ANACOM rejects CTT proposal on postal network density


ANACOM has rejected a proposal submitted by CTT – Correios de Portugal on the coverage density objectives of post offices and postal services offices, considering that the proposal failed to guarantee adequate access to postal services by populations, both in terms of distance that must be travelled to postal establishments and in terms of the services available at these establishments.

It is ANACOM’s objective that the maximum distance which populations have to travel to visit their nearest postal establishment is reasonable, and that post offices and postal services offices are properly dispersed throughout the national territory to ensure that all people, in rural as well as urban areas, have access to these establishments. It is also important to ensure that the number of establishments sited in each zone is appropriate to the local population density.

In terms of the availability of post boxes, CTT must ensure a suitable relation with respect to the number of local inhabitants and in terms of the territorial area served by each post box. In the regulator’s view, CTT failed, in its proposed objectives, to properly consider the population's distribution throughout the national territory, the rural or urban nature of the areas served and the distances between access points.

ANACOM also considers that CTT’s proposal does not properly safeguard provision, to the entire population, of postal services covered by the universal service, by failing to factor in a suitable relationship between travelling distances to establishments and distances that the population is required to travel to access services as actually provided. This circumstance is particularly important when CTT is not required to provide the full range of services at all outlets.

In accordance with the Bases da Concessão do Serviço Postal Universal (Universal Postal Service Concession Bases), CTT is given 30 working days in which to review the rejected proposal, taking ANACOM’s position into consideration.


Consult: