HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 09/29/2000 Utility Advisory Committee - Special Meeting
Public Works Conference room
Port Angeles, WA 98362
September 29, 2000
3:00 p.m.
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Minutes of August 11, 2000 regular meeting will be presented for approval at
October 9 regular meeting.
IV. Discussion Items
A. Transformer Bid Award -"1" Street Substation (Jim H. 10 Min.)
B. Fiber optics update (Scott/Larry 45 min.)
V. Information Only Items
VI. Late Items
VII. Next meeting - October 9, 2000
VIII. Adjournment
N:\PWKS~LIGH'I'~CONS\CATE\UACREQ.WPD
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMO
DATE: September 29, 2000
TO: UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: James L. Harper
SUBJECT: Bid Award 12/16/20 MVA Power Transformer for 'T' Street Substation
Summary:. 'T' Street Substation must be rebuilt in 2001 to maintain an acceptable level of
service on the west side of the city. The power transformer must be ordered now in order to
construct next summer. Six bids were received and evaluated by staff and our consultant.
Recommendation: UAC recommend the City Council accept the bid of
and authorize the Mayor to sign the purchase contract for the purchase of the power
transformer.
Background / Analysis: Much of our load growth over the last several years has been away from
the center of the city to both east and west. On the west side of town there have been a large number
of new subdivisions with new housing as well as new large commercial/industrial load additions at
the Port's industrial park. This load growth has taken up almost all of our reserve capacity and
requires the upgrading of "I" Street Substation on the west side of town in order to allow for
additional growth.
If this project is not completed we will be operating under a level of service lower than that which
our customers have grown accustomed. The reliability on the west side of the city has already been
compromised to the point that if the transformer at "F" Street Substation fails during the winter peak
load, we have insufficient reserves to cover all the load for 6-10 hours while temporary measures are
taken. The most economical way to correct the deficiency and keep from reducing reliability and
level of service even further is to complete this project.
This project is in the approved CFP for 2001 construction. Transformer purchase is required at this
time due to the 36 - 48 week lead time required for delivery. No payment will be required until
delivery on or about July 1, 2001.
Six sealed bids were received September 15, 2000 in response to the RFP for supplying the 12/16/20
MVA power transformer advertised August 14, 2000. The bid prices ranged from $493,421 down
to $339,738. The Engineering estimate for the transformer was approximately $350,000. However,
transformers are normally purchased on a loss evaluated basis. The bids have been reviewed by staff
and by TriAxis Engineering, the city's design consultant on this project. The comparison of the
evaluated prices and bid prices are summarized in the bid summary.
This matter is being referred to the UAC for consideration of the bids and a recommendation to the
City Council that the Mayor be authorized to sign the purchase contract with the staff recommended
best bidder. The bid summary and the staff recommendation will be presented at the time of
the UAC meeting.
N :~PWKS~LiGHTxEN GR~PRO JECTS~[ STREET~UACXFMR'WPD
WASHINGTON, U.S.A.
UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMO
DATE: September 29, 2000
TO: UTILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: Scott McLain, Deputy Director of Power Systems
Larry Dunbar, Power Resources Manager
SUBJECT: Community Telecommunications Action Plan
Summary: Staffand Richard C.T. Li, P.E., with Metropolitan Communications Consultants will
)resent a report on telecommunications planning and fiber-optic backbone development. The
)resentation will highlight the telecommunications planning the City has done, discuss additiona2
)lanning needs and development opportunities, and share the specific actions the City should take
)vet the next three-year period.
Recommendation: The report will be presented with no action requested at this time.
Background / Analysis: The City recently engaged Metropolitan Communications Consultants
(MCC) to prepare a plan of action to guide Staff with telecommunications planning and development
efforts. The City Council's current and proposed 2001 telecommunications goals, applicable
policies and regulations related to telecommunications, and the 2/10/2000 Power Engineers report
"Communications Systems Evaluation for Public Utility District No. 1 of Clallam County and the
City of Port Angeles" were evaluated by MCC. The report summarizes the telecommunications
planning the City has done, identifies additional planning needs and telecommunications
development opportunities, and describes specific actions the City should take over the next three-
year period. A complete copy of the report is located in attachment "A". A copy of the action plan
milestones and timeline is located in attachment "B"
Telecommunications ordinance
The 1996 Telecommunications Act and Senate Bill 6676 have re-regulated the telecommunications
industry at the federal and state levels. The intents of the new laws are to encourage competition and
the delivery of advanced telecommunications services. The new laws define municipal authority and
responsibility related to management of public right-of-way. The City is currently developing but
has not yet completed comprehensive telecommunications ordinances. A comprehensive approach
includes a master telecommunications ordinance that would reference other ordinances such as right-
of-way construction, licensing and taxation, pole attachments (new) and wifeless facility siting
(new). Once comprehensive ordinances are drafted, telecommunications service providers will be
afforded a review and comment period. Afterwards, an outside expert legal review would be
completed to ensure the City has clearly defined but not exceeded its authority. Prior to adoption
of comprehensive telecommunications ordinances, new telecommunications service providers (if
any) may receive interim consent to utilize municipal right-of-way and must agree to comply with
the City's future ordinances. After the new telecommunications ordinance and updates to effected
ordinance are adopted, Staff will be able to respond to new master permit requests and have an
application review process in place and be in full compliance with federal and state law.
Telecommunications needs and interests assessment
On 10/1/1988, the City granted a 15-year cable television franchise to Port Angeles Telecable, Inc.
(presently Northland Cable Television) that will expire on 10/1/2003. As defined by the Cable
Communications Act's franchise renewal procedure, the City must choose the formal renewal
process to preserve its right to deny franchise renewal if negotiations are not successful. For the
formal procedure, a future needs and interests assessment is required. The assessment is the first
step in the renewal process, which must be initiated during a six-month window (no earlier than
10/1/2000 but no later than 4/1/2001). The Cable Operator (Northland Cable Television) will be
charged a fee to help offset the City's costs of renewing the franchise.
