Broadband deployment and sharing other utilities infrastructure A Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) discussion paper

Transcription

1 Broadband deployment and sharing other utilities infrastructure A Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) discussion paper Consumer Council for Water Response September 2010

2 Introduction 1. The Consumer Council for Water is the statutory consumer organisation representing water and sewerage consumers in England and Wales. The Consumer Council for Water has four regional committees in England and a committee for Wales. 2. We welcome the opportunity to respond to the BIS discussion paper which proposes how broadband service providers could lay fibre optic cables through other utilities infrastructure to provide high speed broadband access to consumers. This is of relevance to water and sewerage consumers as public sewers are being considered in this initiative. In response to the questions raised in the discussion paper, we have focussed on the implications of infrastructure sharing on the sewerage services received by consumers. Executive Summary 3. While the Consumer Council for Water agrees that there appear to be benefits for the public in allowing broadband service providers access to water and sewerage companies infrastructure, protection needs to be in place to ensure that the sewerage services received by consumers is not impaired either by the presence of cables or the access given to sewerage infrastructure in order to lay and maintain cables. Any risk of sewer blockage caused by cables must be addressed. Sewer blockages can lead to sewer flooding, which is a severe service failure, is highly distressing for consumers, and potentially harmful to the environment. The use of sewerage infrastructure to host broadband cabling is likely to be limited in scope in rural areas due to the lack of mains sewerage in many of these locations. 4. In addition, more clarity is needed on who is being asked to pay for the potential water and sewerage company involvement in laying and maintaining fibre optic cables in public sewers. Customers of the water and sewerage companies should not cross subsidise the telecommunications function. Any subsequent revenues to water and sewerage companies from third party broadband service providers should be fairly distributed so that consumers gain some benefit from this initiative. If cross subsidies are to be considered, we recommend a consumer led approach as seen with the Government s approach to site area based charging for surface water drainage, where consumers were consulted on the issue. 5. We are aware that trials have taken place in England and Scotland and the Consumer Council for Water would like to see further trials to fully assess the technical implications and feasibility of using public sewers as a host for broadband cables. The outputs of such trials

3 should inform any subsequent progression in this initiative, and help address any risks to the sewerage service received by consumers. Question 1: Do you agree that the ability to share other utilities infrastructure would reduce the costs of rolling out superfast broadband and facilitate investment? 6. The discussion paper clearly sets out the expected benefits to the public of sharing infrastructure as this may reduce costs and public inconvenience from opening up roads and pavements for the laying of cables. However, a cost-benefit analysis should determine whether the cost of allowing access to utility infrastructure compares well with laying new separate infrastructure for broadband cables, and reveal what costs or cross subsidies this may impose on sewerage customers. 7. In response to questions 3 and 4, we explain our concerns about the potential negative impact on the quality of service received by water and sewerage consumers of infrastructure sharing. The Consumer Council for Water s annual tracking survey for measured consumers satisfaction with water and sewerage services. The survey confirmed that 87% of consumers were satisfied with the sewerage service they receive, while 96% were satisfied with the quality of the water supply they receive. 1 The Consumer Council for Water would not like to see this high level of satisfaction deteriorate because of third party activity on the water and sewerage networks, and would expect the standard of service to consumers to be unaffected if this initiative goes ahead. Question 2: We think that encouraging infrastructure sharing might help companies extend the reach of their networks further into harder to reach rural and remote areas. What infrastructure would be most useful in achieving this objective? How much difference do you think that more infrastructure sharing would make to the ability to reach these areas? 8. The discussion paper recommends the use of existing telecommunications and electricity infrastructure as possible ways of delivering broadband services to consumers in rural and remote areas. The paper also confirms that it is not technically feasible to use water mains for this purpose, and suggests sewerage infrastructure as a possible carrier for broadband cables. However many remote and/or rural areas are not connected to mains sewerage. The annual regulatory data 2 submitted by companies to Ofwat shows that at 31 March 2010, there were 798,792 properties in 1 CCWater Annual Tracking Survey Companies June Return 2010 data -

