may adopt delegated acts defining the format and procedures for the provision of such information. Those delegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with Article 32.

Amendment 503

Werner Langen Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	In examining Member States’ detailed plans, the Commission should take into account the limited number of experts and advisers available for national regulatory authorities and providers to call on for the rights allocation procedures.

Amendment 504

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 12 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the Commission considers, upon reviewing such detailed plans provided by a Member State, that it is unlikely that the Member State in question will be able to comply with the timetable applicable to it, the Commission may adopt a decision by means of implementing act requiring that Member State to adapt its plans in an appropriate way to ensure such compliance.	deleted

Amendment 505

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 12a
	Joint authorisation process to grant individual rights of use of radio spectrum
	1. Two or several Member States may cooperate with each other, and with the Commission, in meeting their obligations under Article 6 and 7 of the Authorisation Directive with a view to establish a joint authorisation process to grant individual rights of use of radio spectrum, in line, where applicable, with any common timetable established in accordance with Article 12(2). The joint authorisation process shall meet the following criteria:
	(a) the individual national authorisation processes shall be initiated and implemented by the national competent authorities according to a common schedule;
	(b) it shall provide where appropriate for common conditions and procedures for the selection and granting of individual rights among the Member States concerned;
	(c) it shall provide where appropriate for common or comparable conditions to be attached to the individual rights of use among the Member States concerned inter alia allowing operators to be granted consistent spectrum portfolios with regard to the spectrum blocks to be assigned.

Amendment 506

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 12b
	(a) the individual national authorisation processes shall be initiated and implemented by the national competent authorities according to a common schedule;

Amendment 507

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 12c
	(b) it shall provide where appropriate for common conditions and procedures for the selection and granting of individual rights among the Member States concerned;

Amendment 508

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 12 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 12d
	(c) it shall provide where appropriate for common or comparable conditions to be attached to the individual rights of use among the Member States concerned inter alia allowing operators to be granted consistent spectrum portfolios with regard to the spectrum blocks to be assigned.

Amendment 509

Werner Langen Article 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 510

Petra Kammerevert Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where a national competent authority intends to subject the use of radio spectrum to a general authorisation or to grant individual rights of use of radio spectrum, or to amend rights and obligations in relation to the use of radio spectrum in accordance with Article 14 of Directive 2002/20/EC, it shall make accessible its draft measure, together with the reasoning thereof, simultaneously to the Commission and the competent authorities for radio spectrum of the other Member States, upon completion of the public consultation referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2002/21/EC, if applicable, and in any event only at a stage in its preparation which allows it to provide to the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States sufficient and stable information on all relevant matters.	Where a national competent authority intends to subject the use of radio spectrum to a general authorisation or to grant individual rights of use of radio spectrum, or to amend rights and obligations in relation to the use of radio spectrum for wireless broadband services in accordance with Article 14 of Directive 2002/20/EC, it shall make accessible its draft measure, together with the reasoning thereof, simultaneously to the Commission and the competent authorities for radio spectrum of the other Member States, upon completion of the public consultation referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2002/21/EC, if applicable, and in any event only at a stage in its preparation which allows it to provide to the Commission and the competent authorities of the other Member States sufficient and stable information on all relevant matters.

Amendment 511

Catherine Trautmann Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the duration of the rights of use;	(c) the duration of the rights of use, which is no less than 20 years, and in any case which is appropriate to incentivise investment and competition, and discourage the under-use or ‘hoarding’ of spectrum.

Amendment 512

Françoise Castex Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point i
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(i) the reservation of radio spectrum for certain types of operators, or the exclusion of certain types of operators;	(i) the reservation of radio spectrum for certain types of operators, including operators in the not-for-profit sector, or the exclusion of certain types of operators;

Amendment 513

Françoise Castex Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point k
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(k) the possibility to use radio spectrum on a shared basis;	(k) the possibility to use radio spectrum on a shared basis, including on an unlicensed basis;

Amendment 514

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where Member States intend to establish a joint authorisation process according to Article 12a, the national competent authorities concerned shall simultaneously make their draft measures accessible to the Commission and the competent authorities.

Amendment 515

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. National competent authorities and the Commission may make comments to the competent authority concerned within a period of two months. The two-month period shall not be extended.	deleted
When assessing the draft measure in accordance with this Article, the Commission shall have regard in particular to:
(a) the provisions of Directives 2002/20/EC and 2002/21/EC and Decision No. 243/2012/EC;
(b) the regulatory principles set out in Article 9;
(c) the relevant criteria for certain specific conditions set out in Article 10 and the additional provisions set out in Article 11;
(d) any implementing act adopted in accordance with Article 12;
(e) coherence with recent, pending or planned procedures in other Member States, and possible effects on trade between Member States.
If, within this period, the Commission notifies the competent authority that the draft measure would create a barrier to the internal market or that it has serious doubts as to its compatibility with Union law, the draft measure shall not be adopted for an additional period of two months. The Commission shall also inform the competent authorities of the other Member States of the position it has taken on the draft measure in such a case.

Amendment 516

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Within the additional two-month period referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission and the competent authority concerned shall cooperate closely to identify the most appropriate and effective measure in the light of the criteria referred to in paragraph 2, whilst taking due account of the views of market participants and the need to ensure the development of consistent regulatory practice.	deleted

Amendment 517

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. At any stage during the procedure, the competent authority may amend or withdraw its draft measure taking utmost account of the Commission's notification referred to in paragraph 2.	deleted

Amendment 518

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Within the additional two-month period referred in paragraph 2, the Commission may:	deleted
a) present a draft decision to the Communications Committee requiring the competent authority concerned to withdraw the draft measure. The draft decision shall be accompanied by a detailed and objective analysis of why the Commission considers that the draft measure should not be adopted as notified, together where necessary with specific proposals for amending the draft measure; or
b) take a decision changing its position in relation to the draft measure concerned.

Amendment 519

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 13 – paragraph 5 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) present a draft decision to the Communications Committee requiring the competent authority concerned to withdraw the draft measure. The draft decision shall be accompanied by a detailed and objective analysis of why the Commission considers that the draft measure should not be adopted as notified, together where necessary with specific proposals for amending the draft measure; or	deleted

Amendment 520

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. Where the Commission has not presented a draft decision referred to in paragraph 5(a) or takes a decision referred to in paragraph 5(b), the competent authority concerned may adopt the draft measure.	deleted
Where the Commission has presented a draft decision referred to in accordance with paragraph 5(a), the draft measure shall not be adopted by the competent authority for a period not exceeding six months from the notification sent to the competent authority pursuant to paragraph 2.
The Commission may decide to change its position in relation to the draft measure concerned at any stage of the procedure, including after the submission of a draft decision to the Communications Committee.

Amendment 521

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the Commission has not presented a draft decision referred to in paragraph 5(a) or takes a decision referred to in paragraph 5(b), the competent authority concerned may adopt the draft measure.	Where the Commission has not presented a draft decision referred to in paragraph 5, the competent authority concerned may adopt the draft measure.

Amendment 522

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the Commission has presented a draft decision referred to in accordance with paragraph 5(a), the draft measure shall not be adopted by the competent authority for a period not exceeding six months from the notification sent to the competent authority pursuant to paragraph 2.	Where the Commission has presented a draft decision referred to in accordance with paragraph 5, the draft measure shall not be adopted by the competent authority for a period not exceeding two months from the notification sent to the competent authority pursuant to paragraph 2.

Amendment 523

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
7. The Commission shall adopt any decision requiring the competent authority to withdraw its draft measure by means of implementing acts. Those implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	deleted

Amendment 524

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 13 – paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7) The Commission shall adopt any decision requiring the competent authority to withdraw its draft measure by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	deleted

Amendment 525

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
8. Where the Commission has adopted a decision in accordance with paragraph 7, the competent authority shall amend or withdraw the draft measure within six months of the date of notification of the Commission's decision. When the draft measure is amended, the competent authority shall undertake a public consultation where appropriate, and shall make the amended draft measure accessible to the Commission in accordance with paragraph 1.	deleted

Amendment 526

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 13 – paragraph 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) Where the Commission has adopted a decision in accordance with paragraph 7, the competent authority shall amend or withdraw the draft measure within six months of the date of notification of the Commission's decision. When the draft measure is amended, the competent authority shall undertake a public consultation where appropriate, and shall make the amended draft measure accessible to the Commission in accordance with paragraph 1.	deleted

Amendment 527

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
9. The competent authority concerned shall take the utmost account of any comments of competent authorities of the other Member States and the Commission and may, except in cases covered by the third sub-paragraph of paragraph 2, by the second sub-paragraph of paragraph 6 and by paragraph 7, adopt the resulting draft measure and where it does so, shall communicate it to the Commission.	deleted

Amendment 528

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 13 – paragraph 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) The competent authority concerned shall take the utmost account of any comments of competent authorities of the other Member States and the Commission and may, except in cases covered by the third sub-paragraph of paragraph 2, by the second sub-paragraph of paragraph 6 and by paragraph 7, adopt the resulting draft measure and where it does so, shall communicate it to the Commission.	(9) The competent authority concerned shall take the utmost account of any comments of competent authorities of the other Member States and the Commission and may, except in cases covered by the third sub-paragraph of paragraph 2 and by the second sub-paragraph of paragraph 6, adopt the resulting draft measure and where it does so, shall communicate it to the Commission.

Amendment 529

Giles Chichester Article 13 – paragraph 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
10. The competent authority shall inform the Commission of the results of the procedure to which its measure relates once that procedure has been concluded.	deleted

Amendment 530

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 13 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 13a
	Coverage obligation
	The European Union and the Member States shall adopt measures guaranteeing access for European citizens and entities, public or private, to the single market for electronic communications, as regards both quality of service and market prices, wherever they are within the European Union;

Amendment 531

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 14 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National competent authorities shall allow the provision of access through radio local area networks to the network of a provider of electronic communications to the public as well as the use of the harmonised radio spectrum for such provision, subject only to general authorisation.	1. National competent authorities shall allow the provision of access through radio local area networks to the network of a provider of electronic communications to the public as well as the use of the harmonised radio spectrum for such provision, subject to general authorisation, and compliance with rules applied to license exempt spectrum especially regarding interferences and competition rules.

Amendment 532

Françoise Castex Article 14 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. National competent authorities shall not restrict the right of end users to allow reciprocally or more generally access to their radio local area networks by other end users, including on the basis of third-party initiatives which federate and make publicly accessible the radio local area networks of different end users.	4. National competent authorities shall not restrict the right of end users to allow reciprocally or more generally access to their radio local area networks by other end users, including on the basis of third-party initiatives which federate and make publicly accessible the radio local area networks of different end users. They shall also apply the legal framework so as to foster the spread of cellular base stations and wireless mesh networks.

Amendment 533

Giles Chichester Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
National competent authorities shall allow the deployment, connection and operation of unobtrusive small-area wireless access points under the general authorisation regime and shall not unduly restrict that deployment, connection or operation through individual town planning permits or in any other way, whenever such use is in compliance with implementing measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 2.	National competent authorities shall allow the deployment, connection and operation of unobtrusive small-area wireless access points and shall not unduly restrict that deployment, connection or operation through individual town planning permits or in any other way, whenever such use is in compliance with implementing measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 2.

Justification:
In order to safeguard existing rights of use, network integrity and network performance, small cells deployed in licensed spectrum should be operated under the exclusive license.

Amendment 534

Giles Chichester Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This paragraph is without prejudice to the authorisation regime for the radio spectrum employed to operate small-area wireless access points.	(a) the existing rights of use for licensed spectrum, for which the existing leasing and sharing regimes referred to in Art. 10(6) shall apply.
	(b) the authorisation regime for the radio spectrum employed to operate small-area wireless access points.

Amendment 535

Giles Chichester Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission may, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU[30] and with the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC.[31]	For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission may, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The operation of small-area wireless access points in spectrum with dedicated granted usage rights shall be managed by the respective authorised person or undertaking. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU and Directive 1999/5/EC taking into account the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC.[31]
__________________	__________________
[30] Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (20th individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).	[30] Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (20th individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).
[31] Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).	[31] Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).

Amendment 536

Werner Langen Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission may, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU[30] and with the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC[31].	For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission should, within one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. At the same time, small-area wireless access points already covered by existing user rights may continue to be used in accordance with those rights. The Commission shall specify the technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU30 and with the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC31.
__________________	__________________
[30] Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (20th individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).	Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (20th individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).
[31 ]Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).	Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).

Amendment 537

Jolanta Emilia Hibner Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission may, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU[30] and with the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC.[31]	For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall, by means of an implementing act to be adopted if possible within one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU30 and with the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC.31
__________________	__________________
[31] Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).	[31] Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).

Amendment 538

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission may, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU[30] and with the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC.[31]	For the purposes of the uniform implementation of the general authorisation regime for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access points pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission may, by means of an implementing act, specify technical characteristics for the design, deployment and operation of small-area wireless access points, compliance with which shall ensure their unobtrusive character when in use in different local contexts. The Commission shall specify those technical characteristics by reference to the maximum size, power and electromagnetic characteristics, as well as the visual impact, of the deployed small-area wireless access points. Those technical characteristics for use of small-area wireless access points shall at a minimum comply with the requirements of Directive 2013/35/EU[30] and Directive 1999/5/EC, taking into account the thresholds defined in Council Recommendation No 1999/519/EC.[31]
__________________	__________________
[30] Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (20th individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).	[30] Directive 2013/35/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) (20th individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) and repealing Directive 2004/40/EC (OJ L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).
[31] Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).	[31] Recommendation 1999/519/EC of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) (OJ L 1999, 30.7.1999, p. 59).

Amendment 539

Giles Chichester Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The characteristics specified in order for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access point to benefit from paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to the essential requirements of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and the Council relative to the placing on the market of such products.[32]	The technical characteristics specified in order for the deployment, connection and operation of small-area wireless access point to benefit from paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to the essential requirements of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and the Council relative to the placing on the market of such products.[32]
__________________	__________________
[32] Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (OJ L 91, 7.4.1999, p. 10).	[32] Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (OJ L 91, 7.4.1999, p. 10).

Amendment 540

Lambert van Nistelrooij Article 16 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Without prejudice to their obligations under relevant international agreements including ITU Radio Regulations, the national competent authorities shall ensure that the use of radio spectrum is organised on their territory, and shall in particular take all necessary radio spectrum allocation or assignment measures, in order that no other Member State is impeded from allowing on its territory the use of a specific harmonised band in accordance with Union legislation.	1. Without prejudice to their obligations under relevant international agreements including ITU Radio Regulations, the national competent authorities shall ensure, with a view in particular to securing the implementation of Article 12, that the use of radio spectrum is organised on their territory, and shall in particular take all necessary radio spectrum allocation or assignment measures, in order that no other Member State is impeded from allowing on its territory the use of a specific harmonised band for wireless broadband communications in accordance with Union legislation.

Amendment 541

Christian Ehler Article 16 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Member States shall cooperate with each other in the cross-border coordination of the use of radio spectrum in order to ensure compliance with paragraph 1 and to ensure that no Member State is denied equitable access to radio spectrum.	2. In order to guarantee the smooth functioning of the single market and the implementation of the provisions laid down in this Regulation Member States shall cooperate with each other in the cross-border coordination of the use of radio spectrum in order to ensure compliance with paragraph 1 and to ensure that no Member State is denied equitable access to radio spectrum.

Amendment 542

Lambert van Nistelrooij Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Any concerned Member State may invite the Radio Spectrum Policy Group to use its good offices to assist it and any other Member State in complying with this Article.	Any concerned Member State may invite the Radio Spectrum Policy Group to use its good offices to assist it and any other Member State in complying with paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.

Amendment 543

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission may adopt implementing measures to ensure that coordinated outcomes respect the requirement of equitable access to radio spectrum among the relevant Member States, to resolve any practical inconsistencies between distinct coordinated outcomes between different Member States, or to ensure the enforcement of coordinated solutions under Union law. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	deleted

Amendment 544

Jean-Pierre Audy Chapter 3 – section 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 545

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
European virtual broadband access product	High-quality access products for the provision of pan-European business communications services

Amendment 546

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The provision of a virtual broadband access product imposed in accordance with Article 8 and 12 of Directive 2002/19/EC shall be considered as the provision of a European virtual broadband access product if it is supplied in accordance with the minimum parameters listed in one of the Offers set out in Annex I and cumulatively meets the following substantive requirements:	1. Providers of electronic communications services designated in accordance with article 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework directive) as having significant market power in a relevant market relating to the provision of wholesale high-quality electronic communications services shall ensure the publication of a wholesale reference offer containing at least the elements listed in Annex I.

Amendment 547

Gunnar Hökmark Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The provision of a virtual broadband access product imposed in accordance with Article 8 and 12 of Directive 2002/19/EC shall be considered as the provision of a European virtual broadband access product if it is supplied in accordance with the minimum parameters listed in one of the Offers set out in Annex I and cumulatively meets the following substantive requirements:	1. Where undertakings are found to have SMP in a defined relevant market and where access obligations are imposed in accordance with Article 8 and 12 of Directive 2002/19/EC they shall offer wholesale access products meeting at least the specifications set out in Annex 1, without prejudice to the imposition of physical access obligations and cumulatively meets the following substantive requirements:

Amendment 548

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) ability to be offered as a high quality product anywhere in the Union;	deleted

Amendment 549

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) maximum degree of network and service interoperability and non-discriminatory network management between operators consistently with network topology;	deleted

Amendment 550

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) capacity to serve end-users on competitive terms;	deleted

Amendment 551

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) cost-effectiveness, taking into account the capacity to be implemented on existing and newly built networks and to co-exist with other access products that may be provided on the same network infrastructure;	deleted

Amendment 552

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) operational effectiveness, in particular in respect of limiting to the extent possible implementation obstacles and deployment costs for virtual broadband access providers and virtual broadband access seekers;	deleted

Amendment 553

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) respect of the rules on protection of privacy, personal data, security and integrity of networks and transparency in conformity with Union law.	deleted

Amendment 554

Gunnar Hökmark Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Except where objectively justified in light of prevailing competitive conditions in the relevant wholesale market relating to business access, charges for modern interface leased lines as identified in Annex 1 part 3 shall be cost oriented.