Staff's position is that the assessment should address all telecommunications needs and interests of
the community. The assessment will provide public involvement into City decision making for the
next cable television franchise and the expansion, operation and management of a fiber-optic
backbone, and the provision of telecommunications services. As part of the franchise renewal, there
is a partnership opportunity with the Cable Operator to expand the fiber-optic backbone into an
institutional network for governmental, educational and other public purposes, The partnership
opportunity could enable expansion of the fiber-optic backbone to inexpensively reach
customers/subscribers too. After the new cable television franchise is adopted, Staffwill manage
the franchise to ensure that community needs and interests are satisfied.
Fiber-optic backbone design and construction
Last year, the City and Clallam County PUD engaged Power Engineers, Inc. to review the
communications needs and to determine the feasibility of building a fiber-optic backbone within
the service areas of both entities. On 3/16/2000, Staff made an informational report to Council
summarizing Power Engineers' preliminary engineering, cost estimates and proposed route for
the fiber-optic backbone. The PUD recently reported that they have proceeded with fiber-optic
backbone design and will order fiber-optic cable in the near future. The preliminary engineer's
estimated cost to construct a 25-mile fiber-optic backbone in Port Angeles was $1,500,000. The
cost of an infrastructure from nodes to sites and necessary equipment to activate the network are
not included. A copy of the report's Executive Summary, Conclusions and preliminary
backbone route map are attached in attachment "C". A complete copy of the report is available
for inspection in the Public Works Office.
2
Based on Council goals and the Power Engineers preliminary planning, Staffis inclined to
recommend the City develop a fiber-optic backbone in Port Angeles. Funding for the fiber-optic
backbone and associated business planning is available within City electric utility reserves. The
first stage of activation would include short-term lease of segments of the fiber-optic backbone
for point-to-point communications. For municipal facilities, the first stage of activation will also
include local access network cabling and required edge devices. The second stage of activation
would include the purchase of transport, premise and other equipment for use by prospective core
customers, The fiber-optic backbone will meet the high-bandwidth needs that many new
businesses require. Once the results of the assessment are available and the Utility Advisory
Committee and City Council reach decisions, expansion of the network and purchase of
additional transport and premise equipment would be made on a network-wide basis. The
business plan will need to be updated for each stage of activation and after decisions are reached
based on the needs and interests assessment.
Economic Development
Each component of the Telecommunications Planning and Development Action Plan has an
effect on economic development. The future telecommunications ordinance will need to be
probusiness and treat telecommunications operators in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner
without creating any barriers to entry. The new cable communications franchise must be
responsive to community needs and interests taking into account the cost of meeting such needs
and interests. It will be critical to involve and inform the Utility Advisory Connnittee, the
Economic Development Committee (Port Angeles Works!), business and current and prospective
service providers during the design of the fiber-optic backbone. In addition, economic
development stakeholders need to be actively engaged in the telecommunications future needs
and interests assessment to maximize the benefits the fiber-optic backbone will provide the
community.
To the extent possible, the Community needs and interests obtained from the FairPoint
Corranunications BridgeWorkssM community development program, E-Nabled Visions internet
and e-commerce report and Unisys interact gateway/portal will be incorporated or coordinated
with the City's telecommunications future needs and interests assessment. This will eliminate
duplication of efforts where possible.
Partnership Opportunities
The Power Engineers study highlighted that economic development could be stimulated by an
advanced telecommunications network, that only minimal capital cost savings are available from
joint development ora 1.7 to 5.3 mile segment of the fiber-optic backbone through the City, and
significant benefits and cost savings oppommities may exist for joim operation and maintenance
ora fiber-optic backbone. Staff will continue to explore these cost saving opportunities with the
PUD. Staffwill plan to interconnect the City's fiber-optic backbone with the PUD, Northwest
Open Access Network (NoaNet) and other networks for telecommunications services outside of
the City. NoaNet is an open access network that will enable multiple telecommunications
service providers to deliver services to customers. It is anticipated that the open access network
will have a significant impact on economic development by enabling high-speed and
competitively priced telecommunications services.
3
Tentative Staff Recommendations
On October 9, 2000, Staff will present detailed information to the Utility Advisory Committee
requesting their recommendation to council for:
1. Technical and legal services to assist Staff to complete a new telecommunications
ordinance and update other effected City ordinances including a scope of work, time line
and consulting services proposal.
2. Technical and legal services to assist Staffto complete a telecommunications future needs
and interests assessment including a scope of work, time line and consulting services
proposal.
3. Technical and legal services to assist Staff to complete a business plan for the fiber-optic
backbone and updates as needed for each stage of activation.
4. A request for qualifications for engineering services for design documents including a
scope of work, time line and estimated budget. Once the design is complete, Staff would
call for bids to construct a 25-mile fiber-optic backbone within the City.
5. Recognizing the long lead times required to purchase fiber-optic cabling, Staff would
initiate the purchase through a call for bids or piggyback on a public utility purchase via
interlocal agreement.
After responses to the above action items are received, Staff will return to the Utility Advisory
Committee with detailed cost estimates and funding source recommendations, scope of work,
proposed contracts.
