SubTel Forum Magazine #129 - Finance & Legal

EXORIDUM FROM THE PUBLISHER

WELCOME TO ISSUE 129, OUR FINANCE & LEGAL AND ICPC ‘23 PLENARY PREVIEW EDITION!

Ahectic year is well underway. Besides the usual work, we like many are attending one or more submarine-related conferences every month through June, which speaks volumes about the positive sentiment of our industry. We continue to be very, very busy!

WEBSITE ENABLED NOTIFICATIONS

SubTel Forum’s website now enables notifications through all major desktop and Android browsers allowing subscribers to be notified of news as it breaks. The website is wicked fast and since the new year we have seen more than 500 subscribers enable the announcement system. If you haven’t yet, we suggest you give it a try.

SUBMARINE CABLE ALMANAC

The 45th issue of the Submarine Cable Almanac is now available and contains details on every major submarine cable system in the world. Since the last issue, we have added one new system and updated an additional 25. (https://subtelforum.com/ almanac/) The data provided in this document is, as it ever has been, from the public domain and/or directly supplied by owners and suppliers. If you see a system that needs updating or know of an upcoming system that needs to be represented, please feel free to contact us directly at almanac@subtelforum.com.

PRINTED CABLE MAP

Our Submarine Cable Map for 2023, which showcases every major international submarine cable system, was mailed to

industry movers and shakers, and we hope you are as excited as us on how it looks. Next stop for the spares – Madrid.

ICPC ‘23 PLENARY PREVIEW

Speaking of Madrid, we are pleased to be supporting ICPC ‘23 this year. The International Cable Protection

Committee (ICPC) is the long-standing workhorse association of our industry, the men and women who have been developing the international policies to keep our cables safe or repair them when they’re not for over 60 years. ICPC has provided some excellent articles this issue to better describe their submarine cable content we can all enjoy in April.

THANK YOU

Thanks for their support to this issue’s advertisers: Southern Cross, Submarine Networks EMEA, and WFN Strategies. Thanks also to the many authors who continue to make our issues interesting and so far reaching. Of course, our ever popular “where in the world are all those pesky cableships” is included as well.

Lastly, we would like to thank everyone for helping SubTel Forum start 2023 off on a high note and pushing us past the 6,000 LinkedIn follower milestone! (https://www.linkedin.com/company/ subtel-forum/?viewAsMember=true)

We hope that SubTel Forum will continue to be your primary destination for news and analysis related to the submarine fiber industry.

Stay well and save me an aisle seat –Slava Ukraini STF

A Publication of Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com | ISSN No. 1948-3031

PRESIDENT & PUBLISHER: Wayne Nielsen | wnielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-2527

VICE PRESIDENT: Kristian Nielsen | knielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845

PRODUCTION MANAGER: Hector Hernandez | hhernandez@wfnstrategies.com | [+1] (210) 338-5413

EDITOR: Stephen Nielsen | snielsen@subtelforum.com

ANALYTICS: Kieran Clark | kclark@subtelforum.com | [+1] (540) 533-6965

SALES: sales@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845

DESIGN & PRODUCTION: Weswen Design | wendy@weswendesign.com

DEPARTMENT WRITERS: George N. Ramírez, Kieran Clark, Kristian Nielsen, Nicole Starosielski, Philip Pilgrim, and Wayne Nielsen

FEATURE WRITERS:

Andrés Fígoli, Andy Lipman, Ian Mathews, Jean-François Bilodeau, Kier Clark, Kristian Nielsen, Lewis Baxter, Mencía Martínez, Mike Conradi, Patricio Alberto Rey Sommer, Rita Melo, Ryan Wopschall, Ulises Pin, and Wayne Nielsen

NEXT ISSUE: MAY 2023 – Global Capacity, featuring Submarine Network EMEA Conference Preview

AUTHOR & ARTICLE INDEX: www.subtelforum.com/onlineindex

Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com/corporate-information

BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Margaret Nielsen, Wayne Nielsen and Kristian Nielsen

SubTel Forum Continuing Education, Division of Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com/education

CONTINUING EDUCATION DIRECTOR: Kristian Nielsen | knielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845

Wayne Nielsen, Publisher

Contributions are welcomed and should be forwarded to: pressroom@subtelforum.com.

Submarine Telecoms Forum magazine is published bimonthly by Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc., and is an independent commercial publication, serving as a freely accessible forum for professionals in industries connected with submarine optical fiber technologies and techniques. Submarine Telecoms Forum may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publishers. Liability: While every care is taken in preparation of this publication, the publishers cannot be held

responsible for the accuracy of the information herein, or any errors which may occur in advertising or editorial content, or any consequence arising from any errors or omissions, and the editor reserves the right to edit any advertising or editorial material submitted for publication.

New Subscriptions, Enquiries and Changes of Address: 21495 Ridgetop Circle, Suite 201, Sterling, Virginia 20166, USA, or call [+1] (703) 444-0845, fax [+1] (703) 349-5562, or visit www.subtelforum.com.

Copyright © 2023 Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc.

FORUM IN THIS ISSUE

ISSUE 129 | MARCH 2023

5 QUESTIONS WITH RYAN WOPSCHALL

FEATURES

SUB-SEA CABLES: A FINANCING PERSPECTIVE

By Ian Mathews

ICPC ’23 PLENARY PREVIEW SPOTLIGHT

CURRENT TOPICS IN FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND NATIONAL SECURITY REVIEWS FOR SUBMARINE CABLE SYSTEMS

By Andrew D. Lipman, Ulises R. Pin, and Tanya Tiwari

22 YEARS AGO

By Wayne Nielsen

By Patricio Alberto Rey Sommer

By Kieran Clark

Andrés

FREE RESOURCES FOR ALL OUR SUBTELFORUM.COM READERS

The most popular articles, Q&As of 2022. Find out what you missed!

TOP STORIES OF 2019

The most popular articles, Q&As of 2019. Find out what you missed!

NEWS NOW RSS FEED

a division of Submarine Telecoms Forum. This reference tool gives details on cable systems including a system map, landing points, system capacity, length, RFS year and other valuable data.

Keep on top of our world of coverage with our free News Now daily industry update. News Now is a daily RSS feed of news applicable to the submarine cable industry, highlighting Cable Faults & Maintenance, Conferences & Associations, Current Systems, Data Centers, Future Systems, Offshore Energy, State of the Industry and Technology & Upgrades.

NEWS NOW RSS FEED

Keep on top of our world of coverage with our free News Now daily industry update. News Now is a daily RSS feed of news applicable to the submarine cable industry, highlighting Cable Faults & Maintenance, Conferences & Associations, Current Systems, Data Centers, Future Systems, Offshore Energy, State of the Industry and Technology & Upgrades.

PUBLICATIONS

mapping efforts by the analysts at SubTel Forum Analytics, a division of Submarine Telecoms Forum. This reference tool gives details on cable systems including a system map, landing points, system capacity, length, RFS year and other valuable data.

Submarine Telecoms Industry Report is an annual free publication with analysis of data collected by the analysts of SubTel Forum Analytics, including system capacity analysis, as well as the actual productivity and outlook of current and planned systems and the companies that service them.

CABLE MAP

Submarine Telecoms Industry Report is an annual free publication with analysis of data collected by the analysts of SubTel Forum Analytics, including system capacity analysis, as well as the actual productivity and outlook of current and planned systems and the companies that service them.

CABLE MAP

PUBLICATIONS

Submarine Cable Almanac is a free quarterly publication made available through diligent data gathering and

Submarine Cable Almanac is a free quarterly publication made available through diligent data gathering and mapping efforts by the analysts at SubTel Forum Analytics,

The online SubTel Cable Map is built with the industry standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database. It tracks the progress of

The online SubTel Cable Map is built with the industry standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database. It tracks the progress of some 450+ current and planned cable systems, more than 1,200 landing points, over 1,700 data centers, 37 cable ships

as well as mobile subscriptions and internet accessibility data for 254 countries. Systems are also linked to SubTel Forum's News Now Feed, allowing viewing of current and archived news details.

The printed Cable Map is an annual publication showcasing the world's submarine fiber systems beautifully drawn on a large format map and mailed to SubTel Forum Readership and/or distributed during Pacific Telecommunications Conference in January each year.

CONTINUING EDUCATION

SubTel Forum designs educational courses and master classes that can then appear at industry conferences around the world. Classes are presented on a variety of topics dealing with key industry technical, business, or commercial issues. See what classes SubTel Forum is accrediting in support of the next generation of leaders in our industry.

AUTHORS INDEX

The Authors Index is a reference source to help readers locate magazine articles and authors on various subjects.

SUBTEL FORUM BESPOKE REPORTS

SubTel Forum provides industry analyses focused on a variety of topics. Our individualized reporting can provide industry insight for a perspective sale, business expansion or simply to assist in making solid business decisions and industry projections. We strive to make reporting easy to understand and keep the industry jargon to a minimum as we know not everyone who will see them are experts in submarine telecoms.

In the past we have provided analyses pertaining to a number of topics and are not limited to those listed below. Reach out to info@subtelforum.com to learn more about our bespoke reports.

DATA CENTER & OTT PROVIDERS: Details the increasingly shrinking divide between the cable landing station and the backhaul to interconnection services in order to maximize network efficiency throughout, bringing once disparate infrastructure into a single facility.

If you are interested in the world of Data Centers and its impact on Submarine Cables, this reporting is for you.

GLOBAL CAPACITY PRICING: Details historic and current capacity pricing for regional routes (Transatlantic, Transpacific, Americas, Intra-Asia and EMEA), delivering a comprehensive look at the global capacity pricing status of the submarine fiber industry. Capacity pricing trends and forecasting simplified.

GLOBAL OUTLOOK: Dive into the health and wellness of the global submarine telecoms market, with regional analysis and forecasting. This reporting gives an overview of planned systems, CIF and project completion rates, state of supplier activity and potential disruptive factors facing the market.

OFFSHORE ENERGY: Provides a detailed overview of the offshore oil & gas sector of the submarine fiber industry and covers system owners, system suppliers and various market trends. This reporting details how the industry is focusing on trends and new technologies to increase efficiency and automation as a key strategy to reduce cost and maintain margins, and its impact on the demand for new offshore fiber systems.

REGIONAL SYSTEMS: Drill down into the Regional Systems market, including focused analysis on the Transatlantic, Transpacific, EMEA, AustralAsia, Indian Ocean Pan-East Asian and Arctic regions. This reporting details the impact of increasing capacity demands on regional routes and contrasts potential overbuild concerns with the rapid pace of system development and the factors driving development demand.

SUBMARINE CABLE DATASET: Details more than 450 fiber optic cable systems, including physical aspects, cost, owners, suppliers, landings, financiers, component manufacturers, marine contractors, etc. STF

ANALYTICS

FINANCE & LEGAL OVERVIEW

A Snapshot Of Where We Are And Where We Are Headed

[Reprinted with permission from SubTel Forum 2022/2023 Submarine Industry Report]

HISTORIC FINANCING PERSPECTIVE

Financing a cable system tends to be the most difficult barrier to overcome in an already lengthy process and can take years to secure. There are three models found in submarine cable system funding: multiple financiers Debt/ Equity (typically a combination of investment bank capital and capacity pre-sales), Self-Financed, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDB). Hyperscalers can generally provide the full funding amount without need for outside financial assistance and are Self-Financed on systems

owner. An MDB is typically involved in financing projects that promote growth and modernization in less wealthy countries. They also have the capability to provide lower-cost financing than a commercial bank. (CFI Team, 2021)

Over the last 10 years, the ratio has remained steady between the three financing models. Debt/Equity financed systems have kept a notable lead, accounting for 56 percent of all accomplished cable systems over the last 10 years while Self-Financed teams accounted for 38 percent and MDBs the remaining 6 percent. (Figure 35)

The quantity of the financial investments made in submarine cable systems does not always match with the amount invested. Self-Financed investments account for 52 percent of dollars invested, Debt/Equity Financing accounted for 35 percent and MDBs invested the remaining 13 percent of the $16.7 billion invested through 2022. (Figure 36) While Debt/Equity financed systems tend to be less risky than Self-Financed systems, the prevalence of Hyperscaler driven systems and

the flexibility afforded to Self-Financed projects accounts for its higher percentage of dollar investment.

FIGURE 35: FINANCING TYPE OF SYSTEMS 2012-2022

FIGURE 36: INVESTMENT DISTRIBUTION OF SYSTEMS 2012-2022

Figure 35: Financing of Systems, 2012-2022

Figure 36: Investment Distribution of Systems, 2012-2022

REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF FINANCING ANALYTICS

MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS

Multilateral Development Banks have invested $2.1 billion in submarine telecoms cables over the last 10 years. The largest portions of this total investment — 36 percent — have been invested in the EMEA region. The Americas region received the next most, 24 percent, and the Transatlantic received 23 percent while AustralAsia received 14 percent of total investment and the Indian Ocean region the remaining 3 percent. The Transpacific and Polar regions have yet to receive any MDB investment. (Figure 37)

The EMEA and Americas regions accounting for the two largest portions of MDB investment is little surprise as both regions benefit and, in many cases, rely on MDB financing for various kinds of infrastructure projects. The Transatlantic region receiving nearly one-quarter of MDB investment is somewhat surprising if only traditional Transatlantic routes are considered, but this is due to the SAIL system connecting South America to Africa directly and is a perfect use case for MDB banks.

The AustralAsia region accounting for just 14 percent is likely due to the general growth slowdown observed in this region as nations in most need of new connections has largely been accomplished while the Indian Ocean region has historically not received much investment from MDBs.

DEBT/EQUITY FINANCING

From 2012 to 2022, the largest portion of Debt/Equity financed systems were in the Americas region at 26 percent of total with AustralAsia being

the next most at 19 percent. (Figure 38) Systems in these two regions are typically comprised of multiple local telecoms companies and governments connecting various parts of their respective regions and can be quite expansive and therefore costly.

The Transpacific was the next most at 16 percent of new system activity while the EMEA and Transatlantic regions accounted 14 and 13 percent, respectively. Transpacific systems are some of the largest Transoceanic systems in the world and have higher costs associated even though the total system count is lower than other regions. The EMEA region is like the Americas and AustralAsia regions though investment from local telecoms and governments has fallen off slightly in favor of invest-

Figure 37: Distribution of MDB Investment, 2012-2022

Transatlantic

Ocean

FIGURE 37: DISTRIBUTION OF MDB INVESTMENT 2012-2022

ment from Hyperscalers accounting for its relatively lower investment percentage. The Transatlantic region has observed multiple new cable systems over the last several years and continues to have very high capacity demand resulting in a noticeable amount of new Debt/Equity investment despite the number of cables already present within the region.

The Indian Ocean and Polar regions are the least active regions in the world and will generally have lower investment interest from those looking to rely on strong commercial cases to bring in capacity sales.

SELF-FINANCED

Between 2012 and 2022 the AustralAsia region accounted for the highest portion of Self-Financed system investment at 31 percent of total dollars invested. Many of these are government backed systems that do not have to rely on capacity sales to justify their development. The EMEA region at 24 percent accounts for the second largest amount of Self-Financed systems owing to its overall size and the number of point-topoint systems that do not require large consortiums to develop. (Figure 39)

The Indian Ocean at 16 percent is largely due to the large, inter-regional SEAME-WE type systems that pass through the region involving multiple parties and are treated more as utility infrastructure than revenue generating assets despite the low activity typical to the region.

The Transpacific and Americas region had the next highest percentage of Self-Financed system investment at 12 percent and 10 percent, respectively. While Transpacific systems tend to be costly, they are not developed at a fast enough pace to warrant further investment. Systems in the Americas tend to be revenue generating assets and are more likely to be financed through Debt/Equity.

In the Transatlantic, Self-Financed systems account for just five percent of total investment as only two Hyperscaler driven systems had the ability to finance themselves. The Polar region once again accounts

for the smallest amount of investment as this region is difficult to develop in and has much lower overall demand compared to others.

Figure 39: Distribution of Self-Financed Investment, 2012-2022

FIGURE 38: DISTRIBUTION OF DEBT/EQUITY INVESTMENT 2012-2022

FIGURE 39: DISTRIBUTION OF SELF-FINANCED INVESTMENT 2012-2022

Figure 38: Distribution of Debt/Equity Financed Investment, 2012-2022

CURRENT FINANCING

There has been a total of $16.7 billion invested in submarine cables systems from 2012-2020. (Figure 40) Nearly half of this amount – 47 percent – was invested in just three years from 20162018. This was the result of a boom kicked off by Hyperscaler investment and an overall rise in global bandwidth demand. Had the COVID-19 pandemic not occurred, there may have been even more investment all the way through 2022.

The least amount invested was in 2015 when only $465 million worth of systems were added. This was the lowest activity period for the industry since the crash of the early 2000s, but annual investment has averaged $1.8 billion since then. Overall, this peak and valley trend appears to happen every eight to nine years and has remained consistent since the early 90s. Currently the industry is roughly halfway through an investment drop. If the trend continues, we can expect another boom between 2024 and 2025 which coincides with observed bandwidth demand projections.

The sum of installed cable over the past ten years is estimated to be 506 thousand kilometers, with a yearly average of 46,000. (Figure 41) Comparing the amount of investment to the quantity of kilometers installed a similar eight-to-nine-year cycle is observed.

For the more recent period 2018-2022 a total of $7.4 billion has been invested globally. Of this amount, the AustralAsia region received the highest percentage at 29. The Transpacific, Americas and Transatlantic are the next most – all accounting for double digit percentages as these regions continue to see active development due to traffic between East Asia, North America and Europe. (Figure 42)

While the EMEA is the largest region

it only account for 8 percent of total investment over the last five years. This will change moving forward once expansive systems like Equiano and 2Africa are completed.

FIGURE 40: SYSTEM INVESTMENT 2012-2022

FIGURE 41: SYSTEM DEPLOYMENT 2012-2022

Figure 40: System Investment, 2012-2022

Figure 41: System Deployment, 1992-2012

OWNERSHIP FINANCING ANALYSIS | HISTORIC FINANCING PERSPECTIVE

The Indian Ocean and Polar regions accounted for four and three percent, respectively, indicating demand in these regions has not been high recently. However, looking forward, the Polar region is gaining interest to seek alternative routes to bottlenecks in the Middle East and Mediterranean as well as connecting Antarctica.

ASK AN EXPERT

YEAR PROJECT MDB DETAILS

2019

Improving Internet Connectivity for Micronesia Project

2019 Coral Sea

Asian Development Bank

The ADB Board of Directors has approved a total of $36.6 million in grants to help fund the delivery of the Improving Internet Connectivity for Micronesia Project. This project will help install a submarine cable connection between Micronesia and a proposed Transpacific cable system.

2020 Cook Islands to Samoa

Australian Government Official Development Assistance $60 million

The Australian Government Official Development Assistance provided two-thirds majority funding of the Coral Sea submarine cable system to support the economies of Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands.

2020 Echo

Asian Development Bank $15; Gov. of New Zealand $20; Gov. of Cook Islands $2 million

U.S. International Development Finance Corporation

2021 2Africa IFC

2021 East Micronesia Cable system World Bank

2022 2Africa, EASSy, Equiano, WACS IFC

The Government of Cook Islands has requested the ADB to support a $37 million submarine internet cable project, which will link the islands of Rarotonga and Aitutaki in the Cook Islands to Samoa, where interconnection to the international internet hubs in Fiji and Hawaii will occur.

DFC will provide a loan of up to $190 million to Trans Pacific Networks to support construction of a 15,200 km submarine fiber optic cable connecting Singapore, Indonesia, and the United States. The new cable will expand and enhance internet access across the region, including to isolated islands.

Broadband network and digital services offered in Seychelles will soon get a boost from a new cable system that will be leased by Seychelles-based telecommunications provider Intelvision Limited with support from IFC.

The East Micronesia Cable system was designed to improve communications in the island nations of Nauru, Kiribati, and Federated States of Micronesia.

The investment from the IFC will support WIOCC Group’s continued rollout of terrestrial fiber-optic networks, investment in new subsea cables, and the launch of world-class, openaccess core and edge data center infrastructure across the continent.

Figure 42: Regional Investment in Submarine Fiber Systems, 2018-2022

Table 4: Recent Multilateral Development Bank Projects

FIGURE 42: REGIONAL INVESTMENT IN SUBMARINE FIBER SYSTEMS 2018-2022

SUBTEL CABLE MAP UPDATES

The SubTel Cable Map is built with the industry standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database. It tracks the progress of over 440 current and planned cable systems, 50+ cable ships and over 1,000 landing points.

Systems are also linked to SubTel Forum’s News Now Feed, allowing viewing of current and archived news details.

This interactive map is a continual work and progress and regularly updated with pertinent data captured by analysts at SubTel Forum and feedback from our users. Our goal is to make easily available not only data from the Submarine Cable Almanac, but also more and more new layers of system information.

We hope you continue to make use of the SubTel Cable Map to learn more about the industry yourself and educate others on the importance of submarine cable systems.

All the submarine cable data for the Online Cable Map is pulled from the public domain and we always strive to keep the information as up to date as possible. If you are the point of contact for a company or system that needs to be updated, please don’t hesitate to reach out to kclark@subtelforum.com.

The full list of updated systems since the last issue of the magazine are as follows:

MARCH 20, 2023

SYSTEMS ADDED

Unitirreno

SYSTEMS UPDATED

ALC

Amitié

Bifrost

CX

Equiano

Hawaiki Nui

Highclere Cable

IEX

KAFOS

MedLoop

PDSCN

PEACE

PEACE Singapore Extension

TOPAZ STF

KIERAN CLARK is the Lead Analyst for SubTel Forum. He originally joined SubTel Forum in 2013 as a Broadcast Technician to provide support for live event video streaming. He has 6+ years of live production experience and has worked alongside some of the premier organizations in video web streaming. In 2014, Kieran was promoted to Analyst and is currently responsible for the research and maintenance that supports the Submarine Cable Database. In 2016, he was promoted to Lead Analyst and his analysis is featured in almost the entire array of Subtel Forum Publications.

Do you have further questions on this topic?

ASK AN EXPERT

SUSTAINABILITY AT PTC ’23: THREE TAKEAWAYS

BY GEORGE N. RAMÍREZ AND NICOLE STAROSIELSKI

Sustainability was a hot topic at this year’s Pacific Telecommunications Conference. Many sessions reported on sustainable practices as well as pressing challenges for sustainable development. A highlight of the event was the SubOptic-sponsored series of panels on Sunday, where subsea cable leaders discussed the state of sustainability in the industry. Posters documenting the subsea industry’s carbon footprint, environmental progress, and policy futures were displayed on the walls. Over the following days of the conference, many subsequent panels focused on data centers, with participants often arguing that sustainability is now a necessity. Data center customers, many speakers noted, were increasingly looking for fully sustainable offerings that could be implemented as soon as possible. Joley Michaelson of The Sun Company stated about the future: “The main thing is a turn-key solution option, a full sustainability offering, as quickly as possible. We don’t want anything that is less than 100% renewable.” Others wondered where the drive and investment would come from for sustainability initiatives.

The Sustainable Subsea Networks team of the SubOptic Foundation attended PTC ‘23, presented our research, and listened in to these conversations. We found many points of agreement between speakers, regardless of where they fell on this spectrum between full-on determination

and cautious hesitation. For example, most people agreed that there is no single solution to sustainability out there--no easy or quick fix. Whether they were in the data center or subsea industry, companies needed to think carefully about how sustainability might be implemented across all parts of their business rather than search for a blanket solution. Some common areas and factors affecting sustainability included: limitations on real estate, energy availability, ESG targets, water usage, and the circular economy.