Amendment 555

Catherine Trautmann Article 17 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 in order to adapt Annex I in light of market and technological developments, so as to continue to meet the substantive requirements listed in paragraph 1.	2. The Commission shall, following consultation with BEREC, be empowered to adopt implementing acts in order to adapt Annex I in light of market and technological developments.
	Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33.

Amendment 556

Catherine Trautmann Article 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 557

Gunnar Hökmark Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
A national regulatory authority which has previously imposed on an operator in accordance with Articles 8 and 12 of Directive 2002/19/EC any obligation to provide wholesale access to a next-generation network shall assess whether it would be appropriate and proportionate to impose instead an obligation to supply a European virtual broadband access product which provides at least equivalent functionalities to the currently imposed wholesale access product.	A national regulatory authority which has previously imposed on an operator in accordance with Articles 8 and 12 of Directive 2002/19/EC any obligation to provide wholesale access to a next-generation network shall assess whether it would be appropriate and proportionate to impose or in addition to an obligation to supply a European virtual broadband access product which provides at least equivalent functionalities to the currently imposed wholesale access product.

Amendment 558

Gunnar Hökmark Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
When assessing pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2 or 3 whether to impose a European virtual broadband access product instead of any other possible wholesale access product, the national regulatory authority shall have regard to the interest in convergent regulatory conditions throughout the Union for wholesale access remedies, the current and prospective state of infrastructure-based competition and the evolution of market conditions towards provision of competing next-generation networks, to investments made respectively by the operator designated as having significant market power and by access-seekers, and to the amortisation period for such investments.	When assessing pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2 or 3 whether to impose a European virtual broadband access product instead of any other possible wholesale access product, the national regulatory authority shall have regard to the interest in convergent regulatory conditions throughout the Union for wholesale access remedies, the current and prospective state of infrastructure-based competition and the evolution of market conditions towards provision of competing next-generation networks, to investments made respectively by the operator designated as having significant market power and by access-seekers, and to the amortisation period for such investments. However, European virtual broadband access products shall not be given priority when physical unbundled access is available.

Amendment 559

Catherine Trautmann Article 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 560

Ivo Belet Article 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 561

Amelia Andersdotter Article 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 562

Marietje Schaake Article 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 563

Petra Kammerevert Article 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 564

Catherine Trautmann Article 20 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Measures relating to European access products	Measures relating to high-quality access products for the provision of pan-European business communications services

Amendment 565

Catherine Trautmann Article 20 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall adopt by 1 January 2016 implementing acts laying down uniform technical and methodological rules for the implementation of a European virtual broadband access product within the meaning of Article 17 and of Annex I, point 1, in accordance with the criteria and parameters specified therein and in order to ensure the equivalence of the functionality of such a virtual wholesale access product to next-generation networks with that of a physical unbundled access product. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	1. The Commission shall adopt by 1 January 2016 implementing acts laying down uniform principles for the definition and analysis of wholesale markets for the provision of high-quality electronic communications in accordance with article 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC (Framework directive), as well as consistent specifications for remedies meeting business needs in such markets in accordance with Annex I. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

Amendment 566

Catherine Trautmann Article 20 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down uniform technical and methodological rules for the implementation of one or more of the European access products within the meaning of Articles 17 and 19 and of Annex I, points 2 and 3, and Annex II, in accordance with the respective criteria and parameters specified therein. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	deleted

Amendment 567

Marietje Schaake Article 20 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down uniform technical and methodological rules for the implementation of one or more of the European access products within the meaning of Articles 17 and 19 and of Annex I, points 2 and 3, and Annex II, in accordance with the respective criteria and parameters specified therein. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).	2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down uniform technical and methodological rules for the implementation of one or more of the European access products within the meaning of Articles 17 and of Annex I, points 2 and 3, in accordance with the respective criteria and parameters specified therein. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

Amendment 568

Amelia Andersdotter Chapter 4 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Harmonised rights of end-users	Users' rights to open internet access

Amendment 569

Christian Ehler Article 21 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The freedom of end-users to use public electronic communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services provided by an undertaking established in another Member State shall not be restricted by public authorities.	1. Digital freedoms and cross-border trade shall go hand in hand in order to create and optimise business opportunities for European companies and consumer protection in the global digital economy. The freedom of end-users to use public electronic communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services provided by an undertaking established in another Member State shall not be restricted by public authorities.

Justification:
In line with the Transatlantic Dialogue (TLD) Non-Paper ‘Cyber security and Internet issues - Establishing framework for Transatlantic action’.

Amendment 570

Petra Kammerevert Article 21 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) The freedom of end-users to use public electronic communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services provided by an undertaking established in another Member State shall not be restricted by public authorities.	(1) The right of end-users to use public electronic communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services provided by an undertaking established in another Member State shall not be restricted by public authorities.

Amendment 571

Christian Ehler Article 21 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply any discriminatory requirements or conditions of access or use to end-users based on the end-user's nationality or place of residence unless such differences are objectively justified.	2. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply any discriminatory requirements or conditions of access or use to end-users based on the end-user's nationality or place of residence unless such differences are objectively justified. Unrestricted access to an open internet and the free flow of information and related services shall be ensured, in accordance with existing legislation.

Amendment 572

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 21 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply any discriminatory requirements or conditions of access or use to end-users based on the end-user's nationality or place of residence unless such differences are objectively justified.	2. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply any discriminatory requirements or conditions of access or use to end-users based on the end-user's nationality or Member State of residence unless such differences are objectively justified.

Amendment 573

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 21 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply tariffs for intra-Union communications terminating in another Member State which are higher, unless objectively justified:	deleted
(a) as regards fixed communications, than tariffs for domestic long-distance communications;
(b) as regards mobile communications, than the euro-tariffs for regulated voice and SMS roaming communications, respectively, established in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012.

Amendment 574

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 21 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply tariffs for intra-Union communications terminating in another Member State which are higher, unless objectively justified:	deleted
(a) as regards fixed communications, than tariffs for domestic long-distance communications;
(b) as regards mobile communications, than the euro-tariffs for regulated voice and SMS roaming communications, respectively, established in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012.

Justification:
The market for international calls has been deregulated since 2007 as, already back then, it had been considered competitive. Ever since the market has become even more competitive with minutes bundles, flat rates and MVNOs providing alternative offers complemented by voice over IP services, such as Skype, making even calls worldwide for free possible. There appears therefore little reason to regulate this market.

Amendment 575

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 21 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply tariffs for intra-Union communications terminating in another Member State which are higher, unless objectively justified:	3. From 1 of July 2016, providers of electronic communications to the public shall not apply tariffs for intra-Union communications terminating in another Member State which are higher, unless objectively justified:

Amendment 576

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 21 – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) as regards mobile communications, than the euro-tariffs for regulated voice and SMS roaming communications, respectively, established in Regulation (EC) No 531/2012.	(b) as regards mobile communications, than the mobile communications services at domestic level.

Amendment 577

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 21 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(3a) Billing shall be done both in the currency of the end-user's Member State and in euro, in order to provide transparency and make it easier to compare tariffs.

Amendment 578

Lambert van Nistelrooij Article 21 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 21a
	By December 31 2014 BEREC shall adopt a single value for each of fixed and mobile termination rates calculated in accordance with Recommendation C(2009) 3359 final of 7.5.2009 on the Regulatory Treatment of Fixed and Mobile Termination Rates in the EU.
	By 30 June 2015 all National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) shall ensure that operators designated by them as having significant market power on the markets for wholesale voice call termination on individual public telephone networks as a result of a market analysis carried out in accordance with Directive 2009/140/EC shall levy the termination rates determined by BEREC in this paragraph.

Amendment 579

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Freedom to provide and avail of open internet access, and reasonable traffic management	Open internet access, specialised services and reasonable, justified traffic management

Amendment 580

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 23 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Freedom to provide and avail of open internet access, and reasonable traffic management	Open internet access, specialised services, and reasonable traffic management

Amendment 581

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice, irrespective of their origin or destination, via their internet access service.
	Internet access service providers shall not restrict or prevent the use by end-users of any terminal equipment to access and distribute information and content via their internet access service. This is without prejudice to the rights of Member States to grant individual rights of use under Article 5 of Directive 2002/20/EC.
	Providers of electronic communications to the public shall ensure that end-users are able to run any application utilising the electronic communication function of the internet without any form of restriction on the content exchanged, except for the purposes of reasonable traffic management measures or to implement a court order.

Amendment 582

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	(1) Open internet access shall be fully guaranteed in accordance with Article 2(14), so as to enable end-users to access and distribute any information and content they choose, run applications and use services and terminal devices of their choice via their open internet access service, irrespective of the source or destination of such information, content, applications or services.
	Access network operators shall be subject to a general forwarding obligation in accordance with the best-effort principle.

Amendment 583

Françoise Castex Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	End-users have the right to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services and devices of their choice via their internet access service.
	In order to guarantee a genuine users' freedom of choice, internet service providers shall not discriminate, restrict or interfere with the transmission of Internet traffic.

Amendment 584

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	Users shall have the right to access and distribute information and content, run and provide applications and services and use devices of their choice via an internet access.
	Internet service providers shall not discriminate, restrict or interfere with the transmission of Internet traffic.

Amendment 585

<MB>Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog</MB> Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

|- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Text proposed by the Commission |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Amendment |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service. |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services and devices of their choice, irrespective of their origin or destination, via their internet access service. |}

Amendment 586

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	End-users shall be free, using devices of their choice, to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice, irrespective of their origin or destination, via their internet access service.

Amendment 587

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	End-users have the right to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services or devices of their choice via their internet access service, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

Amendment 588

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice via their internet access service.	End-users shall be free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services and devices of their choice via their internet access service.

Amendment 589

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	deleted

Justification:
The added value of this provision is unclear. Naturally, users are free to enter into contracts. Furthermore, whether these contracts provide for data volumes, speeds or e.g. service quality characteristics is entirely a question of offer and demand and requires no regulation.

Amendment 590

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services. Providers of Internet access services shall advertise with the minimum guaranteed data volume and speed they can provide for, not the maximum speed.

Amendment 591

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services.

Amendment 592

Teresa Riera Madurell Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services. Users shall always be informed in advance of these agreements and shall give their explicit consent to their conclusion. End-users shall be free in accordance with any such agreements to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

Amendment 593

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	With due account to the principle of net neutrality, end-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services, provided they freely and explicitly give their informed consent, and to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

Amendment 594

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	Provided that they freely give their explicit, specific and informed consent, end-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

Amendment 595

Françoise Castex Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	Provided that they freely give their explicit, specific and informed consent, end-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

Amendment 596

Angelika Niebler Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds, as well as general performance characteristics, with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

Amendment 597

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.	End-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes, to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services. The tariffs may not exceed the eurotariffs.

Amendment 598

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Where agreements on data volumes and speeds are entered into, specific content, services or applications may not be omitted from the calculation of volume use or exempted from ‘throttling’ when the agreed data volume limit is reached.

Amendment 599

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1a) It shall not be permissible for providers to impose any form of restriction on access to communication networks, content, applications or services on the basis of end-users’ using terminal equipment not supplied or recommended by the provider.

Amendment 600

Seán Kelly Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	Providers of electronic communication services or providers of content, applications and services shall be allowed to offer specialised services with an enhanced quality of service in addition to internet access services, provided that such offers are not detrimental to internet access services or their performance, affordability or quality.
	Take-up by end-users and application and commercial service providers of specialised services should thus be on a voluntary and non-discriminatory basis.

Justification:
Having regard to BEREC’s conclusion that user control should prevail wherever possible, it is important that the Regulation clarifies that end-users and application and commercial service providers are not faced with suboptimal conditions and quality of internet access such that they are obliged to agree a contract for specialised services. Take-up of specialised services should thus be absolutely voluntary.

Amendment 601

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	Providers of electronic communications to the public or providers of content, applications and services may provide specialised services, via a closed, electronic communications network, to a limited user group, access to which is controlled. Specialised services may not be marketed or used as substitutes for the internet and may not be identical to content, applications or services available on the open internet.

Amendment 602

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	Providers of electronic communications to the public and providers of content, applications and services shall be free to provide to end-user specialised services with an enhanced quality of service, the provision of which shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services. National regulatory authorities shall ensure that end-users are free to access these specialised services.

Justification:
Redrafting to put the elements into logical order, i.e. first providers are free to offer specialised services and, if they do so, then users should be free to benefit from these. Again, what is important is not the fact that users are free to use these services - since they would be even without this provision. Rather it is important to stress that these rights should be enforced by regulatory authorities.

Amendment 603

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service. Where such agreements are concluded with the provider of internet access services, that provider shall ensure that the enhanced quality of service is not to the detriment of the performance, affordability or quality of internet access services, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

Amendment 604

<MB>Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog</MB> Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

|- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Text proposed by the Commission |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Amendment |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service. |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services operated in closed electronic networks with an enhanced quality of service. |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Providers of electronic communications to the end-user shall not discriminate against contents, services or applications from other sources that are competing with their own specialised services. |}

Amendment 605

Patrizia Toia Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service, provided that this does not undermine the overall quality of internet access, unless in emergency conditions or due to a genuine substantiated need.

Amendment 606

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	End-users shall also be free to access specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.

Amendment 607

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	Users shall also have the right to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.

Amendment 608

Angelika Niebler Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service.	End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services for closed user groups with an enhanced quality of service.

Amendment 609

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	deleted

Justification:
As with the preceding provisions, the added value of the first sentence is unclear as providers are anyway free to agree amongst each other on specialised services. The important element of non-impairment of general internet access services was integrated in the amendment to the preceding paragraph.

Amendment 610

Catherine Trautmann Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. Providers of electronic communications shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the effect of the provision of specialised services through their network is always transparent and does not impair the general quality of internet access services in terms of performance, affordability and availability. In so doing, they should maintain internet access services of sufficient capacity and quality to accommodate the advertised internet speeds offered to their end users without congestion.
	In order for national regulatory authorities to be able to assess such potential impairment, providers of electronic communications to the public shall make available, upon request, precise information explaining how capacities are assigned to the two types of services, and if necessary provide justifications about the measures put in place to prevent impairment of internet access services by the specialised services.

Amendment 611

Angelika Niebler Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	Where such agreements with internet access providers are entered into, the provider shall ensure that the higher quality of service does not impair the general quality of internet access services. Providers of specialised services who are also network operators or providers of internet access services may not discriminate against other providers who are reliant on the network operator’s forwarding services, and they shall be required to charge for forwarding in a transparent manner and at fair market prices.

Amendment 612

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	The provision of specialised services shall not impair the quality of internet access services. Neither shall these services impair existing, generally recognised technical standards and their development. Specialised services shall thus be permissible only if there is a demonstrable technical and specific need for them, beyond economic self-interest, as a means of providing genuinely time-critical applications, or applications with a particular security requirement, at a particular level of quality.

Amendment 613

Sabine Verheyen Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	Providers of electronic communication services or providers of content, applications and services may offer specialised services to end users provided they are offered in addition to an open internet access service at a level of quality that reflects the technical progress and provided that they do not impair the general performance, affordability, or quality of open internet access services. Specialised services shall only be offered if the network capacity is sufficient to provide such services in addition to the open internet access. Take-up by end-users or by content and application providers of commercial offers to support managed services should be on a voluntary and non-discriminatory basis.

Amendment 614

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	Providers of electronic communication services or providers of content, applications and services shall be allowed to offer specialised services provided that such offers are in addition to internet access services and are not to the material detriment of their affordability or quality.

Amendment 615

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic within closed electronic communications networks as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity, which are not functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service. The provision of specialised services shall not impair the quality of internet access services. Where network capacity is shared between internet access services and specialised services, the provider of these services shall publish clear and unambiguous criteria based on which network capacity is shared.

Amendment 616

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services. Take-up by end-users or by providers of content, applications and services of commercial offers for specialised services should be on a voluntary and non-discriminatory basis.

Amendment 617

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public may enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair the quality of internet access services.

Amendment 618

Ivo Belet Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair the general quality of internet access services.

Amendment 619

Teresa Riera Madurell Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair the quality of internet access services.

Amendment 620

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair in a recurring or continuous manner the general quality of internet access services.	In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity. The provision of specialised services shall not impair the quality of internet access services.

Amendment 621

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Access network providers who simultaneously offer or market specialised services shall be subject to the same provision obligation as an open internet access service, in accordance with Article 2(14). They may not discriminate against other content providers who are reliant on the network operator’s forwarding services, and they shall be required to charge for forwarding in a transparent manner and at fair market prices.

Amendment 622

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	For national authorities to be able to assess such potential material detriment, providers of electronic communications services or providers of content, applications and services shall transmit to the national authorities, upon request, precise information regarding the capacities assigned to the two types of services.

Amendment 623

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Vertically integrated providers of electronic communications to the public shall not discriminate in any way against traffic from providers of content, applications or services offering content, services or applications competing with their own services or with services provided under exclusive arrangements;

Amendment 624

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. This Article is without prejudice to Union or national legislation related to the lawfulness of the information, content, application or services transmitted.	deleted

Amendment 625

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 23 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. This Article is without prejudice to Union or national legislation related to the lawfulness of the information, content, application or services transmitted.	deleted

Justification:
Together with the implementation of a legislative provision as a ground for traffic management this would give green light to discriminating against, degrading or blocking any content deemed unlawful under the EU or national legislation. Such measures could disproportionately affect end-users' rights to confidentiality of communications, privacy and data protection.

Amendment 626

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) This Article is without prejudice to Union or national legislation related to the lawfulness of the information, content, application or services transmitted.	deleted

Amendment 627

Sabine Verheyen Article 23 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The exercise of the freedoms provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be facilitated by the provision of complete information in accordance with Article 25(1), Article 26 (2), and Article 27 (1) and (2).	4. End-users as well as content, application, and service providers, including the media and cultural industries and governments at all levels, shall be provided with complete information in accordance with Article 20 (2), Article 21 (3) and Article 21a of Directive 2002/22/EC, including information on any reasonable traffic management measures applied that might affect access to and distribution of information, content, applications and services as specified in paragraphs 1 and 2.

Amendment 628

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) The exercise of the freedoms provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be facilitated by the provision of complete information in accordance with Article 25(1), Article 26 (2), and Article 27 (1) and (2).	(4) The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be facilitated by the provision of complete information in accordance with Article 25(1), Article 26 (2), and Article 27 (1) and (2).

Amendment 629

Edit Herczog Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	5. Providers of Internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by discriminating against, restricting, or otherwise interfering with the transmission of Internet traffic except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures or to implement a court order. Traffic management measures shall be deemed reasonable when they are deployed to more efficiently manage traffic on the network in order to preserve the integrity and security of the network, and more efficiently manage traffic on the network in demonstrated punctual cases of acute congestion, provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally. These measures should be shown to comply with the general criteria of relevance, proportionality, efficiency, non-discrimination between parties and transparency, and in accordance with existing laws, including inter alia, privacy and data protection.
	Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this article.

Justification:
It is important to capture the various ways in which the access and use of Internet content, applications and services is being discriminated against (and is at risk of being discriminated against), beyond mere blocking and degradation, in order to address undue preference for an ISP’s own or affiliated Internet-based content, applications and services. Concerning reasonable traffic management, if itemising every possible case would risk being incomplete, cumbersome and not future-proof, there remains a need for all involved to have a very clear scope of what is deemed to be ‘reasonable’ traffic management. The amendment suggested draws on regulatory best practice, notably wording from French NRA ARCEP, to provide this scope. Reference to the need for traffic management to respect freedoms and obligations under privacy and data protection legislation are also highlighted, in line with the several opinions of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) and others on this subject.

Amendment 630

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	(5) Providers of internet access services shall not restrict the rights provided for in paragraph 1 by:
	(a) deleting, blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications, services or terminal devices, or specific classes thereof,
	(b) prioritising specific content, applications, services or terminal devices, or specific classes thereof, or
	(c) concluding special pricing agreements with the end-user which make accessing particular content, applications, services or terminal devices or specific classes thereof seem less economically attractive,
	except in cases where it is necessary to apply justified and reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:

Amendment 631

Angelika Niebler Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by limiting or otherwise impairing the flow of internet traffic, e.g. by blocking, slowing down or degrading it or by means of discrimination, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures should not be applied in a manner directed against particular providers’ content or applications or which downgrades particular providers. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate and shall include inter alia the processing of data in order to:

Amendment 632

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against, restricting specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures or to implement a court order. Traffic management measures shall be considered reasonable when they are deployed to more efficiently manage traffic on the network in order to preserve the integrity and security of the network, and more efficiently manage traffic on the network in demonstrated punctual cases of acute congestion, provided equivalent types of traffic are treated equally. These measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, and proportionate.

Amendment 633

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Providers of internet access services shall treat all internet traffic in accordance with the principle of net neutrality, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate, subject to clear, comprehensible and accessible redress mechanisms and necessary to:

Amendment 634

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures.
	These measures should be shown to comply with the general criteria of relevance, proportionality, efficiency, non-discrimination between parties and transparency, and in accordance with existing laws, including inter alia, privacy and data protection.
	Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:

Amendment 635

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Providers of internet access services shall not block, slow down or discriminate against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:

Amendment 636

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	5. Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Furthermore, traffic management measures shall not be applied in such a way as to discriminate against services competing with those offered by the provider of internet access.
	Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate

Amendment 637

Gunnar Hökmark Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Traffic management measures shall not be applied in such a way as to discriminate against services competing with those offered by the provider of internet access. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:

Amendment 638

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Providers of internet access services shall not restrict the right provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading, altering or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in certain special cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, and strictly proportionate and necessary to:

Amendment 639

Françoise Castex Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Providers of internet access services shall not restrict the right provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:

Amendment 640

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and efficient. Reasonable traffic management includes the processing of data to:

Amendment 641

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:	Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes, speeds or general quality characteristics for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary, in particular, to:

Justification:
Simpler drafting and opening of the list of reasons for traffic management. It is not predictable whether there might be a need for traffic management in other situations in future. Since several layers of safeguards have been built in in the Regulation with regards to traffic management, making the list non-exhaustive does not appear to allow for abuses.

Amendment 642

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	deleted

Amendment 643

Edit Herczog Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	deleted

Amendment 644

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	deleted

Amendment 645

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	deleted

Justification:
Deletion due to new Article 23 - paragraph 5 - subparagraph 1 - introductory part.

Amendment 646

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	(a) implement a court order;

Justification:
A traffic management measure cannot result in the involvement of the liability of an electronic communication provider who is not qualified or entitled either to implement a legislative provision nor prevent or impede a serious crime. This shall be performed by a judge in order to guarantee the rule of law.

Amendment 647

Françoise Castex Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	(a) implement a court order;

Amendment 648

Marietje Schaake Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order;

Amendment 649

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order, or prevent or impede serious crimes;	(a) implement a legislative provision or a court order;

Justification:
It should be underlined that for any such measures a legal basis or a court order is always required.

Amendment 650

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;	deleted

Amendment 651

Edit Herczog Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;	deleted

Amendment 652

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;	deleted

Justification:
Deletion due to new Article 23 - paragraph 5 - subparagraph 1 - introductory part.

Amendment 653

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;	(b) preserve the integrity and security of the European electronic communication provider's network, services provided via this network, and the end-users' terminals;

Amendment 654

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users’ terminals;	(b) preserve the integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and the end-users’ terminals, or

Amendment 655

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	deleted

Amendment 656

Edit Herczog Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	deleted

Amendment 657

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	deleted

Amendment 658

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	deleted

Amendment 659

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	deleted

Justification:
Deletion due to new Article 23 - paragraph 5 - subparagraph 1 - introductory part.

Amendment 660

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users;

Amendment 661

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users;

Justification:
It is general practice that providers filter spam. Requiring explicit agreement from individual users is not possible in practice.

Amendment 662

Françoise Castex Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications for direct marketing purposes to end-users who have freely given their prior explicit and informed consent to such restrictive measures;

Amendment 663

Catherine Trautmann Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) prevent the transmission of unsolicited communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;	(c) prevent the transmission of specific communications to end-users who have given their prior consent to such restrictive measures;

Amendment 664

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	deleted

Amendment 665

Edit Herczog Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	deleted

Amendment 666

Sabine Verheyen, Ivo Belet Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	deleted

Justification:
Deletion due to new Article 23 - paragraph 5 - subparagraph 1 - introductory part.

Amendment 667

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) mitigate the effects of temporary and exceptional network congestion, primarily by means of application-agnostic measures or, when these measures do not prove efficient, by mean of application-specific measures, provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Justification:
In order to preserve net neutrality, the internet service provider shall primarily solve the congestion by ensuring that no specific internet applications, content or service will be subject to discrimination.

Amendment 668

Catherine Trautmann Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) mitigate the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion, primarily by means of application-agnostic measures or, when these measures do not prove efficient, by means of application-specific measures, provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Amendment 669

Françoise Castex Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) mitigate the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion, primarily by means of application-agnostic measures or, when these measures do not prove efficient, by mean of application-specific measures, provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Amendment 670

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) (b) minimise the effects of temporary and exceptional network congestion provided that, in so doing, all content, applications and services are treated in accordance with the best-effort principle.

Amendment 671

Angelika Niebler Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) minimise or prevent the effects of network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Amendment 672

Teresa Riera Madurell Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally, avoiding, wherever possible, measures which discriminate between applications, content, services or devices.

Amendment 673

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) prevent network congestion and minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Justification:
Following the original wording, paradoxically, providers could only mitigate already existing congestion but not take measures to prevent them in the first place. Pro-active and preventing measures should not be excluded.

Amendment 674

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that all traffic are treated equally.

Amendment 675

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.	(d) minimise the effects of any recorded temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

Amendment 676

Edit Herczog Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	deleted

Amendment 677

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	deleted

Amendment 678

Catherine Trautmann, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	National Regulatory Authorities shall monitor whether the practices in their market respect these criteria, in particular whether reasonable traffic management measures only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph. To that purpose, they shall in particular:
	(a) be mandated to regularly monitor and report on Internet traffic management practices and usage polices, in order to ensure network neutrality, evaluate the potential impact of the aforementioned practices and policies on fundamental rights, ensure the provision of a sufficient quality of service and the allocation of a satisfactory level of network capacity to the Internet. Reporting should be done in an open and transparent way and reports shall be made freely available to the public;
	(b) put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures aimed at addressing network neutrality complaints. To this end, all Internet users shall be entitled to make use of such complaint procedures in front of the relevant authority;
	(c) respond to the complaints within a reasonable time and be able to use necessary measures in order to sanction the breach of the network neutrality principle.
	These authorities must have the necessary resources to undertake the aforementioned duties in a timely and effective manner. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity, competition and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the public, the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.
	The Commission shall, after consulting stakeholders and in cooperation with BEREC, lay down guidelines further defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national regulatory authorities under this Article.

Amendment 679

Giles Chichester Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.
	By 1st January 2015, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable traffic management measures, on the basis of this Article.

Justification:
The definition of what constitutes reasonable or acceptable/necessary traffic management will change over time, as the technology continues to develop rapidly and network capacity increases. It is therefore preferable for guidance on what constitutes ‘reasonable traffic management’ to be produced (and kept up to date) by those closest to the markets i.e. regulators acting collectively through BEREC.

Amendment 680

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph. Therefore all techniques to inspect or analyse data shall be in accordance with privacy and data protection legislation. By default, such techniques should only examine header information.

Amendment 681

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph.	Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph. The processing of data shall not reveal any information concerning the content of the communication the end users access.

Justification:
Traffic management measures shall not be based on intrusive communications inspection technique as Deep Packet Inspection (DPI). This provision is extremely necessary to protect freedoms of the European citizens regarding the respect for their private and family life and the protection of personal data, in accordance to article 7 and 8 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Amendment 682

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	No packet inspection going beyond checking of the headers of the data packets shall take place.

Amendment 683

Petra Kammerevert Article 23 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(5a) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 to lay down the technical criteria in accordance with Article 23(5) for determining with maximum accuracy whether exceptional circumstances, as described therein, apply. The requirements to be met in order for exceptional circumstances to apply should be as stringent as possible.

Amendment 684

Amelia Andersdotter Article 23 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. The prices of internet access services from providers of electronic communications to the public shall not depend on the internet content, applications and services used or offered through the same internet access services

Justification:
This is a safeguard against data cap leverage scenario where ISP has very low data caps on public internet access but offers unlimited data for specialised services. This amendment is inspired by the Dutch net neutrality law.

Amendment 685

Sabine Verheyen, Doris Pack, Ivo Belet Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2) and the continued availability of open internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also ensure that the effects of specialised services do not impair cultural diversity, media pluralism and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall also closely monitor and ensure the application of reasonable traffic management measures in compliance with Article 23 (5) taking the utmost account of the BEREC guidelines specified in paragraph 2 of this Article and in paragraph 3a of Article 21(3a) of the Directive 2002/22/EC. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be subject to periodic review to reflect advances in technology. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 686

Françoise Castex Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. National regulatory authorities shall closely ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. To that purpose, the competent national regulatory authority shall:
	(a) be mandated to regularly monitor and report on Internet traffic management practices and usage polices, in order to ensure network neutrality, evaluate the potential impact of the aforementioned practices and policies on fundamental rights, ensure the provision of a sufficient quality of service and the allocation of a satisfactory level of network capacity to the Internet. Reporting should be done in an open and transparent fashion and reports shall be made freely available to the public;
	(b) put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures aimed at addressing network neutrality complaints. To this end, all Internet users shall be entitled to make use of such complaint procedures in front of the relevant authority;
	(c) respond to the complaints within a reasonable time and be able to use necessary measures in order to sanction the breach of the network neutrality principle.
	This authority must have the necessary resources to undertake the aforementioned duties in a timely and effective manner.
	They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity, competition and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the public, the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 687

Amelia Andersdotter Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. National regulatory authorities shall closely ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings. To that purpose, the competent national regulatory authority shall:
	(a) be mandated to regularly monitor and report on Internet traffic management practices and usage polices, in order to ensure network neutrality, evaluate the potential impact of the aforementioned practices and policies on fundamental rights, ensure the provision of a sufficient quality of service and the allocation of a satisfactory level of network capacity to the Internet. Reporting should be done in an open and transparent fashion and reports shall be made freely available to the public;
	(b) put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures aimed at addressing network neutrality complaints. To this end, all Internet users shall be entitled to make use of such complaint procedures in front of the relevant authority;
	(c) respond to the complaints within a reasonable time and be able to use necessary measures in order to sanction the breach of the network neutrality principle.
	This authority must have the necessary resources to undertake the aforementioned duties in a timely and effective manner.
	They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity, competition and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the public, the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Justification:
National Regulatory Authorities’ role must be better defined to guarantee the enforcement mechanism and properly enforce the net neutrality principle, guarantee the freedom of expression and information of users, as well as competition and innovation in the digital economy. The European data protection supervisor should be able to monitor on how specialised services can impact the data protection of European citizens.

Amendment 688

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. The European Commission and national regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued broad availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. Actual Internet speeds and quality of service for individual applications, for types of applications as well as for specialised services should be monitored and tested on an ongoing basis and the findings of this monitoring should be made publicly available.
	The European Commission and national regulatory authorities shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 689

Seán Kelly Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. The European Commission and National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. Real levels of quality of service should be monitored on an ongoing basis, including, inter alia, the testing internet speeds and quality of service for individual applications or for categories of applications, as necessary, as well as for specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Justification:
It is important to have a continuous monitoring of the quality of service of the internet, including the regular assessment of internet speeds so that the vast majority of users can benefit from an ever improving internet and that such innovations as are likely to happen in the coming years are not siphoned off into specialised or premium services.

Amendment 690

Giles Chichester Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. In exercising their powers under Article 30a with respect to Article 23, national regulatory authorities shall closely monitor the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology. National regulatory authorities shall publish reports on a regular basis regarding their monitoring and findings, and provide those reports to the Commission and BEREC.

Justification:
Cultural diversity is not a legal concept, nor is it objectively measurable in a consistent way across Member States, and it is not matched to any power that NRAs could rely on to address any concerns they might identify.

Amendment 691

Petra Kammerevert Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	(1) National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the rights provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of open internet access services, within the meaning of Article 2(2)(14), that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on freedom of opinion and information, linguistic and cultural diversity, media freedom and diversity, and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 692

Angelika Niebler Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	(1) National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on linguistic and cultural diversity, freedom of opinion and information, media pluralism and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 693

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity, competition and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall publish reports regarding their monitoring and findings on an annual basis and submit them to the Commission and BEREC.

Justification:
It should be monitored how specialised services increase competition on the market. Those reports should be accessible to the public.

Amendment 694

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services in accordance with the principle of net neutrality and at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 695

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 24 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.	1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural and linguistic diversity, media freedom and plurality and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

Amendment 696

Petra Kammerevert Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1a) Providers of public electronic communications services shall be obliged to document, and to report without delay to the competent national regulatory authority, all occurrences of the exceptional circumstances provided for in Article 23(5) and all traffic management measures taken in each case.

Amendment 697

Marietje Schaake, Nadja Hirsch Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. National regulatory authorities shall establish clear and comprehensible notification and redress mechanisms for end-users subjected to discrimination, restriction, interference, blocking or throttling of online content, services or applications.

Amendment 698

Petra Kammerevert Article 24 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) In order to prevent the general impairment of quality of service for internet access services or to safeguard the ability of end-users to access and distribute content or information or to run applications and services of their choice, national regulatory authorities shall have the power to impose minimum quality of service requirements on providers of electronic communications to the public.	deleted
National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority of a shortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission’s comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.

Amendment 699

Sabine Verheyen Article 24 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority of a shortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission's comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.	National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission's comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC. BEREC shall lay down and develop general guidelines for the application of reasonable traffic management in close cooperation with the Commission and all stakeholders on the basis of Article 23 and this Article.

Amendment 700

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 24 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority of a shortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission's comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.	National regulatory authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, consult with providers of electronic communications to the public before providing the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information, make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal market. The envisaged requirements shall not be adopted during a period of two months from the receipt of complete information by the Commission unless otherwise agreed between the Commission and the national regulatory authority, or the Commission has informed the national regulatory authority of a shortened examination period, or the Commission has made comments or recommendations. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the Commission's comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted requirements to the Commission and BEREC.

Amendment 701

Sabine Verheyen Article 24 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	National regulatory authorities shall put in place appropriate complaint procedures for issues regarding the performance of internet access service for end-users and providers of content, applications and services.

Amendment 702

Sabine Verheyen Article 24 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	deleted

Amendment 703

Giles Chichester Article 24 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	3. BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in cooperation with the Commission, lay down guidelines defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).

Amendment 704

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 24 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	(3) The Commission may adopt delegated acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with Article 32.

Amendment 705

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 24 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission may adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	3. The Commission shall, after consulting BEREC, adopt implementing acts defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).

Justification:
Uniform application needed.