Attachments: A Community Telecommunications Action Plan
B Action Plan Milestones and Timelines
C Power Engineers Report Executive Summary & Conclusions
Attachment A
THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES, WASHINGTON
COMMUNITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACTION PLAN
September 29, 2000
_METROPOLITAN
COMMUNICATIONS
CONSULTANTS
Tacoma: 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 1702, Tacoma, Washir~lon 98402
Tel: 800.465.2248 Fax: 253,272.1482 www,mcco,com
Seattle: 5847 McKinley PI, N,, Seattle, Washington 98103
Tel: 206.522.6779 Fax: 206.522.6777
Attachment A
The City of Port Angeles, Washington
COMMUNITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACTION PLAN
September 29, 2000
Table of Contents
A. Existing City Goals, Policies and Regulations
· Federal and State Telecommunications Laws and Regulations ............................. A-1
· Review of Port Angeles Goals, Policies and Regulations .......................................... A-2
B. Completed Telecommunications Planning
· City and Other Planning Completed ............................................................................. B-1
· Power Engineers, Demand Survey, 2/10/00 ............................................................... B-1
· Power Engineers, Preliminary Engineering, 2/10/00 ............................................... C-1
C. Preliminary Work Remaining
· Mu,~cipal Telecommu~cat]o~s Regulation .............................................................. C-1
· Commu~ty Te]ecommu~calions Needs and Interests ........................................... C-1
D. Development Steps
· in~astrucL~e Development & Evolution ~art ......................................................D-I
Action Plan
· Action Plan ...................................................................................................................... D-2
Form Project Team and Define Roles .......................................................................... D-3
Commurdty Coordination ........................................................................................... D-3
Municipal Telecommunications Regulation ............................................................... D-4
Community Telecommunications Needs and Interests ............................................ D-4
Fiber Optic Backbone Design and Construction ........................................................ D-5
Backbone Activation (Future Stages) ......................................................................... D-5
Recommendations
· Obtain Municipal Telecommunications Regulation Services .................................. D-6
· Obtain Community Telecommunications Needs and interests Services .............. D-6
· Obtain Backbone Business Plan Services .................................................................... D-6
· Obtain Backbone Design, Bid & Construction Services ............................................ D-6
· Advance P~trchase of Backbone Fiber-Optic Materials .............................................D-6
E. Appendices
· 1996 Te]eco~u~cations Act Seclion 253 ..................................................................
· RCW 3.5.21.860 ................................................................................................................. E-2
· 3. RCW 82.04.065 ........................................................................................................... E-3
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9~29/2000
Attachment A
A. Existing City Goals, Policies and Regulations page A-1
1. Federal and State Telecommunications Laws and Regulations
A summary of Federal and State legislation and regulations governing telecommunications and applicable to
cities is given in Table 1. It should be noted that this section is not intended to constitute legal advice. The
City should consult its own counsel for legal questions.
Federal Government
Telecommunications Act of 1996 Comprehensive reform of telecommunications law and the
(Public Law 104-104) Commtmications Act of 1934. Frees telecommunications
companies to compete in nearly every market.
Cable Television Consumer Amends the Communications Act of 1934 with respect to cable television.
Protection Act of 1992 Imposed new controls on cable rates and new rules to protect consumers.
(Public Law 102-385) Generally considered ineffective.
Cable Communications Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to set forth the authority
Policy Act of 1984 of a governmental or franchising authority to regulate cable television.
(Public Law 98-549) Settling jurisdiction questions between FCC and state regulators.
Communications Act of 1934 Central body of U.S. communications law until 1996 Telecom Act.
(47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.)
Washington State
Chapter 83, Laws of 2000 Senate Bill 6676 Streamlbdng local resulat~bns:
RCW 35.99 Use of city or town rights of way by telecommunications
and cable television providers.
Adding a new section to Chapter 35A.21.
Making all provisions of Senate Bill 6676 applicable to code cities.
Senate Bill 8675 Foctlt~att~g investment and campet#tbn:
Authorizing the provision of telecommunications services by
public utility districts and rural port districts.
House Bill 2881 Tailoring state regulattbns:
New procedures for alternative forms of regulation of
telecommunications companies.
RCW 35.21.860 Electricity, telephone, or natural gas business - franchise fees prohibited
RCW 82.04.065 Definition of competitive telephone service, network telephone service
and telephone business.
RCW 80.36 Washington State statutes relating to telecommunications.
RCW 80.36.040 Requires consent of City Council before use of road, street, and railroad
rights-of-way.
RCW 47.24 Municipal control & regulation of state highways that are also city streets.
Washington Title 480
Administrative Code Washington State regulations governing telecommunications.
Superior Court of Pierce County
Order No. 96-2-09938-0 Grantt)~g City of Tacoma's Mottbn for Summary ]udgment and flnding that:
December 13, 1996 - the City has authority under State and Federal law to provide cable
television service in the Light Division service area, and
- the City has authority under State and Federal law to lease
telecommunications facilities and capacity to telecommunications providers
Table 1: Federal and State Telecommunications Laws and Regulations
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 912912000
Attachment A
A. Existing City Goals, Policies and Regulations page A-2
2. Review of Port Angeles Goals, Policies and Regulations
Table 2 is a review of City telecommunications goals, policies and regulations.
City hoe ade/~ea?
Item Description To comply with yes no Comments
Telecommunications Policies
1 Policy Guidelines 200t Council Goals, xx Document in Telecom Ordinance
Objectives,
Programs/Projects
Ordinances
2 Telecommunications Ordinance 1996 TCA, £SSE16676 in process 8asic telecom regulatory document
3 ~ireless Ordinance re~,ted to 2 xx Siting, ~ocetion, design regulat;~ns
4 Taxation Title § PAMC update Chap. 5.80 PAMC lelecommunications businesses
S Licensing Title 5 PAMC update Chap. 5.04 PAMC Telecommunications businesses
6 Right-of-way or Street Ordinance Title 11 PAMC update Chap, 11.08 PAMC - Excavations, Obstructions
7 Extra conduit authority [SSB 66?6 xx City option, add to Right-of-way Ordinance
8 Electrical Ordinance Title 13 PAMC xx Pole Attachments
9 Master Permit RgW 80.36,040 xx RCW 80.36.040 Municipal Consent
Table 2: Review of Port Angeles Telecommunications Policies and Regulations
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9129/2000
Attachment A
B. Completed Telecommunications Planning page B-1
Preliminary Work Completed
· City Telecommunications Work Completed
Draft Telecommunications Ordinance
E-nable Visions Tour Report (in process)
· Telecommunications Work by Others
FairPoint BrldgeWorks Needs Assessment Report
Unisys Survey
Preliminary Work Completed
· Power Engineers Study, Feb. 2000
Type of Study Demand Survey
Study Sponsors Port Angeles, Clallam PUD
Organizations Surveyed 15 types/lO5 org.