Across the conference, however, participants repeated a strong sentiment that sustainability is an opportunity, not a cost; it is an imperative, not an option. If they don’t get ahead of the sustainability curve, companies

will be hit by a tsunami of government regulation. Many companies are already paving the path forward. Below we chronicle three resounding practical takeaways from the conference: a need for cooperation and collaboration; a search for both low-hanging fruit and long-term solutions--working efficiently, investigating renewable energy, and working remotely; and a call for better metrics.

COOPERATION AND COLLABORATION

A refrain at PTC ‘23 was that industries and companies should work with one another, adapting existing strategies, best practices, and technologies in new contexts. There was no need to re-invent the sustainability wheel. In the lunchtime panel on

SUBSEA

submarine cables, chaired by Elaine Stafford of DRG Undersea Consulting, Stephen Alexander of Ciena made a point of how sustainable practices can be scaled according to different company needs: “One of the biggest things that we have learned is that we can scale up and scale out. We want to scale out a little more. Scaling out means that you have to work with other companies.” On the same panel, Tunde Coker of Open Access Data Centres (OADC) pointed out the need to work with others to motivate change across the supply chain: “We do that through our own supply chain if you are going to be part of our business ecosystem,” Coker said. “We have process accreditation to drive these behaviors.” And as Nigel Bayliff of Aqua Comms stated, “We can all do this together.”

PTC participants suggested that subsea cable companies must not only work with one another, but with others across sectors, especially drawing inspiration from the data center business. The iMasons Climate Accord was consistently named as an example of the ways that companies could collaborate together in order to set strategic goals for this issue. Tunde Coker thought the Accord did a good job of thinking in depth about methodology, measurement, and statistics. This makes collaborative work within an industry and across sectors possible, he observed. When speaking about the iMasons Accord, Joseph

Kava of Google shared, “That’s how you certify what the embedded carbon is in all the equipment that is along the supply chain in building our digital infrastructure.”

The subsea industry has no such Accord or industry-wide agreement. Yet there are many companies that are working together and looking across industries. One example that several participants mentioned was the work of subsea cable companies to branch out to marine renewable energy markets. Didier Dillard of Orange Marine reported that his company was deploying service offerings in the marine renewable energy markets, providing installation and repair of energy cables at offshore wind farms. Orange Marine has also established connections with numer-

ous environmental certification and scientific organizations, including Green Marine Europe, ACt 4 Nature France, and Euro Argo among others.

Andrew Robinson of Xtera suggested another mode of collaboration: subsea cable companies could consider reusing existing materials or sharing resources. Robinson challenged the audience to think about sharing high impact resources like factories and ships more effectively, and how this could lead to improved sustainability. Another strategy: he pointed out that new systems are designed with new cable even though the necessary capacity could be achieved using redeployed cable. While some still believe that sustainability should be a closely-guarded secret, he argued that collaboration could help reduce time and costs, helping everyone in the long run.

In sum, the subsea and data center industries already have a long history of collective action and collaboration in building connections. This provides a firm foundation on which to direct efforts now and in the future towards sustainability.

LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS: EFFICIENCY, ENERGY, REMOTE WORK

Collaboration takes trust, which takes time to build. Solutions have to be carefully thought through, rather than simply dropped into new contexts. Building collaborative transformation through contracts, supply chains, and partnerships are often long-term strategies. Many confer-

Figure 1. Submarine Cable Luncheon, “Pulling Together,” featuring (left to right) moderator Elaine Stafford (Managing Partner, DRG Undersea Consulting), Ayotunde Coker (Chief Executive Officer, Open Access Data Centres), Stephen Alexander (Senior Vice President & Chief Technology Officer, Ciena), Nigel Bayliff (Chief Executive Officer, Aqua Comms), and Bruce Neilson-Watts (Chief Executive Officer, Global Marine Systems Ltd.)

ence participants wondered: “What can be done now to build toward longterm sustainability?”

One area of vibrant discussion about sustainable development at PTC was efficiency. Throughout PTC, we heard stories about industries across the ICT sector striving to be energy efficient and work at maximum capacity. We heard from many that this was simply “common sense.” Companies are installing new energy efficient technologies, ranging from engines to light bulbs. But this work is not yet universal.

The move toward energy efficiency is a matter not simply of technological upgrades, but of efficient management. According to Chris Thorpe of Leading Edge Data Centers, “The problem in our industry is that… it’s not 100% usage. Of the 105 GW of capacity in physical locations, we have a minimum of 37 GW never used ever.” Many factors can play into this, from redundancy and buffers to utilizations and underestimations. Taking sustainability into account is a matter of doing business better and of maximizing the use of infrastructure.

In the subsea cable industry, efficiency not only means ensuring that the cable landing station or data center is energy-efficient, but that cable surveying and laying operations themselves are well managed and conducted efficiently. In Sunday’s submarine cable sessions, Bruce Neil-

son-Watts of Global Marine pointed out, “my biggest way to reduce carbon is finding ways to better manage my ships.” Proper planning can minimize marine transportation, reducing the number of trips needed and thus the

CO2 emitted. New technologies also enable the efficient use of ships themselves. Earlier that day, Emmanuel Danjou shared that ASN had many energy efficiency projects underway, including heat recovery and reuse at manufacturing sites.

A second action companies can undertake is investment in renewable energy. PTC ’23 featured innovative sustainable technologies across the telecommunications landscape.

Of interest for immediate adoption for the subsea industry is renewable energy, which can be purchased from energy providers or installed on site.

In a presentation on Bulk Infrastructure, Peder Naerboe highlighted three facilities powered by green energy: the Oslo Internet Exchange, the N01 Campus, and the DK01 Campus. Didier Dillard shared that his company, Orange Marine, uses electricity from solar panels. “Since 2020, our ships in La Seyne-sur-Mer use 100% green energy following the installation of solar panels…seventy-five percent

Figure 2. SubOptic-sponsored submarine cable panel on sustainability, “Leading By Example,” featuring (left to right) Nicole Starosielski (Associate Professor, New York University), Takahiro Kashima (Professional, NEC Corporation), Emmanuel Danjou (Head of Business Development, Alcatel Submarine Networks), Andrew Robinson (Director System Engineering, Xtera, Inc.), Peder Naerboe (Founder and Chairman, Bulk Infrastructure Group), and Didier Dillard (Chief Executive Officer, Orange Marine).

NEC was able to accomplish reductions by announcing their policies and plans to their suppliers as well as surveying suppliers to learn about their emissions: measurements, standards, and information circulation all facilitate progress.

SUBSEA

of our fleet is electrically connected to the shore-based grid during stand-by and therefore produces no direct emissions.” Emmanuel Danjou highlighted ASN’s solar projects in cable landing stations and Takahiro Kashima of NEC’s Submarine Network Division described an elaborate network of solar powered energy at their factories in Japan.

The third immediate action that can be undertaken is to find creative ways to work remotely. Emmanuel Danjou of ASN reported that reducing business travel during the pandemic resulted in an 895 tonnes CO2 emissions reduction between 2020 and 2021. The evident sustainability benefits of this approach has led to reduced travel for many companies. For Stephen Alexander, “Travel is the biggest thing.” For some, the minimal disruption posed by remote work today even provides a clear business advantage. Andrew Robinson shared that the NO-UK cable system was mostly completed virtually: “our experience on the NO-UK project shows that [CO2 emissions] can be reduced significantly with no impact on project outcome,” he said.

What can companies do now? Ensure that they are not just meeting the ESG targets of regulatory and other environmental bodies in their industry sector but exceeding them; stay ahead of the curve that is the growing level and intensity of government oversight by investing in and deploying sustainable R&D initiatives; work with suppliers and customers to improve the sustainability of products, processes, and practices; and look for ways to make one’s operation more efficient. Sustainability does not necessarily mean extra cost.

BETTER METRICS AND DATA SHARING

At the conference, in both panels and in conversations, we witnessed a widely felt need for better metrics for measuring sustainability progress. Especially within the subsea cable industry, several panelists called for transparent strategies for sharing data with customers and stakeholders. Once a portfolio of metrics was agreed upon, several argued, compa-

Creating a common language for measuring improvements in sustainability is essential, several panelists argued. Having metrics for carbon emissions, for example, will enable companies to assess and reduce their emissions in new and different ways. Doing this requires increased time, management, and coordination that can best be leveraged through collaboration based on professional relationships. “If we don’t take charge, it’s going to be done to us,” Tunde Coker said, “So we can set the agenda and lead globally.” Collaboration in data gathering, data sharing, and in supply chain management is the way forward and companies can be proactive in helping to develop this culture.

nies would be better able to assess their own progress. However, there remains no industry-wide approach to measuring sustainability. “If we don’t share knowledge, how do we learn?” Bruce Neilson-Watts asked the audience. “If we all have that information, then we can do something about the problem.” Many agreed: sharing data across the industry would make it easier for everyone to measure progress and growth. “Being able to measure is critical. You can’t fix what you can’t measure,” said Stephen Alexander.

In particular, one important approach to accountability is committing to lifecycle assessments and to sharing high-level data publicly. Transparency with data is critical to progress. This is particularly true when it comes to measuring carbon emissions, as good data is increasingly a request among customers, suppliers, and vendors. Speaking about the data center sector, Jonathan Atkin of RBC Capital observed that there should be more information “imparted to policymakers and regulators about the fact that there is inherently a more efficient way to consume IT.” He suggested that data centers should have a common scorecard to measure the progress of sustainability that includes carbon intensity, renewables, and Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE). The iMasons Climate Accord is one example of how collaboration across an industry can facilitate data sharing.

Some companies are moving in this direction by following standards and earning certifications for

Creating a common language for measuring improvements in sustainability is essential, several panelists argued. Having metrics for carbon emissions, for example, will enable companies to assess and reduce their emissions in new and different ways.

their environmental efforts, many of which require data collection. Bulk Infrastructure is one: as both a subsea cable and data center company, it has accreditations and standards that account for sustainability. Beyond quality, environmental, and business continuity management, Peder Naerboe reported that they also follow the European Standard for Data Center Design (EN 50600) and the European Commission Code of Conduct for Data Centre Energy Efficiency. In other cases, existing standards don’t quite fit the reality of industry practices on the ground, and so need to be re-tailored. ASN created a Green Charter based on their analysis of the gaps in the standards on sustainable development and social responsibility. In doing so, they ensured legal compliance, reduced energy consumption, and promoted “‘green’ ways of working for employees and contractors.”

This is also a strategy that NEC has implemented for their carbon neutrality goals. They are leveraging Scope 3 standards in order to reduce CO2 emissions from the supply chain. Takahiro Kashima said that Scope 3 efforts boost engagement to encourage suppliers to reduce emissions. NEC was able to accomplish reductions by announcing their policies and plans to their suppliers as well as surveying suppliers to learn about their emissions: measurements, standards, and information circulation all facilitate progress.

Conferences like PTC help to disseminate practices and knowledge across the industry. Here, companies can share the meaningful sustainability initiatives they are pursuing--and inspire others to follow. We look forward to seeing the same process

at the upcoming SubOptic conference in Bangkok, Thailand. Here the SubOptic Foundation will host the first Congress on Sustainability, which will be held Monday March 13 at 8:30am. The Congress will feature leading representatives from

(Bulk Infrastructure), Michael Clare (National Oceanography Centre), Mike Constable, René d’Avezac de Moran (Fugro), Emmanuel Danjou (Alcatel Submarine Networks), Alwyn du Plessis (Mertech Marine), Takahiro Kashima (NEC), Brian Lavallée (Ciena), Andy Palmer-Felgate (Meta), and Dean Veverka (Southern Cross Cables).

This article is an output from a SubOptic Foundation project funded by the Internet Society Foundation. STF

VIDEO LINK HERE: https://drive.google. com/file/d/1qAslSPZFQETUI6a7G x9ZkYu87DrFji6C/view?usp=sharing

all industry sectors, drawing expertise from planning, manufacturing, supply, installation, operation, and recycling. During the Congress, through an open and guided conversation, participants will discuss a series of sustainability metrics aimed at heightening awareness and improving the industry carbon footprint across a cable’s lifecycle. It is our hope the Congress and the many environmental sessions at SubOptic will continue the important conversations begun at PTC ‘23.

Participants in the SubOptic Foundation Congress on Sustainability: Nigel Bayliff (Aqua Comms), Merete Caubet

NICOLE STAROSIELSKI is Associate Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at NYU. Dr. Starosielski’s research focuses on the history of the cable industry and the social aspects of submarine cable construction and maintenance. She is author of The Undersea Network (2015), which examines the cultural and environmental dimensions of transoceanic cable systems, beginning with the telegraph cables that formed the first global communications network and extending to the fiber-optic infrastructure. Starosielski has published over forty essays and is author or editor of five books on media, communications technology, and the environment. She is co-convener of SubOptic’s Global Citizen Working Group and a principal investigator on the SubOptic Foundation’s Sustainable Subsea Networks research initiative.

GEORGE N. RAMÍREZ is a PhD candidate in the Department of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University, where his work focuses on sensation and performance in Latinx popular culture.

Do you have further questions on this topic?

ASK AN EXPERT

Conferences like PTC help to disseminate practices and knowledge across the industry. Here, companies can share the meaningful sustainability initiatives they are pursuing--and inspire others to follow.

WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE THOSE PESKY CABLESHIPS?

BY KIERAN CLARK

As the first quarter of 2023 wraps up it’s the perfect time to once again ask: Where in the World Are All Those Pesky Cableships?

SubTel Forum tracks AIS updates every 6 hours from 53 vessels that make up the global cable ship fleet. Between January 1 and March 2, the cableship fleet logged 14,925 AIS updates based on SubTel Forum’s tracking system. Over half of these updates indicated no movement speed during this 60-day period showing no significant change in overall activity compared to the previous period. This lack of movement is generally attributed to repairs, scheduled maintenance and upgrades.

For this edition of Where in The World Are Those Pesky Cableships, our analysts have created a heat map showing where the cable ship fleet was most active around the world. Red, orange and then yellow indicate the highest amount of activity while lower activity is represented by increasing shades of blue. As indicated by the heat map, the main AIS zones of activity over the past 60 days were East Asia, Indonesia, North Sea, North East Atlantic Ocean and South East Asia. From the total 26 AIS zones, these five accounted for 45 percent of all AIS activity for the cable ship fleet.

The cableship fleet grew more in 2022 than any year in the last 10, and the distribution of vessel ownership has shifted quite significantly. At the end of 2021, SubTel Forum was only tracking 44 cableships but this number increased to include nine more vessels between December 2021 to December 2022. A handful of these additions are vessels that have only recently been added to SubTel Forums AIS tracking data. Some were

added after seeing a shift in their focus from power cables to telecoms cables. In October, the Normand Clipper signed an extended contract with NTT for installation projects over the next several years.

There have also been several conversions, like ASN’s Ile de Molene, which was christened this past summer. Orange Marine’s new vessel the Sophie Germain is now active and will be tracked accordingly in the SubTel Forum system moving forward. She is the first battery powered, energy efficient submarine cable laying vessel in the entire fleet and a further indication of how committed this industry is to overall sustainability and lowering its environmental impact.

Despite this high amount of activity and new vessels added to the fleet, there is a real concern that there is a cable ship capacity crunch. As Dan Swinhoe of DatacenterDynamics discussed in early December, and based on new cable activity observed by SubTel Forum there is some concern that there is not enough cable ship capacity to keep up with new cable demand. Several installers such as ASN are fully booked through 2024 and external vessels are being hired on a more frequent basis to keep up with project workloads. Additionally, the overall age of the fleet is quite high – between 20 and 30 years old – with only a handful of new, modern vessels coming into service over the last few years.

However, it is clear the cable ship fleet will remain busy for the foreseeable future. This is always a nice problem to have! STF

KIERAN CLARK is the Lead Analyst for SubTel Forum. He originally joined SubTel Forum in 2013 as a Broadcast Technician to provide support for live event video streaming. He has 6+ years of live production experience and has worked alongside some of the premier organizations in video web streaming. In 2014, Kieran was promoted to Analyst and is currently responsible for the research and maintenance that supports the Submarine Cable Database. In 2016, he was promoted to Lead Analyst and his analysis is featured in almost the entire array of Subtel Forum Publications.

The cableship fleet grew more in 2022 than any year in the last 10, and the distribution of vessel ownership has shifted quite significantly. At the end of 2021, SubTel Forum was only tracking 44 cableships but this number increased to include nine more vessels between December 2021 to December 2022.

31st May - 1st June 2023

Business Design Centre, London

Submarine Networks EMEA is the leading annual subsea connectivity event in the region, bringing together 800 senior leaders from the global subsea market for two jam-packed days of learning, collaboration and networking.

In addition to offering plenty of networking opportunities, attendees will be able to enjoy thought-leading panels, technical presentations, workshops and cable project and connectivity hub updates.

SPEAKING OPPORTUNITIES: kerry.merritt@totaltele.com

MARKETING OPPORTUNITIES: laura.curwen@totaltele.com

5 QUESTIONS WITH RYAN WOPSCHALL

Talking Network Industry With ICPC’s General Manager

1.

WHAT IS ICPC’S MISSION?

The ICPC is guided by its vision statement which is to be the recognized guardian of subsea cable infrastructure, providing leadership, guidance and a voice for the industry. As the leading submarine cable industry membership-based trade organization focusing on cable protection issues, we support and advocate for our members on technical, environmental, and regulatory aspects of implementing, owning and operating submarine telecom and power cables.

The ICPC was founded in 1958 and has seen tremendous change as an organization since that time. And just as the organization has changed, we acknowledge that the industry is always changing, as are the critical issues facing the protection of submarine cables. As a result, our organization, through the leadership of our Executive Committee, routinely evaluate our vision statement to ensure it aligns with the current events of our industry.

2. HOW DOES ICPC PARTICIPATE IN THE SUBMARINE CABLE MARKET?

The ICPC is a membership-based industry organization. We are comprised of about 190 member companies in over 69 countries globally who work throughout various levels of the submarine cable supply chain

from cable owners, suppliers and installers, marine survey companies, to professional service companies and governments. The ICPC, led by its Executive Committee and supported by its Secretariat team, promotes the awareness of submarine cable protection globally. From the perspective of the submarine telecoms industry, our members represent approximately 98% of all international fiber optic cables. We not only participate in the submarine cable market, we are composed of the submarine cable market.

3.

WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF ICPC’S SUCCESS?

As an industry organization, ICPC’s success draws on its members’ collective experiences installing and operating submarine telecom and power cables. Successes include our outreach and affiliations work with other industry and maritime organizations who operate or have a stake in ocean use, our advocacy of submarine cables as critical infrastructure, our best practice guidance to governments on cable resilience, and our cornerstone event, the annual Plenary, where members and guests share the latest developments in environmental, law and policy, and technical aspects of submarine cables.

4.

AS SUSTAINABILITY HAS BECOME A HOT BUTTON ISSUE IN OUR INDUSTRY, WHAT ARE ICPC’S PLANS FOR SUSTAINABLE OPERATIONS GOING FORWARD?

The ICPC has recognized a growing interest within the submarine cable industry on sustainability. As an organization, our members are sharing information on their own relative carbon footprints for various operational activities, as well as discussing new ideas on reducing the overall footprint. Additionally, the ICPC has engaged through our Marine Environmental Advisor, Dr. Mike Claire, support of other industry organizations who are studying sustainability topics relevant to the submarine cable industry.

5.

WHAT IS NEXT FOR ICPC?

The ICPC acknowledges that the submarine cable industry is changing every year, particularly when viewed from a global scale. We work towards staying current on emerging topics and issues facing the submarine cable industry and our members, and work together to provide guidance and leadership. Additionally, there is a growing interest and awareness on cable security. We view security as an aspect of overall infrastructure resilience and work to provide governments and members guidance on cable resilience planning. Our organization is growing each year, there is new blood coming into the membership, making these exciting times to be part of the ICPC and at the forefront of our industry. The big next step, however, is simply returning back to in person events with the much anticipated in person Plenary occurring this April in Madrid – the first in person Plenary since 2019. STF

RYAN

WOPSCHALL Ryan is the General Manager of the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC), the leading international submarine cable authority providing leadership and guidance on issues related to submarine cable security and reliability. Ryan is also the principal of Wopschall Consulting, LLC, where he specializes in submarine cable infrastructure planning and development.

The ICPC has recognized a growing interest within the submarine cable industry on sustainability. As an organization, our members are sharing information on their own relative carbon footprints for various operational activities, as well as discussing new ideas on reducing the overall footprint.

ICPC ’23 PLENARY PREVIEW SPOTLIGHT

The pandemic has been a topic to report on throughout the industry and the world for the last few years. And while much of the world has moved on and returned to a certain level of homeostasis or normalcy, for the ICPC we are now only (and with much enthusiasm) turning the corner back to our ‘normal’ – having an in-person annual Plenary meeting, the cornerstone event for our members.

The Plenary has always been a gathering point for ICPC members which now includes over 190 companies in over 69 countries serving the submarine telecom and power cable industries. Three days are spent together exchanging technical, environmental and regulatory information, experiences, and lessons learned related to current and emerging cable protection issues. It’s a chance to hear from people on the ground implementing and operating submarine cables and how best to protect them from human activity, increased use of the seabed, changing regulatory frameworks, and how to develop and promote resilient digital and power cable infrastructure. The ICPC not only serves the industry, but we are also composed of the industry and as a result remain at the forefront of cable protection topics worldwide.

The pandemic shifted the Plenary to a virtual event simply out of necessity and as much as we can claim success

in putting on two virtual Plenary events in 2021 and 2022, the experience was not necessarily something we wanted to keep replicating. The value of our Plenary is in the faceto-face interactions with our members to learn from one another, share information, develop relationships across the industry, and gain knowledge on current and emerging issues related to cable protection.

The pandemic, however, had an interesting effect on our organization. Global awareness of digital infrastructure boomed as people shifted to remote working environments, dependent on reliable broadband connections for video conferencing services, cloud products, and a whole host of other services we all learned to become dependent on. Take this to another order of magnitude and the companies providing the streaming and cloud services saw even greater adoption and use, placing more demand on connectivity. The interest and awareness in submarine cables flourished in helpful and not so helpful ways all across the media, also fueled by geopolitical events and heightened discussions about cable security. In turn, however, at least for the ICPC, our membership numbers saw one of the largest increases over time than ever before. With this increase we have also seen new entrants into the industry including both cable owners as well as professional service companies. The cable industry has been very active over the

last ten years in many new and exciting ways, but right now is a very exciting time for our organization.

We are holding our 2023 annual Plenary in Madrid over three days from April 18th through 20th. There has so far not only been a large amount of registrations for the event, but member companies are showing interest in bringing several people including newer hirers or younger professionals to expose them to the ICPC and the broader aspects of the submarine cable industry. This is a welcomed occurrence as our organization is also contemplating how to bring in the newer generations of professionals into the ICPC and show them that they are working in a global yet relatively close-knit community of peers tackling the same or similar challenges in developing, operating and maintaining submarine cable infrastructure.