Amendment 706

Patrizia Toia Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Providers of electronic communications to the public shall, save for offers which are individually negotiated, publish transparent, comparable, adequate and up-to-date information on:	Providers of electronic communications to the public shall, save for offers which are individually negotiated, publish transparent, comparable, comprehensible, adequate and up-to-date information on:

Amendment 707

Sabine Verheyen Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the quality of their services, in accordance with implementing acts provided for in paragraph 2;	(d) the quality of their services;

Amendment 708

Jean-Pierre Audy <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point i</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(i) actually available data speed for download and upload in the end-user’s Member State of residence, including at peak-hours;	(i) actually available data speed for download and upload in the end-user's Member State of residence, including at peak-hours; and the means made available to the end-user to check, at any time, the actual data speed for download and upload, together with a breakdown of the data speed actually available during the period covered by the contract;

Amendment 709

Petra Kammerevert <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point i</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(i) actually available data speed for download and upload in the end-user's Member State of residence, including at peak-hours;	(i) actually available data speed for download and upload in the end-user's Member State of residence, including at peak-hours, and the tools available at any time for end-users to monitor for themselves in real time and using generally recognised procedures the upload and download speeds available to them for the duration of the contract;

Amendment 710

Sabine Verheyen <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point i</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(i) actually available data speed for download and upload in the end-user's Member State of residence, including at peak-hours;	(i) actually available data speed for download and upload in the end-user's Member State of residence, including minimum guaranteed data speed for download and upload at peak-hours;

Amendment 711

Petra Kammerevert <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point iv</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(iv) information on any procedures put in place by the provider to measure and shape traffic so as to avoid congestion of a network, and on how those procedures could affect service quality and the protection of personal data;	(iv) information on any procedures put in place by the provider to measure and shape traffic so as to avoid congestion of a network, and on how those procedures could affect service quality and the protection of personal data, together with all measures under Article 23(5); the tools available at any time for end-users, using generally recognised and comprehensible procedures, to access information regarding the traffic monitoring and management applications and measures referred to in Article 23(5) shall also be indicated;

Amendment 712

Jean-Pierre Audy <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point iv</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(iv) information on any procedures put in place by the provider to measure and shape traffic so as to avoid congestion of a network, and on how those procedures could affect service quality and the protection of personal data;	(iv) information on any procedures put in place by the provider to measure and shape traffic so as to avoid congestion of a network, and on how those procedures could affect service quality and the protection of personal data; and the means made available to the end-user to ensure that traffic orientation measures are applied effectively;

Amendment 713

Amelia Andersdotter <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point iv a (new)</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(iva) the communication inspection techniques used for traffic management measures, instituted for the purposes listed in article 23.5, and their repercussions on users privacy and data protection right.

Justification:
This provision completes the framework and better guarantees the rights of the European citizens regarding the respect for their private life and their protection of personal data, according to articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Amendment 714

Françoise Castex <ART>Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e – point iv a (new)</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(iva) the communication inspection techniques used for traffic management measures, instituted for the purposes listed in article 23.5 and their repercussions on end users privacy and data protection right.

Amendment 715

Patrizia Toia Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The information shall be published in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible form in the official language(s) of the Member State where the service is offered, and be updated regularly. The information shall, on request, be supplied to the relevant national regulatory authorities in advance of its publication. Any differentiation in the conditions applied to consumers and other end-users shall be made explicit.	The information shall be published in a clear, exhaustive and easily accessible and comprehensible form, through the use of standardised and open file formats, in the official language(s) of the Member State where the service is offered, and be updated regularly. The information shall, on request, be supplied to the relevant national regulatory authorities in advance of its publication. Any differentiation in the conditions applied to consumers and other end-users shall be made explicit.

Amendment 716

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 25 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The Commission may adopt implementing acts specifying the methods for measuring the speed of internet access services, the quality of service parameters and the methods for measuring them, and the content, form and manner of the information to be published, including possible quality certification mechanisms. The Commission may take into account the parameters, definitions and measurement methods set out in Annex III of the Directive 2002/22/EC. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	(2) The Commission may adopt delegated acts specifying the methods for measuring the speed of internet access services, the quality of service parameters and the methods for measuring them, and the content, form and manner of the information to be published, including possible quality certification mechanisms. The Commission may take into account the parameters, definitions and measurement methods set out in Annex III of the Directive 2002/22/EC. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with Article 32.

Amendment 717

Amelia Andersdotter Article 25 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. End-users shall have access to independent evaluation tools allowing them to compare the performance of electronic communications network access and services and the cost of alternative usage patterns. To this end Member States shall establish a voluntary certification scheme for interactive websites, guides or similar tools. Certification shall be granted on the basis of objective, transparent and proportionate requirements, in particular independence from any provider of electronic communications to the public, the use of plain language, the provision of complete and up-to-date information, and the operation of an effective complaints handling procedure. Where certified comparison facilities are not available on the market free of charge or at a reasonable price, national regulatory authorities or other competent national authorities shall make such facilities available themselves or through third parties in compliance with the certification requirements. The information published by providers of electronic communications to the public shall be accessible, free of charge, for the purposes of making available comparison facilities.	3. Users shall have access to independent evaluation tools allowing them to compare the performance of electronic communications network access and services and the cost of alternative usage patterns. To this end Member States shall establish a voluntary certification scheme for interactive websites, guides or similar tools. Certification shall be granted on the basis of objective, transparent and proportionate requirements, in particular independence from any provider of electronic communications to the public, the use of plain language and open source software and publically known methodologies, the provision of complete and up-to-date information, and the operation of an effective complaints handling procedure. Where certified comparison facilities are not available on the market free of charge, national regulatory authorities or other competent national authorities shall make such facilities available themselves or through third parties in compliance with the certification requirements. The information published by providers of electronic communications to the public shall be accessible, provided in open data formats, free of charge, for the purposes of making available comparison facilities.

Justification:
To allow for trustworthy comparison the methodology and software implementation has to be open for review. In order to allow oversight over the whole range of internet products the means for average users to confirm their internet product is delivering the contractually agreed specifications, those tools have to be free of charge. To allow the creation for independent comparison facilities the network monitoring data has to be provided by the principle of open data, e.g. easily machine readable, standardised and under a free licence.

Amendment 718

Petra Kammerevert Article 25 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) Upon request of the relevant public authorities, providers of electronic communications to the public shall distribute public interest information free of charge to end-users, where appropriate, by the same means as those ordinarily used by them in their communications with end-users. In such a case, that information shall be provided by the relevant public authorities to the providers of electronic communications to the public in a standardised format and may, inter alia, cover the following topics:	deleted
(a) the most common uses of electronic communications services to engage in unlawful activities or to disseminate harmful content, particularly where it may prejudice respect for the rights and freedoms of others, including infringements of data protection rights, copyright and related rights, and their legal consequences; and
(b) the means of protection against risks to personal security and unlawful access to personal data when using electronic communications services.

Amendment 719

Petra Kammerevert Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iv
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(iv) any restrictions imposed by the provider on the use of terminal equipment supplied, including information on unlocking the terminal equipment and any charges involved if the contract is terminated before the end of the minimum contract period;	deleted

Amendment 720

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(i) any minimum usage or duration required to benefit from promotional terms;	(i) any minimum usage or duration required to benefit from promotional terms. The minimum duration may not exceed 12 months;

Amendment 721

Sabine Verheyen Article 26 – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the actually available data speed for download and upload at the main location of the end-user, including actual speed ranges, speed averages and peak-hour speed, including the potential impact of allowing access to third parties through a radio local area network ;	(b) the actually available data speed for download and upload at the main location of the end-user, including minimum guaranteed speed ranges, speed averages and peak-hour speed, including the potential impact of allowing access to third parties through a radio local area network;

Amendment 722

Paul Rübig Article 26 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible manner and in an official language of the end-user's Member State of residence, and shall be updated regularly. It shall form an integral part of the contract and shall not be altered unless the contracting parties expressly agree otherwise. The end-user shall receive a copy of the contract in writing.	(3) The information required of suppliers under Services Directive 2002/22/EC, as amended by Directive 2009/136/EG, shall be provided in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible manner and in an official language of the end-user's Member State of residence, and shall be updated regularly. A standard layout shall be established for the whole of Europe to ensure that the information is provided in a transferable and consumer-friendly form. It shall form an integral part of the contract and shall not be altered unless the contracting parties expressly agree otherwise.

Amendment 723

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 26 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible manner and in an official language of the end-user's Member State of residence, and shall be updated regularly. It shall form an integral part of the contract and shall not be altered unless the contracting parties expressly agree otherwise. The end-user shall receive a copy of the contract in writing.	3. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible manner and in an official language of the end-user's Member State of residence, and shall be updated regularly. It shall form an integral part of the contract and shall not be altered unless the contracting parties expressly agree otherwise. The end-user shall receive a copy of the contract in writing. Member States may maintain or introduce in their national law language requirements regarding the contractual information, so as to ensure that such information is easily understood by the consumer or other end-user.

Amendment 724

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 26 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible manner and in an official language of the end-user's Member State of residence, and shall be updated regularly. It shall form an integral part of the contract and shall not be altered unless the contracting parties expressly agree otherwise. The end-user shall receive a copy of the contract in writing.	(3) The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be provided in a clear, comprehensive and easily accessible manner and in all the official languages of the end-user's Member State of residence, and shall be updated regularly. It shall form an integral part of the contract and shall not be altered unless the contracting parties expressly agree otherwise. The end-user shall receive a copy of the contract in writing.

Amendment 725

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 26 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) The Commission may adopt implementing acts specifying the details of the information requirements listed in paragraph 2. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33 (2).	(4) The Commission may adopt delegated acts specifying the details of the information requirements listed in paragraph 2. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 32.

Amendment 726

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 27 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Providers of electronic communications to the public shall offer end-users the opportunity to opt, free of charge, for a facility which provides information on the accumulated consumption of different electronic communications services expressed in the currency in which the end-user is billed. Such a facility shall guarantee that, without the end-user's consent, the accumulated expenditure over a specified period of use does not exceed a specified financial limit set by the end-user.	(1) Providers of electronic communications to the public shall offer end-users the opportunity to opt, free of charge, for a facility which provides information on the accumulated consumption of different electronic communications services expressed in the currency in which the end-user is billed. The bill shall be issued in the currency of the Member State or in euro, for eurozone Member States. Such a facility shall guarantee that, without the end-user's consent, the accumulated expenditure over a specified period of use does not exceed a specified financial limit set by the end-user.

Amendment 727

Ioannis A. Tsoukalas Article 27 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall offer end-users the opportunity to opt, free of charge, for a facility which provides information on the accumulated consumption of different electronic communications services expressed in the currency in which the end-user is billed. Such a facility shall guarantee that, without the end-user's consent, the accumulated expenditure over a specified period of use does not exceed a specified financial limit set by the end-user.	1. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall offer end-users the opportunity to opt, free of charge, for a facility which provides information on the accumulated consumption of different electronic communications services expressed in the currency in which the end-user is billed, as well as allows them to control their usage of data services. Such a facility shall guarantee that, without the end-user's consent, the accumulated expenditure over a specified period of use does not exceed a specified financial limit set by the end-user.

Amendment 728

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 28 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Contracts concluded between consumers and providers of electronic communications to the public shall not provide for a minimum duration that exceeds 24 months. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall offer end-users the possibility to conclude a contract with a maximum duration of 12 months.	(1) Contracts concluded between consumers and providers of electronic communications to the public shall not provide for a minimum duration that exceeds 12 months. Providers of electronic communications to the public shall offer end-users the possibility, at their request, also to conclude a contract with a maximum duration of 12 months.

Amendment 729

Paul Rübig Article 28 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) Consumers and other end-users unless they have otherwise agreed, shall have the right to terminate a contract with a one-month notice period, where six months or more have elapsed since conclusion of the contract. No compensation shall be due other than for the residual value of subsidised equipment bundled with the contract at the moment of the contract conclusion and a pro rata temporis reimbursement for any other promotional advantages marked as such at the moment of the contract conclusion. Any restriction on the usage of terminal equipment on other networks shall be lifted, free of charge, by the provider at the latest upon payment of such compensation.	(2) Consumers and other end-users unless they have otherwise agreed, shall have the right to terminate a contract with a one-month notice period after expiry of the minimum contract duration. No compensation shall be due other than for the residual value of subsidised equipment bundled with the contract at the moment of the contract conclusion and a pro rata temporis reimbursement for any other promotional advantages marked as such at the moment of the contract conclusion. Any restriction on the usage of terminal equipment on other networks shall be lifted, free of charge, by the provider at the latest upon payment of such compensation.

Justification:
In order to provide telecommunications companies with the necessary legal, planning and investment security, the guaranteed minimum contract period must be of adequate duration. This would be effectively undermined by a six-month limit.

Amendment 730

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 28 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) Consumers, and other end-users unless they have otherwise agreed, shall have the right to terminate a contract with a one-month notice period, where six months or more have elapsed since conclusion of the contract. No compensation shall be due other than for the residual value of subsidised equipment bundled with the contract at the moment of the contract conclusion and a pro rata temporis reimbursement for any other promotional advantages marked as such at the moment of the contract conclusion. Any restriction on the usage of terminal equipment on other networks shall be lifted, free of charge, by the provider at the latest upon payment of such compensation.	(2) Consumers, and other end-users unless they have otherwise agreed, shall have the right to terminate a contract with a one-month notice period. No compensation shall be due other than for the residual value of subsidised equipment bundled with the contract at the moment of the contract conclusion and a pro rata temporis reimbursement for any other promotional advantages marked as such at the moment of the contract conclusion. Any restriction on the usage of terminal equipment on other networks shall be lifted, free of charge, by the provider at the latest upon payment of such compensation.

Amendment 731

Teresa Riera Madurell Article 28 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Consumers, and other end-users unless they have otherwise agreed, shall have the right to terminate a contract with a one-month notice period, where six months or more have elapsed since conclusion of the contract. No compensation shall be due other than for the residual value of subsidised equipment bundled with the contract at the moment of the contract conclusion and a pro rata temporis reimbursement for any other promotional advantages marked as such at the moment of the contract conclusion. Any restriction on the usage of terminal equipment on other networks shall be lifted, free of charge, by the provider at the latest upon payment of such compensation.	2. Once the contract has been concluded, consumers, and other end-users unless they have otherwise agreed, shall have the right to terminate said contract with a one-month notice period. No compensation shall be due other than for the residual value of subsidised equipment bundled with the contract at the moment of the contract conclusion and a pro rata temporis reimbursement for any other promotional advantages marked as such at the moment of the contract conclusion. Any restriction on the usage of terminal equipment on other networks shall be lifted, free of charge, by the provider at the latest upon payment of such compensation.

Amendment 732

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 28 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) Where the contracts or national law provide for contract periods to be extended tacitly, the provider of electronic communications to the public shall inform the end-user in due time so that the end-user has at least one month to oppose a tacit extension. If the end-user does not oppose, the contract shall be deemed to be a permanent contract which can be terminated by the end-user at any time with a one-month notice period and without incurring any costs.	(3) Where the contracts or national law provide for contract periods to be extended tacitly, the provider of electronic communications to the public shall inform the end-user in writing in due time so that the end-user has at least one month to oppose a tacit extension. If the end-user does not oppose, the contract shall be deemed to be a permanent contract which can be terminated by the end-user at any time with a one-month notice period and without incurring any costs.

Amendment 733

Angelika Niebler Article 28 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) End-users shall have the right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs upon notice of changes in the contractual conditions proposed by the provider of electronic communications to the public unless the proposed changes are exclusively to the benefit of the end-user. Providers shall give end-users adequate notice, not shorter than one month, of any such change, and shall inform them at the same time of their right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs if they do not accept the new conditions. Paragraph 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.	(4) End-users shall have the right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs upon notice of changes in the contractual conditions proposed by the provider of electronic communications to the public. Providers shall give end-users adequate notice, not shorter than one month, of any such change, and shall inform them at the same time of their right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs if they do not accept the new conditions. Paragraph 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Justification:
Restoral of status quo.

Amendment 734

Paul Rübig Article 28 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) End-users shall have the right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs upon notice of changes in the contractual conditions proposed by the provider of electronic communications to the public unless the proposed changes are exclusively to the benefit of the end-user. Providers shall give end-users adequate notice, not shorter than one month, of any such change, and shall inform them at the same time of their right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs if they do not accept the new conditions. Paragraph 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.	(4) End-users shall have the right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs upon notice of changes in the contractual conditions unilaterally proposed by the provider of electronic communications to the public if the proposed changes are to the detriment of the end-user. Providers shall give end-users adequate notice, not shorter than one month, of any such change, and shall inform them at the same time of their right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs if they do not accept the new conditions. Paragraph 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Justification:
Consumers must have the option of terminating their contracts, but only if they are modified in a manner which is detrimental to their interests or has not been mutually agreed. If consumers were authorised to terminate their contracts arbitrarily, even where the modifications were arguably to their advantage, this would create a climate of uncertainty for undertakings in terms of planning and investment.

Amendment 735

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 28 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4) End-users shall have the right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs upon notice of changes in the contractual conditions proposed by the provider of electronic communications to the public unless the proposed changes are exclusively to the benefit of the end-user. Providers shall give end-users adequate notice, not shorter than one month, of any such change, and shall inform them at the same time of their right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs if they do not accept the new conditions. Paragraph 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.	(4) End-users shall have the right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs upon notice of changes in service quality or the contractual conditions proposed by the provider of electronic communications to the public unless the proposed changes are exclusively to the benefit of the end-user. Providers shall give end-users adequate notice, not shorter than one month, of any such change, and shall inform them at the same time of their right to terminate their contract without incurring any costs if they do not accept the new conditions. Paragraph 2 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Amendment 736

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 28 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) A subscription to additional services provided by the same provider of electronic communications to the public shall not re-start the initial contract period unless the price of the additional service(s) significantly exceeds that of the initial services or the additional services are offered at a special promotional price linked to the renewal of the existing contract.	(6) A subscription to additional services provided by the same provider of electronic communications to the public shall not re-start the initial contract period.

Amendment 737

Patrizia Toia, Francesco De Angelis Article 30 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Porting of numbers and their activation shall be carried out within the shortest possible time. For end-users who have concluded an agreement to port a number to a new provider that number shall be activated within one working day from the conclusion of such agreement. Loss of service during the process of porting, if any, shall not exceed one working day.	3. Porting of numbers and their activation shall be carried out within the shortest possible time and in any case within no longer than four working days. To limit the number of cases in which a portability request is rejected or refused, the transferring provider must give a clear and detailed explanation of the reasons for such refusal. For end-users who have concluded an agreement to port a number to a new provider that number shall be activated within one working day from the conclusion of such agreement. Loss of service during the process of porting, if any, shall not exceed one working day.