Interest in System 56% plus 20% moderate
Market Demand mainly voice/data
Partnership Interest 9 organizations
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9/29/2000
Attachment A
C. Preliminary Work Remaining page C-1
Preliminary Work Completed
· Power Engineers Study, Feb. 2000
Type of Study Preliminary Engineering
Study Sponsors Port Angeles, Clallam PUD
Construction PA 4 route segments, 25 mi
PUD 7 route segments, 184 mi
Excess Capacity High interest, voice/data/video
Architecture ATM/IP/IP over SONET
Governance Flexible, Separate or Joint
City Cost ATM S5m, )P $2.7m, IPoS $3.1m
PUD Cost ATM $14m, IP SlOm, IPoS Sllm
City O&M ATM SO.6m, IP $0.5m, IPoS SO.5m
PUD O&M ATM $4.9m, IP $2.7m, IPoS $3.1m
Preliminary Work Remaining
· Municipal Telecommunications Regulation
Interim Master Permits
Complete Telecommunications Ordinance
Update Related Ordinances Affected
· Community Telecommunications Needs and Interests
CATV and Telecom Future Needs and Interests Report
(incorporating work completed by City and Others)
Cable Television Franchise Renewal
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9/29/2000
Attachment A
Attachment A
D. Development Steps, Action Plan and Recommendations page D-2
Action Plan
· Form Project Team and Define Roles
· Community Coordination
· Municipal Telecommunications Regulation
· Community Telecommunications Needs and Interests
· Fiber Optic Backbone Design and Construction
· Network Activation (Future Stages)
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9129/2000
Attachment A
D, Development Steps, Action Plan and Recommendations page D-3
Action Plan
· Form Project Team and Define Roles
City Oversight Utility Advisory Committee
Economic Development Committee
City Council
Management City Project Manager and Staff
Designer City/Telecommunications Consultant
Builder Contractor from RFP Procedure
Operations City or Outsource
Marketing City or Outsource
Financing City Electric Utility Reserves
Action Plan
· Community Coordination
E-nable Visions Tour Report
FairPoint Bridgeworks Program
Unisys Survey
Existing and Prospective Service Providers
Economic Development Stakeholders (Northland, Qwest)
Clallam County PUD
Northwest Open Access Networks (NoaNet)
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9/29/2000
Attachment A
D. Development Steps, Action Plan and Recommendations page D-4
Action Plan
· Municipal Telecommunications Regulation
Prepare Interim Master Permit
Update Draft Telecommunications Ordinance
Update Related Ordinances Affected
Input from City Departments & Service Providers
Independent Legal Review
Council Adoption
Franchise/Master Permit Management
Action Plan
· Community Telecommunications Needs & Interests
Review and Incorporate Work by City and Others
Public Involvement Program
Telecom Development Needs, interests & Opportunities
PEG Access, Resources & Capital Facility Needs
Economic Development Needs and Opportunities
Performance Review of Incumbent Service Providers
CATV and Telecom Future Needs and Interests Report
Cabl'e Television Franchise Renewal
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9/2912000
Attachment A
D. Development Steps, Action Plan and Recommendations page D-5
Action Plan
· Fiber Optic Backbone Design & Construction
Business Planning for Backbone Project
Design, Bid & Build Fiber Only Backbone Project
- 25 mile, est. $1.5m
- Timeline and Budget Estimate
- Financing Plan
Advance Purchase of Fiber-Optic Backbone Materials
Action Plan
· Backbone Activation (Future Stages)
Stage 3. Lease Dark Fiber (Option)
Build Municipal Network
- City Hall to Laurel Substation
- Laurel Sub to Corp Yard
- Corp Yard to 18th St. Area
- Corp Yard to College & BPA Substation
- City Hall to Downtown
Stage 2 Extend Network to Core Customers
Stage 3 City-Wide Network
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9129/2000
Attachment A
D. Development Steps, Action Plan and Recommendations page D-6
Recommendations
· Obtain Technical and Legal Services for
Municipal Telecommunications Regulation Assistance
Interim Master Permits
Update Telecommunications Ordinance
Update Related Ordinances Affected
Community Telecommunications Needs and Interests
CATV and Telecom Needs & Interests Report
Cable Television Franchise Renewal
Business Planning
Fiber Optic Backbone
Recommendations
· Obtain Telecommunications Engineering Services for
Backbone Design, Bid and Construction
Design Documents for Backbone Project
Timeline and Budget Estimate
Financing Plan
Construction Bidding and Award
Construction Stage Services
Project Testing and Acceptance
· Advance Purchase of Backbone Fiber-Optic Materials
Metro~litan Communications Consultants 9129/2000
Attachment A
E. Appendices page £-~
APPENDIX 1:1996 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT SECTION 253
Sec. 253. Removal of Barriers to Entry
(a) In General-
No State or local statute or regulation, or other State or local legal requirement, may prohibit or have the
effect of prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications
(b) State Regulatory Authority -
Nothing in fids section shall affect the ability of a State
A. to impose, on a competitively neutral basis and consistent with section 254, requirements
necessary to
, preserve and advance universal service,
· protect the pubhc safety and welfare,
· ensure the continued quality of telecommunications services, and
· safeguard the rights of consumers.
