Outline
Introduction to the UPLCTechnology UpdateState of the IndustryLegal/Regulatory
FCCCongressState/Local
Conclusions
About the UPLC
Members: virtually every utility and technology company deploying in U.S.
UPLC member utilities serve approx. 50.84 million customers in 38 states.
Purpose: Drive the development of BPL for last-mile high-speed Internet access and enhanced utility applications in U.S. and beyond.Focus: Business, Regulatory and TechnicalResources: Information, Advocacy & Support from United Telecom CouncilBackground: Evolved from UTC Power Line Telecom Forum created in 1998
Bypass or Wi-Fi at transformerBypass or Wi-Fi at transformer
Customer plugs modem into any outlet
Fiber backhauls to the POP
Powerline-fiber interface at substation
How BPL Works
Technical Advances
SpeedsNext generation chipsets: up to 200 Mbps
StandardsSeveral efforts underway (IEEE, HomePlug)
Utility applicationsUPLC Internal Applications Committee
Load Management, AMR, On the Grid Subgroups
Commercial ApplicationsHigh Speed Broadband Internet Access Telephone Services (PBX, Local, & LD)Video Services (On Demand & Conferencing)Home/Building/Campus NetworkingHome Automation
Utility Company Applications AMRVoltage/VAR ControlSCADAEquipment monitoringEnergy ManagementLoad ManagementRemote Connect/DisconnectPower Outage Notification
What Will BPL Deliver?
Industry PlayersAccess Service Providers
Ambient – www.ambientcorp.comAmperion – www.amperion.comCurrent Technologies – www.currenttechnologies.comMain.net Power Line Communications – www.powerline-plc.comIBEC – www.ibec.net
Chipset / Equipment ProvidersDS2 – www.ds2.esArkados – www.arkados.com
Numerous vendors for CPE under Homeplug standardwww.homeplug.org
U.S. BPL DeploymentsAmeren - Main.net
Cape Girardeau, MO: 500 homes passed/70 end users
AEP – Amperion Dublin, OH: 132 homes passed/2 end users
Central Virginia Electric Cooperative –IBEC
Nelson County: 4000 homesCinergy – Current Technologies
Cincinnati, OH: 60,000 homes passed by EOY
City of Manassas – Main.net City-wide deployment to reach 20,000 end users
ConEdison – AmbientBriarcliffe Manor, NY: 1st trial in US
Cullman Electric Cooperative – IBEC Cullman, AL: rural trial
Duke – Main.netCharlotte, NC: 500 users
IdaComm – Ambient/Amperion/Main.netBoise, Idaho: 25 end users
City of Salem, VA -- AmperionSalem, VA: 10 subs, 100 homes passed
PG&E – Main.netMenlo Park, CA: 100 home trial w/AT&T
PEPCO – Current Technologies Potomac, MD: 100 subs
PPL – Main.net/AmperionAllentown, PA: 500 subs, 17000 homes passed
Progress Energy – AmperionRaleigh, NC: 500 home trial w/Earthlink
Southern –Main.net/AmperionBirmingham, AL
Commercial deployment
Trial
City of Manassas
PPL
Cinergy
ConEd
Conectiv
PEPCO
Southern
AEP
Consumers
Cullman CoopAmeren
RPUIPALCO
TECO
Fayetteville
Indianola Municipal
OPPDAPS
Idaho Power
Hawaiian Electric
Sierra Pacific
PG&E
Santee Cooper
Coweta Fayette EMC
Progress Energy
Penn Yan
Chelan PUD
Douglas PUD
Central Virginia Coop
Bowling Green
SMECO
Avista
Kissimmee
New Horizon
Clyde
Orange & Rockland
Alliant
Big Picture of BPL Deployments
Duke
BPL Business Case
Recent UTC/UPLC research report finds that different BPL approaches are tailored to certain markets:
Tier 1 market, Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN –hybrid wireless BPL attractive in dense metro markets Tier 3 market, Syracuse, NY represents –classic system dominates Tier 5 market, Lynchburg, VA represents –costs minimized by cellular system
Technical RulesBPL treated as a type of carrier current system (CCS)
A system, or part of a system, that transmits radio frequency energy by conduction over the electric power lines. A carrier current system can be designed such that the signals are received by conduction directly from connection to the power lines (unintentional radiator) or the signals are received over the air due to radiation of the radio frequency signals from the electric power lines (intentional radiator).
U.S Technical Rules
Radiated Emission Limits for Carrier Current Systems
Regulation Distance µV/m dBµV/m3 3000 69.5
10 270 48.5
30 30 29.5
3 300 49.5
10 90 39
30 30 29.53 100 40
10 30 29.5
30 10 20
Carrier Current Systems1-30 MHz
FCC Class B Digital Devices30-88 MHz
FCC Class A Digital Devices30-88 MHz
FCC Reexamines Rules for BPL
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (04-37)Existing emission limits protect licenseesAdditional safeguards – mitigation techniques, notification databaseMeasurement guidelines that are consistent and repeatable.