The Madrid Plenary is largely a closed event for ICPC members, though we do accept guest speakers and observ-

AGENDA

(Subject to modification and EC approval)

PRE-PLENARY EC-ONLY MEETING

MONDAY, 17TH APRIL 2023

9:00 PM – 6:00 PM

Pre-Plenary Executive Committee Meeting

7:00 PM - 8:30/9:00 PM

Welcome Cocktail Reception for ICPC Members and their accompanying person(s)

Dress code: ‘Business/Smart Casual’ Duque Networking Area

DAY ONE: TUESDAY, 18TH APRIL 2023

8:30 AM

Morning meet and greet with coffee Exhibition Area (Hall Convención)

9:00 AM

Day One of the ICPC Plenary Begins Oslo-MadridVienna Meeting Room

ers. While the agenda is not released publicly, it is composed of industry leaders presenting on topics such as cable security, protecting cables from a legal perspective, global cable repair statistics, planning more resilient cable routes and landings, permitting and regulatory best practices, management of cable and other infrastructure crossings, regional perspectives and lessons learned from around the world, fiber optic sensing, geospatial planning, among many other topics.

The ICPC is looking into the future and with our return to ‘normalcy’ we are now looking forward to hosting Plenary meetings throughout the world just as we have done over our long history. Since we are a membership organization, our success and value is derived from our members. We look forward to continued growth in our membership and our continued dedication to providing leadership and guidance on cable protection issues. STF

9:00 AM

Opening of Meeting (Chairman)

9:05 AM

Welcome Speech (Host or Conference Dinner Sponsor)

9:20 AM

EC Elections and Appointments - Voting Reminder

9:25 AM

The Year in Review (Presentation by Chairman & General Manager)

9:50 AM

Working Group Reports

10:15 AM

End of Members’ Session

10:15 AM

Morning Coffee Break and External Speaker Registration in the Exhibition Area (Hall Convención)

10:45 AM

Open Session Commences

Oslo-Madrid-Vienna Meeting Room

10:45 AM

Welcome to External Speakers (Chairman)

10:50 AM

Keynote Speech

11:10 AM

Global Report of Cable Repair Commencement Times (Invited Paper)

11:30 AM

Presentation Session

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

12:00 PM

Panel TBD (30 minutes)

12:30 PM

Onsite Lunch Break

1:30 PM

Legal Review (Presentation by ICLA)

2:00 PM

Liaison with Other Organisations and Seabed Users

• Europe Submarine Cable Association (ESCA)

• Denmark Cable Protection Committee (DKCPC)

• North American Submarine Cable Association (NASCA)

• Oceania Cable Protection Association (OSCA)

• International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO)

• SubOptic 2019

• International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Smart Cables Initiative

• UNEP-WCMC

• West African Cable Protection Event

• International Council on Large Electric Systems (CIGRÉ)

3:00 PM

Afternoon Coffee Break in the Exhibition Area (Hall Convención)

3:30 PM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

5:00 PM

Summary of Issues Raised During Day One

5:15 PM

End of Business Day One

DAY TWO: WEDNESDAY, 19TH APRIL 2023

8:30 AM

Morning meet and greet with coffee Exhibition Area (Hall Convención)

9:00 AM

Day Two of the ICPC Plenary Begins Oslo-MadridVienna Meeting Room

9:00 AM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

10:30:

Morning Coffee Break in the Exhibition Area (Hall Convención)

AGENDA

11:00 AM

Environmental Review (Presentation by MEA)

11:30 AM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

12:30 PM

Onsite Lunch Break

1:30 PM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Panel TBD (30 minutes)

3:00 PM

Afternoon Coffee Break in the Exhibition Area

3:30 PM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

5:00 PM

Summary of Issues Raised During Day Two

5:15 PM

End of Business Day Two

DAY THREE: THURSDAY, 20TH APRIL 2023

8:30 AM

Morning meet and greet with coffee Exhibition Area (Hall Convención)

9:00 AM

Day Three of the ICPC Plenary Begins Oslo-MadridVienna Meeting Room

9:00 AM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

10:30 AM: Morning Coffee Break in the Exhibition Area

11:00 AM

UN Observer Representative Review (Presentation by UNOR)

11:30 AM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

12:30 PM

Onsite Lunch Break 1:30 PM Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

3:00 PM

Afternoon Coffee Break in the Exhibition Area

3:30 PM

Presentation Sessions

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

Presenter & Presenter Title (30 minutes)

4:30 PM

Request for Members’ Feedback on the 2023 Plenary (to be completed online)

4:35 PM

Arrangements for the 2024 Plenary

4:40 PM

EC Election and Appointments Announcement

4:45 PM

Meeting Closure

22 YEARS AGO

1 MARCH 2001

OUR COMPANY WAS FOUNDED

WE’RE A FAMILY BUSINESS AND WE TAKE GREAT PRIDE IN OUR PEOPLE, SERVICES AND PUBLICATIONS.

SUB-SEA CABLES: A FINANCING PERSPECTIVE

BY IAN MATHEWS

The requirements of third-party financiers are often downplayed or overlooked when developers are initially contemplating a sub-sea cable. Much time is rightly spent by developers in optimising the tender documents to ensure a technically efficient and reliable sub-sea cable system and in obtaining commitments from potential capacity purchasers. Less time is spent in discussions with financial institutions as to how to fund the cable and, in particular, the structuring elements of the financing. As financial institutions may well be the largest single providers of capital, early engagement is important

to ensure that potential roadblocks and deal breakers are not discovered a long way down the cable’s development timeline. This article seeks, at a high level, to identify both potential financier requirements and various alternative means of financing the opportunity.

POTENTIAL STRUCTURES

The two most common approaches seen in the market are the Incorporated Joint Venture (“IJV”) and the Unincorporated Joint Venture (“UJV”).

At its simplest, the IJV is a special purpose vehicle that

incorporates one or (more commonly) several shareholders who hold a vested interest in developing the project. These can include both active (e.g. existing cable operators) and passive (e.g. governmental) investors. The IJV then seeks to raise the necessary finance required for the cable either from its shareholders’ own internal resources or from a combination of its shareholders’ own resources and debt finance from third parties. Investors are rarely willing to provide guarantees but may provide other forms of support for the mitigation of specific risks necessary to attract the financiers. However, far more commonly, investors will seek to limit their own financial exposure to the amount of equity committed and provide no other collateral to the financiers other than the assets of the cable company, a structure commonly known as “project finance”.

as an IJV and raises its share of the capital for the UJV as per the IJV model above. However, this is relatively uncommon as the specific nature of project financing at the IJV level provides additional protections for financiers that could, if triggered, limit the ability of the IJV to meet its share of the UJV’s costs as they fall due. This could cause material disruption to the broader financing of the UJV and would be unappealing for the other UJV investors.

FINANCIER CONSIDERATIONS

Banks are conservative. This is less of an issue for a UJV structure as any third-party finance raised will be at the developer rather than the asset level and would have full recourse to the sponsor. It is important under an IJV structure. As financiers would normally be the largest single layer of capital in the company, their views do need to be considered. The key risks fall broadly into the following generic categories.

TECHNOLOGY AND DESIGN

By contrast, under a UJV structure, there is no single legal entity that directly raises third party financing as each investor is required to fund its proportionate share of the costs as they fall due. This approach tends to be seen both in opportunities where there are multiple cable pairs owned by different parties under the wider umbrella of the cable’s development and also where the investors are sufficiently creditworthy that they can raise the financing on their own balance sheet and inject this as capital to cover their share of the costs. This is the quickest and simplest means of financing cables but does place the entire financial risk of the cable on the shoulders of the investors.

It is possible to incorporate an IJV into a broader UJV structure whereby one of the cable investors is incorporated

Financiers like proven technology. Whilst the cable industry does - and will continue to – evolve, the underlying technology is well-proven with most of the improvements in technology and efficiency tending to be incremental as opposed to dramatic in nature. Unproven technology risks will limit bank appetite for financing on a project finance basis and will require one or more of higher equity contributions from developers and/or completion guarantees and higher levels of liquidated damages under the cable construction contracts. Whilst some cable contractors may be prepared to accept higher obligations on their side to deliver unproven technology, this may come at an additional cost and may not, by itself, be sufficient to meet lender requirements. As such, the use of a credible third-party consultant would be required assist lenders to understand new technologies and explain how certain elements of the system design need to be in synchronisation with the business plan projections such as the ability to expand the “lit” capacity in the future with the corresponding capital expenditure built into the plan.

PERMITTING AND APPROVALS

Financiers like legal certainty. Evidence from various industries, including sub-sea cables in Asia-Pacific, has shown that the lack of the correct permits, licenses and approvals – such as environmental approvals - can undermine the viability of the project. It is not enough to inform

potential lenders that, in the fullness of time, the required permits will be forthcoming. Such permits and approvals will be required as a condition precedent to closing the financing and permitting drawdown. The time required to obtain approvals such as environmental approvals can be unpredictable and time-consuming. This applies to all cable opportunities, but is particularly more important where approvals are required from one or more governments or from one or more layers of government within one country e.g., federal, province and region. A cable without the required landing station permit or permits - it has happened before – is an expensive seafloor decoration.

CABLE CONSTRUCTION AND LAYING

Financiers like competence. The cable industry is dominated by a limited number of well-established and proven names such as Alcatel Submarine Network, Fujitsu, NEC, TE SubCom and Huawei. All represent names that are not only extensively banked but which have used innovative financing approaches to present attractive financing options for developers such as deferred payment schemes. For financiers, if the cable is not made and laid to the required specifications, there is no cash flow and no means to repay the debt. As such, contractor selection is key. However, it is recognised that there has increasingly been diplomatic pressure put on countries such as the Pacific Island Nations to increasingly consider security concerns when selecting a contractor.

Other than the competence of the contractor the main financier considerations are the contractual protections against potential cost increases (other than for change orders by the IJV, which would require the prior consent of the financiers), delays in completion (including the ready availability of cable laying vessels) and performance shortfalls. In general, the protections for delay and performance shortfalls would tend to be in the range of 10-20% of the contract value, but any failure to complete the construction and installation can see liability caps of up to 100% of the contract value. In the case of liquidated damages for delay, these should be structured to cover fixed costs including debt servicing and in the case of liquidated damages for performance shortfalls, these should be structured to allow for the pay-down of third-party debt by an amount sufficient to restore debt service coverage ratios to those originally envisaged.

OPERATIONS AND INSURANCE

Financier like certainty of revenues. Assuming the commercial viability of the transaction is proven (see below), the

main concern for financiers is the interruption or breakage of the cable and the time and costs taken to repair the cable. Under capacity purchase agreements signed with the end users, the cable operator may have to start paying compensation for the loss of service after an allowed period. For financiers, not only do they face the lack of revenues coming into the company but they may be faced with cash outflows as the company makes payments to its customers on account of liquidated damages. These issues would normally be dealt with through a combination of self-insurance achieved through combining with other cable owners to pay fees to ensure an installation / repair vessel is maintained within the region, a short-term working capital facility to cover operating costs that would fall due within the next sixty or ninety days and a reserve account to cover the next six months interest and principal repayment that would fall due. These elements would help to buy time to repair any damage to the cable and ensure that debt service is not affected.

COMMERCIAL VIABILITY

Financiers like financial certainty. The perception of “commercial viability” can differ markedly between developers and financiers. Whilst developers will tend to look at market growth projections when developing their revenue forecasts, financiers rarely bank the upside potential of additional growth unless there is compelling evidence to do so such as the proposed cable replacing an existing cable nearing the end of its operating life or where such cash flow projections are verified by credible third-party market consultants that have thoroughly analysed the underlying revenue assumptions. Financiers like to see committed revenues locked in whether through long-term leases or upfront indefeasible rights of use (or both) and will debt size their base case based upon such committed revenues. The payment arrangements need to be backed by credible capacity purchasers, either on a standalone basis or supported via bank guarantees. Without credible capacity purchasers, financiers will not lend to the extent that may be sought by the developer.

This is seen in countries where lack of scale and creditworthiness often go together. Many of the cables to the Pacific Island Nations have been funded by International Financial Institutions such as the Asian Development Bank (“ADB”), World Bank and, increasingly, the Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific (“AIFFP”). This is because they are not commercially viable from a private sector financing perspective. That is not to say that smaller transactions cannot be financed by the private sector as ANZ financed the Interchange sub-sea cable be-

tween Fiji and Vanuatu. Notwithstanding a market report that showed the potential upside arising from the cable’s introduction, the debt was sized on contractually pre-committed revenues from parties with acceptable credit profiles.

The above categorisations are not meant to be exhaustive but are to provide an overview of the typical financing considerations that need to be taken into account by a developer if they wish to raise third-party financing particularly from commercial banks for an IJV structure. The developer may also request the contractor to mobilise a financing package, but the same considerations will still apply to lenders. The section below outlines the potential financier options that will need to be considered to optimise the financing of a sub-sea cable.

FINANCIER OPTIONS

Traditionally the choice of financiers for cable projects has been binary – public sector lenders such as the International Financial Institutions for the politically and/or nationally important but commercially non-viable cables and private finance institutions such as commercial banks for the commercially viable opportunities. This duality has become increasingly blurred with not only an increased degree of collaboration and crossover between the two groups of financiers, but also the increased role of new actors as potential sources of capital.

Public sector institutions are often perceived by developers as bureaucratic, slow moving and hamstrung by internal policies and procedures. Whilst such perceptions are not necessarily incorrect by themselves, such a view is to tar unfairly all such institutions with the same brush. From ANZ’s interactions with many public sector institutions – both in the sub-sea cable sector and elsewhere in Asia-Pacific - we would argue that there are two main areas where public sector financing can play, and has played, an important role in the financing of projects.

The first relates to the private sector teams within the larger public institutions. These teams are often staffed by experienced financiers drawn from the private sector with many of them previously working in the project finance teams of commercial banks. This has seen, for example, the Private Sector Operations Department of the ADB develop a “speed to market” that is not dissimilar to that of many commercial banks.

Taking the ADB as an example, they can

provide loans both directly from their own resources and through mobilisation under their B Loan Programme. They can also provide political risk mitigation products such as guarantees that protect against expropriation, civil war, political violence and breach of contract by the host government. They also, through their wider involvement as a provider of grants and concessionary funding to governments, provide a “halo” effect to the transaction as any illegal action taken by a government against a company benefitting from an ADB loan (or analogous Multilateral Agency) would have severe ramifications across the wider government relationship.

The “halo” effect of Multilateral Agencies is of significant importance in mobilising commercial finance as one of the biggest challenges facing commercial lenders in many countries is the political risk of doing so and the capital costs that need to be factored into pricing. ANZ worked closely with a Multilateral Agency on a potential cable financing opportunity in the Pacific and was close to finalising the financing plan when the host government arbitrarily awarded the construction contract to a party that was not the preferred bidder under the tender overseen by the Multilateral Agency: both prospective lenders elected to exit and the proposed cable was not financed.

A second group of public sector institutions that can provide material assistance in raising financing from the private sector are Export Credit Agencies (“ECAs”). These are governmental bodies from, in the most part, OECD na-

tions that have traditionally supported the export of capital goods such as cables from their home country through the provision of guarantees that provide commercial and political risk protection for commercial lenders. Whilst the ECA would still need to be satisfied on the points raised above, the result could be not only extended tenors and lower pricing than would otherwise be the case, but potentially also the financing of transactions that would otherwise not have been capable of being financed. For example, as part of a response to a tender, Alcatel Submarine Networks could be asked to mobilise French ECA Bpifrance to assist the developer both in raising commercial bank financing for its project and potentially supporting either vendor financing or deferred payment schemes that would minimise the initial capital outlay of the project: similar ECA support are also available for the other major cable contractors.

Historically, ECAs provided support for up to 85% of the eligible costs under an export contract plus additional cover for a percentage of local costs and other incidental costs. In recent years, the scope of some ECAs has broadened to include providing direct loans as well as guarantees. In addition, the fundamental requirement for capital good exports has been widened by some ECAs to include the loosely defined term “national interest”. This can range from supporting goods and services in the home market to being politically beneficial to the ECA’s government. The Australian ECA Export Finance Australia has embraced this wider national interest approach across Asia-Pacific supporting key projects. The Australian Government also established the AIFFP to deliver sustainable, transparent and high-quality infrastructure, including cables, in its geopolitical sphere of influence. The AIFFP financed the Coral Sea Cable System to Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands and is working on other cable projects involving Timor Leste and Palau.

Within the private sector, a relatively new development has been the involvement of private equity and pension funds in cable opportunities. Whilst the pension funds have historically tended to come in only after the cable is commissioned and revenues commenced, organisations such as the Vanuatu Provident Fund were investors at the onset of the Interchange project. For developers, there may be opportunities to involve the larger pension funds at a project’s onset given the relatively short lead times involved will not be a material drag on their required returns. Further, some pension funds also manage debt funds that could be involved directly as third-party financiers. One consideration that needs careful analysis is that pension funds prefer annuity income streams such as those

derived from long-term leases which may be incompatible with commercial bank requirements that a significant proportion of the revenues be locked away via indefeasible rights of use that are payable at Ready for Service.

The above may imply that commercial banks are becoming increasing marginalised. This is far from the case as commercial banks will continue to play an important role not just in mobilising financing for the sector, but in advising developers in identifying the appropriate capital stack, the potential financiers and the key terms and conditions that financiers will require. An experienced commercial bank will understand institutional requirements and when a public sector supported financing package may be a better solution than a pure commercial bank solution (and vice versa). Commercial banks are also best placed to coordinate the required technical, legal, market and environmental due diligence consultants, noting that many of the public sector institutions have both specific policy requirements and dedicated teams to ensure compliance. Consultant selection is key to ensure a timely and cost-efficient financing process and an experienced financier can identify the right consultants to ensure the financing stays on track, that deliverables are met and that costs – particularly legal costs – are managed appropriately.

With the explosion in data usage globally, whether through the Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Computing or more generic streaming activities, the importance of subsea cables in the world economy will only grow. With the need for cables, the need for their financing is here to stay. How they are financed depends upon the preferred path taken by the developer – IJV or UJV, private sector financing or public sector financing or a combination of both. What this article has hopefully presented is that the decisions made at an early stage in the development process will have an influence on the financing options. The ability to maximise these options at an early stage will provide for additional flexibility later in the process which will allow for potential lender considerations to be included within the transaction’s structure. It is never too early to engage with financiers. STF

IAN MATHEWS is an Executive Director, Corporate Finance International at Australia and New Zealand Bank. Based in Singapore he has over thirty years’ experience of advising and arranging structured finance transactions across the telecommunication, infrastructure and hydrocarbon sectors across the Asia-Pacific region.

CURRENT TOPICS IN FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND NATIONAL SECURITY REVIEWS FOR SUBMARINE CABLE SYSTEMS

BY ANDREW D. LIPMAN, ULISES R. PIN, AND TANYA TIWARI

With over four billion current Internet users, global demand for data has never been greater. Submarine cable systems are key to meeting this demand. Carrying over 99% of all international communications, submarine cables remain the primary method of transporting internet traffic because of their speed, capacity, and security. As the demand for connectivity continues to rise, an evolving geopolitical climate and increased focus on cybersecurity and national security concerns, including ownership of critical infrastructure, have presented new challenges impacting submarine cable transactions and developments. To address these concerns, the United States government dedicates considerable time and resources to national security reviews of foreign investments to ensure data transmitted over submarine cables is not susceptible to foreign adversaries. This article provides an overview of these efforts and regulatory and policy developments in the United States affecting the submarine cable industry.

UNITED STATES NATIONAL SECURITY REVIEW PROCESS FOR SUBMARINE CABLE SYSTEMS

Submarine cables landing in the United States are subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”). Pursuant to the Submarine Cable Act of 1921 (the “Act”), as implemented by Executive Order No. 10530 and Section 1.767 of the FCC’s Rules, operators must obtain an FCC license before operating a submarine cable in the United States.

Submarine cable applications and transactions of United States carriers involving certain levels of foreign ownership or participation are subject to considerable scrutiny by the United States government. The FCC generally refers such applications and transactions to the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United States Telecommunications Services Sector (commonly known as “Team Telecom”), a task force that conducts a national security and law enforcement reviews to assess potential risks to the interests of the United States. Team Telecom was created through Executive

Order 13913, issued in April 2020, and is comprised of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Homeland Security, and Attorney General (Department of Justice). In addition, the President may designate the head of any executive agency or department, or any assistant to the President as a member of Team Telecom.

A. TEAM TELECOM REVIEW

In the normal course, Team Telecom reviews a submarine cable system if (1) the system would connect the United States to a foreign point, or (2) the system would have aggregate direct or indirect foreign ownership of 10% or more. However, in recent years, Team Telecom has started scrutinizing all submarine cable applications, including domestic systems and projects where the cable owners are 100% American.

Once submarine cable applications are filed with the Commission, FCC staff routinely send them to Team Telecom, who generally notifies the FCC during the public notice period if it plans to review the application for national security issues. If so, the application is taken out of processing and FCC staff will suspend further Commission action until it hears back from Team Telecom that all potential national security issues related to the submarine cable have been resolved.

As an initial step in the Team Telecom review process, the Committee generally requests that applicants answer certain threshold questions (referred to as “triage questions”). Team Telecom has made publicly available standardized triage questions covering five general categories: (1) corporate structure and shareholder information of the applicant(s); (2) relationships with foreign entities; (3) financial conditions and circumstances; (4) compliance with applicable laws and regulations; and (5) business and operational information, including services to be provided and network infrastructure. As part of these questions, Team Telecom seeks detailed information about the submarine cable’s existing equipment type, storage and security of network data, encryption key usage, and persons and entities with access to the applicant’s network and data.

When conducting its analysis of national security risks, Team Telecom considers two broad areas: (a) the nature of the proposed network, including the security of the data running through it, and (b) the identity of the applicant(s), including the degree of foreign government control over such persons. This is a highly fact-based evaluation process in which Team Telecom conducts a background check on the shareholders and managers of the applicant compan(ies) and evaluates any vulnerabilities or concerns with the oper-

ations of the network and the data running through it.

In its initial determination, Team Telecom may find:

(1) that granting the license or transfer of license poses no risk to United States national security or law enforcement interests; (2) that any such risks raised could be effectively addressed through standard mitigation measures recommended by Team Telecom; or (3) that a secondary assessment is needed because the risks cannot be allayed by standard mitigation measures.

Team Telecom not only has the authority to review applications of prospective licensees for national security threats, but also is authorized under Executive Order 13913 to review existing licenses to identify any additional or new risks to national security or law enforcement interests. Team Telecom may do this of its own accord by majority vote of its members, even absent changes in foreign ownership. In reviewing existing licenses, Team Telecom may ultimately decide to recommend additional mitigation measures, take no additional action with respect to the license, or recommend revocation.

B. MITIGATION AGREEMENT REQUIREMENTS

Team Telecom’s review often results in the imposition of standard mitigation measures, which can take the form of letters of assurances (“LOAs”) or network security agreements (“NSAs”), as a condition of approval. The mitigation requirements are obligations companies are legally required to undertake or should undertake in order to secure submarine cable systems. While companies can establish the details of their policies for themselves, policies for logical and physical security must be submitted for Team Telecom’s approval, and Team Telecom could choose to reject a policy that it deems inadequate. Similarly, if a company fails to take steps Team Telecom views as necessary to meet what the mitigation agreements anticipate, Team Telecom can go back to the mitigation negotiating table and request more detailed measures.

Upon a review of eleven publicly available mitigation agreements that Team Telecom entered into with submarine cable operators between January 2020 to December 2021, all eleven mitigation agreements required, among other things, that the applicants: (1) take measures to prevent unauthorized logical access to the submarine cable system; (2) submit for Team Telecom’s review and approval a policy setting forth logical security measures; (3) physically secure the submarine cable system; (4) submit for Team Telecom’s review and approval a policy setting forth the submarine cable’s physical security measures; (5) implement and submit for Team Telecom’s review and approval a policy

for screening personnel; and (6) protect the resiliency of the submarine cable system. In addition, seven of the eleven mitigation agreements also included a mitigation term that required the applicants to promptly be able to disable or interrupt traffic on the submarine cable system. The agreements also included various security-related measures, including obligations to report breaches, provisions for both Team Telecom’s compliance monitoring and third-party auditing, requirements for changes in control and foreign influence, responsibilities to hire security officers and security directors, and reviews/approvals of principal equipment by Team Telecom.

DEVELOPMENTS AND TRENDS IN NATIONAL SECURITY EFFORTS IMPACTING SUBMARINE CABLE SYSTEMS

A.TIMELINE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY REVIEW

Under Executive Order 13913, Team Telecom is required to complete its initial review of a submarine cable application within 120 days. However, such reviews have gone considerably longer as Team Telecom initiates multiple rounds of questions before starting the 120 days clock and can complete a second evaluation, if required, adding an additional 90 days to the review clock.

Recent procedural changes implemented by the FCC also review applications more carefully prior to the Commission’s release of the public notice accepting the application for filing. It is not uncommon to see the FCC request applicants for several supplements to the original application, which has led to several months of delays for the initial public notice.

Similarly, recent changes in the review of submarine cable applications by the Department of State may also lengthen the timeline for approval. In delegating licensing authority to the FCC, Executive Order No. 10530 provides that the FCC must obtain approval of the Secretary of State before granting or revoking a submarine cable landing license. Previously, the Department of State commenced its review of license applications upon publication of the FCC’s public notice, and the application was deemed approved by the State Department if it did not notify the FCC of objections within that 30-day period. If the application was referred to Team Telecom, the Department of State reviewed concurrently. However, under the revised coordination procedures that went into effect on February 23, 2022, the State Department will not begin its review until after the FCC notifies it of Team Telecom’s final recommendation and the FCC’s proposed final decision. The revised procedures also provide for a shorter 10-day initial

review period, which may be extended by the Department of State.

B.EXPANDED FOCUS ON CONTINUED COMPLIANCE

Mitigation agreements are viewed as critical for protecting data traversing the submarine cable, facilitating surveillance programs conducted by United States national security and law enforcement agencies, and preventing foreign governments and foreign adversaries from gaining visibility into the United States’ telecommunications systems. In recent years, Team Telecom and the FCC have expanded efforts to ensure continued compliance with mitigation requirements. Efforts include increased compliance monitoring, such as through site visits that may include discussions with key officers and staff, inspection of physical premises, and demonstrations of relevant technologies or security features. To support these efforts, many mitigation agreements include commitments to support site visits, interviews of company personnel, review of responsive documents, and other access requirements, as well as notice and reporting obligations and provisions for third-party verification of compliance obligations.

As the global demand for connectivity continues to grow unabated, new national security concerns have prompted heightened scrutiny of transactions involving critical infrastructure in the United States. As such, while enjoying new opportunities for growth, submarine cable owners and operators must navigate an increasingly complex legal and regulatory landscape. To avoid delay and uncertainty, owners and operators should remain vigilant of policy and regulatory developments impacting the industry. STF

ANDREW D. LIPMAN is Partner at Morgan Lewis. He practices in most aspects of communications law and related fields, including regulatory, transactional, litigation, legislative, and land use. Andy’s clients in the private and public sectors include those in the areas of local, long distance, and international telephone common carriage; Internet services and technologies; conventional and emerging wireless services; satellite services; broadcasting; competitive video services; telecommunications equipment manufacturing; and other high-technology applications. Additionally, he manages privatizations of telecommunications carriers in Europe, Asia, and Latin America.

To open the US local telephone market to competition, Andy has been involved in most new legal and regulatory policies at the Federal Communications Commission, at state public service commissions, in Congress, and before courts. He helped shape crucial provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and used similar approaches to promote the opening of foreign markets. He also obtained one of the first competitive local service and interconnection agreements in continental Europe and the first competitive fiber network application in Japan. Andy’s practice includes strategic analysis of companies’ telecom user agreements, renegotiating existing agreements, and negotiating new, more favorable telecom user agreements.

For nearly a decade, Andy served as senior vice president, legal and regulatory affairs, for MFS Communications, the nation’s largest competitive local services provider. One of the founders of MFS, Andy helped guide the company from startup to its eventual sale for $14.4 billion to WorldCom. Frequently writing and speaking on telecommunications, Andy’s work encompasses more than 170 articles and five books, including two Dow Jones books on telecommunications. He occasionally appears on National Public Radio, C-SPAN, Bloomberg News Network, and ABC News, and he served on the editorial advisory boards of Phillips Publishing Company, Internet Law and Regulation, Telecommunications Alert, Telecommunications Reports, Telecommunications Regulatory Monitor, and The Satellite Compendium.

ULISES R. PIN is Partner at Morgan Lewis. He represents US and foreign communications and technology companies on corporate, financial, and regulatory matters. He also advises private equity firms, venture capital funds, and financial institutions on investments in the telecommunications, media, and technology (TMT) sectors. Ulises represents clients before the Federal Communications Commission and government agencies in Mexico, Latin America, Europe, and Asia. He has experience in cross-border transactions with particular emphasis on foreign investment and national security issues, including securing approvals by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

Ulises’s practice covers all sectors of the TMT market, including wireline, wire-

less and international communications, infrastructure projects (land and submarine networks), satellite services, internet services, and emerging technologies. He counsels on complex cross-border transactions, including mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures; public offerings; joint ventures; and private and public equity investments. He also represents public and private companies in international corporate and finance transactions across industries, including technology, energy, retail, and real estate. Additionally, Ulises drafts and negotiates telecommunications and technology contracts on behalf of hyperscalers, telecommunications operators, equipment manufacturers, and large telecommunications users.

TANYA TIWARI is Associate at Morgan Lewis. She advises clients on regulatory and compliance matters related to the Universal Service Fund (USF), including the USF programs and contributions. She also assists with bankruptcy and transactional matters and advocates policy before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Prior to joining Morgan Lewis, Tanya was an associate general counsel at the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), where she served as the lead attorney supporting the Rural Health Care Program and worked on corporate governance and procurement matters. Tanya is admitted to practice in Virginia only, and her practice is supervised by DC Bar members.

SOMETIMES YOU NEED THE FAST LANE

MUSINGS ON ATLANTIC SYSTEMS

BY WAYNE NIELSEN

Ihad the opportunity to present my thoughts on the Atlantic market in the recent submarine session at PTC ’23 in Honolulu in January. There’s only so much one can squeeze into a dozen minutes, so I decided to present the full version in SubTel Forum.

As such, I considered three main areas of interest, namely System Growth, Capacity, and Arctic Snapshot, detailed herein.

SYSTEM GROWTH

Growth on the Transatlantic route skyrocketed from the late 1990s through 2003. After a 12year drought, the Transatlantic region added a new cable every year from 2015 to 2018. After a brief respite in 2019, the Transatlantic region is back to pushing forward with strong momentum.

Two major causes of the development slowdown after 2003

were a glut of capacity and the financial crash of the early 2000s which was brought on by overinvestment in the submarine cable industry. With investment on the rise again, and systems aging out in the Transatlantic route,

new systems are beginning to come online.

The MAREA system installed in 2017 tapped into the exploding demand from Hyperscalers, with one of the key selling points being massive bandwidth available — 200 Tbps potential — on a modern submarine fiber system on a route full of aging cables. Additionally, this cable – along with Dunant cable installed last year — provides an alternative path to increase route diversity, and more directly connect Europe to important data centers in Ashburn, Virginia. The SACS and SAIL cables installed in 2018 potentially indicated an increased desire to South America and Africa directly but this has not seen sustained momentum. Additionally, to further connect South America with other areas of the world, 2021 saw the addition of the EllaLink system that branches across other areas of the continent before traveling north to Europe.

While there was a notable rise in demand for routes away from the traditional New York-London, the Amitié and Grace Hopper cables created additional connections along this route, highlighting its continued importance.

SYSTEM GROWTH KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 19 total systems in service

• 53% of systems >13 years old

• 2003-2015 - No new systems

• 2015-2022

• Steady growth since (~1 per year)

• 8 total systems added

• 2023-2026

• 4 systems planned (Amitié, Grace Hopper, Leif Erikson, and SAEx West)

• Some systems moving away from NY-London route

CAPACITY

Transatlantic routes are the most competitive globally –especially those connecting the two biggest economic hubs in the world of New York and London – and carry traffic between the highly developed economies and technology markets of North America and Europe.

Based on publicly announced information, lit capacity growth in the Transatlantic region is currently projected to outpace design capacity growth by 2025. While there is still time for systems for 2025 to be developed, that window is closing considering a typical submarine cable project takes 2-3 years to implement. The meteoric rise in bandwidth demand is driven by individuals and businesses continuing

to switch to cloud and web based services as they have since the start of COVID.

However, with the advent of 400G technology (not applicable to old systems!) and high fiber pair count systems (16 to 24 or more) it is possible that design capacity will be able to stay ahead of demand through system upgrades and new systems announced over the next 12-18 months.

CAPACITY KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 2016-2020

• Most competitive global route

• Cloud service driven growth

• Available Capacity CAGR Grew at 16%

• Lit Capacity CAGR Grew at 41%

• Lit Capacity grew 2x pace of Available

• 2021-2025

• Projected Total Capacity CAGR growth of 8%

• Projected Lit Capacity CAGR growth of 36%

• Demand outpacing capacity buildout (based on publicized projects)

ARCTIC SNAPSHOT

Interest in Polar projects has been at an all-time high in the past few years, as cable developers are looking to take advantage of the dramatically shorter routes between Europe, North America and Asia that can be achieved through the Arctic Circle. The Quintillion Subsea system has proven that a fully Arctic system can be made for future systems that look to tackle this particularly difficult region.

The Arctic in toto is still an unproven, risky route with a number of environmental challenges that need to be addressed for any system. Operations & Maintenance of any Arctic system creates its own set of unique trials, as much of any Arctic cable will be inaccessible during significant times of the year. As such, this higher risk is matched with a higher reward for a successful Arctic cable system.

ARCTIC SNAPSHOT KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 2 Arctic systems RFS since 2017 (Quintillion & EAUFON)

• 3 Arctic systems planned through 2026 (Far North, Nunavut and Polar Express)

• Arctic routes minimize latency between Europe and Asia

• Avoid bottlenecks such as Suez Canal

CLOSING THOUGHTS

Bandwidth demand continues to skyrocket, but the potential impact of current Big Tech struggles on new system builds is still in question. Given today’s geopolitical issues, the US to Europe Atlantic routes are more critical than ever, but certain Arctic routes are probably imperiled due to political concerns with Russia. New unannounced systems are anticipated in short term.

We’ll see. STF

WAYNE NIELSEN Wayne Nielsen is Managing Director of WFN Strategies and possesses more than 35 years’ experience in submarine cable systems, including polar and offshore Oil & Gas submarine fiber systems, and has developed and managed international telecoms projects in Antarctica, the Americas, Arctic, Europe, Far East/Pac Rim, and Middle East. In 2001, he founded WFN Strategies, which provides design, development, and implementation support, as well as commercial and technical due diligence of submarine cable systems for commercial, governmental, and Oil & Gas clients. He is the founder and publisher of Submarine Telecoms Forum magazine, the industry’s considerable voice on the topic. He received a postgraduate master’s degree in international relations, and bachelor’s degrees in economics and political science, and is a former employee of British Telecom, Cable & Wireless and SAIC.

Do you have further questions on this topic?

ASK AN EXPERT

NEAR FUTURE OF THE DATA INDUSTRY

BY PATRICIO ALBERTO REY SOMMER

During the last few years, we have been witnessing tremendous traffic growth in the backbone networks that connect us. Data Centers are being built everywhere and different technologies as AI are making headlines every day. Chat GPT maybe been the first tangible product that gives the general public a glimpse on what is to come. Assisting to GSMA MWC at Barcelona, I could see firsthand how mobile technology is also pushing. We do not have many WIFI 6E devices and we are talking about WIFI 7 and we have not ended deploying 5G and we are also talking of the benefits of 6G.

What do we need to sustain all these fast-growing trends? My first thoughts are connectivity and energy. And now comes the big question, who will provide it?

My experience as infrastructure developer is that driving and independent subsea cable project has become a very difficult endeavor. In the real world, if you do not secure a contract with a content provider is very hard to drive a feasible initiative. And the trend is that more and more

OTT’s are developing their own infrastructure for their use. Due to their nature, these companies have ready access to high amounts of capital that allows them to develop these projects without the burden of getting into a project finance or issuing debt to budget the deployment, accelerating the entire process tremendously. Besides all that, cable vendors provide them high discounts due to the upfront payments that the content companies can provide. The risks involved are also very low, this is mainly explained by the intended use of the capacity, all of it is need internally to support their core business. The risk of over sizing the infrastructure has proven also almost inexistent due to the high growth of the data requirements, being the opposite a very common scenario.

From a traditional infrastructure development standpoint, it seems very counter intuitive to have an industry investing heavily in low yield assets as subsea fiber optic cables, instead of investing all its own resources in their core businesses, as most of other industries do. Maybe

the Subsea Cable Developers have not come up with an attractive alternative, from an operational/financial standpoint, for them to adopt. The irruption of investment funds buying operators infrastructure could be a more efficient financial solution but is nowhere to be seen yet. The challenges here is to develop an innovative solution that can allow traditional infrastructure developers or investment funds to compete with a very efficient formula. First, there is a time factor, traditional project finance processes require approximately 2-3 years of hard work, a first

stage to find clients for the capacity and a second phase structuring the financing scheme. Another crucial factor is price, content providers are getting used to pay only the cost of the infrastructure at very discounted rate. An intermediary will have a hard time matching up, the project finance structure usually does not allow hard upfront payments lowering the discount rate that the can access from the vendor, there are also commercial risks due to many factors, being price erosion, competition, and unsold capacity the main ones, obviously this is reflected in the interest rate of the debt. The last factor that adds costs for the OTT in this scheme is the cost of the intermediary making this traditional approach to infrastructure very inefficient and uncompetitive. And last, the complexity of managing the construction of a subsea cable project and its operation once is on service is not high, so value from a traditional infrastructure development or an investment fund is not much in this department, content providers have already internal resources and third parties that manage different stages of these initiatives efficiently.

Other traditional actors in providing subsea fiber optic capacity are telcos. Is evident to the industry that they are not taking any steps to initiate new backbone connectivity projects. All the contrary, at least in Latin America, they are selling their backbone assets focusing in the last mile. Operators are being subject to fierce competition and their prices are not going up, also they are driving huge investments in new technologies as 5G. All of this has reduced their margins and competitivity. These companies are now focusing on providing other digital services as value migrated from the connections to the data.

As a summary, to address the connectivity needs for the next decade and avoid an industry integration with the content providers, a new business model has to be created. The risks of having all the digital eggs in the same basket is very high, taking in consideration that the subsea cable industry is responsible of the bulk of all communication in the world. Needless

Energy is another relevant factor to consider, last year Data Center’s electricity consumption accounted for an approximately 2-3% of the global supply. Industry projections estimate a steep increase in energy requirements in the following years that could reach 8-10% of the global supply by 2030. This is a quantic leap that needs to be addressed now.

to say how strategic is for governments, industries and individuals.

Energy is another relevant factor to consider, last year Data Center’s electricity consumption accounted for an approximately 2-3% of the global supply. Industry projections estimate a steep increase in energy requirements in the following years that could reach 8-10% of the global supply by 2030. This is a quantic leap that needs to be addressed now.

The energy sector is facing this challenge with many setbacks, the Ukraine war has stressed the industry supply and we are now one step behind compared to one year ago.

Without Russian gas European countries are now struggling to reach energy self-sufficiency to be able to withstand simple energetic needs as heating for the winter season.

How will tech companies address this reality? Energy is just a strategic asset for them as it is subsea cable connectivity. Will the digital industry take a different approach to address their fast-growing energy needs? If they do, they could be tempted to develop their own energy solutions, as they do with the subsea network.

Developing an Energy Project has challenges of its own. Environmental requirements are way more complex that the ones that they face with digital infrastructure. Even for sustainable energy solutions, regulatory requirements require several years for government approvals. Design, construction, and operation risks are higher and are further away of the capacities of content providers.

The digital industry is also migrating rapidly to renewable energy, this places more constraints in the type of solutions that they will require, so their share of the global matrix growth (6-8%) should be developed to produce clean energy. This is good news for the environment, and really needed but is harder to accomplish.

From my point of view the main risk coming from the Energy factor is time, not the business model. If we need so much power in 6 years, we should be addressing it now. It is not rare that projects take much more than that. Solar and wind power plants can be implemented in shorter periods but have less reliability (plant factor) and are efficient only where there is wind and high sun radiation, electricity cannot be easily transported across long distances. Hydro

Electric projects require long time frames and a huge environmental requirements that make them hard to develop, and yes they need water and differences of altitude to be able to harvest energy.

My takeout of the Energy factor are three: Time, Location and Regulations. The first one is obvious and should be addressed immediately by all energy intensive companies in the digital world as energy is their most important resource, the clock is ticking. We cannot jeopardize the world’s digital growth due to lack of planning. Location is important because you need to be close to a clean energy supply, and simply that is where we should place the data centers in order to drive the industry into sustainability. Regulations have a lot in common with Location, but refers to the norms that are enforced in the place where you what to place your infra. Political uncertainty/ instability, subjective environmental requirements and slow administrative processes are not friends with infrastructure investments and sometimes suppose big risks.

The Digital Industry thriving, but to keep it that way we must look into the future and address the needs that we will face. Its size is a factor that we must take into consideration in its network and energy requirements. Concepts as free trade, infrastructure provision business models and resource planning must be promptly addressed to keep the industry healthy and competitive. We do not have to forget that the industry is being driving a true digital revolution for some time, is our responsibility to ensure its promising future. STF

PATRICIO ALBERTO REY SOMMER is General Manager of Desarrollo País (Fondo de Infraestructura S.A.). He is an industrial civil engineer, with a master’s degree in engineering sciences from the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. In his professional career, he has worked in operational and financial areas of various companies such as Procter & Gamble, Budnik and Prize. He has also worked in the public sector, planning for the Regional Ministerial Health Authorities and Mayor of the Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins Region, where he led reconstruction projects after the earthquake of February 22, 2010. Previously, he covered the role of Manager of the National Network, of the Chilean Chamber of Construction (the union that brings together the main Chilean builders, contractors and concessionaires). He currently holds the position of General Manager of Desarrollo País (Fondo de Infraestructura S.A.) from where he seeks to promote the development of sustainable and resilient infrastructure for Chile.

We cannot jeopardize the world’s digital growth due to lack of planning. Location is important because you need to be close to a clean energy supply, and simply that is where we should place the data centers in order to drive the industry into sustainability.

RECENT

MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING DEVELOPMENTS AND ITS IMPACTS ON REGULATORY APPROVALS FOR SUBMARINE TELECOMMUNICATION CABLES

A Study Case for Belgium, Cyprus and Greece

BY MENCÍA MARTÍNEZ AND RITA MELO

INTRODUCTION: MSP UPDATES IN THE WORLD

The concept of Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) emerged during the 1980s in the context of marine conservation planning, being the original zoning plan of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP) in Australia a “pioneering example of MSP”.

The MSP is a public process of analyzing and allocating the spatial and temporal distribution of human activities in marine areas, including energy production, oil and gas exploration, shipping and fishing activities, conservation, raw material extraction, tourism, and installation of submarine cables; to achieve ecological, economic, and social objectives that have been specified through a political process1.

Marine Spatial Planning can result in plans, permits, and other administrative decisions that determine on the spatial and temporal distribution of relevant existing and future activities and uses in marine waters and can also take the form of different non-binding visions, strategies, planning concepts, guidelines, and governance principles related to the use of each country’s marine space.

In 2017, UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries launched a Joint Roadmap to accelerate MSP processes worldwide. Since then, the number of countries initiating, advancing, or approving their own MSP processes has significantly increased, currently under development in over 70 countries.

In Europe, after the EU Directive 2014/89/EU on maritime spatial planning, EU member states were obliged to implement their MSPs in marine waters under their jurisdictions before 2021. While most countries are still in the early phases of their MSP initiatives, others have already approved, implemented, or even revised its marine spatial plans for many years. Fully developed and implemented MSPs are limited to certain regions of Germany, Belgium, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Latvia, and Lithuania, in countries like Portugal, Poland, Malta, Sweden, and Denmark plans are at an advanced stage, while in other countries plans are still under development and approval as it is the case of Greece or Cyprus.

Marine Spatial Plans, broadly speaking, include data on human activities (tourism, energy developments, fishing areas or military areas), infrastructure and facilities (telecommunications cables, lighthouses, main ports), nationally designated areas (Natura 2000, environmental protected areas, protected species) and energy and mineral resources. This resembles land-use planning in the marine environment.

1 Marine Spatial Planning Global. Concepts and terminology. Definition of Marine Spatial Planning (MSP). Available at: https://www.mspglobal2030.org/es/recursos/referenciasclave-de-la-pem/enfoque-paso-a-paso/conceptos-y-terminologia/

Specifically, for subsea telecommunications cables, Marine Spatial Plans are fundamental to help minimize potential conflicts between these Projects and other uses of the marine environment like shipping, fishing and offshore energy development.

Cable operators need to obtain various permits and approvals from relevant competent authorities in each country before installing and operating subsea cables. These permits and approvals may include requirements for the protection of the marine environment and may impose conditions on the installation and operation of subsea cables.

MSP DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACTS IN SUBSEA CABLE PROJECTS

Submarine telecommunication cables have been critical to global communication networks since the first cable was laid across the English Channel in 1850. Since then, numerous cables have been put into operation worldwide. In general, when planning the landing of subsea cables, cable operators assess various factors, including the suitability of the seabed, the presence of sensitive habitats or species, and potential impacts on existing infrastructure and other users of the marine environment. These assessments are typically carried out in accordance with relevant regulations and requirements, such as environmental impact assessments, marine spatial planning, and protection of marine habitats and species.

MSP plays a critical role in managing the marine environment and ensuring sustainable use of marine resources. The laying of submarine cables can impact the marine environment, fishing, navigation, and other valuable resources. Marine Spatial Planning authorities can provide cable corridors, which influence general data availability and access to cables. Improved coordination and cooperation between national authorities can improve the harmonization of regulations, licensing requirements, and data sharing across countries. By incorporating subsea telecom cables into MSP, governments and authorities can ensure that cable placement is well-coordinated and that environmental impacts are minimized.

Cable operators need to obtain various permits and approvals from relevant competent authorities in each country before installing and operating subsea cables. These permits and approvals may include requirements for the protection of the marine environment and may impose conditions on the installation and operation of subsea cables.

Broadly speaking, an environmental permit is required for any activity that may have an impact on the environment - including the installation and operation of subsea cables. The permit application may include Environmental Forms, Appropriate Environmental Assessments or a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) that assesses the potential environmental impacts of the project and identifies measures to mitigate those impacts.

Source: https://www.dms.gov.cy/dms/shipping.nsf/all/FCD4E14C14CC2F05C22588BF001F29AA?opendocument

It is important to indicate that although some cable corridors may not be specifically defined for telecommunication cables but also for more complex linear projects (like offshore wind or O&G), these allow to better define the permitting associated with each type of Project, reducing permitting requirements and auxiliary studies applicable for telecom cables. This is the result of coordination between multiple authorities for the execution and approval of MSPs, involving Strategic Environmental Assessments, avoiding beforehand Environmental Areas of Conservation (e.g., Natura 2000 or IBAs).