4 England and Wales that were not connected to the companies networks for sewerage services. 9. We raise concerns about the use of sewerage infrastructure under questions 3 and 4 below. Question 3: What do you see as the main barriers to infrastructure sharing? 10. The sewerage system performs a vital role for the protection of public health, and the safe removal of waste water. The sharing of access and the use of public sewers for laying broadband cables must not put this vital service at risk or reduce the quality of the sewerage service received by consumers. Adequate protection must be in in place. This protection needs to be carefully informed by water and sewerage companies, the relevant regulators and consumers. 11. Sewers carry waste water from properties, and are not designed and constructed with a view to being used by third parties for other purposes. Before a cable is laid in a sewer (either along the base or attached to its top) consideration must be given to whether the diameter of the pipe can accommodate the fibre optic cable. 12. This is particularly important for surface water sewers or combined sewers (that carry foul waste and surface water) as the volume of waste water increases during periods of rainfall. Foul only sewers are smaller diameter, carry more bulky material and can be therefore more prone to blockage, so are equally as important to consider. Foul only sewers are becoming more common as more developments are built on a sustainable basis and surface water is taken to soakaways or ponds and not into the public system. 13. The fibre optic cable itself would also need to be sufficiently robust to withstand the pressure of the sewer flow at peak demand, and also any sewer cleaning methods that are undertaken, such as pressure jetting. A loose cable could block the sewer, especially if it is a smaller diameter pipe. 14. Sewer blockages can lead to discharges from sewers. Sewer flooding is one of the most distressing service failures for consumers and may also cause an environmental hazard. 15. Third parties responsible for the cable may not be qualified to carry out works on a sewer, and may potentially damage its structure in the course of maintaining or laying a cable. There could be resource implications for the water and sewerage company if sewerage operatives need to be present whenever broadband cable engineers are accessing a sewer. Problems with the broadband cable would likely require water company staff to attend to isolate the sewer. Any maintenance could see the sewer taken out of service with the

5 resulting inconvenience for consumers. The costs involved in this maintenance could also fall unfairly to sewerage consumers. 16. Appropriate protection would need to be in place to prevent any unnecessary risk to the service received by consumers, and to minimise the risk of sewer blockage. This could take the form of service level agreements and/or codes of practice between the broadband service provider and the water and sewerage company. This could set out technical guidance as to the type of sewer that can be used for laying cables (pipe diameter, construction material, age, condition, and capacity at peak demand) and set maintenance standards. Ultimately, a water and sewerage company may need to inspect or survey a sewer before allowing access for fibre optic cables. This would incur a cost which should be borne by the broadband service provider. 17. Any codes of practice or service level agreements should be publicly accessible to demonstrate to interested parties, including consumers, that the risk of service failure is properly managed, appropriate protection is in place, and that water and sewerage customers are not paying the cost for maintenance associated with fibre optic cables in sewers (this should be borne by the broadband service provider). 18. A service level agreement or code of practice should also set out the broadband providers liability if a sewer flooding incident occurs and evidence shows that the cable was either the cause or a contributing factor to the incident. Question 4: What benefits are there for utility infrastructure owners in making their infrastructure available for sharing? 19. Water and sewerage companies would appear to have potential to earn extra revenue from third party broadband cable providers by allowing access to public sewers. This approach would need to be approved by the economic regulator Ofwat, and it would require careful communication and transparency to ensure that monopoly sewerage customers were not cross subsidising the telecommunications function and that any subsequent revenues were fairly distributed to customers. Company shareholders should not be the only beneficiaries of this arrangement as it is money derived from consumers bills that has funded the sewerage infrastructure. Question 5: What additional incentives would infrastructure owners like to see in place to encourage more sharing? 20. We have no comments to add on question 5. Question 6: What government action would be most likely to ensure the quickest and most effective deployment of broadband through

6 infrastructure sharing? Is legislation likely to be required or would industry co-operation be quicker and more effective? 21. As mentioned under Question 3 above, consumers need to be protected against any risks to the sewerage service they receive due to allowing access to sewers for broadband cables. Legislation may not be necessary to deliver this. Consumers could be protected through the use of Codes of practice and/or service level agreements, which should be drafted and consulted on to provide such safeguards to avoid the risk of sewer blockages or poor sewer performance. Cost benefit analysis to determine whether the cost of using sewers for broadband access compares well with other options for delivering high speed broadband. A regulatory impact assessment to assess the possible cost impact to water and sewerage companies and any possible cross subsidy to customers. Consumer research to measure public option on this initiative to inform a consumer led approach. 22. The Consumer Council for Water is aware that the water industry representative body Water UK is assessing the technical implications of using public sewers as a host for broadband cables, and trials have taken place to assess the feasibility of this. The results of these trials, and any technical assessments undertaken by the water and sewerage companies, should act as evidence in determining how consumers sewerage service can be protected if this is to be more widespread, and provide the technical basis for determining an appropriate code of practice. It may be necessary to conduct further trials to gather sufficient technical information to achieve this. Enquiries Enquiries about this consultation response and requests for further information should be addressed to: Steve Hobbs Policy Manager Consumer Council for Water Tel: Mobile: steven.hobbs@ccwater.org.uk The Hide Market, West Street, St. Philips, Bristol BS2 0BH