From the UPLC Power Line newsletter - August 17, 2004 INDUSTRY: PROGRESS ENERGY CAROLINAS CONCLUDES SUCCESSFUL BPL TRIAL To paraphrase Mark Twain: recent reports of BPL's demise have been greatly exaggerated. Let's look at a case in point: Last month Progress Energy Carolinas (PEC) announced that it had concluded its trial of BPL in Raleigh, North Carolina. It emphatically stated that the trial was a success and that it had demonstrated internal and commercial applications for BPL. PEC also reported that interference to amateur operations in the area had been mitigated effectively, and was confirmed by the FCC in field measurements taken on location. Nonetheless, opponents of BPL publicly claimed that the news demonstrated BPL's flaws, and characterized the ending of the trail as a "shut-down". Matt Oja, Director of Emerging Technologies at PEC, strongly rejected this view. "The reasons for ending the trials in Raleigh have nothing to do with interference claims or concerns." He added that "It's not a 'get out of BPL' thing and my concern is that some people might have interpreted it that way." In an interview with the UPLC, Oja elaborated that PEC simply concluded Phase II of its trial, which had succeeded in its goal to provide "experiential design, operation, and market information so that we would have a more solid foundation for our business models. We were able to successfully deploy our system in a competitive market, demonstrate several utility applications, and establish alliances with key service providers. It has been a successful trial. Closing the field trial is a natural step in our progression." In response to opponents' concerns about interference, the FCC investigated complaints in Raleigh and found that "the Progress Energy BPL trial in the Raleigh area is in compliance with the Commission's rules and that the measures implemented to notch frequencies used by the Amateur Radio Service to avoid the potential for harmful interference are effective." The FCC "neither found nor observed any BPL signal levels or effects from the Progress Energy BPL operation that appeared to have the potential to seriously degrade, obstruct, or repeatedly interrupt mobile amateur communications or fixed amateur communications at the specified addresses." As for the future, Oja said that "we know that BPL works and it works well. We know it can be competitive and even superior to existing broadband technologies." He said that BPL is becoming even more attractive from a cost standpoint, but he noted that "BPL is not a simple decision for a utility," and cited substantial capital requirements, personnel commitment, and regulatory uncertainty involved in a BPL deployment. PEC is currently evaluating the results of Phase II of its field trial and how those results factor into its BPL business plan. ===== e-mail: k1ki@arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444