Rick Lindquist is putting the finishing touches on a story for the ARRL Web site about some good news from the Cedar Rapids BPL trial area. Alliant Energy has decided to end its trial early. Congratulations to Wade and Jim Spencer and the others who patiently worked with the utility and helped them come to this conclusion. Details below. 73, Mark K1RO _________ Utility Cuts Short BPL Trial that was Target of Amateur Complaints NEWINGTON, CT, Jun 15, 2004--Alliant Energy has called an early end to its broadband over power line (BPL) pilot project in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The "evaluation system" went live March 30, and plans were for it to remain active until August or September. Alliant shut it down June 25. Ongoing, unresolved HF interference from the system to retired engineer Jim Spencer, W0SR, and other amateurs prompted the ARRL to file a complaint to the FCC on Spencer's behalf demanding it be shut down. Spencer said he was happy with Alliant's decision, and was gracious in expressing appreciation to the utility for working with him on the interference issues. "And thanks also to the ARRL and the Cedar Rapids BPL Steering Committee for their knowledge and efforts in making a truly professional evaluation," he added. Alliant Energy's BPL Project Leader Dan Hinz says the ARRL complaint "certainly was a factor" in the utility's decision to pull the plug prematurely but "not the overriding factor." More to the point, he said, was that Alliant also was able to "accomplish the majority of its objectives" ahead of schedule. The primary purpose of the Cedar Rapids evaluation was to gain an understanding of BPL technology and what issues might be involved in a real-world deployment, Hinz explained, adding that regulatory uncertainty and other unspecified technical issues also factored into the choice to end the pilot early. Hinz said Alliant is "moshing the data" to compile a written evaluation of the Cedar Rapids pilot, but the company has no plans at this point to move forward with BPL. Alliant did not partner with a broadband services provider, and it has no other BPL test systems in operation. The system used Amperion BPL equipment. According to Spencer, five fixed Amateur Radio stations within proximity of the BPL evaluation system and two mobile stations formally reported BPL interference on HF. "The radio amateurs and Alliant Energy cooperated by sharing interference information," he said. "Alliant Energy turned the BPL evaluation system off twice to allow collection of extensive BPL frequency and signal level data--with and without BPL." He said Alliant and Amperion tried various "notching" schemes to rid amateur frequencies of the BPL interference with only limited success. The system included both overhead and underground BPL links to feed 2.4 GHz wireless "hot spots" for end user access. Hinz said the area's topography presented some challenges, especially with the system's wireless links. In hindsight, he suggested, Cedar Rapids might have not have been the best place to test BPL. "I think in the end, we actually over-challenged ourselves with this specific pilot location." Despite "substantial progress" in interference mitigation, Hinz said, Alliant decided at this point that "it wasn't worth the extra effort" to resolve the thornier technical issues. As for the broader implications of Alliant's decision, Hinz says he's always viewed BPL as a "strategic deployment technology," not one a company could roll out just anywhere and expect to be competitive with existing broadband services such as cable and DSL. "At least that's how we were looking at it.," he said. "You have to find the right areas with the right topography with the right concentration of certain types of customers," he said. "And from our test standpoint, we didn't necessarily give perhaps as much merit to some of those criteria as we should have." "It's never been in my mind that BPL has to compete with the speeds of cable today," Hinz added. "It has to compete with the speeds of cable and the next best thing tomorrow as well, if it's going to be usable well into the future." Cedar Rapids already has established broadband providers. Hinz said the Alliant system was a test-stand operation that never reached the point of signing up any real customers, and its technology was "fixed in time." Other companies have gone beyond what Alliant was able to accomplish in Cedar Rapids, he asserted, and plan to move ahead with BPL. He hinted that Alliant might want to take another look at BPL once the FCC has put BPL rules and regulations into place, and the technology has further evolved. Spencer and Hinz agree that the BPL situation was resolved without any rancor. Still outstanding are some chronic power line noise problems Spencer has experienced. "There's been ongoing dialogue," Hinz said "He helps keep our lines pretty clear up there." The ARRL's formal complaint to FCC Enforcement Bureau Chief David H. Solomon called on the Commission not only to close down Alliant's BPL field trial system but to fine the utility $10,000 for violating the Communications Act of 1934 and FCC Part 15 rules. In late May, ARRL Midwest Division Director Wade Walstrom, W0EJ, also called on Alliant Energy to shut down its BPL system "without delay" and not resume operation until "any and all interference issues have been fully resolved." The ARRL became involved in Spencer's case after United Power Line Council <http://www.uplc.org> President William R. Moroney invited the League in mid-March to keep his organization in the loop on any cases of BPL interference that were not being satisfactorily addressed. For additional information, visit the "Broadband Over Power Line (BPL) and Amateur Radio" page on the ARRL Web site. To support the League's efforts in this area, visit the ARRL's secure BPL Web site.