Amendment 738

Paul Rübig Article 30 – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) Providers of electronic communications to the public which delay or abuse switching, including by not making available information necessary for porting in a timely manner, shall be obliged to compensate end-users who are exposed to such delay or abuse.	(6) Providers of electronic communications to the public which delay or abuse switching, including by not making available information necessary for porting in a timely manner, shall be obliged to compensate end-users who are exposed to such delay or abuse to the extent of the damage suffered. In this connection, portability transfer shall take account of any payments outstanding and may under reasonable circumstances be delayed accordingly.

Amendment 739

Werner Langen Article 30 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 30a
	Application of general principles regarding information society service providers
	National supervisory authorities shall ensure that information society service providers comply with the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and platform openness, including measures to facilitate the switching of providers, interoperability, application and data portability and digital content search neutrality.

Amendment 740

Herbert Reul Article 30 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 30a
	Application of general principles regarding information society service providers
	National supervisory authorities shall ensure that the rights of national consumers are not undermined. Information society service providers shall comply with the principles of transparency and non-discrimination, including measures to facilitate the switching of providers, interoperability and digital content search neutrality.

Amendment 741

Paul Rübig Article 30 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 30a
	Application of general principles and legal provisions to information service providers also
	The national regulatory authority shall ensure that information service providers comply with the same principles of transparency, non-discrimination and platform openness, including measures to facilitate the switching of providers, interoperability, 'any-to-any' communication, application and data portability and digital content search neutrality.

Amendment 742

Angelika Niebler Chapter 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Chapter 5a
	Openness and transparency
	Article 30a - application of general principles of openness and transparency to information society service providers
	National regulatory authorities shall ensure, that information service providers comply with the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and platform openness, including measures to facilitate the switching of providers, interoperability, 'any-to-any' data transfers, application and data portability and search neutrality.

Justification:
Since the adoption of the EU regulatory framework (2002), the telecommunications market has changed significantly, with the convergence of the formerly separate markets occupied by traditional telecom and Internet service providers respectively. In order to uphold uniform consumer rights, transparency provisions and privacy requirements regarding the use of communications services, the rules governing traditional telecommunications services should apply to Internet service providers also.

Amendment 743

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 31 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
With regard to European electronic communications providers, penalties shall be imposed in accordance with Chapter II regarding the respective competences of national regulatory authorities in the home and host Member States.	deleted

Amendment 744

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 32 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 17(2) and 19(5) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the [date entry into force of the Regulation].	(2) The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 17(2) and 19(5) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from the [date entry into force of the Regulation].
	The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.

Amendment 745

Petra Kammerevert Article 32 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 17(2) and 19(5) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the [date entry into force of the Regulation]	(2) The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 17(2), 19(5) and 23(5) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the [date entry into force of the Regulation]

Amendment 746

Petra Kammerevert Article 32 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) The delegation of power referred to in Articles 17(2) and 19(5) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.	(3) The delegation of power referred to in Articles 17(2), 19(5) and 23(5) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

Amendment 747

Petra Kammerevert Article 32 – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(5) A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 17(2) and 19(5) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.	(5) A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 17(2), 19(5) and 23(5) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.

Amendment 748

Pilar del Castillo Vera Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new) <DOC2>Directive 2002/20/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 10 – paragraph 6 a new</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	In Article 10, the following new paragraph 6a is added :
	‘A national regulatory authority shall notify BEREC of any measures taken by it under paragraphs 5 and 6.’

Amendment 749

Giles Chichester Article 34 a (new) <DOC2>Directive 2002/19/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 34a
	Amendments to Directive 2002/19/EC
	Directive 2002/19/EC is amended as follows:
	Article 13 paragraph 2a (new), the following paragraph is added:
	Where a national regulatory authority is considering whether or not to impose or maintain price controls in accordance with paragraph 1 for wholesale access to next-generation networks, it shall consider the state of competition in the retail market. In the presence of an effective protection against discrimination at wholesale level and of a demonstrable pricing constraint from either infrastructure-based competition from competing next-generation fixed line or wireless networks or regulated access products on the copper network the national regulatory authority shall lift price controls for wholesale access for next generation networks.

Justification:
Price regulation can only be justified where end-users need to be protected from monopoly pricing, i.e. in the presence of a so-called ‘persistent bottleneck’, which is not subject to price constraints from either competing retail offers or regulated offers on another network. Embedding the principle in EU law provides much-needed legal certainty.

Amendment 750

Gunnar Hökmark, Jens Rohde Article 34 a (new) <DOC2>Decision No 243/2012/EU</DOC2> <ART2>Article 15 </ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	Article 34a
	Amendments to Decision No 243/2012/EU
	In Article 15, the third subparagraph is amended as follows
Article 15	Reporting and review
Reporting and review	By 10 April 2014, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the activities developed and the measures adopted pursuant to this Decision.
By 10 April 2014, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the activities developed and the measures adopted pursuant to this Decision.	Member States shall provide the Commission with all information necessary for the purpose of reviewing the application of this Decision.
Member States shall provide the Commission with all information necessary for the purpose of reviewing the application of this Decision.	By 31 December 2015, the Commission shall conduct a review of the application of this Decision. The review shall include:
By 31 December 2015, the Commission shall conduct a review of the application of this Decision.	A common timetable defining an end date by which bands identified for mobile broadband communications at ITU level such as the 700 MHz, 1.5GHz and 3.8-4.2 GHz bands are freed up and harmonised for mobile broadband usage in all EU-Member States while respecting the outcome of the assessment by the European Commission in accordance with article 6.5.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:081:0007:0017:EN:PDF)

Amendment 751

Werner Langen Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new) <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 2(c)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(c) ‘electronic communications services’:
	a service which consists in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks, including telecommunications and transmission services in networks used for broadcasting and services providing or facilitating communication, while excluding services whose primary purpose is to supply and exercise editorial control over media content using electronic communications networks and services; it does not include information society services, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 98/34/EC, which do not essentially relate to communications, even where based on the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks;

Amendment 752

Angelika Niebler Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new) <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 2(c)</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(1a) Article 2(c) is amended as follows:
(c) ‘electronic communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration which consists wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks, including telecommunications services and transmission services in networks used for broadcasting, but exclude services providing, or exercising editorial control over, content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services; it does not include information society services, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 98/34/EC, which do not consist wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks;	(c) ‘electronic communications service’ means a service which consists in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks, including telecommunications services, services providing or facilitating communications and transmission services in networks used for broadcasting, but exclude services whose primary purpose is to ensure editorial control by the supplier over media content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services; it does not include information society services, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 98/34/EC, which do not essentially relate to communications even where based on the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks;

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2002:108:0033:0033:DE:PDF)

Justification:
The 2002 definition of electronic communications services is now outdated and must accordingly be must be widened to take account of the fact that the market now encompasses both traditional telecom operators and the over-the-top players.

Amendment 753

Edit Herczog Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new) <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 2 – point c </ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	In Article 2, point c is amended as follows
‘electronic communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration which consists wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks, including telecommunications services and transmission services in networks used for broadcasting, but exclude services providing, or exercising editorial control over, content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services; it does not include information society services, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 98/34/EC, which do not consist wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks.	‘electronic communications service’ means a service which consists in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks, including telecommunications services, transmission services in networks used for broadcasting and Internet Protocol based substitutes using Applications or service platforms, but exclude services providing, or exercising editorial control over, content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services; it does not include information society services, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 98/34/EC, which do not consist wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks and do not provide a substitute to those.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2002:108:0033:0033:EN:PDF)

Justification:
Since the time of adoption of the EU regulatory framework in 2002 the communications market has significantly changed and is today characterized by the convergence of formerly more separated markets of traditional telecommunications services and Internet Protocol based services. Migration to all IP will blur the distinction between IP based services and telecommunications services. Today, many text, voice or video communication is increasingly substituted by software Applications or data platform providers. To preserve basic consumer rights, transparency requirements, privacy and to cater for basic security requirements like the provision of emergency services, rules established for traditional telecommunications services must also apply for these alternative service provisioning. Otherwise, we will leave European Citizen increasingly without any basic protection and preserve an imbalance between service providers on the electronic communications markets. It is therefore high time to extend the scope of application of the framework rules protecting our Citizen to all service providers who provide similar services to the consumer.

Amendment 754

Francesco De Angelis Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– (a) in paragraph 1, the first sub-paragraph is replaced by the following:	deleted
1. Where an intended measure covered by Article 7(3) aims at imposing, amending or withdrawing an obligation on an operator in application of Article 16 of this Directive in conjunction with Article 5 and Articles 9 to 13 of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), and Article 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive), the Commission may, within the period of one month provided for by Article 7(3) of this Directive, notify the national regulatory authority concerned and BEREC of its reasons for considering that the draft measure would create a barrier to the single market or its serious doubts as to its compatibility with Union law, taking into account as appropriate any Recommendation adopted pursuant to Article 19(1) of this Directive concerning the harmonised application of specific provisions of this Directive and the Specific Directives. In such a case, the draft measure shall not be adopted for a further three months following the Commission’s notification.

Justification:
In order to prevent detrimental effects on end users, it is necessary to reaffirm the competence of national authorities with regard to the task of harmonizing the application of specific provisions of this - and other specific - Directives.

Amendment 755

Amelia Andersdotter Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– (a) in paragraph 1, the first sub-paragraph is replaced by the following:	deleted
1. Where an intended measure covered by Article 7(3) aims at imposing, amending or withdrawing an obligation on an operator in application of Article 16 of this Directive in conjunction with Article 5 and Articles 9 to 13 of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), and Article 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive), the Commission may, within the period of one month provided for by Article 7(3) of this Directive, notify the national regulatory authority concerned and BEREC of its reasons for considering that the draft measure would create a barrier to the single market or its serious doubts as to its compatibility with Union law, taking into account as appropriate any Recommendation adopted pursuant to Article 19(1) of this Directive concerning the harmonised application of specific provisions of this Directive and the Specific Directives. In such a case, the draft measure shall not be adopted for a further three months following the Commission’s notification.

Amendment 756

Giles Chichester Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– (a) in paragraph 1, the first sub-paragraph is replaced by the following:	deleted
1. Where an intended measure covered by Article 7(3) aims at imposing, amending or withdrawing an obligation on an operator in application of Article 16 of this Directive in conjunction with Article 5 and Articles 9 to 13 of Directive 2002/19/EC (Access Directive), and Article 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive), the Commission may, within the period of one month provided for by Article 7(3) of this Directive, notify the national regulatory authority concerned and BEREC of its reasons for considering that the draft measure would create a barrier to the single market or its serious doubts as to its compatibility with Union law, taking into account as appropriate any Recommendation adopted pursuant to Article 19(1) of this Directive concerning the harmonised application of specific provisions of this Directive and the Specific Directives. In such a case, the draft measure shall not be adopted for a further three months following the Commission’s notification.

Amendment 757

Francesco De Angelis Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 15</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– (a) the following sub-paragraph is inserted between the first and second sub-paragraphs of paragraph 1:	deleted
In assessing whether a given market has characteristics which may justify the imposition of ex-ante regulatory obligations, and therefore has to be included in the Recommendation, the Commission shall have regard in particular to the need for convergent regulation throughout the Union, to the need to promote efficient investment and innovation in the interests of end users and of the global competitiveness of the Union economy, and to the relevance of the market concerned, alongside other factors such as existing infrastructure-based competition at retail level, to competition on the prices, choice and quality of products offered to end users. The Commission shall consider all relevant competitive constraints, irrespective of whether the networks, services or applications which impose such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of service or application which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user, in order to determine whether, as a general matter in the Union or a significant part thereof, the following three criteria are cumulatively met:
(a) the presence of high and non-transitory structural, legal or regulatory barriers to entry;
(b) the market structure does not tend towards effective competition within the relevant time horizon, having regard to the state of infrastructure-based and other competition behind the barriers to entry;
(c) competition law alone is insufficient to adequately address the identified market failure(s).

Justification:
In order to prevent detrimental effects on end users, it is necessary to avoid a weakening of competition rules in the Member States.

Amendment 758

Amelia Andersdotter Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 15</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– (a) the following sub-paragraph is inserted between the first and second sub-paragraphs of paragraph 1:	deleted
In assessing whether a given market has characteristics which may justify the imposition of ex-ante regulatory obligations, and therefore has to be included in the Recommendation, the Commission shall have regard in particular to the need for convergent regulation throughout the Union, to the need to promote efficient investment and innovation in the interests of end users and of the global competitiveness of the Union economy, and to the relevance of the market concerned, alongside other factors such as existing infrastructure-based competition at retail level, to competition on the prices, choice and quality of products offered to end users. The Commission shall consider all relevant competitive constraints, irrespective of whether the networks, services or applications which impose such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of service or application which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user, in order to determine whether, as a general matter in the Union or a significant part thereof, the following three criteria are cumulatively met:
(a) the presence of high and non-transitory structural, legal or regulatory barriers to entry;
(b) the market structure does not tend towards effective competition within the relevant time horizon, having regard to the state of infrastructure-based and other competition behind the barriers to entry;
(c) competition law alone is insufficient to adequately address the identified market failure(s).

Amendment 759

Giles Chichester Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a <DOC2>Directive 2002/21/EC</DOC2> <ART2>Article 15</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– (a) the following sub-paragraph is inserted between the first and second sub-paragraphs of paragraph 1:	deleted
In assessing whether a given market has characteristics which may justify the imposition of ex-ante regulatory obligations, and therefore has to be included in the Recommendation, the Commission shall have regard in particular to the need for convergent regulation throughout the Union, to the need to promote efficient investment and innovation in the interests of end users and of the global competitiveness of the Union economy, and to the relevance of the market concerned, alongside other factors such as existing infrastructure-based competition at retail level, to competition on the prices, choice and quality of products offered to end users. The Commission shall consider all relevant competitive constraints, irrespective of whether the networks, services or applications which impose such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of service or application which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user, in order to determine whether, as a general matter in the Union or a significant part thereof, the following three criteria are cumulatively met:
(a) the presence of high and non-transitory structural, legal or regulatory barriers to entry;
(b) the market structure does not tend towards effective competition within the relevant time horizon, having regard to the state of infrastructure-based and other competition behind the barriers to entry;
(c) competition law alone is insufficient to adequately address the identified market failure(s).

Amendment 760

Catherine Trautmann Article 37 – point 1 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) In Article 1(1), the following third subparagraph is inserted:	deleted
This Regulation shall apply to roaming services provided in the Union to end users whose domestic provider is a provider of electronic communications to the public in a Member State.

Amendment 761

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 37 – point 1 <DOC2>Regulation (UE) n° 531/2012 </DOC2> <ART2>Article 1</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Regulation shall apply to roaming services provided in the Union to end users whose domestic provider is a provider of electronic communications to the public in a Member State.	This Regulation shall apply to regulated roaming services provided in the Union to end users whose domestic provider is a provider of electronic communications to the public in a Member State

Amendment 762

Catherine Trautmann Article 37 – point 2 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point r (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) In Article 2 (2), the following point (r) is inserted:	deleted
(r) ‘bilateral or multilateral roaming agreement’ means one or more commercial or technical agreements among roaming providers that allow the virtual extension of the home network coverage and the sustainable provision by each roaming provider of regulated retail roaming services at the same price level as their respective domestic mobile communications services.

Amendment 763

Catherine Trautmann Article 37 – point 3 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 7</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) In Article 4, the following paragraph 7 is added:	deleted
7. This Article shall not apply to roaming providers that provide regulated retail roaming services in accordance with Article 4a.

Amendment 764

Herbert Reul Article 37 – point 3 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 7</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
7. This article shall not apply to roaming providers that provide regulated retail roaming services in accordance with Article 4a.	7. Following the abolition of roaming charges, this article no longer applies.

Amendment 765

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 37 – point 3 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Article shall not apply to roaming providers that provide regulated retail roaming services in accordance with Article 4a.	This Article shall apply until 30 June 2016.

Justification:
With the Commission’s proposal the separate sale of roaming services in Europe has in actuality been chocked due to the market uncertainty it brings about until its adoption. Against the background of the abolishment of roaming charges, as proposed by the rapporteur, the decoupling facilities are no longer of use, which is why providers should not be required to further dedicate resources to this.

Amendment 766

Catherine Trautmann Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 767

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 768

Giles Chichester Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Article shall apply to roaming providers which:	1. Providers of roaming services shall be entitled to limit the consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate by reference to a reasonable use criterion. Any reasonable use criterion shall be applied in such a way that consumers availing themselves of the roaming provider’s various domestic retail packages are in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union. A roaming provider availing itself of this possibility shall publish, in accordance with Article 26(1)(b) of Regulation XXX/2014, and include in its contracts, in accordance with Article 26(1)(b) and (c) of that Regulation, detailed information on how the reasonable use criterion is applied, by reference to the main pricing, volume or other parameters of the retail package in question.
	2. By 31 December 2014, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria in the retail contracts provided by roaming providers availing themselves of this Article. BEREC shall develop such guidelines by reference to the overall objective in paragraph 1, and shall have regard in particular to the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, to the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, to any observable effect of roaming at domestic service rates on the evolution of such rates, and to the evolution of wholesale roaming rates for unbalanced traffic between roaming providers.
	3. The competent national regulatory authority shall monitor and supervise the application of the reasonable use criteria, taking utmost account of the BEREC guidelines once they are adopted, and shall ensure that unreasonable terms are not applied.

Amendment 769

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Paragraphs 1, 6 and 7 shall not preclude the limitation by a roaming provider of consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate by reference to a reasonable use criterion. Any reasonable use criterion shall be applied in such a way that consumers availing of the roaming provider’s various domestic retail packages are in a position to confidently replicate the typical domestic consumption pattern associated with their respective domestic retail packages while periodically travelling within the Union. A roaming provider availing of this possibility shall publish, in accordance with Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation XXX/2014, and include in its contracts, in accordance with Article 26(1)(b) and (c) of that Regulation, detailed quantified information on how the reasonable use criterion is applied, by reference to the main pricing, volume or other parameters of the retail package in question.	deleted

Amendment 770

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
By 31 December 2014, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria in the retail contracts provided by roaming providers availing of this Article. BEREC shall develop such guidelines by reference to the overall objective set out in the first subparagraph, and shall have regard in particular to the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, to the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, to any observable effect of roaming at domestic service rates on the evolution of such rates, and to the evolution of wholesale roaming rates for unbalanced traffic between roaming providers.	BEREC shall develop such guidelines by reference to the overall objective set out in the first subparagraph, and shall have regard in particular to the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, to the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, to any observable effect of roaming at domestic service rates on the evolution of such rates, and to the evolution of wholesale roaming rates for unbalanced traffic between roaming providers.

