Broadband Power Line:Where Are we?

A presentation to theAPPA Legal SeminarNovember 8, 2004

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

Technical Update

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

Extraction Unit

Medium Voltage Coupler

BPL Overhead Installation

Medium Voltage Coupler

Repeater

Extraction Unit Coupler

BPL Underground Installation

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

Business Issues

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

Public Policy Issues

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

Half of all lines are cable modem and another third are DSL

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

brett.kilbourne@utc.org

Any Questions?