(c) State and Local Government Authority-
Nothing in this section affects the authority of a State or local government B.to manage the public rights-of-way or
C. to require fair and reasonable compensalion from telecommunications providers, · on a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis,
· for use of public rights-of-way on a nondiscriminatory basis,
D. ff the compensation required is publicly disclosed by such government.
(d) Preemption -
If, after notice and an opporturdty for public comment, the Commission determines that a State or local
government has permitted or imposed any statute, regu~alion, or legal requirement that violates
subsection (a) or (b), the Commission shall preempt the enforcement of such statute, regulation, or legal
requirement to the extent necessary to correct such violation or inconsistency.
Metropo)itan Communications Consultants 9/29/2000
Attachment A
E. Appendices page E-2
APPENDIX 2: RCW 35.21.860 ELECTRICITY, TELEPHONEw OR NATURAL GAS BUSINESS --
FRANCHISE FEES PROHIBITED--EXCEPTIONS.
(1) No city or town may impose a franchise fee or any other fee or charge of whatever nature or
description upon
· the light and power, or gas distribution businesses, as defined in RCW 82.16.010, or
· telephone business, as defined in RCW 82.04.065,
except that
(a) a tax authorized by RCW 35.21.865 may be imposed and
Co) a fee may be charged to such businesses that recovers actual adnffnistrative expenses incurred by
a city or town that are directly related
· to receiving and approving a permit, license, and franchise,
· to inspecting plans and construction, or
· to the preparation of a detailed statement pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW.
(2) Subsection (1) of this section does not prohibit franchise fees imposed on an electrical energy, natural
gas, or telephone business, by contract existing on April 20, 1982, with a city or town, for the duration
of the contract, but the franchise fees shall be considered taxes for the purposes of the limitations
established in RCW 35.21.865 and 35.21.870 to the extent the fees exceed the costs allowable under
subsection (1) of this section.
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9/29/2000
Attachment A
£. Appendices page E-3
APPENDIX 3: RCW 82.04.065 "COMPETITIVE TELEPHONE SERVICE,' "NETWORK TELEPHONE SERVICE," "TELEPHONE
SERVIC£/' "TELEPHONE BUSINESS."
(1) "Competitive telephone service" means the providing by any person of telecommunications
equipment or apparatus, or service related to that equipment or apparatus such as repair or
maintenance service, if the equipment or apparatus is of a type which can be provided by persons
that are not subject to regulation as telephone companies under Title 80 RCW and for which a
separate charge is made.
(2) "Network telephone service" means
· the providing by any person of access to a local telephone network, local telephone network
switching service, toll service, or coin telephone services, or
· the providing of telephonic, video, data, or similar communication or transmission for hire, via a
local telephone network, toll line or channel, cable, microwave, or similar communication or
transmission system.
"Network telephone service" includes
- interstate service, including toll service, originating from or received on telecommunications
equipment or apparatus in this state if the charge for the service is billed to a person in this state.
"Network telephone service" includes
· the provision of transmission to and from the site of an internet provider via a local telephone
network, toll line or channel, cable, microwave, or similar communication or transmission system.
"Network telephone service" does not include
· the providing of competitive telephone service,
· the providing of cable telev~ion service, nor
· the providing of broadcast services by radio or television stations, nor
· the prov/sion of internet service as defined in RCW 82.04.297, including the reception of dial-in
connection, provided at the site of the internet service provider.
(3) "Telephone service means competitive telephone service or network telephone service, or both, as
defined in subsections (1) and (2) of this section.
(4) "Telephone bus.mess" means the bus'mess of providing network telephone service, as defined in
subsection (2) of this section. It includes cooperative or farmer line telephone companies or
associations operating an exchange.f1997 c 304 § 5; 1983 2nd ex.s. c 3 § 24.]
Metropolitan Communications Consultants 9/29/2000
Attachment B
Tentative Community Telecommunications Action Plan Milestones
Completion Year and Quarter
Preliminary Planning Milestones 2000 2001 2002 2003
,'3','--,--,--,--,'--,---,',--,---,-",',-',--,-'
Power Engineers Report --'~'--+,--~---!-?-+,---~---i-q:'-~--?-'+-
~Draft Telecommunications Ordinance
_l_~. ___mi ___H_IL.~I-__ Jl_._[___L._j__i___L..L__ l_.~ll __L_.2
I ] : I [ [ I I :I I l: : 1
[ : I : i : i i I I I l
E-Nabled Visions ~rour, BridgeWorksm, Unisys : L i L i L ] ] t J. t : ,) L
Mca Action Plan
L_a.__~__L_~2__± ........ _~.._± ........ z_x ......
Telecommunications Ordinance
I !- I ; 1~'7 FT T--
Select and retmn technical and legal consultants : I I
,_.,__,___,._,____,__.,.___,___,._,_.._,..._,___,..,__,.
lFinal Drafl Telecommunications ordinance L_iL L L L Z _l)
Stakeholder review and comment
----H-j---.~.---i---.~---4---lb--i----,L--i---+-q..--+--+l- ......
Consideration/incorporation of comments lilill [ ~ [ ' ' [ ~ IIl]1
__~. __± ......... ~_.Z[. __~_ .... ~__~__..~...~___3. .... L.
Independent legal review
'lOrdinance adoption by Council '---''--'--'---"'----'-I .I I ' t ] I~, T' ---~-- 't y --4--)-~l---q----*:, ...... /
,__..__,___,__...._.,._,__-,__. .... _k ..... t ....
Telecommunications Needs and Interests Assessment
-'~--1 T' i.~-['-m--Ti-Yi--F-' .... ]- ,---1 .... -,: .... .~..ll
Select and retain technical and legal consultants l
...... -t ..... ?'
Public proceeding issues development I I 1 i : [~! i : ~ i : I ,
___,___,.__,._.,.__,_..___,_.,.__,_,._,_._,__. ..... 4
Ipublicinvolvement [ i :~ I I ,
i .: ..__._.~_: _L__..Z._i __Z.: .... -I-: I ~ .