Although permitting can be a significant barrier in some cases, with major time and cost implications, a good development of Marine Spatial Plans is the ´cable´ to speed up and facilitate the process. A well-established regulatory framework helps to frame and define location, required permits-in-principle and timeframe for telecom subsea cable projects, leading to less intensive environmental permitting studies and compliance documentation (most times levying the necessity of a full EIA).

CASE STUDIES FOR MSP IMPLEMENTATION IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES, (SOME EXAMPLES)

CYPRUS- MSP UNDER APPROVAL

In 2019, the Cypriot government established a national MSP authority, the Deputy Ministry of Shipping to oversee the development and implementation of the MSP

in the country. The Deputy Ministry of Shipping has been working to develop a comprehensive MSP framework for Cyprus, which includes the management of subsea telecommunications cables.

In December 2021 a draft of the National Policy Statement, which is the strategic framework for Marine Spatial Planning and the Maritime Spatial Plan in Cyprus was issued and sets the main priorities, goals (economic, social, cultural and environmental) and strategic guidelines for the marine waters of the Republic, accounting for the need of a sustainable growth.

The draft MSP included a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) study, which was submitted to the Competent Authorities. A relevant public consultation period was completed in January 2023 (to submit views to the Environmental Authority) and it will be reviewed by SEA Committee. The relevant Environmental Opinion will have to be issued by the Environmental Authority before the MSP can be finalised / adopted (expected in 2023).

One of the Priorities for the Maritime Spatial Planning is the “Protection of the existing submarine cable network and sustainable development of related infrastructure” which ensures the operation of basic infrastructure approved in the framework of international telecommunications and energy cooperation.

Cyprus has several subsea telecom cables landing on its shores, including the SeaMeWe-3, PEACE Cable, Hawk, Blue Cable, Tamares North, Poseidon, TE North/

TGN-Eurasia/SEACOM/ Alexandros/Medex, MedNautilus Submarine System, CADMOS-2, CADMOS, UGARIT, Turcyos-2 and Turcyos-1.

The upcoming MSP specifies zones where the landing of any subsea cables and pipelines should occur for its protection and to avoid potential conflicts with other future uses of the maritime space.

Currently, the permitting procedures and responsibilities in Cyprus are fragmented between the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and Territorial Seas (TS). The regulation applicable to the EEZ is under the Ministry of Transport, Communication and Works, in line with the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf Law and TS are under the Deputy Ministry of Shipping, who enforces the MSP Law/Regulations. In the interim, a combined permitting process for the EEZ and TS, based on existing EEZ legislation, is being explored by the Authorities and may be applicable to telecom subsea cables.

Telecom Subsea Projects in Cyprus are considered under the Environmental Impact Assessment Law, Annex II Category2, requiring the submission of an Environmental Information Form, which is a standard document, fairly easy to be completed. Nonetheless, it is still common Authorities require auxiliary environmental studies and/or may even determine an EIA is required at a later stage in the process.

Considering technical knowledge on environmental assessments, requirements and impacts stemming from telecommunication cable Projects in Cyprus within Authorities is not extensive, permitting suppliers need to support and fully expand on the exact differences between telecommunication cable installations and interconnector cables and pipeline construction and operation. Surely the tendency is the more telecom Projects are implemented in country, the deeper the knowledge about subsea telecom cables is rooted within Authorities, and Marine Spatial Planning greatly facilitates a wider understanding of its nature and impacts.

2 Law no. 127 of 2018 concerning the Environmental Impact Assessment of Certain Projects. Law no. 127 of 2018 concerning the Environmental Impact Assessment of Certain Projects. Amended by: Law no. 23 of 2021 amending the Environmental Impact Assessment of certain projects Law no. 127 of 2018. Available at: https://www.fao.org/faolex/results/ details/en/c/LEX-FAOC211224/

In Cyprus, it is expected that upon implementation of the MSP, future telecommunication cables will have to consider defined landing locations (as it is shown under map above).

GREECE- MSP UNDER DEVELOPMENT

There is currently a national MSP under development in Greece (still pending). At the moment MSP related items are addressed in “Special Frameworks for Spatial Planning” (terrestrial spatial plans - TS Plans) and Regional Spatial Frameworks, covering specific economic sectors. Sectoral plans have been elaborated so far for aquaculture, (2011, to be revised), tourism (under finalization) and industry, (2009, to be revised), which include spatial planning guidelines for the land-based, coastal and marine segments of each sector.

The Ministry of Environment and Energy is the Competent Authority for the implementation of Marine Spatial Planning, and to achieve its Planning goals, it cooperates with the Ministry of Maritime Affairs & Insular Policy which is responsible for the “National Strategy of Maritime Policy”3. Marine Spatial Planning accounts for the presence and importance of subsea cables in county´s waters.

In addition to protecting subsea cables, MSP in Greece also considers the potential impact of new cable installations on the marine environment and other marine activities.

The protection of subsea telecommunications cables in 3 European MSP Platform. Countries: Greece. Available at: https://maritime-spatialplanning.ec.europa.eu/countries/greece

Source: Greece MSP map. Available at: http://maps.msp-greece.eu/maps/41/view#/

Greece is governed by several laws and regulations, including Law 4014/20114, setting out the framework for the development of marine spatial planning in Greece and establishing the legal basis for the protection of marine ecosystems. These laws and regulations aim to ensure the sustainable use and protection of Greece’s marine environment and its critical infrastructure, including subsea telecommunications cables.

Greece has multiple submarine cable systems connecting it internally and to other countries in the Mediterranean and beyond. To name a few with upcoming ready-for-service (RFS) dates: the 2Africa System, Apollo East and West, Blue, India Europe Xpress (IEX), Ionian, and the Medusa Submarine Cable System. Based on the most updated Greek Legislation MD ΥΠΕΝ/ΔΙΠΑ/64712/4464/2022 issued end of July 2022, marine telecommunication projects/activities are not subject to the Environmental Permitting procedure (elaboration of an ESIA for the issuance of the Environmental Permit).

BELGIUM- AND EXAMPLE OF PIONEER MSP DEVELOPMENT

Belgium has been one of the pioneers in the development and implementation of Marine Spatial Planning, as it was the first country in Europe to adopt a national law on MSP. The national authority responsible for the MSP is the Minister of the North Sea. The planning process at the national level has a legal basis in the Marine Environment Act, amended in 2012 to include the development of an MSP. Its name was also amended to “Act for the protection of the marine environment and for the organization of maritime spatial plan4 Law No. 4014 on the environmental licensing of works and activities, regulation of illegal constructions in connection with environmental stability and other provisions falling under the competence of the Ministry of Environment.. Available at: https://www.ecolex.org/ details/legislation/law-no-4014-on-the-environmental-licensing-of-works-and-activitiesregulation-of-illegal-constructions-in-connection-with-environmental-stability-and-otherprovisions-falling-under-the-competence-of-the-ministry-of-environment-lex-faoc108645/

Source: https://www.health.belgium.be/en/marine-spatial-plan

ning in the maritime regions under the Belgian jurisdiction.”

In 2014, the Belgian government launched the first cycle of Marine Spatial Planning, which covered the Belgian part of the North Sea. The MSP process involved extensive stakeholder engagement, scientific assessments, and the development of a Plan to balance the protection of the marine environment with the sustainable use of its resources.

In the spring of 2017, the review process of the Belgian MSP for the period 2020-2026 commenced with an informal consultation. In 2018, the Council of Ministers adopted the pre-draft MSP, and a large-scale formal consultation process was launched in July 2018. The second Belgian MSP was signed into law by the King on 22 May 2019 and published in the Belgian Official Gazette on 2 July 2019. It entered into force on 20 March 2020.

The Belgian MSP also included the development of specific policies for the management of subsea cables, recognizing their importance for the functioning of the digital economy and the need to ensure their proper management and protection. The Plan identified areas that were suitable for the installation of subsea cables and established guidelines and procedures for their installation and operation, in coordination with relevant stakeholders and authorities.

The MSP for the Belgian part of the North Sea does identify areas that are suitable for the installation of subsea

cables, based on criteria such as seabed conditions, existing infrastructure, and environmental considerations.

One of the main areas is located in Zeebrugge, a coastal town in the northwestern part of Belgium. Zeebrugge is home to the Zeebrugge Cable Landing Station (CLS), which serves as a key landing point for several major submarine cable systems connecting Europe and North America.

The policies and guidelines for subsea cables in the marine spatial plan cover various aspects, including the process for obtaining permits, the technical requirements for cable installation and protection, and the requirements for monitoring and reporting.

In addition to the MSP law, other laws and regulations may also apply to subsea telecommunications cables in Belgium, depending on their specific characteristics and location. For example, cables that are installed in or near protected areas may be subject to additional regulations aimed at protecting the biodiversity and natural values of those areas.

The regulatory framework for subsea cables in Belgium is implemented by several governmental bodies, including the Ministry of the North Sea, the Federal Public Service Economy, and the Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment. These bodies are responsible for granting permits, monitoring compliance, and enforcing the relevant regulations.

Belgium has five telecom submarine cable operational systems: the BT North Sea (RFS 2023), Concerto, Pan European Crossing (UK-Belgium), SeaMeWe-3 and the Tangerine.

REFINED INFORMATION ON MARINE USES BETTER DEFINES PERMITTING FOR TELECOM SUBSEA CABLE PROJECTS

In this article we have briefly framed Marine Spatial Planning in Europe and its impacts on the permitting of telecommunication submarine cable Projects, with a brief overview on the status of development and main key regula-

tor players in three countries: Belgium, Cyprus and Greece. Depending on the development of each countries’ regulations for the planning of its marine environment, the permitting scope of these specific Projects may entail significant differences in scope, budget and schedule.

Considering Marine Spatial Planning is developed and implemented in-country by multidisciplinary teams from a wide range of official stakeholders, and that it entails current and future marine uses and environmental and social considerations, it determines and bounds specific areas for the installation of telecommunication subsea cables, therefore determining and defining the permitting requirements from Authorities.

Projects of this nature landing in countries with well-established regulatory framework and predecessor similar developments have a better overview on its permitting obligations, leading to more efficient planning. STF

MENCÍA MARTÍNEZ has more than 20 years of experience in the environmental, H&S and social areas. Currently she is the EHS & Sustainability Services Area Manager, also acting as Technical and Commercial Lead, leading a team of 35 professionals. Most of her experience has been focused in HSEC Impact Assessment as well as environmental and H&S audits (due-diligence and legal requirements), risk and liabilities assessment, sustainability and feasibility studies, and offshore projects. She also leads the asbestos risks assessment group within AECOM Spain. Her career was developed in different sectors, such as oil & gas, power, mining, and several others.

RITA MELO is a Senior Environmental Consultant at the EHS & Sustainability Services Department at AECOM Spain and has more than 8 years of experience as an international Project Manager. She was involved in permitting, environmental and social studies, waste management strategies, and water and soil remediation campaigns. She had the opportunity to work for the private and public sectors, and led studies, strategies and assessments for multilateral funding institutions like WB, ADB, FDA.

Rita is a Geology Engineer from Aveiro University in Portugal and has developed her career in Portugal, Spain, Mozambique, Belgium and Vietnam since 2011.

The policies and guidelines for subsea cables in the marine spatial plan cover various aspects, including the process for obtaining permits, the technical requirements for cable installation and protection, and the requirements for monitoring and reporting.

ADDING A NEW BRANCH TO AN EXISTING CABLE: LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

BY MIKE CONRADI AND LEWIS BAXTER

One question on which we have been asked to advise on a few occasions has been where a client (the “Customer”) wishes to build a new branch to add it to an existing submarine cable system owned and operated by a third party (the “Supplier”). In this case the Customer will typically need not only a permission to connect to the Supplier’s system, but they will also need to purchase capacity, spectrum or a fibre pair along the Supplier’s Trunk route. This sort of bespoke arrangement brings with it a number of unique legal considerations, which are discussed in this article below.

STRUCTURE

The structure of the transaction might be as follows:

The Supplier is a provider of telecommunications products and services, and is the owner and operator of an existing submarine network connecting various countries in the region. The Customer and the Supplier have agreed in principle that the Supplier will reserve capacity on its existing submarine cable and the Customer will be permitted to connect its own, new, branch cable to the Supplier’s existing trunk cable in order to facilitate a connection from the Customer’s location onwards.

As part of this arrangement, and in order for the arrange-

ment to go ahead as described, the Customer would need to procure the completion of the new branch cable by a third party with the relevant expertise in installing, operating and maintaining cables.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

1. ALLOWING THE NEW BRANCH TO BE CONNECTED TO THE EXISTING CABLE AT A BRANCHING UNIT

As discussed above, an arrangement to allow a new branch to be connected to an existing submarine cable at a branching unit is unusual and brings with it a specific set of considerations. For example the agreement between the Customer and the Supplier needs to set out ownership rights clearly in respect of the new branch cable and connecting branching unit, making it clear that (i) the Supplier owns and retains all rights, title and interest in the existing trunk cable; (ii) the Customer will own all rights, title and interest in the new branch cable and its associated equipment and facilities - and the agreement will also need to be clear on the demarcation point between the two (e.g. the branching unit itself).

The Customer’s ability to make any network and system configuration or design changes to the new branch cable, the WSS-ROADM and the terminating equipment (including network and system upgrades, routing configuration and rearrangement and other related functions) will be a point of discussion – can the Supplier veto or influence these decisions or not? Whether it is reasonable for the Supplier to ask for this veto power will depend in large part on the technical configuration of the two cables after connection and on the extent to which changes in the branch could impact the trunk.

The Supplier may want to make the Customer’s ability to sell the new branch to a third party subject to the Supplier’s written consent and to the new owner being subject to certain conditions, such as having all relevant permits and licences in place, or the Supplier determining that the new owner has reasonable means to discharge its obligations under the agreement. Whilst such a request from the Supplier may be reasonable the Customer will not want to give the Supplier a veto of such a significant business decision – so one compromise might be that the Customer is be required to notify the Supplier of its intention to sell or otherwise dispose of its ownership in the branch cable, with the Supplier being deemed to have granted its consent

unless certain conditions are met (which might, for example, look to the financial capacity of the new owner).

2. SELLING FIBRE OR CAPACITY ON THE TRUNK

Aside from the right to connect the new branch to the existing trunk, the second critical element to the agreement will be the provision by the Supplier of capacity or fibre on the trunk, and the nature and pricing mechanism for that. The new branch will of course be useless without the Customer having the ability to use the trunk and to connect onwards on from the trunk’s landing points.

One model to achieve this could be for the Customer to purchase, on an IRU model, a long term right to capacity, or to spectrum, or to an entire fibre-pair, on the trunk. This would entail an upfront payment in return for such rights, typically combined with a smaller annual maintenance fee. The authors of this paper have often written (including in previous editions of SubTel Forum) about the meaning of an “IRU” since there remains considerable industry misunderstanding. To summarise though an “IRU” does not have any special legal meaning and typically an “IRU” does not convey property rights. Rather an “IRU” is usually best understood as a long term service commitment (though the only way to understand it properly is to read what the IRU agreement itself actually says). This means though that the Customer purchasing an IRU might want some additional comfort that their rights will be honoured even if the Supplier were to become insolvent. For this reason the Customer may seek some additional comfort – e.g. in the form of an agreement with the lenders to the Supplier – to reassure them that their IRU will be maintained even if the Supplier ceases to control the relevant assets.

On the IRU model one matter for negotiation will be the extent to which the Customer is bearing a risk in respect of the maintenance costs – will they be charged a fixed fee irrespective of the actual maintenance costs of the trunk, or will they pay a percentage of actual costs? If the latter then, depending on the complexity of the trunk system, it may be necessary to think about precisely how to define which elements of actual costs are to be shared with the Customer. Should, for example, the Customer bear any responsibility for the cost of repairs for a shunt fault on another fibre within the system, if it is not the one they are using? Will the specific fibre they are using even be fixed?

Another potential model would be that the Supplier promises to supply individual capacity services, from named end-point POPs all the way through to the demarcation point between the trunk and the branch cable, for pre-set prices. This would enable the Customer to activate services

on an incremental basis as and when needed. In order to guarantee availability the contract would need to specify that the Supplier will hold capacity available to allow the Customer to make such orders. The most significant difference between this and the IRU model is that the Customer would not be expected to pay significant sums of money upfront – but would instead pay on a periodic lease basis only for the capacity or services that they actually need.

One issue with this second model is that it will likely too difficult to agree in advance what the lease prices will be for new services ordered – potentially – many years into the future. From the Customer perspective it will be important to have some certainty on this since if these lease prices are too high it could make it very difficult for them to use the branch profitably. For this reason it may make sense to have some sort of benchmarking mechanism, or else a process to link the costs of new leases to some index of similar telecoms service prices.

A further issue on this point could be whether or not there is an obligation on the Customer to create the connection, and so start making payments, by a specific start date. From the Supplier’s perspective they may feel that if they are being asked to hold capacity on the trunk free it is not unreasonable for them to expect a date by which they will start to receive compensation for this but from the Customer perspective the Supplier will not in fact suffer any incremental cost, or any real loss of business (assuming plenty of spare capacity) until the new connection has actually been made.

3. SEPARATE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS

A final important area to consider will be the question of the construction of the new branch and its maintenance. If possible it would make most sense to have the same turnkey company (“Builder”) construct the branch as has already constructed the trunk (this would minimise the risk of “finger pointing” between two different builders in the event of a problem developing in the two cables’ abilities to connect properly). Even with the same Builder though there are still issues that could arise. As an example the Supplier will, reasonably, be concerned about the risk that damage to their trunk is caused during work to connect the new branch to it. From the Customer’s perspective, though, all work is being done by the Builder so they will seek to avoid being caught in a dispute between what is, in reality, an issue between the Supplier and the Builder. For this reason the Customer will likely wish to avoid taking any liability beyond passing on any damages received from

the Builder in the event such a problem arises during construction. A compromise could include giving the Supplier assurance as to the level of responsibility assumed by the Builder under the branch construction contract – or even giving the Supplier a direct right, as a third party, to claim damages directly from the Builder in that contract. If the Builder also built the Supplier’s system then they may be more willing to agree to this. Similarly – and depending on the routing details – it may make most sense for the Supplier’s existing maintenance arrangements also to cover the Customer’s new branch system. This would avoid the need for two separate contracts and two different maintenance providers to be operating in respect of the same geography – and would ensure that even if there were doubt about exactly what had gone wrong or the location of a problem only one company would be responsible for fixing the issue.

If, then, the Supplier is part of a regional maintenance arrangement then the Customer could look to join the same arrangement. Similarly the Customer could look to sign up to the same private maintenance arrangement – if there is no appliable regional one - as the Supplier has already signed up to – and the two parties could each agree not to switch maintenance providers without the agreement of the other.

In summary then connecting a new branch, under separate ownership, to an existing trunk is a complex exercise not only technically but also in terms of thinking through the likely practical and legal risks and reflecting them pragmatically in the contract documents. We hope this article may be of some assistance in this exercise! STF

MIKE CONRADI is Partner of DLA Piper LLP. He is co-chair of the international telecoms practice at global law firm DLA Piper LLP and the lead partner for digital infrastructure. He is rated amongst the leading telecoms lawyers globally by all the various guides and was the editor of the Communications Law Handbook. The legal guide Chambers and Partners says of him that “[he] produces punchy and straightforward answers - he’s direct and commercial, and gets to the point quickly.”

Mike has a particular interest in submarine cable systems - having worked on the legal aspects of more than 100 different cable projects during the course of his 25 year career. He has delivered a legal “masterclass” to every “SubOptic” event since 2004 and was the only private practice lawyer on the SubOptic industry legal standards working group.

LEWIS BAXTER is Associate of DLA Piper LLP. He is an associate in the Technology and Sourcing Practice at DLA Piper LLP. Lewis works within DLA Piper’s international telecommunications practice, advising firms on transactions in the telecommunications sector, with a particular focus on submarine cable systems.

UTILIZING GIS TECHNOLOGY TO VISUALIZE THE SUBMARINE CABLE MARKET

BY KIERAN CLARK

Geographic Information System (GIS) technology has revolutionized the way different industries gather, manage, analyze, and present location-based data. The submarine cable industry is one of the many sectors that have greatly benefited from the application of these tools. Submarine cables are the backbone of the internet and carry over 99% of global data traffic and are thus critical to understand from an economic and national security perspective. GIS technology allows businesses, governments, and end-users to easily visualize and interpret submarine cable and related data, helping them to make informed decisions about appropriate regions to invest in new cables, where to land them, and how to maintain and manage existing systems.

One of the key advantages of using this technology in the submarine cable industry is the ability to layer multiple sets of data to provide a greater understanding of a region’s needs and challenges. For instance, combining information on the age of cable systems with bandwidth demand growth and circuit capacity cost can help prospective and current cable owners determine where the most lucrative business

opportunities are. GIS technology enables the creation of intuitive maps that show the location and status of submarine cables around the world. These maps can be easily shared and updated, making it easier for stakeholders to stay informed about the current state of the market.

Location-based data is also useful in facilitating collaboration between owners and investors in the submarine cable industry. Cable systems often cross international borders and require coordination between multiple parties, including cable owners, telecommunication companies, and governments. Interactive, digital maps provide an easy and accessible method for sharing complicated data sets, allowing for better coordination and decision-making. This is particularly important in areas where multiple cable systems exist in close proximity, as overlapping infrastructure can create complications for those involved in nearby submarine cable systems.

GIS technology is also useful in identifying areas that are under or over-served by fiber routes. By overlaying data center locations with submarine cables, it is possible to identify areas of growing data usage and target potential

landing partners. This can help businesses stay ahead of the curve by expanding their networks to meet growing demand in the places where they are needed most.

Another significant benefit to the submarine cable industry is improved asset management. Submarine cables are expensive to install and maintain, and their lifespan can range from 20 to 25 years. Effective asset management is crucial to ensuring that cables remain operational for their expected lifespan and that maintenance costs are kept to a minimum. GIS technology can be used to track the status of cables, including information on the age, condition, and location of each cable. By overlaying this information with data on environmental conditions, such as ocean currents and water temperatures, cable owners can identify potential risks to their infrastructure and take preventative action to mitigate them. Additionally, earthquakes and other natural disasters can pose a significant threat to submarine cable systems, particularly those in the Pacific region. Interactive maps with real-time data updates can be used to identify areas that are prone to such events, allowing cable owners to proactively plan for maintenance or seek alternative, safer routes. A layer of data showing cable fault activity or shipping traffic can also be useful for assessing the risk of a new build or managing maintenance operations.

Mapping technology is particularly well-suited to addressing these concerns, as it provides a much more intuitive way to look at data than viewing spreadsheets and reading reports. SubTel Forum, for example, utilizes ArcGIS Online for its interactive submarine cable map, which provides a high-level overview of the submarine cable market. This tool is not only useful for education and awareness, but also provides users with a hands-on demonstration of the power of different location-based data visualizations.

In addition to these use cases, GIS technology can also

be used to help businesses and governments track market trends and identify new opportunities. By analyzing data on cable routes, bandwidth demand, population density, and other relevant factors, it is possible to identify emerging markets and predict future demand. This information can be used to inform business strategy, investment decisions, or public policy giving involved parties all the information they need to make informed decisions.

