1. Benchmarking Expert Working Group (BEWG) 2016
Roman BAHNARU
BEWG Chair
ANRCETI
3rd Meeting BEWG
20-21 February 2017
Tbilisi, Georgia

2. Chapter I – BEWG activity
Chapter II – Regulatory Benchmark

3. Chapter I – BEWG activity

4. 1.1 Establishment and objectives
BEWG – was established at 6th EaPeReg Plenary Session, November 5th 2015, Moldova. Initiative from the sectorial regulators, based on the success of BEREC expert working groups activities/outcomes, and their long-term cooperation. Main goal of the BEWG is exchange of best practices, cooperation and assistance among members for comparing and improving the national EaPeReg members’ regulations in the alignment of their regulatory frameworks and statistical indicators to those used by the European Union
BEWG is a regulatory forum of experts to share best practices, share expertise and discussing up-to-date challenges facing EaPeReg and European markets related to regulatory framework and statistical indicators.
Promote benchmarking regulatory practices and pave the way for a better comparison tool of electronic communications environment among members
Monitor the development of regulatory activities among members – NRA competencies, market analysis, consumer protection, etc.
Collect information about key indicators and trends on the telecom sector, in particular for the fixed, mobile (including MTR, STR and FTR) and broadband market
Understand how NRAs obtain the information necessary to perform their statistical functions - to exchange know-how on the practical aspects of statistical NRA functions
----
Dissemination of best practices, contributions from BEWG members is essential to the successful benchmarking study performed by the BEWG
Main outcomes of BEWG will be yearly EaPeReg Reports on market trends and regulatory activities.
Deliverables are based on the responses from the BEWG members (completed questionnaires) and the F2F meeting discussions.

5. 1.2 BEWG Team Armenia Sergey LAZIKYAN, Tigran Khachatryan Azerbaijan
Ulkar Sadigova , Heydar Rustamov, Mobil Mammadzada
Belarus
Volha Barkouskaya , Tatsiana Habrusionak
Georgia
Rati Skhirtladze, David Gogichaishvili
Moldova, Chair of BEWG
Roman Bahnaru, Corneliu Perlog
Ukraine
Lilia Malon
Lithuania
Eugenijus Žvalionis
Macedonia
Petar Tasev, Aleksandar Kocevski
Poland
Przemyslaw Tarnawski, Aleksandra Stepnowska (remote participation)
Romania, Co-chair of BEWG
Bogdan Vasilescu
Representatives of all 6 EaP Countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Republic of Moldova and Ukraine) and 3 EU Countries (Lithuania, Romania, Poland), as well as the representatives of the Macedonia

6. ACTIVITY / EXPECTED OUTPUT/DELIVERABLES
1.3 Action Plan 2016
Period
ACTIVITY / EXPECTED OUTPUT/DELIVERABLES
RESPONSIBLITIES
Dec Jan.2016
Develop the Questionnaires for the survey
BEWG members
Feb.2016
F2F kickoff meeting, discussion of the Questionnaires
Mar.2016
Final Questionnaire /Approval of the Questionnaires
Chair & co-chair, BEWG members
Apr.-May 2016
Call for contributions based on the Questionnaires, collection of data
May-Jun.2016
Analysis, verification of data based on the Questionnaires contributions
Chair & co-chair
Jul.-Sept.2016
Preparation of the draft Benchmarking Report
Chair and co-chair
Oct.2016
Second F2F meeting, discussion Draft Benchmarking Report
Oct.-Nov.2016
Finalizing the Benchmarking Report
BEWG members, Chair and co-chair
Nov.2016
Presentation and Approval of the final Benchmarking Report. 2 plenary of EaPeReg
BEWG members, Chair & co-chair

7. 1.4 Meetings
The 1st Meeting of the EaPeReg Benchmarking Expert Working Group (BEWG) was held in Tbilisi, Georgia on 2-3 February 2016:
Action Plan for BEWG for 2016 and Terms of Reference for BEWG – were discussed and approved by the participants
Presentation and discussion of the draft questionnaire „Regulatory benchmarking” and „Statistical benchmarking”
Presentations on current status on key regulatory and statistical issues by BEWG Members’ countries
The 2nd Meeting of the EaPeReg Benchmarking Expert Working Group (BEWG) was held in Kiev, Ukraine on October 2016.
Presenting & validating the draft report „Regulatory benchmarking”
Presenting & validating the draft report „Statistical benchmarking”
Future steps

