Objective 2: Create a reduction in compliance costs and timeframes for service providers

4.2 Objective 2: Create a reduction in compliance costs and timeframes for service providers

In 2009, the RMA was amended to give local authorities the explicit power to issue certificates of compliance in instances where activities comply with the provisions of a national environmental standard (NES). Operators do not have to seek a certificate of compliance, especially when a proposal is clearly a permitted activity under the NESTF. In general, mobile operators will seek a certificate of compliance for a new facility, but they are less likely to do so for matters such as minor upgrades. Generally, the lines companies will not apply for certificates of compliance for cabinets for the Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB) roll-out, but this has changed over the life of the NESTF and is discussed later in this section.

The majority of straightforward telecommunications applications, and, in particular, NESTF applications requiring resource consent, are processed within a 20-working-day statutory period. There are rarely ongoing compliance costs for equipment allowed as a permitted activity within the road reserve. For example, the standardisation of noise performance standards for cabinets located in roads has greatly reduced the need for individual acoustic reports to support RMA applications and post-construction compliance testing.⁷ The NESTF specifies standardised noise levels and the point of measurement in all regions.

Regulation 4 of the NESTF requires radio-frequency reports demonstrating compliance with NZS 2772.1:1999 to be provided to councils before new or upgraded wireless telecommunications facilities become operative. This is now reported to be a “straightforward” and nationally consistent process, which has removed local variation. Evidence at planning hearings is now more focused, thereby reducing hearing timeframes and removing reliance on expert witnesses.

That said, issues were raised about various aspects of field exposure prediction and measurement, and these are discussed in detail in appendix 6. These issues range from the need for more guidance on how to handle certain parameters when modelling exposures, to how to predict exposures from sites that are staged incrementally and what to do when there is difficult access to sites where measurements need to be taken.

In terms of the magnitude of benefits arising from the regulation, the telecommunications industry estimates that $3.2 million has been saved in direct costs,⁸ and that over $10 million may be saved over the duration of the 4G roll-out. One mobile operator estimates that savings per site range from $3,000 to $30,000. The former figure is the saving under the NESTF compared with a simple RMA process (ie, no notifications, no requests for further information), while the latter compares the situation under the NESTF with a complex process that requires a hearing and increased monitoring.

Chorus’s experience presents a more complex picture.⁹ The NESTF has not delivered any direct financial benefit to them in terms of cabinet deployment costs, for the following reasons:

RMA costs were higher under the Fibre To The Node (FTTN) project because of the level of engagement with council officers and the numbers of site visits. In those early days of the NESTF, Chorus organised a caravan to visit every council.

The need for more site visits arose as more resource consents were required, because the NESTF is more stringent in its requirements relating to size and noise than the district plan rules it replaced.¹⁰ Before the 2009 RMA amendment that authorised councils to issue certificates of compliance under an NES, field trips were arranged to every installation.

Even with cabinet design specifications being guided by the NESTF, resource consents are often still required because of the separation rules in Regulation 8.

Chorus provided information about cabinet installation to every council until recently, when Auckland Council indicated that this was no longer required. This reporting can be inefficient because it duplicates the information required for the corridor access request, which initiates the installation phase of the facility. Chorus has suggested that as councils and the industry become more confident working with the NESTF, the need for information will reduce, as will costs. Chorus’s experience is consistent with anecdotal evidence that parties that engage early during the implementation of an NES incur extra transaction costs, which creates an unfortunate incentive structure.

Chorus also notes that increased consistency of rules and interpretation of those rules, and the increased confidence this inspires, all have worthwhile, intangible benefits.

Chorus incurs compliance costs when working around street trees. Currently they incur $4 million per year in arborists’ fees to undertake work within the drip line of trees in Auckland. Regulation 6 allows provisions in district plans for work within the drip line of a tree or other vegetation to be more stringent than those in the NESTF. Chorus has suggestions as to how this cost could be reduced, such as a certification scheme for contractors to undertake this type of work (see section 7.3, suggestion 2).

4.3 Objective 3: Reduce the timeframe and lower the costs for the availability of new services to consumers

The majority of cabinets are located in the road reserve. As discussed in the previous section, although savings were not realised for the FTTN, the RMA process for cabinets under the NESTF has been progressively streamlined. However, for a mobile cellular network only a minority (approximately 15 per cent) of the sites are located in road reserves, and so the impact of the NESTF has been harder to estimate. Those minority sites are generally in the suburbs or residential fringe areas, where it has been hard to establish facilities, and industry has valued the role of the NESTF in these circumstances.

The industry considers the NESTF had a role in facilitating the initial establishment of the 2degrees network in some key areas due to the NESTF being released at the same time as the first phases of the 2degrees network roll-out. This has increased competition in that sector. The initial mobile networks of Telecom and Vodafone, as well as the introduction of 3G services, were substantially established before the advent of the NESTF.