Overall, GIS technology has transformed the way the submarine cable industry operates, providing owners, investors, and end-users with an unprecedented level of insight into the market. By layering multiple sets of data, identifying areas that are under or over-served by fiber routes, and planning for potential disasters, businesses and governments can make informed decisions about where to invest in new cables and how to manage existing systems. With the continued development of this transformative technology, it is likely that the submarine cable industry will continue to benefit from its use in the years to come. STF

KIERAN CLARK is the Lead Analyst for SubTel Forum. He originally joined SubTel Forum in 2013 as a Broadcast Technician to provide support for live event video streaming. He has 6+ years of live production experience and has worked alongside some of the premier organizations in video web streaming. In 2014, Kieran was promoted to Analyst and is currently responsible for the research and maintenance that supports the Submarine Cable Database. In 2016, he was promoted to Lead Analyst and his analysis is featured in almost the entire array of Subtel Forum Publications.

Do you have further questions on this topic?

ASK AN EXPERT

IS IT ADVISABLE TO MAKE SUBMARINE CABLE DAMAGE CLAIMS?

ANDRÉS FÍGOLI

Yes, indeed. This straightforward question involves reflection on whether a submarine cable owner has any scope for action when its network is disrupted due to the activity of a fishing vessel or merchant ship that has negligently damaged one of its submarine cables.

One option is to remain passive and let the author of the damage be a potential recidivist in the future. Another option is to investigate the causes of the cable fault, identify the author and immediately alert local authorities so that they can proceed with the arrest of the suspected ship.

The second option is primarily aimed at recovering the costs incurred in repairing the damaged cable and, in the long term, it also reduces the risk that maritime operators in the affected area face similar events in the future.

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES

With the increase in fuel costs for cable maintenance ships, repair costs are higher. Other factors also play a role, such as the availability of these vessels and even the hurricane season. In addition, sometimes cable owners must

wait months until they can afford to repair a shunt fault at a reasonable competitive price.

Therefore, to justify a claim for damage compensation, which may amount to $1-3 million, these types of damages should be properly documented to the insurance companies of the shipping industry (P&Is) and eventually to a local court. In some cases, even the restoration costs exceeded the actual repair costs.

Furthermore, the argumentation should have an excellent understanding of cable repair operations and the importance of the submarine cable in the landing countries, so as to persuade naval authorities to collaborate with the investigations and find the authors of the cable fault. A common mistake is framing these outages as private business incidents of telecommunications companies when they clearly affect or potentially disrupt the digital sovereignty of a country or an entire region, and also other stakeholders such as the financial sector1

Of course, this option has complexities, hazards and un-

1 See Burnett, Captain Douglas R., U.S. Navy (Retired): “Repairing Submarine Cables Is a Wartime Necessity” US Naval Institute Proceedings, Vol. 148/10/1,436.

certainty as to whether the costs incurred in the repair will be recovered. However, this short-term monetary objective should not overlook the long-term strategy of the owner of a 25-year undersea asset, which is to send a clear message to the shipping/fishing industry that it should better control its activity in the area.

DISSUASIVE EFFECT

The dissuasive effect is the key issue for carriers/OTTs when protecting their subsea assets. The role of the insurance companies of the shipping industry (P&Is) in controlling their own customers is crucial. Otherwise, they would continue paying the cable owners for the misbehavior of their customers (merchant ships/fishing vessels).

Nearly 70% of cable faults are due to reckless human activity that could be avoided. A trawler ship pursuing a highly profitable shoal, a merchant ship dragging its anchor on the seabed are just examples of a captain’s negligent behavior when they know that submarine cables clearly marked in the nautical charts are nearby . Unfortunately, this casuistry seems to increase in parallel with the growth of maritime traffic.

In March 2021, the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC) issued its latest recommendation (191) titled “Preparatory Actions for Civil Claims Development for Cable Damage”. This recommendation intends to help cable owners to obtain compensation damages in these scenarios, combining the savoir faire of Telecommunication and Maritime law with litigation expertise for both arenas.

Other international organizations have already raised the alarms to secure the integrity of subsea networks.

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS

In several countries these initiatives are changing the regulatory framework for installing and operating a submarine cable. This trend is upward.

However, policymakers forget to tackle the abovementioned risks, which are prevalent in the subsea telecommunication industry. Most of these new national security plans rely on the role of the cable owner as the first line of defense against reckless fishermen, but clearly fail to help telecommunication companies to effectively identify the authors of a cable cut.

Of course, it would be unreasonable to require developing countries’ navies to adopt in such critical infrastructure plans a 24/7 air or naval surveillance.

In such plans, we propose that governments commit to inform the affected cable owner, within 24 hours of an outage, which vessels were near the damaged cable at the specific time, based on information from AIS/VMS and

other tracking systems (i.e., radars).

This fast-track procedure should also include the possibility to rapidly aboard the ship to obtain various evidence, such as logbooks, reports and testimonies of deck officers on duty.

The rest of the steps, such as the arrest of the ship, could be carried out as usual by the affected cable owner. This approach, apart from increasing the likelihood of obtaining damage compensation, will also increase the effectiveness of the dissuasive effect, which would be now seriously weighted by the P&Is.

With these basic measures, we believe that the telecommunication industry will have some additional pragmatic tools to ensure that the long arm of the law also reaches the seas.

DUE DILIGENCE

Before any damage compensation is awarded, it is important to keep in mind that any owner of a submarine cable must comply with national regulations and be prepared to be challenged in court on these issues. If licenses, permits and concessions are in order, there is a better chance of expediting these negotiations or legal proceedings against ship owners and their P&Is.

Accordingly, telecommunications companies should be very well acquainted with the various maritime planning initiatives underway where their submarine cables are laid. While these plans are intended to protect the marine environment where submarine cables are innocuous, they also protect a country’s sovereignty, prevent seabed congestion and ensure the safety of the vessels2.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of submarine cable faults can be prevented with further education and a good response from the affected cable owners. Damage claims against the authors of cable faults is a key tool to increase the dissuasive effect and avoid further accidents.

Therefore, governments should be consistent with their critical infrastructure plans and actively collaborate with cable owners in identifying suspect vessels to preserve their own digital sovereignty. STF

ANDRÉS FÍGOLI is an experienced international commercial dispute resolution lawyer at Fígoli Consulting. Mr. Fígoli graduated in 2002 from the Law School of the University of the Republic (Uruguay), holds a Master of Laws (LLM) from Northwestern University, and has worked on submarine cable cases for almost 21 years in a major wholesale telecommunication company. He also served as Director and Member of the Executive Committee of the International Cable Protection Committee (2015-2023).

2 See Jumrah, Wahab. “Bridging the Legal Regime under the UNCLOS and Precautionary Principle for Submarine Cable Fibre Optic Projects”, SubTel Forum, Issue 128, January 2023.

BILL 96

A Quebec Act Compelling All Business Contracts To Be Drafted In French

BY JEAN-FRANÇOIS BILODEAU

On June 1, 2022, Bill 96, an Act respecting French, the official and common language of Québec1 came into force to modify the Charter of the French Language.2 The application of certain provisions relating to the use of French in contracts with the Government was delayed until June 1, 2023. The main impact of the amendments is to require all contracts entered into with the Quebec government, the civil administration and governmental agencies to be drafted in French. The Act also applies to contracts for goods and services offered to private businesses and rendered in Quebec.

In particular, companies providing underwater cable installation or repair services connecting the Province of Quebec through the St. Lawrence River, the Gulf of St Lawrence, the Hudson, James and Ungava Bays as well as in the Hudson Strait are likely to be impacted by the new legislation.

The Act is divided in chapters and we are interested in the provisions of the “Language of the Civil Administration” and on the “Language of Commerce and Business.”

However, before reviewing the Act, we will consider the reasons for its adoption for the mandatory use of French in contracts entered in Quebec.

THE ORIGIN OF THE CHARTER OF THE FRENCH LANGUAGE AMENDMENTS

In 2021, the population of the United States was 331,9

million and that of Canada was 38.24 million for a total of 370 million inhabitants. At that time, the population of the province of Quebec was 8.5 million but 6.8 million used French as its language. The Quebec government has from the beginning of the 20th century taken measures to protect the use of French as it is impacted by the economic weight of the English culture and commercial might. In recent years, the growth of the population did not come through natural birth but rather from immigration to the tune of 45,000 people per year in Quebec. Studies published in 2020 have demonstrated that English is used in the working environment by 2 out of 3 persons in the Montreal area where most of the immigrants settle.3

The government believes that immigrants and other individuals living in the area are drawn to use English in their working environment. In order to reverse the trend and impress upon immigrants that the language of business and commerce ought to be French, the government adopted in 2022, the Act respecting French, the official and common language of Québec.

We shall now see how its provisions will support the political endeavour to promote the use of the French language in Quebec.

THE LANGUAGE OF THE CIVIL ADMINISTRATION

Prior to the amendments of 2022, section 21 of the Charter of the French Language (the “Charter”) provided

3 Studies published in 2021 by the Quebec French Language Board (Office québécois de la langue française - OQLF)

that contracts entered into by the civil administration and the related subcontracts were to be drawn up in French. They could be written in another language such as English, if concluded with a party outside Quebec.4 Hence, if you were not a Quebec-based company, you could conclude a contract drawn in English only when contracting with the government or with one of its agencies.

Section 21 was amended by subsection 21.4 that will come into force on June 1, 2023. Where the government enters into a contract in Quebec, contracts must be drawn in French but a version in a language other than French may be attached to the contract if the provider is not registered to carry on business in Quebec and if its head office is located in a state where French is not an official language.5 In such a situation, a foreign service provider located in France, Belgium or other French countries would not be able to use an English version with the original French contract version.

The important determination is centred on the notions of “entering into a contact with a party outside Quebec” and “entering into a contract in Quebec.” The Act does not define those notions. In order to be able to draw contracts in English only, the service provider would have to be located outside Québec and the contract should not appear to have been entered in Quebec. There are not cases specifically discussing the notion. In Hocking c. Haziza,6 the Quebec Court of Appeal had to determine whether a class action judgment rendered in Ontario could be declared executory in Quebec against HSBC Bank Canada. The notion of “contract entered in Quebec,” is discussed in passing as applicable to Quebec customers being clients of an HSBC branch located in Quebec.

In my view, a contract having been signed in Quebec by a foreign service provider and a customer in Quebec, that

4 Idem: 21. Contracts entered into by the civil administration, including the related subcontracts, shall be drawn up in the official language. Such contracts and the related documents may be drawn up in another language when the civil administration enters into a contract with a party outside Québec.

5 Idem: 21.4. A version in a language other than French may be attached to the contracts and other related written documents referred to respectively in sections 21 and 21.3

(1) where the civil administration enters into a contract in Québec with

(a) a natural person not residing in Québec;

(b) a legal person or an enterprise not required to be registered under the Act respecting the legal publicity of enterprises (chapter P-44.1) and whose head office is located in a State where French is not an official language;

(c) a person or body exempt from the application of this Act under section 95; or

(d) a legal person or an enterprise whose sole establishment is situated on a reserve, a settlement or lands referred to in section 97; and

(2) in any other situation determined by government regulation.

For the purposes of this Act, “State” has the meaning assigned by the first paragraph of article 3077 of the Civil Code.

6 2008 QCCA 800

is subject to Quebec jurisdiction and laws could be said to have been entered in Quebec. In order to circumvent the application of the French provisions, a service or cable provider would have to carefully include a provision to the effect the contract is not entered in this province despite the signature location and the jurisdiction and local law clauses.

Article 21.3 stipulates that not only contracts entered in Quebec must be drafted in French but also all written documents (or communications) sent to enter into the contract, related to the contract or such communications sent under such a contract between the parties.7 It would appear that once a contract is to be drafted in French, all related communications related thereto would have to be exchanged in French.

The extent of the documentation and related contracts covered by the Act would apply to instruction manuals, warranties, financing, insurance, etc. In the case of insurance article 21.5 provides an exception. A policy may be issued in English for a contract entered in Quebec if it has no French equivalent, comes from outside Quebec and its use is not widespread in the province.8 The terms used in the article have not been defined and it is difficult to advise yet on the meaning of equivalent, coming from out of province or not being widespreadly used. Property and casualty policies would not be covered by the exception as they are widely used in Quebec. The interpretation of the clause would have to be made on a case-by-case basis.

The Act also applied to the agencies of the government

7 Ibid note 2: Article 21.3. The provisions of section 21, 21.1 or 21.2 apply to the written documents listed below, according to whether they relate to a contract referred to in section 21 or an agreement referred to in section 21.1 or 21.2:

(1) written documents sent to the civil administration to enter into a contract or agreement with it;

(2) written documents related to a contract or agreement to which the civil administration is a party; and

(3) written documents sent, under such a contract or agreement, by one of the parties to the contract or agreement to another.

Sections 16 and 16.1 do not apply to a communication that is also a written document referred to in this section.

8 Idem: 21.5. Despite section 21, a contract may be drawn up only in a language other than French where the civil administration enters into a contract outside Québec.

In addition, the following contracts may be drawn up only in a language other than French:

(1) in the cases and on the conditions determined by government regulation,

(a) a contract entered into with a person or enterprise that carries on the activities of a clearing house; and

(b) a contract entered into on a platform that makes it possible to trade in a derivative governed by the Derivatives Act (chapter I-14.01), a security governed by the Securities Act (chapter V-1.1) or other movable property, provided, in the last case, that the contract is not a consumer contract; and

(2) an insurance policy, if it has no French equivalent in Québec and

(a) it comes from outside Québec; or

(b) its use is not widespread in Québec.

that obtains services from a company of other types of legal persons.9

We will now turn to the application of the Act to commerce and business.

THE LANGUAGE OF COMMERCE AND BUSINESS

The basic principle is that an enterprise that offers goods or services in Quebec must inform and serve its customers in French.10 The notion of offering goods and services is at the core of the duty to use the French language in commerce. For example, a Quebec communication company (Comm. Co.) that wishes to install, repair or upgrade an underwater cable between points from the south and north shore of the St. Lawrence River issues a request for proposals or a tender. The cable company responds to the tender and submits a bid to Comm. Co. This action would in all likelihood be tantamount to offering services in Quebec and all contracts would have to be drafted at least in French. In order to circumvent the application of the Act, Comm. Co. could incorporate a subsidiary in Ontario and conduct the bidding process outside the province of Quebec. The commercial endeavour that would take place in Quebec between the Ontario subsidiary and the Quebec head office would be subject to the Charter. The scope of those contracts between the related companies could then be limited and curtailed.

When French is to be used, every inscription on a product such as a cable, on its container or on its wrapping, or on a document or object supplied with it, including the directions for use and the warranty certificates, must be drafted in French.11 The French inscription may be accompanied with a translation, but no inscription in another language may be given greater prominence than that in French or be available on more favourable terms.

All computer software and operating systems, whether installed or uninstalled, must be available in French unless no French version exists. Software can also be available

9 Article 21.11. Where an agency of the civil administration obtains services from a legal person or an enterprise, it shall require that the services be rendered in French.

Where the services thus obtained are intended for the public, the agency shall instead require the service provider to comply with the provisions of this Act that would be applicable to the agency if the latter had itself provided the services to the public.

10 Idem: Article 50.2. An enterprise that offers goods or services to consumers must respect their right to be informed and served in French.

An enterprise that offers goods or services to a public other than consumers must inform and serve it in French.

11 Idem, Article 51. Every inscription on a product, on its container or on its wrapping, or on a document or object supplied with it, including the directions for use and the warranty certificates, must be drafted in French. This rule also applies to menus and wine lists. The French inscription may be accompanied with a translation or translations, but no inscription in another language may be given greater prominence than that in French or be available on more favourable terms.

in other languages, provided the French version can be obtained on terms, except price where it reflects higher production or distribution costs, that are no less favourable and that it has technical characteristics that are at least equivalent. 12

The Government may, by regulation and on the conditions it fixes, provide for exceptions to the application of sections above, but no such enactment has been made at this time.

Contracts of adhesions or that predetermined by one party or contracts containing standard clauses and related documents must be drawn up in French. However, the original may be accompanied by versions in other languages as well at the request of the parties.13 Schedules to the cable-laying contracts would be subject to that provision.

Invoices, receipts, releases and other documents of the same nature must be drawn up in French. No person may send such a document in a language other than French if the French version is not available to the recipient on terms that are at least as favourable.14

THE CONCLUSIONS

We have reviewed the provisions of the Act but each situation must be examined on its specific terms and circumstances to determine their impact on your business. Planning ought to be done at the inception of the relationship and the use of French language in the contracts but also in all business communications should be considered between the service provider and the contracting party to ascertain the impacts and costs associated with the its use in your commercial endeavours. STF

JEAN-FRANÇOIS BILODEAU is Counsel at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP and focuses his practice on maritime law-related disputes. As a former member of the Royal Canadian Navy Reserve, his experience in navigation and ship management enables him to provide relevant legal services, supported by technical knowledge of the marine industry. He represents different interests active in the marine industry before Québec and federal courts and the Supreme Court of Canada.

12 Idem: Article 52.1 All computer software, including game software and operating systems, whether installed or uninstalled, must be available in French unless no French version exists. Software can also be available in languages other than French, provided that the French version can be obtained on terms, except price where it reflects higher production or distribution costs, that are no less favourable and that it has technical characteristics that are at least equivalent.

13 Idem: Article 55. Contracts predetermined by one party, contracts containing printed standard clauses, and the related documents, must be drawn up in French. They may be drawn up in another language as well at the express wish of the parties.

14 Idem: Article 57. Invoices, receipts, acquittances and other documents of the same nature must be drawn up in French.

No person may send such a document in a language other than French if the French version is not available to the recipient on terms that are at least as favourable.

PM 2.0 BY

YOUR PROJECT ANALYTICS ANYTIME. ANYWHERE.

PROVEN PROCESSES AND METHODOLOGIES

• Defined Processes

• Template Driven

• PMP Based Project Management Approach

• Rigorous Documentation Controls

• Quality Assurance Focused

• Secure Records Storage

• Accessible and User Friendly

INTRODUCING THE VIRTUAL REP

• In-Field Analysis Without In-Field Risk

• Remote real-time analysis and reporting without the added cost of today’s in-field representation liabilities.

REQUEST A QUOTE

BACK REFLECTION

1851 NEWFOUNDLAND POLE LINE SURVEY (GISBORNE’S JOURNAL)

PART 1 OF 2

BY PHILIP PILGRIM

As this may well be the largest article to ever be contained in the SubTel Forum Magazine, I will begin by extending my sincere gratitude to Mr. Wayne Nielsen for publishing this significant document. I believe it important to bring this historical record to light and am positive that it will be referenced by many in the years to come. With this being said, the article is still too large for one issue so you will have to wait for the conclusion to this cliff-hanger in part two, coming in May.

This issue’s Back Reflections is both a glimpse into the very early days of modern telecommunications as well as into frontier life in the 1850’s. Historians interested in aboriginal affairs will also find this document to be important as the Indigenous of North America also played a significant role in the deployment of the first telecom networks.

Just as Tolkien’s Hobbit’s journey leads to the epic Lord of the Rings quest, this journey of Frederic Newton Gisborne leads to the Atlantic Cable adventure!

Three things amazed me while reading when this journal:

Firstly, it is that while Gisborne was struggling in the wilds of Newfoundland, with his vision to extend the telegraph network in North America towards England, the first successful submarine cable was being laid at the exact same time across the English

Channel and it was completed on Oct. 17, 1851. This day was a month-anda-half into Gisborne’s survey when he was at a low point (not the lowest) and prayed to God to save his men from starving. He was answered by rendezvousing with a schooner that happened to anchor in a nearby bay. Also, during this same journey, his brother Hartley will have completed the construction of Newfoundland’s first telegraph system (60 miles).

Secondly, when immersed in this “adventure”, you completely forget that Gisborne was an experienced telecom engineer and that the purpose of the journey was to survey a route for a pole line and bridle road across 400 miles of uncharted wilderness very late in

the season. It may be helpful for the reader to know that Gisborne was only 27 years old in 1851 and had sailed the world with his brother and uncle from age 16 to 19. He began his telecom career at age 23 in 1847 in Montreal where he was trained by Orrin Wood (who constructed and operated the earliest telegraph system of Samuel Morse in 1844). By 1850, Gisborne had:

• Surveyed and supervised the 300 mile extension of the telegraph line from Montreal along the St. Lawrence River to New Brunswick (1847-1848).

• Constructed the first telegraph line in Nova Scotia (150 miles in 1849) and became Superintendent of the provinces telegraph system and supervised the planning and partial

roll-out of an additional 700 miles of network (1850-1851).

• Worked with the Associated Press of NYC to transmit news to NYC that arrived from Europe by ship in Halifax (1849). He was thus made well aware of the financial value of news in this “generation 1” internet. He also saw the telegraph replace the Pony Express and the increase in news speed to NYC. He saw the telegraph route extend from first from Boston, then from Saint John (N.B.) then to from Halifax (N.S.).

• Become disenchanted with some of the corrupt politicians of NS who privatized the lucrative provincial telegraph network and sold it to themselves (1850).

• Realized the obvious: NYC and London must (and will) be connected through the eastern most site in North America, (inevitably eastern Newfoundland) (1849).

• Was well aware of the first sub-

marine cable across the English Channel just 11 months before his journey began (1850).

Thirdly, within less than a year following the completion of this journey, Gisborne will have:

• Completed his survey report and presented to the Government of Newfoundland.

• Travelled to NYC to secure funding (Horace Tebbets and D. B. Holbrook) and organize a company with them (Newfoundland Electric Telegraph Company) to build the pole line across Newfoundland and to transfer news from Europe to St. John’s via steamship and to intercept news “barrels” dropped from steamships enroute to NYC from Europe.

• Secured a Charter with the Government of Newfoundland to build the pole line and in turn gain exclusivity of 30 years to land submarine cables in Newfoundland as well as negoti-

ating mineral rights and land grants.

• Failed to make transit agreements for NYC-London traffic with the private network of Nova Scotia so, he re-worked his network plan to bypass Nova Scotia altogether. This revised plan required a 10 mile submarine cable (NB-PEI) and a 160 mile submarine cable (PEI-Nfld).

• Travelled to England to meet with the Brett Brothers (who laid the first submarine cable), brought them into his Newfoundland Electric Telegraph Company.

• Purchased submarine cable in the UK (with guidance from the Bretts).

• Purchased a vessel (steamship christened Ellen Gisborne) to be the first cable ship in North America.

• Developed machinery for laying a cable.

• Laid the first cable in North America (Nov 22, 1852).

• Obtained a Charter with the PEI Government that included exclusivity and land concessions.

BACK REFLECTION

EVENTS LEADING TO THE SURVEY

On March 12, 1851, the petition of the Gisborne brothers was put to the Government of Newfoundland. It was the idea and proposal to construct a telegraph route across Newfoundland to aid in connecting London to NYC via Newfoundland. The plan included a submarine cable to connect the island of Newfoundland to Nova Scotia. This petition was tabled less than 6 months after the first submarine cable was laid between England and France. (Note: this first submarine cable was mostly “non-armoured” and only functioned for 1 day before it broke on rocks.) An excerpt from the government reading of the petition is shown in figure 1. The discussions on March 12 focused on the larger pole line spanning the island ~ 400 mi. in length.

The next day, the Gisborne brothers other petition to the Government was tabled. This was to consider their offer to build a telegraph system between St. John’s and Carbonear. It would be the first telegraph system in Newfoundland and would effectively be a low-risk, proof-of-concept, and demonstration of abilities. Gisborne leveraged his past builds from Montreal to N.S. and references from the Government of N.S. to support his abilities. Gisborne, knowing the importance of promotion, seemed to ensure the press also conveyed this intelligence. Figure 2.

Note on the petitions: Newfoundland, being a British colony, required consent of the crown to enact upon these petitions. The formal approval of Queen Victoria was received nearly a year later in February of 1852, but the Government began the process of conditional approvals on Sept. 24th. Trivia: Nfld. remained a British colony until 1949 when it was the last province to join Canada.