F- T-- i i '?
IE-Nabled Visions internet & e-commerce report
,_._._,____,._.,__.._,___.,.__.__...._..._ __+
BridgeWorkss~ community development program
Unisys intemet gateway/portal
..........................
Stakeholder involvement L.__! _'_-,..,___'_,_-'__,_'..____,_.. I___L..
mdms ana recommendations report
Council approval of report recommendations
Request for proposal
l ....... +__b..:__H~:__+-~__~_._lb...~.-b_,_½
Council consideration of proposal(s)
Attachment B
Tentative Community Telecommunications Action Plan Milestones - Continued
Completion Year and Quarter
2000 2001 2002 2003
Fiber-Optic Baclrbone Design and Construction
Request for qualifications to retain consultant i i tel ' i ' i t i
Fiber-optic cable purchase
Fiber-optic cable receipt i ',,' ; i i~ i l
--.----~-+--4---+--,t-~.-4---.--I-4.-4-_~__~-.
Business planning for fiber-optic backbone I .
.... +--~- ....... +-----~--+.-~----~ .... -4----~-~, ---~--
Draft design documents .
Stakeholder involvement
,t , ,
Final design documents
Call for bids to construct fiber-optic backbone
~ i I" 'J ~ ' ' l--
Bid award, construction commences .
___ ~ , , , ~_ I .
Fiber-optic backbone completion/acceptance --+.---~----~---~----4.-+--!-
BPA fiber-optic completion/NoaNet activation l .......
Fiber-Optic Backbone Activation
Stage I business plan update (as needed) !: ...... 2__!__.]__}--~___ !__L_~_L.~I__I .L__ .__[ ....
Fiber-optic service drops i i ili ]ll!l t i
Activation equipment request for proposal .......
.......
Activationequipment purchase/installation
....... 1-'--. '-~i--' ~'--.--',r--'I ....... , ...............
Testingandactivation(pointtopoint) . , ~, . , ~ . ,. I ~ [ ~. * I I I |
b--
Stage 2 business plan update (as needed) ..... .........
Activation equipment request for proposal
Activation equipment purchase/installation
[ , i i i t ~ I i I , I
...... r--T--?-- ,T-- ,,w-",r--T--?--T--n '--F'-r-- '--T'-
Testing and activation (core customers) , . . , t , · ~, ,
...... +----~--,-+--t-+---~--~-4-- --~--Z-~---~-
Stage 3 business plan update (as needed) it ~ I Ii ~ t ~ .L I' ti_ii ~ t }te}} il-a ~ .
......... ~,--~i"-T--: --r ..... , --~ .... ~---T--.--t---
Fiber-optic service drops i I i i ! I I I l~. I !
Activation equipment request for proposal
.....
Aetivation equipmentpurchase/installation [ { [ i I I i i i ! t ! ! {~,
Testing and activation (nerwork-wide) ,,
Attachment C
Communications Systems
Evaluation for Public
Utility District No. 1
of Clallam County
and the City of Port Angeles
POWER Engineers, Inc.
February 10, 2000
Attachraent C
Executive Summary
The City of Port Angeles (City) and Public Utility District (PUD) Number 1 of Clallam
County (District) retained POWER Engineers, Inc., (POWER) to review the
communications needs within the serving area of both entities and to help determine the
feasibility of building a fiber optic-based backbone communications system in Clallam
County. POWER evaluated internal District needs, City needs, and other needs related to
economic development in Clallam County.
Each network architecture reviewed could be used by the City and District as a transport
network or as an application network.
· A transport network would be one that carries applications (services) such as voice,
video, and data. The City and District would contract with one or more service
providers, such as Olypen or Century Telephone, to provide the services across the
network.
· An application network would be a situation where the City and/or the District
offers applications such as telephone service, video conferencing, and Interact access
to users.
Because the City and District both have stated they do not want to initially provide
applications directly, POWER will not address the second type of operation.
General Conclusions
POWER's study drew conclusions in the following areas:
· Construction - Can the network be built, and what are the challenges?
· Excess capacity - Is there interest in a network, and how could it be used internally?
· Architecture - What kind of network should be built, and what are the advantages and
disadvantages?
· Governance - How should the City and District own and operate the network?
· Cost - What are the estimated construction costs for the network?
· Joint network - Should the network be jointly owned or separately owned?
· Operation and maintenance - How should the network be operated and maintained?
Construction Conclusions
No significant physical obstacles that would prevent construction of a network were
identified. Some areas having difficult access to the District's transmission line were
determined to exist west of Port Angeles, between Airport Substation and Sappho
Substation. Options exist to reduce the impact of this difficult access, including the
potential use of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) transmission line that runs
parallel to the District line.
PEI-BOI 46-0432-99/dfl) 1
Attachment C
Excess Capacity Conclusions
There is a high level of interest from public and private entities in the (joint) serving areas
in accessing any excess capacity on a fiber network in Clallam County. The three typical
types of communication access - voice, video, and data - are all in demand in Clallam
County.
Architecture Conclusions
Any of the three network architectures (ATM, IP, and SONET/IP) that use electronics
would meet the current and future communications needs of the District and City.
Configuration of specific node electronics will determine an architecture's ability to meet
more strategic requirements, such as automated meter reading (AMR), cable television
(CATV), etc.
Governance Conclusions
Separate and/or joint network construction, operation, and maintenance are very flexible.
The routing of the fiber allows the City and District to meet at two (2) substations within
the City of Port Angeles and share equipment and fiber or simply interconnect to each
entity's infrastructure with special lines of demarcation.
Cost Conclusions
Estimated costs for the four (4) architectures were determined. They are summarized in
Figure 1-Estimated Total System Capital Costs. Details can be found in Table 5-
Estimated Capital Costs on Page 37 and in Appendix B-Detailed Cost Estimates.