8. 1.5 Outcomes of the EaPeReg BEWG
It is important to mention that all participants BEWG contributed with presentations, provided inputs to discussions.
All information on BEWG actvity (Benchmark reports, agendas, PP presentations, ToR, action plan 2016, etc.) has been uploaded on BEWG dedicated space and all registered members can access the information.
Online shared space - Google Drive

9. 1.6 Structure of Benchmark reports
Part 1 – Regulatory
Institutional issues
Legislation framework
Legal issues
Regulatory framework
Market analysis
Part 2 - Statistical
Financial Indicators – overall in telecom sector
Mobile Telephony market – penetration, ARPU, MoU, etc.
Fixed Telephony market – penetration, ARPU, MoU, etc.
Broadband Market – penetration, ARPU, AUPU, speed shares, etc.
TV market – penetration, ARPU, etc.
M2M

10. Chapter II – Regulatory Benchmark

11. 2.1 EU Policy background and Regulatory framework
As a key part of the Europe 2020 Strategy, on 19 May 2010 the Commission adopted a new policy for the telecoms, ICT and media sectors – “A Digital Agenda for Europe” (the Digital Agenda). The Digital Agenda's main objective is to develop a digital single market in order to generate smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe.
A key instrument for achieving the priority areas outlined in the Europe 2020 Strategy and the Digital Agenda, is the implementation by EU member states of the EU Regulatory Framework
The key documents of regulatory framework for electronic communications are:
Directive 21 - Framework Directive
Directive 20 - Authorisation Directive
Directive 19 - Access Directive
Directive 22 - Universal Service Directive
Directive 58 – Privacy Directive

12. 2.2 Regulatory Governance
This section examines the general institutional framework in which the National Regulatory Authorities (NRA) operate.
The principles underpinning the operations of the NRAs are:
independence: the NRAs must be legally separate from and independent of all organisations providing electronic communications networks, equipment or services;
right of appeal: effective national mechanisms must enable any user or supplier of electronic communications networks or services who is affected by the decision of a NRA to appeal to an independent body;
impartiality and transparency: the NRAs must exercise their power in an impartial and transparent manner, and must also put in place mechanisms for consulting interested parties when they are considering taking steps which may impact heavily on the market.

13. 2.3 Legislation framework
The electronic communications law is the main and superior legislative document in the sector. The electronic communications law is adopted, acted and entered into force in all EaP countries. The strategy is a core national document which is usually accompanied by an action plan, sets out the actions and programs meant to achieve the overall objective of building an advanced Information Society and a knowledge based economy. In most EaP countries and in selected EU member states National Broadband Plan is a part or separated Plan oriented to the main document like national Digital Agenda Strategy on development of information society.

14. 2.4 Legal issues
Legal issues are important in the process of regulatory landscape, because of raised development of a number of services and complexity to regulate them. This section provides a discussion of the legal choices, and compares EaP and EU systems. In many cases, the decisions taken by the NRA are binding, and they do not require further approval by any authority. The decisions are taken by the NRA collegially, by means of voting procedure, during the regular sessions of the NRA. In all EaP countries consultation procedure is held before the decision becomes binding. Usually written and verbal consultations, soliciting comments and responses from all the interested parties (public and private entities, NGOs, consumers), are held before taking any formal decision. Dispute resolution: What kinds of disputes do the national regulatory authorities have to deal with? The most common disputes in practice are: Interconnection disputes, Cross- border, Disputes between electronic communications service/network providers and consumers/end-users, Radio Spectrum Disputes.

15. 2.5 Regulatory framework
Authorisation regime: In most of EaPeReg countries and EU countries a notification is required in order to officially enter into the market, except for Azerbaijan and Belarus. Number portability: As can be seen from the Table in Report, number portability is possible in all countries, and is for free for end users. Universal Service: Universal Service Directive 2002/22/EC defines universal service (US) as the "minimum set of services of specified quality to which all end-users have access, at an affordable price in the light of specific national conditions, without distorting competition". However, National legislation in all EaP countries defines the scope of universal service as broadly corresponding to the elements listed in the Universal Service Directive, currently, there are 4 countries where no obligations related to the provision of universal service was adopted. Market analysis. NRAs identify relevant markets for analysis, assess the development of markets, define undertakings with SMP and choose regulatory remedies which aim to eliminate any distortion of competition.

16. Future steps
Update Regulatory and Statistical Questionnaires and Benchmark reports
Analyze the possibilities to achieve annual Study (benchmark) on the fixed/mobile Broadband price
Study the Digital Scoreboard’s indicators, studies, reports, DESI – that measures progress of the European digital economy - finally try to release benchmark report for EaPeReg countries (dimension Connectivity)