PREAMBLE

The first two steps for Gisborne was to survey the 400-mile route and to build the proof of concept system (60miles). He split the work so that his brother handled the build from St. John’s to Carbonear while he simultaneously surveyed.

In addition to the telegraph line, the government also wished to build a road across southern Newfoundland, so Gisborne was tasked with both surveying a pole line and a road. From other records, we see he initially started to mark the route but abandoned this time-consuming effort. His journal and notes on where bridges would be needed were to act as a guide for the actual construction teams.

Figure 1. Morning Courier, March 22, 1851

For the survey, Gisborne secured the sailboat “William & Brothers” and re-christened it “United Brothers” and put together a team of eight to conduct the survey. The cunning plan was to exploit the long fjord-like harbours of Newfoundland’s south coast by playing a sort of leapfrog: the survey on foot would travel westward and skip along the heads of the many harbours while the United Brothers with supplies would sail ahead further west and wait at the head of an agreed harbour for the survey team to rendezvous and re-supply. For feeding the survey team enroute, they would carry supplies from the ship and also hunt game as needed. Note to the reader: Newfoundland is currently renowned for its abundance of moose, but the species was not introduced to the island until 1904. You will see references to “deer” in the journal. This refers to caribou that are also known as “reindeer.” One may think that “deer” could be white tale deer; though common in the North East of America and well distributed, no white-tail deer ever inhabited Nfld. Reindeer on the other hand were plentiful but not well distributed. They tended to remain in large herds.

We see an account of their preparations and gear in Figure 3. They seem to be using modern and lightweight items for the period.

The survey began in St. John’s on September 1, 1851 and proceeded across the Avalon peninsula then across the south coast of Newfoundland. Unfortunately, Gisborne’s first journal covering the first 5 weeks seems lost. From references in the second journal, we can see that by Oct.

7th, when the second journal picks up the trail, they have travelled ~ 180 miles and have had hardships. They are low on supplies and the last probable rendezvous point would have been in Piper’s Hole (50 miles behind them). There are also references to their path in this region having been very challenging and difficult. A route further north out of Piper’s Hole would have been more favourable as mentioned in this second journal. By October 7th, one member of the team, L. Morrissey, seems to have departed and another was very “used-up”. From analysis of a record of pay document for this survey, we can determine that Morrissey left the team on October 6th, and this most likely would have been in Long Harbour. At one point, Gisborne mentions going back to Long Harbour for supplies, so it was inhabited in some form in 1851.

News from the survey was covered by the local press but due to the remote location and isolation, very few updates were available, and they were very delayed. We see one in Figure 4 and the message seems to have been slightly distorted.

Finally, the transcription of this document is from a scan of a pdf that seems to be a typed transcription of Gisborne’s actual journal. As the pdf is faded, blurry, and cropped in many sections, I have attempted to decipher the writing to the best of my abilities. I have endeavoured to translate exactly as written (sic erat scriptum), but I did insert an occasional hyphen or comma to help untangle long sentences, and to improve readability. It is quaint to see long lost words like droke and dropt; and the expression “ Ticklish work this

BACK REFLECTION

rafting business.”, reinforces my earlier reference to Tolkien’s works. I could hear the voice of Gandalf when I read that line.

Reference: https://collections. mun.ca/digital/collection/cns/ id/42947

Here begins: Gisborne’s Journal of an Electric Telegraph Survey of Newfoundland 1851

OCTOBER 7TH. 1851.

I forgot to mention that yesterday afternoon we picked up an Indian drinking cup of birch bark, frequently came across the prints of moccasins & furthermore saw the remains of an old tilt in the woods, which altogether make me feel certain that I must have mis-calculated the distance we had walked since leaving Long Harbour & that the river we had crossed was in truth the famous Little River mentioned by George House. The day breaking with bad weather & a S.W. wind we counted up our bread & found that it had diminished during the last 9 days even more rapidly than we had imagined. This made it necessary that I should try south for the Indian village & accordingly we moved off the Telegraph track at as rapid a pace as lightened bags & a horrid lay of country would allow us. We soon sighted a remarkable sugar loaf hill which I named Hartley’s Hill & at whose base took our usual fare of bread and tea at about half past 11 a.m. Our course being S. by E. from Shea’s mountain. The weather cleared

up after noon & we practically got out of the wretched tracking bushes by skirting around the tops of the hills. From the summit of Hartley’s Hill we caught a glimpse of salt water but could not make out the locality from the chart. After duly impressing upon my mind the various neighboring heights we hurried down to the sea shore. Not finding any inhabitants I went inland again travelling SSW. according to House’s directions. It now begin to rain again with the wind strong from the S.W. & at sun-down we encamped at the edge of a muddy pond, wet, low spirited and miserable.

Our tea being finished we divided the bread into 5 portions and again drew lots.

OCTOBER 8TH.

Wind S.W. weather moderated with a strong breeze about daybreak. It may be noticed that during the last 7 or 8 successive days we have had almost continued rain & that with the exception of a few trout eaten at 2 meals we have subsisted entirely upon dry biscuit & tea. Notwithstanding all one hears about the “Staff Of Life”. Bread is a miserable diet. It is the most unsatisfying food you can eat i.e. for a long continuance & proven a very weak substance to travel upon. I perfectly agree with the Indians who say “plenty bread no venison bad, plenty venison no bread good”! Let those who doubt this fact, try it! Once again let me caution all travelers in this country about depending upon game for support. At certain seasons and in certain localities there is abundance, but at other times & in other districts even Indians are necessitated to eat their wretched dogs.

We marched this morning S.W. by S. to the summit of bold bleak mountain which I named Noad’s Mountain. This mountain is very striking as it is bare of even the usual mossy covering & put me forcibly in of a gigantic ebullition of ancient lava. From this eminence we could see the ocean both S & E. some 10 miles distant a large boat steering eastward. The

Figure 3. The Morning Courier August 6, 1851

Figure 4. The Morning Courier September 27, 1851

uncertainty of my position was most painful to me especially as I had to put on a cheerful countenance and speak confidently to the men. By this time my feet were nearly bare tho’ my load was allowed to be 6 lbs heavier than any other man’s in the gang. I now determined to move up N by E. until I could bring Shea’s Mountain in view again & give my men the option of returning alone to Long Harbour or run the risk of following me to the Bay of Despair as an opinion had been gaining ground in my mind latterly that we had not yet reached Little River but were still in Fortune Bay. Without giving them as yet any clue to my intention I struck off N by E. at a rapid pace and at sundown encamped on the wooded slope of a hill some 5 miles distant from Noad’s Mountain. On inspection we found that each man had about 10 biscuits left but tea & sugar none. During the evening I made them the foregoing proposition. They were not a little astounded at the idea of going on alone & protested that they were infinitely safer in following wherever I would lead than in retracing their steps without my guidance. Poor Pat vowed he would never lose sight of me with life in him & the rest chiming in settled that question. We had several showers during the afternoon & at night I lay awake cogitating as to the best course to pursue on the morrow.

OCT. 9TH.

A clear bracing frosty morning wind W. Took a small allowance of bread and juniper tea & started with a determination to strike out upon the beach which we had visited yesterday

hunt about for some human dwelling along the coast & if unsuccessful make back with all speed for Long Harbour and replenish our stores. At 1 P.M. we reached the beach & proceeded along the shore eastward. We had not advanced far however before a small boat appeared pulling around the westward headland & I despatched Gallishaw full cry after her. In an hour he returned in the punt with a Mrs. Matthew Smith and her son who took us to their very humble but most acceptable dwelling where we procured some potatoes & fresh cod fish, which we devoured with thankful hearts.

Note: It is morally impossible with the assistance of a sea chart only to ascertain your locality when coming out from the interior upon the coast & if your chart prove deficient as mine afterwards did, the chances are 10 to one that you will die of starvation before you meet with a human being. As I had before surmised, we proved to be in North Bay (Fortune Bay).

OCT. 10TH.

Our arrival proved quite a Godsend to this miserably poor family. Imagine a man with a wife & six children not having a bit of bread or flour in the house for 5 or 6 days in succession & living upon fish alone like a nest of otters. The morning being fine with wind W. I hired Smith & his boat & proceeded in company with Dady & Ryan to Valorum (1) where I purchased a fresh supply of provisions, stores etc. Ryan pleaded so hard for his liberty that I was constrained to let him go. The very idea of Little River being still ahead of us seemed to appal him. (1. likely Belleoram) Nothing

however but the fear of his being taken ill again & giving out on the way would have enduced me to part with him as he was decidedly one of if not my very best man. The poor fellow was completely “used up” and I have no doubt will give a most doleful account of our hardships on his arrival in St. John’s. We shall all feel his loss as he was the life and soul of our little party. I wrote a few lines to the Att’y Gen’l & to Mrs. G. & returned to North Bay the same afternoon. We had a fine sail with a fair wind back to make up for the ½ gale in our teeth this morning.

OCT. 11TH.

Busy all day making clothes, repairing tent, guns, boots, etc. I made myself pair of swan skin breeches & a capital fit they proved. The liberty accorded to Pat Ryan gave general satisfaction & I am very glad that Dady was the only man who accompanied me to Valorum otherwise I might have had trouble. It was a lovely summer day with the wind W. This evening I missed in a very unaccountable manner a doubloon, & a watch key which I had purchased in Valorum having on the 6th inst. lost my gold one. As it is a miserable thing to be without the time of day when travelling I almost exhausted my ingenuity before hitting upon the plan of using the flattened top of a solid gold toothpick to wind up my watch with & now to lose the key again was annoying. Both it and the money turned up afterwards!

OCT. 12TH.

Sunday morning wind S.E. every appearance of rain. As our preparations for a fresh start were hardly

Figure 4. Map showing the pole line route and failure location repaired by William Tobin in 1862

BACK REFLECTION

completed we remained by until noon & there being then no favourable change in the weather we remained waiting and watching until it was too late to proceed. All hands would have been glad to return home & asked if I should continue on if renewed local difficulties presented themselves, the answer received was “That I should go ahead if I saw the grim shadow of death perched on the next cliff.”

OCT. 13TH.

Up at daybreak. Wind S.S.E. foggy & spitting rain. Started however at 8 a.m. & proceeded up Salmon River at high water which gave us an opportunity of stemming the Little Falls. We finally about 4 miles up in the country & took to the woods when about 8 miles south Of Shea’s Mountain. We proceeded on N.W. by W. & N.W. for half a mile & then gave it up for the day the rain having commenced to fall in good earnest. There is abundance of small birch & spruce near the precipitous cliffs of Salmon River but the stream is not navigable for boats & there is but little cultivatable land in the vicinity. We spread our silk camp in a little grove on the hill side & listened to rain throughout the night.

OCT. 14TH.

An E.S.E. wind with fog and rain. No use to think of a start. Had to cut a drain through the ground floor of our tent in order to carry off the surplus water. Passed a miserable day & night. We consider this a rather cheering sort of start!

OCT. 15TH.

Still foggy and lowering, with a baffling wind from the S. At 8AM

it commenced raining but we made off notwithstanding & marched in the same course as yesterday crossing for the 3rd time the rapid waters of St. Kiel’s brook. We were brought to a stand about sundown by a very long & very narrow lake encamped on its edge in a grove of spruce trees. I shot 2 ptarmigan today this being the first time we have met with for some time. At 7 p.m. the wind having gone into the westward, at last stars shone brightly & at a tremendous fire I assumed my new duty since Pat left us —that of cook. Shea’s mountain being in view since 3 p.m. I am glad to have it again in my power to say. Ahead 2 miles

Note: The line between this point mountain & Shea’s mountain will cost £ 30 per mile. St. KieI’s brook will cost to bridge about £30. Poor land.

OCT. 16TH.

Smart showers about sunrise but afterwards it cleared up beautiful thank God & we started in high spirits. Just before stopping to dine at 1 p.m. we perceived a fine stag minus one of his horns coming right towards us at a great rate. There being a little mound between him and us I ran for it thinking to get a nearer shot. Completely out of breath, I arrived at the hillock just as the stag sprang past. A slight whistle instantly arrested him within 15 y & I fired & missed him! Pleasant tho’t for hungry men. At 4 p.m. we broke out within 200 yards of the extreme head of Little River Arm, thus again proving great accuracy in making our land falls. — Perceiving a smoke rising from the bushes on the opposite shore we rounded the arm

& forded, knee deep only, the long talked of long dreaded Little River! I must however inform the traveller that this wonderful “Little River” which is a bugbear in every Southern Shoreman’s mouth is that Little River which empties itself into the ocean near White Bear Bay. It is important to know this as the fishermen imagine it is the Eastern “Little River” in Bay of Despair. On arriving on the opposite shore, we found Mr. Edward McDonald of Galtos who with his wife and children were collecting firewood and berries. They were terrified when they perceived our party advancing. Neither when we met did they believe our tale; the woman telling us to our faces “That we had to done some wrong and were running for our lives! And “that no man could be where we were if they were after any good”. After a few minutes consideration, McDonald put us on a track and told us that it led to the Indian village but that as it was near sun down we had better not try to proceed on as there was but a very indistinct path. Being anxious however to make up for lost time we tried it, got off track and had a time of it. We forced over some tremendous cliffs and & fortunately made our way back to the land wash we had last left at a spot about ½ a mile from the river’s mouth. Here we found a clearing & a tilt formed and passed a comfortable night in spite of a very sharp frost. Ahead 5 miles. Wind N.W.

Note: We crossed some fine land during the last 2 miles of to—day’s walk covered densely with birch & spruce as far as the eye could reach N. & North westward were forests.

From Shea’s Mountain to Little River the road will average £30 per mile to which add £50 extra for crossing one deep gulch & stream & £40 for spanning Little River.

OCT. 17TH.

Rose at dawn, walked a mile down the beach & was rewarded by finding a splendid 3 lb. trout which had been regularly netted by a prostrate spruce tree when the morning tide had fallen. At 7 a.m. we retraced our steps back to McDonald’s tilt in order to procure some further fresh information from him. His son however, who advanced to meet us said his Father & Mother had already gone out “berrying”. I did not believe this story & we afterwards found out that they being alarmed had hidden from us. We thought however that with our compass course S.S.W. & the signs in the path we could not go far wrong and accordingly made off at a great rate and in high glee. (I was somewhat surprised this morning to find the missing doubloon & watch key in my pocket! The magical effect I suppose of a few kind words & spoken seriously). On we marched until 1 p.m. No signs of a wigwam & at 4 p.m. we came upon the identical little cove pointed out upon my chart by George House as the spot where the Indians resided but nary an Indian there, not even a cleared spot, everything desolately wild on every side. Sick at heart we turned back N.N.E & encamped at sundown in one of the deep gulches thro’ which we were wending our wearied way. We knew that McDonald was off as his boat was loaded & he was only waiting for the fair wind

which had been blowing all day & to mend matters we had improvidently consumed nearly all our food believing that relief was at hand. I really felt disheartened & while the men were fixing up for the night I clambered up a precipice to get a view of the surrounding country. Far as the eye could reach were bleak mountains & interminable woods & the extreme solemnity of silence reigned supreme. It was indeed a desolate position & the idea that the men who had risked their lives in my service might yet die of starvation being heavy on my soul. A short and sincere prayer to our Heavenly Father for guidance considerably relieved me & upon mounting a still loftier hill I could perceive anchored near the opposite shore of a wide Bay a small schooner. Inexpressibly relieved I returned to the camp & eagerly communicated the cheering intelligence to the now jovial men. I am happy, most happy to bear record that ever since we started, each man on his knees offered up his evening thanksgiving to the Almighty & surely the Lord with us, for notwithstanding a thousand falls no man was seriously hurt & altho’ frequently wet & hungry no man suffered from ill health. Weather cold & clear wind N.W. There must be some great error in my chart concerning this Bay.

Note: Two important arms running 10 miles are absent, as in my case, on the chart.

OCT. 18TH.

Up at 4 a.m. regularly frozen out of camp & started off northward without taking breakfast. At 8 a.m. we made the salt water arm on the opposite

side of which were 2 schooners at anchor. We now lighted a fire in order to boil our kettle & raise a smoke & on appearance of a small boat fired our guns. No attention paid to our signals until an hour afterward when the same little boat being perceived by us again we kept up a volley of musketry until to our great joy she pulled over to us. The punt which belonged to a small schooner from Fortune Bay contained 4 men who informed us that the Indian village was 3 miles north of us. The course therefore for us from Little River should have been N.W. in lieu of S.S.W. ! No wonder we were led astray. The tide being on the rise we ran swiftly along the beach & at 11a.m. reached the long-lookedfor Indian village of Conn. We walked up to the best looking house in the place where we were kindly received by Mrs. John Lewis whose husband was absent on the hunting expedition in the interior. There are about 40 Indians belonging to this settlement, but most were absent on our arrival. Some of their habitations are very good, others are merely wigwams of birch bark. There were a few cattle & few fowls about the settlement. After a good meal of potatoes & venison, I made a bargain with two Micmacs, Joseph Paul & John Brazil, to accompany us to White Bear Bay. We all got a good fit out of moccasins, stockings & etc. and from Robert McDonald (a white trader who had married a squaw) I purchased bread, pork, butter & tea so that after all our second trip to Valorum saved us a still longer trip to Galtos as McDonald had only just arrived in Conn. In the evening we danced tried gymnastic exercises until

BACK REFLECTION

3 after midnight & nothing could exceed their delight when I figured the New Zealand & Tahitian war dances for their amusement. So soon as they could be brought to believe that we really had come by from St. John’s they evidently considered us most worthy objects of admiration. Mrs. Lewis showed me two letters from the R.C. Bishop Dr. Mullock in which his Lordship most feelingly informs the poor women of the almost sudden deaths of her two daughters. Dr. Mullock had taken them to St. John’s with the intention of returning them to their parents so soon as they were competent to teach their fellow countrymen, but the change in life & diet was too for their constitutions & after a short time they sickened & died. At 3 a.m. I retired to rest in a nice clean bed thoro’ly convinced that the Conn are models for courtesy, kindness & brotherly feeling to the white inhabitants of the Island.

Note: 1st. The Indians informed me that N.W. by W. course merely from Piper’s Hole would have carried me clear of the bad lay of the country in North Bay (Fortune Bay) & brought me out two or three miles north of the Northward Arm in the Bay of Despair.

2nd. The two Arms of Conn & the Bay of Despair not being on my chart made me keep along a point & a ½ too far to the southward from Long Harbour. From the information now received & also from the lay of the land, I saw to the northward of my track, I am satisfied that it will be better to run the Telegraph Line N.W. by W. ½ N. from Walsh’s pond leaving Bennett’s Mountain about 3 miles north & Mount Archibald 1

mile south of the track & not touching Long Harbour except by a branch road at all. By so doing a saving of £3,000 to £4,000 would be effected besides securing a road on a better level. There is some splendid land in the Bay of Despair but the Indian village neighbourhood is poor. The forests northward ere of small growth & intersected by numerous marshes & small ponds.

OCT. 19TH.

Sunday and a lovely morning. As we were very anxious to make a start our Indian friends stretched a point of conscience by completing the making of our moccasins & we remained for them until afternoon. Meanwhile I pushed off in a small punt & took a sketch of Brant’s Point (the name of the Indian settlement). Just prior to starting, men women & children rushed out to join in a weasel hunt. The animal killed after some trouble & I was presented the skin to make a purse of. On our departure for Ship Cove distant about 3 miles we were saluted by a volley of musketry which we returned with our guns. The whole settlement turned in honor & several persons seemed very sorry to part with us. On in Ship Cove at 5 p.m. we were very kindly received by a trader (Mr. George Hoskins) who has lately established himself there. About 9 p.m. a couple of shots informed us that a little female stranger had made her appearance in a tilt. Three shots for a boy & two for a girl the western shore ceremony. At midnight the wind went round N.N.E., E. & S.E. & the rain commenced.

OCT. 20TH.

Wet all day with the wind varying from the S.E. to S.W. & foggy. Impossible to make a move. There was some good land in Ship Harbour and Hoskins had a fine patch of potatoes growing. He seems to make a very good living here, has a very pretty wife, an enormously fat child 9 months old that can walk & almost talk & altogether a very enviable fellow. Another Indian “Matthew Brazil” followed us today & as he promised to show me a fordable spot in East Bay river, I offered him a dollar to go with us a day’s march which he accepted. The Indians mentioned a curious fact that they have lately discovered a small lake some few miles north of Conn which has 3 outlets one leading out of East Bay (Bay of Despair) another into Bay of Exploits & a 3rd into St. Georges Bay! & that with the exception of a few portages of 100 yards or so each, they can travel in a canoe to either of those bays. In the evening I wrote a letter for Hoskins to his Father in England, whom he had not heard of for many years and another for M. Brazil to the Priest at St. Pierre’s. Matthew being a little excited on a bottle of rum produced by Hoskins in honour of the occasion gave us the ancient Micmac war dance (a very unusual treat for a stranger) & was highly delighted when I joined in with him and yelled to the chorus time. Rained hard all night.

OCT. 21ST.

Wind N.E. very cold and showery all day. After breakfast we started & had scarcely proceeded ½ a mile before Matthew Brazil rolled over dead drunk having procured a bottle of rum

during the night from some place. We left him & continued on when hours afterwards we were arrested by the report of a couple of gun shots in our rear & were soon afterward overtaken by John Paul & John Brazil 2 young Indians. The former having my note book which I had stupidly left behind in Hoskin’s house. I rewarded him with a dollar & as the young men were on a hunting expedition we all kept together until we reached East Bay River. The first glance at it satisfied me that it must be rafted as it is both wide & deep. Half an hour sufficed to make a good raft & at 7½ p.m. we were comfortably settled under our tent. From John Brazil I purchased and an Indian dog for 10/- (Philip:10 shillings or ½ £) and £20 would not repurchase him from me now. We call him “Le Muche”.

Note: From the high lands we could see an easy lay of country from the Arm of Despair both eastward & westward & the road will average £30 per mile to make add £30 for bridging Despair Brooke & £30 for Conn Brook & £80 for Bay D›Est River. Some of the land good.

OCT. 22ND.

Fog in early part of the day and calm. We started at 9 a.m., the Indian boys leaving us to proceed northward our course being N.W.W. Le Muche followed me well. We passed over level ground intersected with drokes of small timber and numerous ponds until 2 p.m. when we dined on 7 ptarmigan shot by us during the morning’s march. We passed near one very large lake which empties into Bay d’Est & which I named Kent’s

Lake. It is 20 miles long. We saw a fine young stag at 4 p.m. & Joe Paul crept down upon it like a panther. We drove a ball into its fore shoulder but the wounded animal made off quicker on 3 legs than Brazil & myself could follow it on 2. A slight breeze which now sprung up from the SE & SW brought its usual accompaniment of rain & at 5½ p.m. we camped. Despite the rain I sat chatting with the Indians until midnight when it rained heavily. Ahead 7 miles.

Note: The road must skirt the foot of Kent’s Lake & creep round under Witch Hazel Hill & will cost about £30 per mile. Poor land.

OCT. 23RD.

