Industry Canada Expects BPL Rules This Year, Says Official
Industry Canada, which in 2005 issued a BPL consultation paper (CD Dec 2 p5), expects BPL rules to debut this year, Jean-Claude Brien, dir.-spectrum engineering, told us in an interview. Instead of a rigid timeline for the BPL rulemaking, he said, the agency has one “dictated by general interest in the technology, consumer demand, requests for trials and other factors.” Brien said it would be “premature to speculate” on how the change in federal govt. in Canada will affect the BPL rulemaking. BPL isn’t a political matter but an “operational issue,” so the transition shouldn’t affect the proceeding, a Canadian regulatory source said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
In starting its BPL consultation, Industry Canada made clear its main aim is international technical harmonization. Most of its proposed rules mirror the FCC’s BPL rules. Brien said his department is reviewing comments from those interested and discussing “potential regulatory action.” Consultations will occur with the Radio Advisory Board of Canada, Canadian Electricity Assn., United Telecom Council and Radio Amateurs of Canada, he said: “The resulting policy or standards are officially published with a comment period, usually 90 days.”
Industry Canada writes technical rules. Telecom service regulation is the province of the Canadian Radio-TV & Telecom Commission (CRTC), meaning BPL would come under CRTC if BPL operators provide broadband services, Brien said. He said starting with the FCC rules was appropriate because of the similarity between the 2 countries’ power grids.
Concerns about harmful interference from BPL are “genuine,” Brien said. Many licensed spectrum users have voiced concern over potential interference, he said: “Our objective is to develop a regulatory approach that best meets the needs of the Canadian radio communications environment, which includes the deployment of new technologies.” Industry Canada could depart from the FCC’s approach on interference, he indicated. Industry Canada proposed the FCC rules as a starting point, he said: “We are closely examining this issue from a domestic point of view.”
Only one major BPL trial has been reported in Canada, in contrast to the U.S., with scores of pilots and a couple of commercial deployments. A regulatory source said that besides waiting for the Industry Canada BPL proceeding, utilities may want to see the outcome of CRTC’s telecom policy review. That review, expected last Dec., was delayed by the election, the source said, calling the environment “still unstable from a regulatory point of view.” Some utilities are looking at BPL solely for grid management and other internal uses, the source said. Regulators see the technology as promising, but regard it as still in its infancy, the source said. But Canada numbers among its firms many successful BPL access system makers such as Corinex and ElectroLinks.
Asked if demographics discourage Canadian utilities from adopting BPL, the source acknowledged it’s possible. “You cannot compare how it is deployed in the U.S.,” the source said. Another consideration is that most utilities are owned not privately but by the provinces, the source said. This constrains their decision making. As for a recent National Rural Telecom Coop. statement that BPL isn’t appropriate for rural utilities, the source said some power companies in Canada are also skeptical about BPL’s efficiency in serving “10 households that are a few kilometers apart.”