$20,000,000
$18,000,000
$16,000,000
$14,0O0,000
O $12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,0OO,00O
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
Dark Fiber ATM IP SONET/IP
System Type
Figure 1-Estimated Total System Capital Costs
PEI-BOI 46-0432-99/dro 2
Attachment C
Estimated separate and joint architecture costs were deterrrfined. With the physical
routing of the District's and the City's systems, there were two (2) locations where they
could be interconnected: the City's Laurel Substation and the BPA substation by
Peninsula College. The BPA substation by Peninsula College does not currently have a
City or District substation or other facilities. A fiber only interconnect could be used, or
a small (12x 12) building could be placed near the substation to allow for node equipment
to be placed. The Distrct curentiy owns property across from the BPA substation.
The estimated City and District costs are shown separately in Figure 2-Estimated
Separate Capital Costs. Details can be found in Table 5-Estimated Capital Costs on page
37 and in Appendix B-Detailed Cost Estimates.
$14,500,000
$12,500,000
$10,500,000
$8,500,000 [] City
$6,500,000 · D strict
$4,500,000
$2,500,000
$5OO,OO0
Dark Fiber ATM IP SONET/IP
Figure 2-Estimated Separate Capital Costs
Joint Network Conclusions
With a joint network, there would be minimal capital cost reductions to either entity to
construct the initial backbone. Some cost reduction would be realized by sharing
equipment at two nodes (Laurel and the BPA substation) and sharing approximately 1.7
miles of fiber cable between the BPA substation and Laurel Street Substation (see Figure
7-Shared Fiber on page 11). This would save approximately $61,200 in fiber and
between $106,000 and $400,000 (depending on the architecture) in equipment.
Operation and Maintenance Conclusions
The cost of operation and maintenance of the network is directly related to:
· the number of users
· the frequency of user additions or removals to the network
· the number of fiber cable changes to add or remove users
PEI-BO146-0432-991d1~ 3
Attachment C
· the total number of network elements (nodes and customers) on the system
Compiled using general industry knowledge, the estimated operation and maintenance
costs are shown in Figure 3-Estimated Annual O&M Costs. For additional details
regarding O&M cost estimates, see Table 6-Estimated O&M Costs on page 38.
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000 [ cit
~ $400,000
0 I1 District
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$o
Dark Fiber ATM IP SONET/IP
Architectures
Figure 3-Estimated Annual O&M Costs
There will be additional cost and manpower impacts to the City and District that cannot
be quantified easily. They include:
· An increased administrative staff to market the network, perform accopnting
functions for the network, and to seek staff (or an outside entity) to operate and
maintain the network.
· An increased workload for the procurement of the main backbone as well as all
upgrades and changes to the network. This may require more staff during the initial
two or three years of network operation to meet growth demands. With the phased
approach, the network will be growing dynamically until all of the fiber is placed.
After the backbone is completely operating, the workload may decrease.
· The increased use of legal counsel and management at the board level, particularly
during the initial stages of the network. The rates the City and District charge for
access will need to be determined, contracts with service providers and/or panners
will require review and approval, and it is possible the City and/or District may face
legal challenges to the network(s).
Savings by jointly ol{erating and maintaining the network(s) could be realized.
Quantifying this is difficult. Jointly operating and maintaining the network(s) should
reduce the number of technicians required to operate and maintain the system, reduce the
size and complexity of a network operations center (NOC), and reduce billing
complexity. In addition, customers would realize the benefit of procuring
PEI-iBO1464431-99/dlb 4
AttacbJnent C
telecommunications infrastructure from one (apparent) entity, rather than causing
customers to coordinate between two entities when the customer requires access to the
infrastructure in both the City of Port Angeles and Clallam County.
PEI-BO! 46-0432-991df'o 5
Attachment C
Conclusions
General Network Strategy and Excess Capacity
There has been a very positive response to the survey and visits with various businesses
in Clallam County. The majority of responses showed some interest in an advanced
telecommunications infrastructure in Clallam County (see Figure 16-Interest in System).
With the high number (31%) that responded within a short interval, it leads to the
conclusion that the Clallam County area is in need of improved telecommunications
services.
Both the City and County EDC members have expressed the need for improved
telecommunication services in the City of Port Angeles and within Clallam County. With
improved services, both EDCs believe economic improvements within the City and
County could be stimulated. This could be through call center-type companies, data
warehousing companies, electronic commerce companies, and other communication-
intensive businesses moving into the area.
There are two basic elements in a communications system:
· the physical infrastructure: in this case, fiber and electronics
· the content: such as Interact access, basic phone, cable TV, etc.
The City and District are very experienced in the infrastructure portion of a
communications system. They are not directly experienced, but placing all dielectric
self-supporting (ADSS) fiber cable is similar to placing conductor for a power system.
The electronics installation, maintenance, and operation would require the training or
staffing of individuals to perform those functions.
Neither the City nor the District has significant experience with telecommunications
content, such as Internet access, basic phone service, or video conferencing services.
With these things in mind, POWER would recommend that the City and District consider
beginning the process of building an advanced communications system in the Clallam
County region with the following goals and limits in mind:
· Develop a detailed business plan to justify the project.
· Engineer and build an infrastructure network only. This would include ADSS fiber
cable and electronics to provide transport of content and private traffic.
· Build separate City and District fiber cables and electronics. Construction and
equipment orders should be combined as often as possible. Both the City and District
should choose the same technology and vendor.
PEI-BO! ,~,-o43z-99/a~o 47
Attachment C
· Jointly share the operation and maintenance of the network to reduce costs for both
the City and the District.
· Seek partnerships or "anchor" tenants with such companies as US West, Century
Telephone, Fair Point Communications, Olypen Intemet Services, and others.. These
companies (and others) have established communications content services. With
access to low-cost infrastructure, it is likely they can or will be able to bring advanced
communications to the people of Clallam County. They also, in the case of US West
and Northland Cable Television, have last-mile access to the residents and businesses
of Clallam County.