Heavy rain & thick weather. Determined to remain by our camp until noon. At noon it blew half a gale from the S.W. & the rain came down in torrents. At 6 p.m. when too late for a start it cleared up, the wind being at W. by N. I sat by our fire until midnight and listened to the following Indian method of catching a beaver. “Suppose” said Joe, “You see beaver house in pond you lie down in bush and watch him, by and bye near sun down, up come one beaver from under water near house, he stop, look around swim off up pond, you no fire 2- -3 minute another comes up, he no stop, swim off same track. 1 minute 1 more another then another, may be in all 3,4,5, Now you keep gun ready. Maybe half an hour you first chap come back with piece of wood in mouth, when comes close you shoot. Suppose you miss him you see no more beaver that day, suppose dead, he sink. Very soon other beaver come,

you shoot, kill him, another shoot, kill him. Suppose no see you they no care noise gun. You catch all. When all dead you (get) em out with a long pole.” In such broken English was I informed of their methods of securing the various wild birds & animals on the Island.

OCT. 24TH.

Off at a good pace at 8 a.m. & killed 3 ptarmigan soon afterwards. Then within a mile of North Bay I shot a fine old stag. I sent 2 balls after him before he dropt. Each man secured 15 to 20 lbs of his meat which delayed us so much that it was 1 p.m. before we reached & crossed North Bay brook. At this time we had a very heavy hail storm accompanied with rain & a heavy blow from the N.W. We are all so chilled from being wet through that we stopt for the night at 4½ p.m. Joe telling us that we should not see any good spot for an encampment again for 7 or 8 miles. By an unfortunate omission, we found ourselves without any salt in order to make our fresh meat palatable we used a small piece of salt codfish with it. The weather looking bad & our late bought experience urging me to save our bread as much as possible, I limited each man to an allowance of one biscuit to each meal & ordered that everyone should eat from his own stock of venison, then every man carried as much extra weight of meat as he tho’t requisite for his appetite. Ahead 7 miles.

Note: The road we traversed today will average £30 per mile which add £10 only for crossing North Bay brook as a narrow place for a bridge.

BACK REFLECTION

The course throughout from North to White Bear Bay is W. by N. by compass. Lay of land easy, but no good soil.

OCT. 25TH.

An inch of snow upon the ground at daybreak which was washed away before 8 a.m. by a shower of rain. At 9½ a.m. it cleared up the wind changing from SW to NW & we started. At 10 a.m. we saw 3 deer. I fired at one of them a doe & smashed her fore shoulder. Joe sent a second ball through her stomach & she would still have led us chase if my dog Le Muche had not bounded along side of her and pinned her by the nose. A small pond being near, the dog dragged her into it & forced her head under the water where he kept it until she was drowned. Le Muche was so exhausted in the struggle that had I not been on hand to pull him out of the water when he reached the bank he would have been drowned from sheer instability to scramble up. Good dog that. We now threw away our coarse & rather tough old stag venison & replenished from the doe, which is considered much better meat. During our march we passed 3 other deer within shot & a company of 40 or 50 half a mile north of us. Ptarmigan were also abundant but we reserved our ammunition. At 5 p.m. we stopped & whilst looking for a spot to encamp upon, 3 deer hove into sight. As we were upon an almost level plain & with no shelter in the direction of the game the Indians said no man could get within ½ a mile of them. This at once

put me on my mettle & amid the suppressed laughter and witticisms of our party I slipt into a neighbouring pond up to my knees and stole off towards the game. After half an hour of wading and squirming along the wet moss I let drive when about 200 years distant at a two year old milk white stag. The ball passed through his heart! Joe said, “You better than plenty Indians”. We took from him the heart, kidney, head and leg bones (the marrow in the latter being when roasted a great delicacy)

and upon fared sumptuously. Another immense stag came within shot of our tent shortly afterwards but we allowed him to pass on unmolested. At 9 p.m. the wind went back S.W. & it rained heavily all night. Our tent was very leaky as the bushes being very low we could not find a pole high enough on which to fasten it. Ahead 12 miles.

Note: Several small lakes forced us a little north of our course today but the lay of the country is easy & the road will not average over £25 per mile & there were no brooks to cross. Soil poor.

OCT. 26TH.

Raining hard again. How truly dispiriting! All hands put on ½ allowance of bread. Sugar finished, no pepper

& as I before mentioned no salt. At 11½ a.m. we started in the rain and were soon wet thro. We did not stop to dine but continued on until 5 p.m. when we reached Hare’s Bay Brook and encamped in a grove near its banks. We passed several herd of deer and numerous coveys of ptarmigan on our march. Joe fired at a white doe, (my rifle missed fire) and wounded her. She made off, Joe in chase. He returned however in a short time, unsuccessful. Some men growled when I intimated that I should persevere on my understanding so long as I had a leg to stand upon. We all felt anxious about our boat as was now nearly 4 weeks since we parted from her & we were much afraid that she would leave, despairing of ever seeing us again. It blew hard & rained in torrents all night, wind S.W. As we were obliged to lie down in our wet garments it proved a severe night for us. Ahead 8 miles.

Note: We were still driven up north of our estimated course, say now W. by N.½ N. all day. The road easy costing about £27 per mile. No brooks to bridge. Land poor.

OCT. 27TH.

Wind W.S.W. blowing a gale. Cleared up at 7½ a.m. We again drew lots for the bread there being but 6 biscuits for each man & our venison near out. As Hare Bay Brook (a considerable stream at all times) was now a river we set to work at a raft then 2 & 2 crossed over without accident. Ticklish work this rafting business. We maintained the course W by N½ N. All day leaving Hare Bay headlands about 10 miles to

Figure 5. Gisborne’s Path in This Article

the southward of us. They will be readily recognized by the following sketch. This eminence is visible from Bay of Despair. At 3 p.m. Joe gave us proof positive of his wonderful eyesight by telling us that he could see 2 deer on a small marsh lying directly in our course. At this time we were fully a mile & a half from the spot & not one of us believed him. At 4 p.m. an hour afterwards we reached Salmon brook in the midst of a furious storm of wind & rain. Gun in hand he forded a very dangerous rapid and half an hour afterwards we lay shivered on the wet moss we heard two shots fired. Joe soon reappeared on the opposite bank with the gratifying intelligence that he fired slugs from both barrels & killed 2 deer. The very two he had previously seen when so far distant. We now forded the stream middle deep cut up a doe & carried The whole carcass nearly a mile into a droke of woods where we raised the tent. As everything was wet it was with the utmost difficulty we could light a fire. Joe finally accomplished it by use of dampened powder & rags.

We passed a dreadful night as it blew a hurricane & the rain descended in torrents. Twice our tent was blown down about our ears. This night’s work determined me not to attempt taking any of my white men past White Bear Bay (if we ever get there) as I find that I can endure twice what they can & this is nothing to what I am led to believe we have yet to expect. Ahead 9 miles.

Note: Hares Bay River must be crossed a little below the fork and will cost about £75 to bridge. The road today will average £30 per mile. There are some good spots of land near above the mentioned stream. Salmon Brook can be bridged for £25.

OCT. 28TH.

Cold & clear wind W. drying our clothes until 10 a.m. & then started for Little River. We marched W by N½ N leaving the readily recognized Head-lands of La Hune on our left. (Diagram)

At 4 p.m. we reached the oft spoken of and long dreaded “Little River”. I need hardly mention that its

name is a libel on its proportions. It is a very considerable body of water. On our arrival we found that the late rains had caused the river to overflow its banks & which consequently to wade knee deep for some little distance before we could gain a small wooded knoll. The legitimate boundary of the stream. Joe said that during 20 years experience he had never seen so much water in Little River, not even during the spring freshets. So soon as we gained this wood we set to work constructing two rafts. Joe (Dady & myself) at one, Brazil, Gallishaw & Mulloy at the other & by 6 p.m. we were all in readiness for a launch on the morrow. As the night promised to be fine we did not spread our tent but made a shelter of boughs with a large fire passed comfortable night in spite of very cold frosty weather. Wind N. Ahead 11 miles.

Note: This country over which we passed was barren & bare of timber & the hills smooth. The only hill of note in our track is an eminence named Indian Brook Head which anyone who has or may see will recognize from this sketch.

Figure 5. The Morning Courier November 22, 1851

BACK REFLECTION

Indian Brook Head N.W. by W. distance 5 miles. It lies about ½ a mile north of the Telegraph route & is about 5 miles E. of Little River. After crossing this stream, which will cost £150 to bridge you keep the green hill of a conical form on your southern side until India Head is open to view. The road will average £30 per mile.

OCT. 29TH

It froze hard during the night & the ice was strong enough on the smaller ponds to bear Le Muche. Wind N.W. Little River fell 3 feet during the night. We rose before the sun and breakfasted on full allowance & venison & a fragment of bread. We then on our respective rafts poled up current some 200 yards & then with straining nerves made for the opposite shore the stream being about 120 yards wide. We had to paddle across the flattened end of our poles as we could not find the bottom at 15 feet. We landed between two tributary streams about 100 yards above the grand falls, the roar of whose rushing waters. So frightfully near, made us return sincere thanks at heart for our safe passage across. Once over this river out burdens felt one half lighter & on the strength of our ‘plenty venison no bread fare’ we travelled cheerily and rapidly. Our whole anxiety now being as to whether our boat was still in White Bear Bay. We marched on without stopping except to eat a mouthful of cold venison & at 4½ p.m. were on high land looking down upon White Bear Bay. There on the landlocked sheet of water & surrounded by majestic scenery reposed the “United Brothers”. 3 shots & a wild hurrah!

was speedily answered from below & no shipwrecked mariners were ever more joyfully welcomed by loving friends than were we by our rejoiced comrades. The poor fellows described their anxiety on our account as intense & our long separation (30 days in lieu of 12!!) as the longest & most painful interim ever passed in their lives. They had kept the sheep (purchased from old Whiffen in Placentia Bay) for this occasion & we soon made merry over a good meal. Walsh had shot hare & 50 or 60 ptarmigan on the neighbouring hills, Dash being well up to his work now, Joe Paul found his brother Frank living in this Bay & we both remained at his wigwam. John Brazil having determined to leave me here as he depredated the idea of marching on at this inclement season. I bargained with Joe to continue on to La Poile Bay & arranged to continue my journey with him alone, thus giving my men a spell by the sea which they much needed. It was 2 hours after midnight before we lay down to rest. Ahead 13 miles.

Note: There is some good land & fine woods on Little River; afterwards all is barren until you reach White Bear Bay when you again come once again upon some good spots. The road will average £30 per mile.

OCT. 30TH.

Calm & fine. Wind W. Getting to rights for a start tomorrow. I instructed Capt. Hanahan to proceed on at once & that if he could make

his port within 5 days (not including wet ones) to run down to the bottom of La Pole Bay and there await my arrival but if detained past that time by headwinds to right to Port au Basque & there await my return by boat from the Cape. My late land party all felt a little unwell from eating heartily of potatoes, after being without them for some time, they should be used sparingly for a day or two. I knocked tomtit or two out of a high tree with my rifle. To the intense admiration of my Indian friends who had somewhat doubted Joe’s stories of its performances. In the evening we cut down our silk camp small enough to shelter 2 or 3 persons only as Joe said we could not hereafter get high enough poles on which to sustain it if left as it was.

Note: I picked up some pieces of coal in White Bear Brook which had been washed down by a little tributary stream running into the main brook about 4 miles inland. A seam of coal 6 inches wide shows itself in the bank of this stream & the neighbouring lands bear strong evidence of there being a considerable vein in the vicinity.

STF

PHILIP PILGRIM is the Subsea Business Development Leader for Nokia's North American Region. 2021 marks his is 30th year working in the subsea sector. His hobbies include "Subsea Archaeology" and locating the long lost subsea cable and telegraph routes (and infrastructure). Philip is

Do you have further questions on this topic?

play for offshore wind.

STAY CURRENT

community buy-in and long term success of these installations.

Climate Change

While the telecom industry has been operating for quite some time and has made significant advances in our knowledge of benthic marine environments, climate change is one issue that we will have to face in conjunction with all offshore maritime industries and the wider world. The push for projects concerning environmental monitoring and communications is spreading throughout the industry, with a current focus on issues relating to marine megafauna and fisheries targets. Initiatives such as SMART cables and similar monitoring systems in offshore wind will go a long way towards narrowing existing knowledge gaps and ensuring that we have lengthy and reliable data records as our seas undergo this period of immense change.

based in Nova Scotia, Canada.

As mentioned previously, interdisciplinary initiatives such as ROSA will be integral in encouraging data sharing and data tracking as some common fisheries and conservation target species exhibit spatial and temporal distribution shifts. By working together, industry and local stakeholders can broaden our collective knowledge of how the oceans around us will be impacted by climate change related phenomena. As such, we can hope to mitigate issues to the best of our abilities and focus on nurturing sustainable growth of both telecom and offshore wind industries, keeping the world connected and providing reliable sources of clean, renewable wind energy. Similarly, collective knowledge on natural system faults, both for subsea cables and offshore wind infrastructure, will contribute to our understanding of how best to shift future engineering and operation innovations to cope with an increase in strength and frequency of inclement weather events and other climatic factors.

Summary

Throughout both industries, a common theme is the importance of early and continued stakeholder engagement. “We stand by the idea that stakeholder engagement and outreach with other maritime users and operators is incredibly important,” Ryan Wopschall, ICPC GM states, “Raising awareness of subsea cables within the offshore renewable energy sector and encouraging developers and stakeholders to contact us in regard to new and ongoing projects will further facilitate safe and efficient use of marine resources and long-term protection of seabed infrastructure.” All marine users must be considered throughout project development, and these considerations, alongside those of public perceptions, will help to pave the way for

In the past century and a half, humans have come to understand a significant amount about our oceans and how they function. Through the course of hundreds of subsea cable installations, the telecom industry has been at the forefront of uncovering benthic knowledge. Our understanding of seafloor hydrology, shifting sediments, ecological interactions, and even earthquakes and tsunamis has greatly increased. By taking what we have learned and applying it to the burgeoning offshore wind industry, we can best position ourselves to reap the rewards of an extensive renewables network while mitigating social, environmental, and ecological impacts. We have extensive local fisheries and communities networks, professional guard vessels and crews, broad knowledge of the marine environmental and applicable requirements and legislation, and, above all, we have a vision for long-term, sustainable success in harnessing our renewable natural resources for clean energy. To our partners in the offshore wind industry— we are ready and willing to help you reach your goals.

Emma Martin is the Marine Systems Associate at Seagard. She has her BA in Biology from Boston University, USA and her MSc in Marine Systems and Policies from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. She has performed marine field work around the world and looks forward to continuing to support maritime infrastructure developments.

FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA

ON THE MOVE

LUDOVIC HUTIER has been appointed the new CEO of BW Digital, which owns Hawaiki Submarine Cable.

IAN CLARKE started a new position at Google and will help lead their Global Submarine Networking team.

Feel

FRANK REY was promoted to Partner/ GM at Microsoft.

RUSSELL BURCHELL was promoted to Director Subsea/New Builds and Projects at Seaborn Networks STF

SUBMARINE CABLE NEWS NOW

CABLE FAULTS & MAINTENANCE

Last Cable Connecting Vietnam Breaks Down

Half of Vietnam’s International Capacity Restored

Four Cable Faults Impact Vietnam Telecoms

Conferences & Associations

Get Your SubOptic 2023 Tickets Now!

CURRENT SYSTEMS

Southern Cross 400GbE Services Now Available!

DATA CENTERS

Equinix Will Construct Data Center in Barcelona

DRC’s Open Access Data Centre Operational Soon

FUTURE SYSTEMS

Vocus Starts Laying Darwin Segment of DJSC

Bifrost Cable to Improve Philippine Connectivity

Cambodia Starts Submarine Cable to Hong Kong

2Africa Cable Lands in Mozambique

Two New Undersea Cable Routes for Vietnam

Amitie Cable Installation off Cape Ann

ZTT to Supply 3 Cables in Brazil

Telma, Vodafone to Connect Madagascar to 2Africa

China Pulls Back From SEA-ME-WE 6

PDSCN Partners Kickstart Phase II

OFFSHORE ENERGY

Petrobras Taps Maersk, Alcatel for Mero Field

STATE OF THE INDUSTRY

Ellie Sweeney to Take Over As New Vocus CEO

Panduit Acquires Subsea Portfolio from DongWon

On Protecting the Undersea Cable System

Aqua Comms Acquires Openbyte Infrastructure

Global Cloud Xchange and Tampnet Partner to Support Digital Demand in the Nordics

Prysmian Launches Global Sustainability Academy

SUBTEL FORUM

Submarine Cable Almanac – Issue 45 Out Now!

TECHNOLOGY & UPGRADES

Ciena Unveils WaveLogic 6, 1.6 Tb/s Solution

Ciena, Intelia to Upgrade Honotua Cable

Infinera Doubles Capacity on Unity Cable

ADVERTISER CORNER

Marketing with SubTel Forum is one of the easiest and most cost-effective means of reaching the submarine fiber cable market. By placing an ad, or logo, on one of our fine products, your brand is visible to the thousands of readers and consumers of our publications. Our readers hail from over 85 countries, with more than 55% representing either Middle or Senior Management. In our most recent poll of demographics, we found that more than 60% of our readers carry a high purchasing influence or are the final decision maker in their organizations. To be featured in SubTel Forum means to be seen by the literal movers and shakers in the industry. If you are interested in being seen in the submarine cable industry, advertise in SubTel Forum today!

SUBTEL FORUM BI-MONTHLY MAGAZINE

The premier publication for the submarine telecoms industry. Each issue is built around a central theme, discussing that specific aspect of the submarine fiber market.

• Over 100,000 downloads per issue

• Two months exposure

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• Complimentary tile Web Banner on SubTel news feed

• Optional :30 Embedded Video (Full-Page and Two-Page Spread ads only)

• Social Media acknowledgment (LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter)

• Acknowledgment in announcement Press Release and Mailer

2023 TOPICS & ARTWORK DEADLINES:

January Global Outlook | Art due Jan 2

March Finance & Legal | Art due Mar 6

May Global Capacity | Art due May 1

July Regional Systems | Art due July 3

September Offshore Energy | Art due Sept 4

November Data Centers/New Technology | Art due Nov 6

ART & VIDEO REQUIREMENTS

• Full Page: 8.5” W x 11” H | Half Page: 8.5” W x 5.5” H

• 300 dpi, High-Resolution PDF or JPG with crop marks

• Optional Video: Include blank box in ad design for video over-lay (size: no restrictions)

• Optional Video - 30 seconds

• 1280 × 720 or 1920 × 1080 resolution – mp4 Video File

SUBTEL FORUM IS EXCITED TO PARTNER WITH YOUR BUSINESS ON THE FOLLOWING SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITY

SUBTEL FORUM IS EXCITED TO PARTNER WITH YOUR BUSINESS ON THE FOLLOWING SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITY

SUBTEL FORUM ALMANAC

Released quarterly and serves as a reference tool for anyone interested in the submarine cable industry. The Almanac features each major international system on its own page, along with a system map, landing points, system capacity, length, RFS year and other valuable data.

• Over 525,000 downloads per issue

• Three months EXCLUSIVE Sponsorship

QUARTERLY INVESTMENT: $5,000

EXCLUSIVE 3-MONTH SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• Full-Page Ad (optional :30 embedded Video) near front of document

• Logo/Link on Cover and acknowledgment on Publication Webpage

• Complimentary tile Web Banner on SubTel news feed

• Social Media acknowledgment (LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter)

• Acknowledgment in announcement Press Release and Mailer

ART & VIDEO REQUIREMENTS

• Full Page: 8.5” W x 11” H

• Add an additional .125” all the way around if you’d like your ad to bleed

• 300 dpi, High-Resolution PDF or JPG with crop marks

• Optional Video: Include blank box in ad design for video over-lay (size: no restrictions)

• Optional Video - 30 seconds

• 1280 × 720 or 1920 × 1080 resolution – mp4 Video File

ARTWORK DEADLINES:

February/March/April Issue Art due Feb 6

May/June/July Issue Art due May 8

August/September/October Issue Art due Aug 7

November/December/January Issue Art due Nov 13

SUBTEL FORUM IS EXCITED TO PARTNER WITH YOUR BUSINESS ON THE FOLLOWING SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITY

SUBTEL FORUM INDUSTRY REPORT 3

Updated annually, the Report provides the most accurate, comprehensive data on the submarine fiber market. The analysis of data includes system capacity analysis as well as the actual productivity and outlook of current and planned systems and the companies that service them.

• Over 560,000 downloads per issue

• One-year exposure

YEARLY INVESTMENT: $3,750

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• Two-page Spread Ad

• Complimentary Tile Web Banner on SubTel news feed

• Social Media acknowledgment (LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter)

• Acknowledgment in announcement Press Release and Mailer

ART & VIDEO REQUIREMENTS

• Full Page: 8.5” W x 11” H | Art due Oct 2

• Add an additional .125” all the way around if you’d like your ad to bleed

• 300 dpi, High-Resolution PDF or JPG with crop marks

• Optional Video: Include blank box in ad design for video over-lay (size: no restrictions)

LOCK IN NOW FOR 2023!

Sponsors can lock into a specific category below. First come-first served!

• Global Overview

• History of Submarine Telecoms

• System Growth

• Out of Service Systems

• Evolution of System Ownership and Customer Base

• Capacity Ownership

• Financing Analysis

• Historic Financing Perspective

• Regional Distribution of Financing

• Current Financing

• Supplier Analysis

• System Suppliers

• Installers

• Surveyors

• Recent Mergers, Acquisitions, and Industry Activities

• System Maintenance

• Publicity

• Reporting Trends & Repair Times

• Club Versus Private Agreements

• Cable Ships

Note: Subtel Forum reserves the right to change categories

• Current Cable Ships

• Shore-End Activity

• Market Drivers and Influence

• Hyperscalers

• Data Centers

• Special Markets

• Offshore Energy

• Unrepeatered Systems

• Sustainability

• Regional Market Analysis and Capacity Outlook

• Transatlantic Regional Market

• Transpacific Regional Market

• Americas Regional Market

• AustralAsia Regional Market

• EMA Regional Market

• Indian Ocean Pan-East Asian Regional Market

• Polar Regional Market

SUBTEL FORUM IS EXCITED TO PARTNER WITH YOUR BUSINESS ON THE FOLLOWING SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITY

SUBTEL FORUM PRINT CABLE MAP

Add your Logo to this beautiful, large format print map which showcases every major international sub- marine cable system, and we are proud to say, hangs in many offices in our industry.

• Only 22 spaces available!

• Over 3,500 distributed

• PTC ‘23 Conference Distribution

• Maps then mailed to 2500 of the industry movers and shakers in February 2023

• Art Deadline| November 3

YEARLY INVESTMENT: $4,300

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• Complimentary tile Web Banner on SubTel news feed

• Social Media acknowledgment (LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter)

• Acknowledgment in announcement Press Release and Mailer

• 25 Complimentary copies for Sponsor

SUBTEL FORUM IS EXCITED TO PARTNER WITH YOUR BUSINESS ON THE FOLLOWING SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITY

SUBTEL FORUM ONLINE CABLE MAP

Built with the industrystandard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database, the Subtel Forum Online Cable Map tracks the progress of:

• 550 Current & Planned Cable Systems

• 1,500+ Landing Points

• 1,700+ Data Centers

• 53 Cable Ships

• Systems are also linked to SubTel Forum’s News Now Feed, allowing viewing of current and archived news details

• If you haven’t had the chance, use this link to the Online Cable Map to explore our many features

12-MONTH EXCLUSIVE SPONSORSHIP INVESTMENT: $35,000

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS:

• 12-Month Exclusive Sponsorship of the Online Map

• Your Logo/Link on every page

• 75-word Company Description of company Announcement

• Complimentary tile web banner (visible on SubTel news feed)

• Social media acknowledgment (LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter)

• Acknowledgment in announcement Press Release and mailer