Amendment 771

Herbert Reul Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
By 31 December 2014, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria in the retail contracts provided by roaming providers availing of this Article. BEREC shall develop such guidelines by reference to the overall objective set out in the first subparagraph, and shall have regard in particular to the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, to the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, to any observable effect of roaming at domestic service rates on the evolution of such rates, and to the evolution of wholesale roaming rates for unbalanced traffic between roaming providers.	By 31 December 2016, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria in the retail contracts provided by roaming providers availing of this Article. BEREC shall develop such guidelines by reference to the overall objective set out in the first subparagraph, and shall have regard in particular to the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, to the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, to any observable effect of roaming at domestic service rates on the evolution of such rates, and to the evolution of wholesale roaming rates for unbalanced traffic between roaming providers.

Amendment 772

Silvia-Adriana Ţicău Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The competent national regulatory authority shall monitor and supervise the application of reasonable use criteria, taking utmost account of the BEREC general guidelines once they are adopted, and shall ensure that unreasonable terms are not applied.	The competent national regulatory authority shall ensure that unreasonable terms are not applied.

Amendment 773

Herbert Reul Article 37 – point 3 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 5</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(3a) The following paragraph 7 is added to Article 5:
	7. Following the abolition of roaming charges, this article no longer applies.

Amendment 774

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 37 – point 3 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 5</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(3a) In Article 5, the following paragraph 7 is added:
	7. This Article shall apply until 30 June 2016.

Justification:
With the Commission’s proposal the separate sale of roaming services in Europe has in actuality been chocked due to the market uncertainty it brings about until its adoption. Against the background of the abolishment of roaming charges, as proposed by the rapporteur, the decoupling facilities are no longer of use, which is why providers should not be required to further dedicate resources to this.

Amendment 775

Catherine Trautmann, Dimitrios Droutsas Article 37 – point 4 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(4a) The following article is inserted:
	Article 6a
	Abolition of retail charges
	With effect from 1 July 2016, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming customers in any Member State for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent, for any roaming MMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used or any general charge to enable the terminal equipment or service to be used abroad.
	To prevent an unlimited use of retail roaming services at domestic price level and thus any waterbed effect that could have an influence on the prices applied to all the customers, including those who do not use roaming services, providers should be entitled to apply in their retail package a fair-use clause which consists in a maximum of 5 weeks per year.
	By December 2015, the Commission shall, after a public consultation and after requesting and taking utmost account of BEREC’s opinion, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable retail charges when a customer exceeds this fair-use clause. In any case, these charges should not exceed the cost recovery of providing such services.

Amendment 776

<MB>Jens Rohde, Phil Bennion, Catherine Bearder, Fiona Hall, Bill Newton Dunn, Sarah Ludford, Rebecca Taylor, Edward McMillan-Scott, George Lyon, Graham Watson, Andrew Duff, Judith A. Merkies</MB> Article 37 – point 3 a (new)

<DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6a</ART2>;

|- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Text proposed by the Commission |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Amendment |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| (3a) Article 37 point 4 (new) the following article is inserted: |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Article 6a

|- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Abolition of retail roaming charges |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| With effect from 1 July 2015, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming customers for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent, for any roaming MMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used- or any general charge to enable the terminal equipment or service to be used abroad. |}

Justification:
This amendment brings the abolishment of the roaming surcharges in line with the European Parliament`s resolution of 12 September 2013 on ‘the Digital Agenda for Growth, Mobility and Employment: time to move up a gear’, in which the European Parliament calls for the abolishment of roaming in 2015.By including MMS messages in this provision we address unexpectedly high bills as an emerging issue (often the consumer thinks they have sent an SMS but it is actually an MMS for which separate charges apply). As this article very specifically refers to the individual types of services offered, the inclusion of wording ‘or any general charge to enable the terminal equipment or service to be used abroad’ seeks to prevent the introduction of more general charges for, e.g. ‘enabling the phone to be used abroad’ (some operators require consumers to contact them before they will enable roaming on handsets).

Amendment 777

Gunnar Hökmark Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1. By 31 December 2015, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria by roaming providers. BEREC shall have regard in particular to the evolution of pricing and consumption patterns in the Member States, to the degree of convergence of domestic price levels across the Union, to any observable effect of roaming at domestic service rates on the evolution of such rates, and to the evolution of effective wholesale roaming rates for unbalanced traffic between roaming providers of various sizes.

Amendment 778

Giles Chichester Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	With effect from 1 July 2016, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming customers for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent, for any roaming MMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used or any general charge to enable the terminal equipment or service to be used abroad.

Justification:
NOTE: MMS included to avoid a situation where there was scope for operators to apply a surcharge for MMS when roaming.

Amendment 779

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – point 4 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(4 a) Article 7 is replaced by the following:
Article 7	Article 7
Wholesale charges for the making of regulated roaming calls	Wholesale charges for the making of regulated roaming calls
1. The average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the customer’s roaming provider for the provision of a regulated roaming call originating on that visited network, inclusive, inter alia, of origination, transit and termination costs, shall not exceed EUR 0,14 per minute as of 1 July 2012.	1. The average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the customer’s roaming provider for the provision of a regulated roaming call originating on that visited network, inclusive, inter alia, of origination, transit and termination costs, shall not exceed EUR 0,05 per minute as of 1 July 2014.
2. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply between any pair of operators and shall be calculated over a 12-month period or any such shorter period as may remain before the end of the period of application of a maximum average wholesale charge as provided for in this paragraph or before 30 June 2022. The maximum average wholesale charge shall decrease to EUR 0,10 on 1 July 2013 and to EUR 0,05 on 1 July 2014 and shall, without prejudice to Article 19, remain at EUR 0,05 until 30 June 2022.	2. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply between any pair of operators and shall be calculated over a 12-month period or any such shorter period as may remain before the end of the period of application of a maximum average wholesale charge as provided for in this paragraph or before 30 June 2022. The maximum average wholesale charge shall decrease to EUR 0,01 on 1 July 2016 and shall remain until 30 June 2022.
3. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated by dividing the total wholesale roaming revenue received by the total number of wholesale roaming minutes actually used for the provision of wholesale roaming calls within the Union by the relevant operator over the relevant period, aggregated on a per-second basis adjusted to take account of the possibility for the operator of the visited network to apply an initial minimum charging period not exceeding 30 seconds.	3. Mobile termination rates for roaming voice calls shall not exceed EUR 0,005 from 1 July 2016 and shall also remain until 30 June 2022.
	4. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated by dividing the total wholesale roaming revenue received by the total number of wholesale roaming minutes actually used for the provision of wholesale roaming calls within the Union by the relevant operator over the relevant period, aggregated on a per-second basis adjusted to take account of the possibility for the operator of the visited network to apply an initial minimum charging period not exceeding 30 seconds.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Justification:
In a number of Member States average retail domestic price is below EUR 0,05. Keeping wholesale price for voice roaming at current level - EUR 0,05 after 1/07/2016, when operators will be obliged to charge roaming customers identically as domestic ones, would create serious distortions on the market. Therefore the wholesale prices for voice should be further decreased in order to allow for a greater competition. Roaming mobile termination rates should be decreased in order to avoid market distortions

Amendment 780

Jens Rohde Article 37 – point 4 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7 – paragraphs 1 and 2</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(4a) In Article 7, paragraphs 1 and 2 are replaced by the following:
1. The average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the customer’s roaming provider for the provision of a regulated roaming call originating on that visited network, inclusive, inter alia, of origination, transit and termination costs, shall not exceed EUR 0,14 per minute as of 1 July 2012.	1. The average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the customer's roaming provider for the provision of a regulated roaming call originating on that visited network, inclusive, inter alia, of origination, transit and termination costs, shall not exceed the limits set in paragraph 2.
2. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply between any pair of operators and shall be calculated over a 12-month period or any such shorter period as may remain before the end of the period of application of a maximum average wholesale charge as provided for in this paragraph or before 30 June 2022. The maximum average wholesale charge shall decrease to EUR 0,10 on 1 July 2013 and to EUR 0,05 on 1 July 2014 and shall, without prejudice to Article 19, remain at EUR 0,05 until 30 June 2022.	2. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply between any pair of operators and shall be calculated over a 12-month period or any such shorter period as may remain before the end of the period of application of a maximum average wholesale charge as provided for in this paragraph or before 30 June 2022. The maximum average wholesale charge shall not exceed EUR 0,10 on 1 July 2013 and shall decrease to EUR 0,03 on 1 July 2014, to EUR 0,02 on 1 July 2015, and to EUR 0,01 on 1 July 2016.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Justification:
Without creating a wholesale market in which the smaller players can compete, new legislation could distort competition and lead to the eviction of smaller and dynamic players from the market for international roaming. This amendments reduces wholesale roaming caps to a level which enables each provider who so wishes to offer retail services including ‘roam like at home’ in the short term. In addition, maximum wholesale charges are reduced in line with cost reductions, while leaving a reasonable margin in relation to capped retail charges to encourage market entry. This will enable market-led development of retail offers, and is certain to achieve the policy objective of putting an end to retail roaming tariffs by 2015, by enabling all providers to supply ‘roam like at home’ to mobile user. The levels of the revised wholesale roaming caps put forward are not below cost, as is evidenced by: (i) existing retail offers on domestic markets, (ii) existing domestic MVNO access offers and agreements, and (iii) a small number of bilateral wholesale roaming agreements between mobile network operators. Furthermore, the September BEREC benchmark report, which analysed the average EU roaming retail and wholesale rates for the first quarter of 2013, indicated the following margins:• Voice a) retail: 0.324 cents per minute, b) wholesale: 0.113 cents per minute.• SMS a) retail:0.084 cents per SMS, b) wholesale: 0.025 cents per SMS.• Data a) retail:0.482 cents per MB, b) wholesale:0.069 cents per MB. These numbers therefore demonstrate margins of 286% for voice, 336% for SMS and 698% for data.

Amendment 781

Gunnar Hökmark Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 7a
	1.Wholesale roaming access shall be provided on non-discriminatory terms and conditions without making a distinction between domestic and foreign operators, including the terms and conditions of wholesale access provided for domestic mobile services; creating a level playing field for all market operators

Amendment 782

Gunnar Hökmark Article 37 – point 4 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 7a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Operators shall have the right to access other networks at the same wholesale charges and conditions as they offer access to their own networks to other operators, unless national regulators or BEREC view it as unfair price conditions distorting the competition,

Amendment 783

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 37 – point 4 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6 a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(4a) The following Article is inserted
	Article 6a
	Abolition of retail roaming surcharges
	1. With effect from 1 July 2016, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming customers for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used, without prejudice to measures taken to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage.
	2. Paragraph 1 shall not preclude the limitation by a roaming provider of consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate by reference to a reasonable use criterion. Roaming providers shall publish and include in its contracts detailed quantified information on how the reasonable use criterion is applied, by reference to the main pricing, volume or other parameters of the retail package in question.
	3. Roaming providers may offer their customers the possibility to make a deliberate choice to renounce the benefit of the application of the applicable domestic service rate to regulated roaming services in return for other advantages offered by that provider. The roaming provider shall remind those end users of the nature of the roaming advantages which would thereby be lost. National Regulatory Authorities shall monitor in particular whether roaming provider availing of this article engage in business practices which would amount to circumvention of the default regime.
	By 31 December 2015, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders, assess risks of fraud and arbitrage between regulated roaming services at domestic price levels and original domestic services and lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria in the retail contracts provided by roaming providers. The competent national regulatory authority shall monitor and supervise the application of reasonable use criteria, taking utmost account of the BEREC general guidelines once they are adopted, and shall ensure that unreasonable terms are not applied.

Amendment 784

Jürgen Creutzmann Article 37 – point 4 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 6 a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(6a) the following Article is inserted
	Abolition of retail roaming surcharges
	1. With effect from 1 July 2016, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming customers for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used, without prejudice to measures taken to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage.'
	2. Paragraph 1 shall not preclude the limitation by a roaming provider of consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate by reference to a reasonable use criterion. Roaming providers shall publish and include in its contracts detailed quantified information on how the reasonable use criterion is applied, by reference to the main pricing, volume or other parameters of the retail package in question.
	3. By 31 December 2016, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders, assess risks of abuse and arbitrage between regulated roaming services at domestic price levels and domestic services in the host state and lay down general guidelines for the application of reasonable use criteria in the retail contracts provided by roaming providers. The competent national regulatory authority shall monitor and supervise the application of reasonable use criteria, taking utmost account of the BEREC general guidelines once they are adopted.

Justification:
It is proposed to abolish retail roaming charges from July 2016 on. However, in order to allow for this, BEREC should adopt guidelines on measures to prevent abuse and arbitrage effects which could otherwise negatively impact domestic markets and incentives for investment.

Amendment 785

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – point 4 b (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 8</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(4b) Article 8 is replaced by the following:
Article 8	Article 8
Retail charges for regulated roaming calls	Retail charges for regulated roaming calls
With effect from 1 July 2013, the retail charge (excluding VAT) for a euro-voice tariff which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated roaming call may vary for any roaming call but shall not exceed EUR 0,24 per minute for any call made or EUR 0,07 per minute for any call received. The maximum retail charge for calls made shall decrease to EUR 0,19 on 1 July 2014. As of 1 July 2014, roaming providers shall not levy any charge on their roaming customers for calls received, without prejudice to measures taken to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage. Without prejudice to Article 19 those maximum retail charges for the euro-voice tariff shall remain valid until 30 June 2017.	With effect from 1 July 2013, the retail charge (excluding VAT) for a euro-voice tariff which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated roaming call may vary for any roaming call but shall not exceed EUR 0,24 per minute for any call made or EUR 0,07 per minute for any call received. The maximum retail charge for calls made shall decrease to EUR 0,19 on 1 July 2014 and to EUR 0,15 on 1 July 2015 and the maximum retail charge for calls received shall decrease to EUR 0,05 on 1 July 2014 and to EUR 0,03 on 1 July 2015. Those maximum retail charges for the euro-voice tariff shall remain valid until 30 June 2016. As of 1 July 2016, roaming providers shall not levy any charge on their roaming customers for calls received, without prejudice to measures taken to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Amendment 786

Herbert Reul Article 37 – point 5 – point a <DOC2>Regulation (EU) 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
With effect from 1 July 2013, the retail charge (excluding VAT) for a euro-voice tariff which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated roaming call may vary for any roaming call but shall not exceed EUR 0,24 per minute for any call made or EUR 0,07 per minute for any call received. The maximum retail charge for calls made shall decrease to EUR 0,19 on 1 July 2014. As of 1 July 2014, roaming providers shall not levy any charge on their roaming customers for calls received, without prejudice to measures taken to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage. Without prejudice to Article 19 those maximum retail charges for the euro-voice tariff shall remain valid until 30 June 2017.	deleted

Amendment 787

Jens Rohde Article 37 – point 5 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 9 – paragraph 1</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(5a) In Article 9, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
1. With effect from 1 July 2012, the average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy for the provision of a regulated roaming SMS message originating on that visited network shall not exceed EUR 0,03 per SMS message. The maximum average wholesale charge shall decrease to EUR 0,02 on 1 July 2013 and shall, without prejudice to Article 19, remain at EUR 0,02 until 30 June 2022.	1. With effect from 1 July 2013, the average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy for the provision of a regulated roaming SMS message originating on that visited network shall not exceed EUR 0,02 per SMS message. The maximum average wholesale charge shall decrease to EUR 0,01 on 1 July, to EUR 0,0075 on 1 July 2015, and to EUR 0,005 on 1 July 2016.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Justification:
Without creating a wholesale market in which the smaller players can compete, new legislation could distort competition and lead to the eviction of smaller and dynamic players from the market for international roaming. This amendments reduces wholesale roaming caps to a level which enables each provider who so wishes to offer retail services including ‘roam like at home’ in the short term. In addition, maximum wholesale charges are reduced in line with cost reductions, while leaving a reasonable margin in relation to capped retail charges to encourage market entry. This will enable market-led development of retail offers, and is certain to achieve the policy objective of putting an end to retail roaming tariffs by 2015, by enabling all providers to supply ‘roam like at home’ to mobile user. The levels of the revised wholesale roaming caps put forward are not below cost, as is evidenced by: (i) existing retail offers on domestic markets, (ii) existing domestic MVNO access offers and agreements, and (iii) a small number of bilateral wholesale roaming agreements between mobile network operators. Furthermore, the September BEREC benchmark report, which analysed the average EU roaming retail and wholesale rates for the first quarter of 2013, indicated the following margins:• Voice a) retail: 0.324 cents per minute, b) wholesale: 0.113 cents per minute.• SMS a) retail:0.084 cents per SMS, b) wholesale: 0.025 cents per SMS.• Data a) retail:0.482 cents per MB, b) wholesale:0.069 cents per MB. These numbers therefore demonstrate margins of 286% for voice, 336% for SMS and 698% for data.