FCC proposals are cautious but pragmatic
BPL Report and OrderFCC Adopts Rules October 14, 2004
Mitigation capabilityExclusion zones/exclusion bandsBPL databaseEquipment certificationMeasurement guidelines
Commissioners’ StatementsFCC Chairman Powell/FERC Chairman Wood
Urges utilities to deploy BPL in recognition of public interest benefits
FCC Chairman Powell/ Commissioner AbernathyNascent technology: minimum regulations appropriate
FCC Commissioner Copps: no broadband gameplan at FCC
BPL Report and Order
Key issuesEmissions: Class A, otherwise status quoExclusion zones/bands: manageable
Underground BPL exemptLimited spectrum/geographic areas
BPL database: industry administered, limited disclosure, 180 days to establish
Issue: 30-day advance notice requirementEquipment Certification: transition period
7 % of Zip Codes unserved/15% Served by One Provider Source: FCC “High-Speed Services for Internet
Access: Status as of December 31, 2003”
The Big Public Policy Picture on BPL
The Big Public Policy Picture on BPL
AccessBPL can be deployed in isolated rural communities and suburban areas that are either unserved or underserved.
CompetitionUtilities offering wholesale access to BPL networks for carriers and ISPs.BPL providers offer affordable service to customers with enhanced features.
Administration Strongly Supports BPL
President Bush Boosts BPLCalls for Universal Affordable Broadband Access by 2007 (March 26, 2004).Supports Technical Standards That Encourage BPL (April 27, 2004)Demos BPL at NTIA (June 24, 2004)
Chairman Powell Visits BPL Sites/Sees “Bright Future for BPL”
City of Manassas, Virginia (October 12, 2004)Menlo Park, California (July 14, 2004)Raleigh, North Carolina (March 5, 2004)Potomac, Maryland (April 9, 2004)
Broadband Expensing Bill (Section 302 of S-1637)
• Permits expensing of broadband direct/indirect costs related to qualified equipment
• Current generation (128 Kbps up/1 Mbps down) = 50%
• Qualified subscriber is nonresidential subscriber in a rural or underserved area or a residential subscriber in a rural or underserved area that is not in a saturated market
• Next generation (5 Mbps up/22 Mbps down)
• Qualified subscriber is nonresidential subscriber in a rural or underserved area or any residential subscriber
RUS Broadband Loan Program
• $2.211 Billion for FY2004 for rural broadband loans, which includes $ $2.051 billion for direct cost of money loans and $80 million for 4% loans.
• Eligible Rural Community means any area of the country that is not contained in an incorporated city or town with a population in excess of 20,000 inhabitants.
• 4% loans for communities of under 2,500 that are unserved and that meet income/population density requirements.
• $100,000 = minimum loan. • $7,500,000 = Maximum loan (only
applies to 4% loans)
Legislative Issues for BPL
Legislative Issues for BPL
Telecom Act Rewrite Expected in 200596 Act viewed as outmoded by new technology.BPL among issues that could be addressed
House Telecom Subcommittee holds hearings on convergence including representatives from BPL industry.
Policy Issues for Utilities
Municipal utilities in position to remedy digital divide; promote broadband competitionBig issue for munis: State barriers to entry
States that restrict munis: AR, FL, MN, MO, NE, NV, SC, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA
Sec. 253 does not apply to “any entity”. Nixon v. Missouri Municipal League (Supreme Court)
City of Manassas: MLEC status
Policy Issues for BPLInfrastructure Access Issues
Open accessMultiple ISPs: non-issue, good for businessMultiple BPL Operators: Technically infeasible
Pole attachmentsDeregulatory approach should work
Qualified workersEmployee sharing should be encouraged for safety/reliability reasons aloneOption should exist for contractors to make attachments
Policy Issues for BPL
Commercial Services IssuesBPL is a technology, not a service.
VoIP, Internet access, streaming video, are all just services that ride on the network.Analogy: cable modem, DSL
Deregulatory national policy framework for networksRoom for states to address important consumer issues for the services provided over the network.
Any regulation of the services should be on a competitively neutral basis.
Policy Issues for BPL
Internal applicationsIncentives
Direct fundingNYSERDA
Tax incentivesCredits/deductions
Cost allocation issuesUbiquitous deployment of BPL can be encouraged by allocating reasonable costs of internal applications to the utility.Minimize accounting/administrative requirements.
Conclusions
BPL industry moving beyond technical to market trial/commercial deployments.BPL does have a bright future, and different technology approaches can economically serve different municipal markets.BPL is a nascent technology and utilities need incentives to deploy it.UPLC supports deregulatory approach towards BPL.Interested in learning more, contact the UPLC!
Brett Kilbourne
United Power Line Council
1901 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20006
(202)833-6807
Any Questions?
Top Related