Amendment 788

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – point 4 c (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 12</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(4c) Article 12 is replaced by the following:
Article 12	Article 12
Wholesale charges for regulated data roaming services	Wholesale charges for regulated data roaming services
1. With effect from 1 July 2012, the average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the roaming customer’s home provider for the provision of regulated data roaming services by means of that visited network shall not exceed a safeguard limit of EUR 0,25 per megabyte of data transmitted. The safeguard limit shall decrease to EUR 0,15 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2013 and to EUR 0,05 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2014 and shall, without prejudice to Article 19, remain at EUR 0,05 per megabyte of data transmitted until 30 June 2022.	1. With effect from 1 July 2013, the average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the roaming customer’s home provider for the provision of regulated data roaming services by means of that visited network shall not exceed a safeguard limit of EUR 0,15 per megabyte of data transmitted. The safeguard limit shall decrease to EUR 0,05 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2014 and to EUR 0,0050 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2015 and shall remain at EUR 0,0050 per megabyte of data transmitted until 30 June 2022.
2. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply between any pair of operators and shall be calculated over a 12-month period or any such shorter period as may remain before 30 June 2022.	2. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply between any pair of operators and shall be calculated over a 12-month period or any such shorter period as may remain before 30 June 2022.
3. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated by dividing the total wholesale revenue received by the visited network or home network operator for the provision of regulated data roaming services in the relevant period by the total number of megabytes of data actually consumed by the provision of those services within that period, aggregated on a per-kilobyte basis on behalf of the relevant roaming provider or home network operator within that period.	3. The average wholesale charge referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated by dividing the total wholesale revenue received by the visited network or home network operator for the provision of regulated data roaming services in the relevant period by the total number of megabytes of data actually consumed by the provision of those services within that period, aggregated on a per-kilobyte basis on behalf of the relevant roaming provider or home network operator within that period.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Amendment 789

Jens Rohde Article 37 – point 5 b (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 12 – paragraph 1</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(5b) In Article 12, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
1. With effect from 1 July 2012, the average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the roaming customer’s home provider for the provision of regulated data roaming services by means of that visited network shall not exceed a safeguard limit of EUR 0,25 per megabyte of data transmitted. The safeguard limit shall decrease to EUR 0,15 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2013 and to EUR 0,05 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2014 and shall, without prejudice to Article 19, remain at EUR 0,05 per megabyte of data transmitted until 30 June 2022.	1. With effect from 1 July 2013, the average wholesale charge that the visited network operator may levy on the roaming customer’s home provider for the provision of regulated data roaming services by means of that visited network shall not exceed a safeguard limit of EUR 0,15 per megabyte of data transmitted. The safeguard limit shall decrease to EUR 0,015 per megabyte of data transmitted on 1 July 2014, to EUR 0,0050 on 1 July 2015, and to EUR 0,0025 on 1 July 2016.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Justification:
Without creating a wholesale market in which the smaller players can compete, new legislation could distort competition and lead to the eviction of smaller and dynamic players from the market for international roaming. This amendments reduces wholesale roaming caps to a level which enables each provider who so wishes to offer retail services including ‘roam like at home’ in the short term. In addition, maximum wholesale charges are reduced in line with cost reductions, while leaving a reasonable margin in relation to capped retail charges to encourage market entry. This will enable market-led development of retail offers, and is certain to achieve the policy objective of putting an end to retail roaming tariffs by 2015, by enabling all providers to supply ‘roam like at home’ to mobile user. The levels of the revised wholesale roaming caps put forward are not below cost, as is evidenced by: (i) existing retail offers on domestic markets, (ii) existing domestic MVNO access offers and agreements, and (iii) a small number of bilateral wholesale roaming agreements between mobile network operators. Furthermore, the September BEREC benchmark report, which analysed the average EU roaming retail and wholesale rates for the first quarter of 2013, indicated the following margins:• Voice a) retail: 0.324 cents per minute, b) wholesale: 0.113 cents per minute.• SMS a) retail:0.084 cents per SMS, b) wholesale: 0.025 cents per SMS.• Data a) retail:0.482 cents per MB, b) wholesale:0.069 cents per MB. These numbers therefore demonstrate margins of 286% for voice, 336% for SMS and 698% for data.

Amendment 790

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – point 4 d (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 13</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(4d) Article 13 is replaced by the following:
Article 13	Article 13
Retail charges for regulated data roaming services	Retail charges for regulated data roaming services
1. Roaming providers shall make available and actively offer to all their roaming customers, clearly and transparently, a euro- data tariff as provided for in paragraph 2. This euro-data tariff shall not entail any associated subscription or other fixed or recurring charges and may be combined with any retail tariff.	1. Roaming providers shall make available and actively offer to all their roaming customers, clearly and transparently, a euro- data tariff as provided for in paragraph 2. This euro-data tariff shall not entail any associated subscription or other fixed or recurring charges and may be combined with any retail tariff.
When making this offer, roaming providers shall remind those roaming customers who have already chosen a specific roaming tariff or package of the conditions applicable to that tariff or package.	When making this offer, roaming providers shall remind those roaming customers who have already chosen a specific roaming tariff or package of the conditions applicable to that tariff or package.
2. With effect from 1 July 2012, the retail charge (excluding VAT) of a euro-data tariff which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated data roaming service shall not exceed EUR 0,70 per megabyte used. The maximum retail charge for data used shall decrease to EUR 0,45 per megabyte used on 1 July 2013 and to EUR 0,20 per megabyte used on 1 July 2014 and shall, without prejudice to Article 19, remain at EUR 0,20 per megabyte used until 30 June 2017.	2. With effect from 1 July 2013, the retail charge (excluding VAT) of a euro-data tariff which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the provision of a regulated data roaming service shall not exceed EUR 0,45 per megabyte used. The maximum retail charge for data used shall decrease to EUR 0,20 per megabyte used on 1 July 2014 and to EUR 0,10 per megabyte used on 1 July 2015 and shall remain at EUR 0,10 per megabyte used until 30 June 2016.
Every roaming provider shall charge its roaming customers for the provision of any regulated roaming data service to which a euro-data tariff applies on a per-kilobyte basis, except for Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) messages which may be charged on a per-unit basis. In such a case, the retail charge which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the transmission or receipt of a roaming MMS message shall not exceed the maximum retail charge set in the first subparagraph.	Every roaming provider shall charge its roaming customers for the provision of any regulated roaming data service to which a euro-data tariff applies on a per-kilobyte basis, except for Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) messages which may be charged on a per-unit basis. In such a case, the retail charge which a roaming provider may levy on its roaming customer for the transmission or receipt of a roaming MMS message shall not exceed the maximum retail charge set in the first subparagraph.
3. From 1 July 2012 roaming providers shall apply a euro- data tariff to all existing roaming customers automatically, with the exception of such roaming customers who have already made a choice of a specific roaming tariff, or who are already on a tariff which is demonstrably lower than the euro-data tariff or who have already made a choice of a package by virtue of which they benefit from a different tariff for regulated data roaming services than they would have been accorded in the absence of such choice.	3. From 1 July 2012 roaming providers shall apply a euro- data tariff to all existing roaming customers automatically, with the exception of such roaming customers who have already made a choice of a specific roaming tariff, or who are already on a tariff which is demonstrably lower than the euro-data tariff or who have already made a choice of a package by virtue of which they benefit from a different tariff for regulated data roaming services than they would have been accorded in the absence of such choice.
4. From 1 July 2012 roaming providers shall apply a euro- data tariff to all new roaming customers who have not made a deliberate choice to select a different roaming data tariff or a tariff package for roaming services which includes a different tariff for regulated roaming data services.	4. From 1 July 2012 roaming providers shall apply a euro- data tariff to all new roaming customers who have not made a deliberate choice to select a different roaming data tariff or a tariff package for roaming services which includes a different tariff for regulated roaming data services.
5. Any roaming customer may request to switch to or from a euro-data tariff, respecting their contractual conditions, at any point in time. Any switch shall be made within one working day of receipt of the request, shall be free of charge and shall not entail conditions or restrictions pertaining to elements of the subscription other than Union-wide roaming. A roaming provider may delay such a switch until the previous roaming tariff has been effective for a minimum specified period not exceeding two months. A euro-data tariff may always be combined with a euro-SMS tariff and a euro-voice tariff.	5. Any roaming customer may request to switch to or from a euro-data tariff, respecting their contractual conditions, at any point in time. Any switch shall be made within one working day of receipt of the request, shall be free of charge and shall not entail conditions or restrictions pertaining to elements of the subscription other than Union-wide roaming. A roaming provider may delay such a switch until the previous roaming tariff has been effective for a minimum specified period not exceeding two months. A euro-data tariff may always be combined with a euro-SMS tariff and a euro-voice tariff.
6. By 30 June 2012 roaming providers shall inform all their roaming customers individually, in a clear and understandable manner and on a durable medium, about the euro-data tariff, that it will apply from 1 July 2012 at the latest to all roaming customers who have not made a deliberate choice of a special tariff or package applicable to regulated data roaming services, and about their right to switch to and from it in accordance with paragraph 5.	6. By 30 June 2012 roaming providers shall inform all their roaming customers individually, in a clear and understandable manner and on a durable medium, about the euro-data tariff, that it will apply from 1 July 2012 at the latest to all roaming customers who have not made a deliberate choice of a special tariff or package applicable to regulated data roaming services, and about their right to switch to and from it in accordance with paragraph 5.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Amendment 791

Herbert Reul Article 37 – point 6 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 14 – paragraph 1 a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
When the consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate is limited by reference to a reasonable use criterion in accordance with Article 4a(2), roaming providers shall alert roaming customers when the consumption of roaming calls and SMS messages has reached the reasonable use limit and at the same time shall provide roaming customers with basic personalised pricing information on the roaming charges applicable to making a voice call or sending an SMS message outside the domestic service rate or package in accordance with the second, fourth and fifth sub-paragraphs of paragraph 1 of this Article.	From 1 July 2017, where the consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate is limited by reference to a reasonable use criterion in accordance with Article 6a(2), roaming providers shall alert roaming customers when the consumption of roaming calls and SMS messages has reached the reasonable use limit and at the same time shall provide roaming customers with basic personalised pricing information on the roaming charges applicable to making a voice call or sending an SMS message outside the domestic service rate or package.

Amendment 792

Herbert Reul Article 37 – point 7 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 15 – paragraph 2a</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
ʻ2a. When the consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate is limited by reference to a reasonable use criterion in accordance with Article 4a(2), roaming providers shall alert roaming customers when the consumption of data roaming services has reached the reasonable use limit and at the same time shall provide roaming customers with basic personalised pricing information on the roaming charges applicable to data roaming outside the domestic service rate or package in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article. Paragraph 3 of this Article shall apply to data roaming services consumed outside the applicable domestic service rates or packages referred to in Article 4a(2).	2a. From 1 July 2017, where the consumption of regulated retail roaming services at the applicable domestic service rate is limited by reference to a reasonable use criterion in accordance with Article 6a(2), roaming providers shall alert roaming customers when the consumption of data roaming services has reached the reasonable use limit and at the same time shall provide roaming customers with basic personalised pricing information on the roaming charges applicable to data roaming outside the domestic service rate or package in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.« Paragraph 3 of this Article shall apply to data roaming services consumed outside the applicable domestic service rates or packages referred to in Article 6a(2).

Amendment 793

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 37 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) [...]	deleted

Amendment 794

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) [...]	deleted

Amendment 795

Giles Chichester Article 37 – point 8 – point a – point i <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 8a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall review the functioning of this regulation and, after a public consultation, shall report to the European Parliament and the Council by 31December 2016 at the latest.	1. The Commission shall review the functioning of this Regulation and shall report to the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 6.
	2. The Commission shall, by 1 July 2015, after a public consultation, report to the European Parliament and the Council on whether to change the duration or revise the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12, also taking into account termination rates.

Amendment 796

Gunnar Hökmark Article 37 – point 8 – point a – point i <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 19</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	To increase competition the Commission shall by 30 June 2015, after a public consultation, propose to the European Parliament and the Council a revision of the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in articles 7,9 and 12, also taking into account the development of mobile termination rates.

Amendment 797

Catherine Trautmann Article 37 – point 8 – point b – point i <DOC2>Regulation No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 19 – paragraph 2</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
If the report shows that tariff options, in which the domestic service rate applies both to domestic and regulated roaming services, are not provided in all retail packages for reasonable use by at least one roaming provider in each Member State, or that the offers by alternative roaming providers have not made substantially equivalent retail roaming tariffs easily available to consumers throughout the Union, the Commission shall by the same date make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address the situation and ensure that there is no difference between national and roaming tariffs within the internal market.	If the report shows that tariff options, in which the domestic service rate applies both to domestic and regulated roaming services, are not provided in all retail packages for reasonable use by at least one roaming provider in each Member State, or that the offers by alternative roaming providers have not made substantially equivalent retail roaming tariffs easily available to consumers throughout the Union, the Commission shall, by July 2015, after a public consultation and after requesting and taking utmost account of BEREC’s opinion, make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address the situation and ensure that there is no difference between national and roaming tariffs within the internal market.

Amendment 798

Catherine Trautmann Article 37 – point 8 – point b – point ii <DOC2>Regulation No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point d</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) to change the duration or reduce the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12 with a view to reinforcing the ability of all roaming providers to make available in their respective retail packages for reasonable use tariff options in which the applicable domestic service rate applies to both domestic services and regulated roaming services, as if the latter were consumed on the home network.	(d) to change the duration or reduce the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12 with a view to reinforcing the ability of all roaming providers to make available in their respective retail packages for reasonable use tariff options in which the applicable domestic service rate applies to both domestic services and regulated roaming services, as if the latter were consumed on the home network by July 2015.

Amendment 799

Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein Article 37 – point 8 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 19</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(8a) Article 19 is replaced by the following:
Article 19	Article 19
Review	Review
1. The Commission shall review the functioning of this Regulation and, after a public consultation, shall report to the European Parliament and the Council by 30 June 2016. The Commission shall evaluate in particular whether the objectives of this Regulation have been achieved. In so doing, the Commission shall review, inter alia:	1. The Commission shall review the functioning of this Regulation and shall report to the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 6.
(a) whether competition has sufficiently developed in order to justify the expiry of maximum retail charges;	2. The Commission shall, by 30 September 2015, after consulting BEREC, report to the European Parliament and the Council on whether to change the duration or revise the level of mobile termination rates for roaming and maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12.
(b) whether competition will be sufficient for the removal of maximum wholesale charges;	3. The Commission shall, by 30 June 2016, after a public consultation, report to the European Parliament and the Council on, inter alia:
(c) the developments and expected future trends in wholesale and retail charges for the provision to roaming customers of voice, SMS and data communication services, in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level in the Member States, both for pre-paid and post-paid customers separately, and in the quality and speed of these services;	(a) whether competition has sufficiently developed in order to justify the expiry of maximum retail charges;
(d) the availability and quality of services including those which are an alternative to voice, SMS and data roaming services, in particular in the light of technological developments;	(b) whether competition will be sufficient for the removal of maximum wholesale charges;
(e) the extent to which consumers have benefited through real reductions in the price of roaming services, the variety of tariffs and products which are available to consumers with different calling patterns, and the difference between roaming and national tariffs, including the availability of offers providing a single tariff for national and roaming services;	(c) the developments and expected future trends in wholesale and retail charges for the provision to roaming customers of voice, SMS and data communication services, in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level in the Member States, both for pre-paid and post-paid customers separately, and in the quality and speed of these services;
(f) the degree of competition in both the retail and wholesale markets, in particular the competitive situation of smaller, independent or newly started operators, including the competition effects of commercial agreements and the degree of interconnection between operators;	(d) the availability and quality of services including those which are an alternative to voice, SMS and data roaming services, in particular in the light of technological developments;
(g) the extent to which the implementation of the structural measures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 has produced results in developing competition in the internal market for roaming services to the extent that the difference between roaming and national tariffs has approached zero;	(e) the extent to which consumers have benefited through real reductions in the price of roaming services, the variety of tariffs and products which are available to consumers with different calling patterns, and the difference between roaming and national tariffs, including the availability of offers providing a single tariff for national and roaming services;
(h) the extent to which the level of wholesale and retail maximum charges has provided adequate safeguards against excessive prices for consumers while allowing the development of competition in the internal market for roaming services.	(f) the degree of competition in both the retail and wholesale markets, in particular the competitive situation of smaller, independent or newly started operators, including the competition effects of commercial agreements and the degree of interconnection between operators;
2. If the report shows that the structural measures provided for by this Regulation have not been sufficient to promote competition in the internal market for roaming services for the benefit of all European consumers or that the differences between roaming tariffs and national tariffs have not approached zero, the Commission shall make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address this situation and thus achieve an internal market for mobile communication services, ultimately with there being no difference between national and roaming tariffs. The Commission shall examine, in particular, whether it is necessary:	(g) the extent to which the implementation of the structural measures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 has produced results in developing competition in the internal market for roaming services to the extent that the difference between roaming and national tariffs has approached zero;
(a) to lay down additional technical and structural measures;	(h) the extent to which the level of wholesale and retail maximum charges has provided adequate safeguards against excessive prices for consumers while allowing the development of competition in the internal market for roaming services.
(b) to modify the structural measures;	4. If the report referred to in paragraph 2 shows that there is a need to change the duration or revise the level of maximum wholesale charges or mobile termination rates for roaming, the Commission shall, by 31 December 2015 make appropriate proposal to the European Parliament and the Council to address this situation.
(c) to extend the duration and possibly revise the level of the maximum retail charges provided for in Articles 8, 10 and 13;	If the report, referred to in paragraph 3, shows that the structural measures provided for by this Regulation have not been sufficient to promote competition in the internal market for roaming services for the benefit of all European consumers or that the differences between roaming tariffs and national tariffs have not approached zero, the Commission shall, by 31 December 2015, make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address this situation and thus achieve an internal market for mobile communication services, ultimately with there being no difference between national and roaming tariffs.
(d) to change the duration or revise the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12;	5. In addition, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council every two years after the report referred to in paragraph 1. Each report shall include a summary of the monitoring of the provision of roaming services in the Union and an assessment of the progress towards achieving the objectives of this Regulation, including by reference to the matters referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3.
(e) to introduce any other necessary requirements, including non-differentiation of roaming and national tariffs.	6. In order to assess the competitive developments in the Union-wide roaming markets, BEREC shall regularly collect data from national regulatory authorities on the development of retail and wholesale charges for voice, SMS and data roaming services. Those data shall be notified to the Commission at least twice a year. The Commission shall make them public.
3. In addition, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council every two years after the report referred to in paragraph 1. Each report shall include a summary of the monitoring of the provision of roaming services in the Union and an assessment of the progress towards achieving the objectives of this Regulation, including by reference to the matters referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.	BEREC shall also annually collect information from national regulatory authorities on transparency and comparability of different tariffs offered by operators to their customers. The Commission shall make those data and findings public.
4. In order to assess the competitive developments in the Union-wide roaming markets, BEREC shall regularly collect data from national regulatory authorities on the development of retail and wholesale charges for voice, SMS and data roaming services. Those data shall be notified to the Commission at least twice a year. The Commission shall make them public.
BEREC shall also annually collect information from national regulatory authorities on transparency and comparability of different tariffs offered by operators to their customers. The Commission shall make those data and findings public.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Amendment 800

Pilar del Castillo Vera Article 37 – point 8 a (new) <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 231/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 19</ART2>;
Present text	Amendment
	(8a) Article 19 is replaced by the following:
Review	1. The Commission shall review the functioning of this Regulation and shall report to the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 6.
1. The Commission shall review the functioning of this Regulation and, after a public consultation, shall report to the European Parliament and the Council by 30 June 2016. The Commission shall evaluate in particular whether the objectives of this Regulation have been achieved. In so doing, the Commission shall review, inter alia:	2. The Commission shall, by 30 June 2015, after a public consultation, report to the European Parliament and the Council on whether to change the duration or revise the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12, also taking into account termination rates.
(a) whether competition has sufficiently developed in order to justify the expiry of maximum retail charges;	BEREC shall, by 30 June 2015, after a public consultation, lay down guidelines on measures to prevent anomalous or fraudulent usage for the purpose of Article 6a.
(b) whether competition will be sufficient for the removal of maximum wholesale charges;	3. The Commission shall, by 30 June 2016, after a public consultation, report to the European Parliament and the Council on, inter alia:
(c) the developments and expected future trends in wholesale and retail charges for the provision to roaming customers of voice, SMS and data communication services, in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level in the Member States, both for pre-paid and post-paid customers separately, and in the quality and speed of these services;	(a) the availability and quality of services including those which are an alternative to voice, SMS and data roaming services, in particular in the light of technological developments;
(d) the availability and quality of services including those which are an alternative to voice, SMS and data roaming services, in particular in the light of technological developments;	(b) the degree of competition in both the retail and wholesale markets, in particular the competitive situation of smaller, independent or newly started operators, including the competition effects of commercial agreements and the degree of interconnection between operators;
(e) the extent to which consumers have benefited through real reductions in the price of roaming services, the variety of tariffs and products which are available to consumers with different calling patterns, and the difference between roaming and national tariffs, including the availability of offers providing a single tariff for national and roaming services;	(c) the extent to which the implementation of the structural measures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 has produced results in developing competition in the internal market for roaming services.
(f) the degree of competition in both the retail and wholesale markets, in particular the competitive situation of smaller, independent or newly started operators, including the competition effects of commercial agreements and the degree of interconnection between operators;	The Commission shall examine, in particular, whether it is necessary to lay down additional technical and structural measures or to modify the structural measures.
(g) the extent to which the implementation of the structural measures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 has produced results in developing competition in the internal market for roaming services to the extent that the difference between roaming and national tariffs has approached zero;	4. If the report referred to in paragraph 2 shows that there is a need to change the duration or revise the level of maximum wholesale charges, the Commission shall make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address this situation.
(h) the extent to which the level of wholesale and retail maximum charges has provided adequate safeguards against excessive prices for consumers while allowing the development of competition in the internal market for roaming services.	If the report referred to in paragraph 3 shows that the structural measures provided for by this Regulation have not been sufficient to promote competition in the internal market for roaming services for the benefit of all European consumers, the Commission shall make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address this situation.
2. If the report shows that the structural measures provided for by this Regulation have not been sufficient to promote competition in the internal market for roaming services for the benefit of all European consumers or that the differences between roaming tariffs and national tariffs have not approached zero, the Commission shall make appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council to address this situation and thus achieve an internal market for mobile communication services, ultimately with there being no difference between national and roaming tariffs. The Commission shall examine, in particular, whether it is necessary:	In both cases, proposals for any appropriate measures shall be presented simultaneously with the reports.
(a) to lay down additional technical and structural measures;	5. In addition, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council every two years after the report referred to in paragraph 3. Each report shall include a summary of the monitoring of the provision of roaming services in the Union and an assessment of the progress towards achieving the objectives of this Regulation.
(b) to modify the structural measures;	6. In order to assess the competitive developments in the Union-wide roaming markets, BEREC shall regularly collect data from national regulatory authorities on the development of retail and wholesale charges for voice, SMS and data roaming services. Those data shall be notified to the Commission at least twice a year. The Commission shall make them public.
(c) to extend the duration and possibly revise the level of the maximum retail charges provided for in Articles 8, 10 and 13;	BEREC shall also annually collect information from national regulatory authorities on transparency and comparability of different tariffs offered by operators to their customers. The Commission shall make those data and findings public.
(d) to change the duration or revise the level of maximum wholesale charges provided for in Articles 7, 9 and 12;
(e) to introduce any other necessary requirements, including non-differentiation of roaming and national tariffs.
3. In addition, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council every two years after the report referred to in paragraph 1. Each report shall include a summary of the monitoring of the provision of roaming services in the Union and an assessment of the progress towards achieving the objectives of this Regulation, including by reference to the matters referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.
4. In order to assess the competitive developments in the Union-wide roaming markets, BEREC shall regularly collect data from national regulatory authorities on the development of retail and wholesale charges for voice, SMS and data roaming services. Those data shall be notified to the Commission at least twice a year. The Commission shall make them public.
BEREC shall also annually collect information from national regulatory authorities on transparency and comparability of different tariffs offered by operators to their customers. The Commission shall make those data and findings public.

(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:172:0010:0035:EN:PDF)

Amendment 801

<MB>Catherine Trautmann, Patrizia Toia, Teresa Riera Madurell, Dimitrios Droutsas, Edit Herczog</MB> Article 38 – point 1 a (new)
<DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 6a (new)</ART2>;

|- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Text proposed by the Commission |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| Amendment |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| (1a) In Article 3, a new paragraph 2a is added: |- |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| |width="50%" style="vertical-align:top;"| BEREC’s advisory role upstream of any legislative proposals affecting the electronic communications sector should be made methodical |}

Amendment 802

Giles Chichester Article 38 a (new) <DOC2>Decision No 243/2012/EU</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 6a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 38a
	Amendments to Decision No 243/2012/EU
	When establishing the structure of the licence fees payable for the allocation of spectrum, national competent authorities shall ensure that the chosen fee structure minimises the time to make new network and services available to consumers and citizens by:
	(a) considering the relative merits of alternative fee structures, including the payment of recurring annual fees for the duration of the licence, in terms of the impact they have on investments, innovation and the availability of a particular service throughout the European Union; and
	(b) considering to initiate the collection of such fees from the date of the launch of the services which rely upon the allocated spectrum.

Justification:
The current fee structure employed in the majority of cases across the Union is characterised by large up-front payments which do not align well with the timing profile of the required network investments, nor with the timing of revenue generation that the use of the allocated spectrum allows. A more balanced approach, which consider the full impact that alternative fee structures have on investments and innovation.

Amendment 803

Paul Rübig Article 39 – paragraph 1 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 6a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. The first report shall be submitted no later than 1 July 2018. Subsequent reports shall be submitted every four years thereafter. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments, taking account in particular of developments in information technology and of the state of progress in the information society. The reports shall be made public.	The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. In any event, the Commission shall, by 30 June 2015, conduct a review and evaluation of the overall legal framework for the electronic communications sector and submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report containing appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments.
	The evaluation shall include the following aspects in particular:
	- assessment of whether significant market price asymmetry and access rules may be otherwise regulated;
	- assessment of the need for further regulation in this area and applicability thereof to all market participants across the entire value chain;
	- ensuring user control of digital services and guaranteed portability when switching between different operating systems;
	- ensuring equal operating conditions for all market participants, including providers of 'over-the-top' online services and providers of telecommunications services; ensuring that users of 'over-the-top' online services are also protected by principles such as transparency, non-discrimination, openness, portability, interoperability and measures to facilitate the switching of providers, which are already applicable in the case of telecommunications service providers.

Amendment 804

Edit Herczog Article 39 – paragraph 1 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 6a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. The first report shall be submitted no later than 1 July 2018. Subsequent reports shall be submitted every four years thereafter. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments, taking account in particular of developments in information technology and of the state of progress in the information society. The reports shall be made public.	The Commission shall perform a comprehensive evaluation and review of the entire regulatory framework for electronic communications, and shall submit a report with appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council by 30 June 2015.
	The review shall be carried out in view of
	- assessing whether the asymmetric, SMP-based price and access regulation of the EU regulatory framework can be removed
	- evaluating the continued need for the remaining regulation which would apply symmetrically to all players on the market along the converging value chain
	- ensuring that users of digital services are able to control their digital life and data by removing obstacles to switching operating systems without losing their applications and data
	- ensuring a level playing field with, and providing sufficient protection of consumers using ‘over the top’ online services compared to telecommunications services by establishing rules that ensure the application to ‘over the top’ online services of well-established principles for the provision of electronic communications services such as transparency, non-discrimination, openness, ease of switching providers, interoperability, any-to-any communication and portability to their services.

Justification:
In its Communication accompanying this legislative proposal the Commission acknowledges the transitory nature of SMP based asymmetric ex-ante regulation and the need to establish a level playing field with so called ‘over the top’ online services in a converging all IP market. These are two basic requirements to provide for competitive framework conditions for the European ICT industry and we cannot afford to postpone these changes, essential for the recovery of our strategically important ICT sector. When the next revised framework will enter into force, we will have experienced two decades of transitory sector specific ex-ante SMP regulation. Already today we clearly observe that telecommunications markets are competitive and with the underlying market structure and established wholesale markets competition rules are already today able to sufficiently guarantee the competitive functioning of telecommunications markets in Europe. This does not mean that we do not need to continue to provide for symmetric rules, applicable to all market players independent of any SMP to ensure basic security requirements and to sufficiently protect consumers. Well established principles which have proven their value in protecting consumers and keeping markets open for competition like any-to-any-communication, portability, non-discrimination, openness of platforms, transparency and the like should be applied in an appropriate way to all players in the converging all IP world.

Amendment 805

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 39 – paragraph 1 <DOC2>Regulation (EU) No 531/2012</DOC2> <ART2>Article 4 – paragraph 6a (new)</ART2>;
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. The first report shall be submitted no later than 1 July 2018. Subsequent reports shall be submitted every four years thereafter. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments, taking account in particular of developments in information technology and of the state of progress in the information society. The reports shall be made public.	The Commission shall comprehensively assess and review the entire regulatory framework applicable to electronic communications and, by 31 March 2015 at the latest, notify the European Parliament and Council of its findings, together with any proposed amendments.

Amendment 806

Angelika Niebler Article 39 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. The first report shall be submitted no later than 1 July 2018 . Subsequent reports shall be submitted every four years thereafter. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments, taking account in particular of developments in information technology and of the state of progress in the information society. The reports shall be made public.	The Commission shall comprehensively assess and review the entire regulatory framework applicable to electronic communications and, by 30 June 2015 at the latest, submit a report, together with any recommendations, to the European Parliament and Council.

Amendment 807

Gunnar Hökmark Article 39 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. The first report shall be submitted no later than 1 July 2018. Subsequent reports shall be submitted every four years thereafter. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments, taking account in particular of developments in information technology and of the state of progress in the information society. The reports shall be made public.	The Commission shall submit reports on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and the Council at regular intervals. The first report shall be submitted no later than 1 July 2018 . Subsequent reports shall be submitted every four years thereafter. The Commission shall, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals with a view to amending this Regulation, and aligning other legal instruments, taking account in particular of developments in information technology and of the state of progress in the information society. The review shall include amongst others:

Amendment 808

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The Commission review

Amendment 809

Giles Chichester Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(a) The review shall include the Commission Recommendation of 17 December 2007 on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex-ante regulation in accordance with Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services including the ‘three criteria’ test. The Commission Recommendation of 17 December 2007 on relevant product and service markets shall remain in force until the comprehensive review of the regulatory framework;

Justification:
The potential modification of the current regulatory and competition model of the EU must be carried out under a comprehensive review, public consultation and impact assessment. This Regulation or implementing acts of the Commission should not prejudice such a review, in this context the modification of the currently applicable list of relevant markets cannot be justified before the co-legislators will have agreed upon it following the review.

Amendment 810

Gunnar Hökmark Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point i (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(i) pan-European services and operators, taking into account the possibility for the Commission to identify transnational markets under Article 15(4) of Directive 2002/21/EC;

Amendment 811

András Gyürk Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point i (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(i) Facilitating the development of globally competitive pan-European providers and the provision of cross-border business services.

Amendment 812

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1) assess the possibility of ending asymmetric and SMP-based pricing and access arrangements;

Amendment 813

Gunnar Hökmark Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point ii (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ii) identification of transnational markets, initially at least with respect to business services; enabling providers to notify BEREC of their intention to serve such markets, and supervision of providers serving such markets by BEREC

Amendment 814

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point 2 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2) shall assess the continued need for the existing arrangements applicable equally to all market operators on the value chain;

Amendment 815

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point 3 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(3) shall ensure that consumers and digital service users are able to control their digital identity and data and that measures are taken to facilitate a switch between different operating systems with no loss of applications or data;

Amendment 816

Gunnar Hökmark Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point iii (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(iii) a single Union authorisation including pan-European spectrum auctions and the supervisory structure for the framework as a whole;

Amendment 817

Werner Langen, Herbert Reul Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point 4 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(4) ensure a level playing field and equal competition with regard to telecommunications and OTT services, thereby ensuring adequate protection for OTT service users, taking particular account of the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and interoperability and the need to facilitate the switching of providers.

Amendment 818

Gunnar Hökmark Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point iv (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(iv) A strengthening of the application of the functional separation remedy by removing the exceptional character of the obligation creating increase incentives for network investments and further develops the internal market in electronic communications.

Amendment 819

Gunnar Hökmark Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point v (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(v) The promotion of the global competitiveness of the Union and the European digital industry, as well as investment and innovation.

Amendment 820

Jean-Pierre Audy Article 39 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 39a
	European regulatory and supervisory authority for the European single market for electronic communications
	An independent European regulatory and supervisory authority for the European single market for electronic communications shall be established to regulate and supervise the functioning of the European electronic communications market. The operating costs of this independent authority shall be met through a compulsory levy on electronic communications.

Amendment 821

Jean-Pierre Audy Annex 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
[...]	deleted

Amendment 822

Catherine Trautmann Annex 1 – heading 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
MINIMUM PARAMETERS FOR OFFERS OF EUROPEAN VIRTUAL BROADBAND ACCESS PRODUCTS	MINIMUM PARAMETERS FOR OFFERS OF EUROPEAN HIGH-QUALITY ACCESS PRODUCTS FOR THE PROVISION OF PAN-EUROPEAN BSUINESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES

Amendment 823

Catherine Trautmann Annex 1 – part 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. [...]	deleted

Amendment 824

Catherine Trautmann Annex 1 – part 2 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Fixed network wholesale access product offered at Layer 3 of the International Standards Organisation seven layer model for communications protocols (‘Network Layer’), at the IP level bit-stream level with handover points offering a higher degree of resource aggregation such as at national and/or regional level	OFFER 1: High-quality fixed network wholesale access product offered at Layer 3 of the International Standards Organisation seven layer model for communications protocols (‘Network Layer’), at the IP level bit-stream level with handover points offering a higher degree of resource aggregation such as at national and/or regional level

Amendment 825

Catherine Trautmann <ART>Annex 1 – part 2 – point 2.2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part</ART>
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Ability to support different quality of service levels (e.g. QoS 1, 2 and 3) with regard to:	Ability to support high quality service levels with regard to:

Amendment 826

Catherine Trautmann Annex 1 – part 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. OFFER 3	3. OFFER 2

Amendment 827

Jean-Pierre Audy Annex 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
MINIMUM PARAMETERS OF EUROPEAN ASQ CONNECTIVITY PRODUCTS	deleted
Network elements and related information
- A description of the connectivity product to be provided over a fixed network, including technical characteristics and adoption of any relevant standards.
Network functionalities:
– connectivity agreement ensuring end-to-end Quality of Service, based on common specified parameters that enable the provision of at least the following classes of services:
– voice and video calls;
– broadcast of audio-visual content; and
– data critical applications.

Amendment 828

Marietje Schaake Annex 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
MINIMUM PARAMETERS OF EUROPEAN ASQ CONNECTIVITY PRODUCTS	deleted
Network elements and related information
- A description of the connectivity product to be provided over a fixed network, including technical characteristics and adoption of any relevant standards.
Network functionalities:
– connectivity agreement ensuring end-to-end Quality of Service, based on common specified parameters that enable the provision of at least the following classes of services:
– voice and video calls;
– broadcast of audio-visual content; and
– data critical applications.

Amendment 829

Petra Kammerevert Annex 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
MINIMUM PARAMETERS OF EUROPEAN ASQ CONNECTIVITY PRODUCTS	deleted
Network elements and related information
– A description of the connectivity product to be provided over a fixed network, including technical characteristics and adoption of any relevant standards.
Network functionalities:
– connectivity agreement ensuring end-to-end Quality of Service, based on common specified parameters that enable the provision of at least the following classes of services:
– voice and video calls;
– broadcast of audio-visual content; and
– data critical applications.

Amendment 830

Catherine Trautmann Annex 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
MINIMUM PARAMETERS OF EUROPEAN ASQ CONNECTIVITY PRODUCTS	deleted
Network elements and related information
- A description of the connectivity product to be provided over a fixed network, including technical characteristics and adoption of any relevant standards.
Network functionalities:
– connectivity agreement ensuring end-to-end Quality of Service, based on common specified parameters that enable the provision of at least the following classes of services:
– voice and video calls;
– broadcast of audio-visual content; and
– data critical applications.