· Build a distribution system that can support high bandwidth requirements (greater
than 45 Mbps) only if necessary. If the partner/anchor tenant will continue to invest
in the existing or new infrastructure and technology (such as very high-speed digital
subscriber line (VDSL) and improved cable modems) to meet the needs of residents
and business, this will not be necessary.
· Find an operator to run and maintain the network. As time progresses, the City
and/or District could staff this role. During the initial implementations, an external
operator would allow the City and District to "learn" how this network operates and
to avoid internal staffing problems if the network changes dramatically (for example,
selling or leasing the entire infrastmcture to a third party).
* Use an RFP process for all major components of the network, including fiber cable,
electronics, and operation and maintenance. Some vendors could provide all three,
but separation will improve the choices available.
Find an interconnection (or more than one) off the peninsula. This would allow
greater access to service providers and greater choices for content. There was some
interest in access to the Seattle area (and beyond) from some companies surveyed.
Network Architecture
There is a large demand for combined voice and data services as well as data only. Both
a data-only and voice-only network will support video conferencing. This means ifa
voice-only or a data-only network is built, video conferencing will be supported. From
the survey responses, the type (architecture) of communications system that should be
constructed, if the City and/or District choose to, should support data and voice services.
Most voice services can be supported on a pure IP network (Architecture 3) by using
VoIP equipment.
With the convergence of voice and data communications, POWER would recommend
choosing either Architecture 3-Ethemet (IP) Based Network or Architecture 4-
SONET/IP Network. The decision between the two types should depend on the level of
risk the City or District is willing to assume.
· The Ethernet network would pose the smallest risk of possible conflict with existing
communications companies and regulators because of its data-only nature. It would
reduce the flexibility of the network (at this time) to provide high-quality, reliable
voice service (such as a call center would need), but would meet the data needs of
most potential users. Several vendors can supply this type of equipment.
PEI-BOI 46-0432-99/d/b 48
Attachment C
The SONET/IP network would carry some risk because of its inherent voice
capability, but would provide the flexibility of allowing voice and data services while
providing the high reliability of a SONET network. It also would provide some
measure of "future proofing." SONET is not a dead technology - it is being used
differently but will continue to be viable for some time. See "Not Fade Away?" from
the November 1999 issue of Fiber Exchange in Appendix D-Reference Material.
With these issues in mind, POWER would recommend that the City and District use the
following goals or limits while preparing to build an advanced communications system in
the Clallam County region.
· Determine which segments should be built first, based on cost, demand, partnership
opportunities, and internal needs.
· Engineer and write a detailed RFP for the portions of the network desired to be built
first. Break it into three (3) portions (fiber cable, electronics, operation and
maintenance), allowing for bids on any or all of them.
· Obtain RFP responses from all three technologies - SONET/IP, Ethernet, and ATM.
ATM technology has been expensive to own and operate, but this is starting to
change.
· Use OC-12 (622.08 Mbps) or Gigabit Ethernet (1000 Mbps) rates for the RFP. The
OC-48 (2488.32 Mbps) rate used in this report may be more than is required at first.
The business plan could help refine this.
· Initially, use the network for internal voice and data needs. This will allow a "bum-
in" for the network and allow the City and the District to "adjust" to the network.
Build Sequence
The order in which the segments are built is greatly dependent on the individual
requirements of the City and District, the demand for service, the requirements of any
partners and the capital available to construct. The current recommended sequence of
segments for each entity is detailed separately. This build sequence may not be optimal.
As the system is finalized and construction begins, the sequence should be reevaluated.
City
The recommended build sequence is Segment 8, 9, 10, and then 11.
· The market research indicates that the City should build Segment 8 first. This
segment will pass the majority of respondents who expressed interest in accessing the
network. It will have a ring (route redundancy) through a large majority of the
segment. It also will pass near City Hall and allow for the two potential
interconnections with the District. Distribution fiber should be built (if necessary,
depending on partners) to connect those initially interested.
· Segment 9 should be built next. It will continue creating redundant physical paths for
the fiber and complete the east end of Port Angeles.
PEI-BOi 46-0432.991df~ 49
Attachment C
· Segment 10 should be built next. It will expand the network into the west portion of
Port Angeles, pass additional respondents, and pass near areas identified as requiring
economic development. ,
· Segment 11 should be built next. It will complete the City of Port Angeles (as it
exists today), create additional fiber paths, and finish the initial backbone.
District
The recommended build sequence is Segment 1, 5, 6, 7, 2, 4, and 3.
The District is in a more complicated situation than the City. There is market demand in
Sequim, Forks, and Neah Bay, the three extreme "ends" of the network. Portions of
Segment 7 (Fairmont to Port Townsend) could be constructed with US West. Century
Telephone has some fiber in Segment 3 and Segment 4. They are interested in additional
fiber in those areas. Segment 1 and Segment 5 would benefit the District in terms of
internal use and linking to Segment 7. Squim showed the most market interest.
Without taking into account Century Telephone's desires, the District should build in the
following sequence. If Century Telephone becomes involved, or expresses a desire to
become involved, then the build sequence should be altered.
· Segment 1 will allow the District and City to interconnect their networks, enabling
the two networks to exchange traffic and O&M functions.
· Segment 5 will allow the District to begin to address internal SCADA and lease line
needs.
· Segment 6 will connect the City of Squire to the network and bring an external
connection into Port Angeles. The segment also will prepare the District for NoaNet
interconnection at the Fairmont Substation.
· Segment 7 will connect the City of Port Townsend.
· Segment 2 will be the most difficult in terms of terrain. Funding for this segment
may require revenue support from the rest of the network; by this point, it should be
able to find revenue. It will bring the network closer to Century Telephone.
· Segment 4 will connect Forks to the network and come closer to Century Telephone
· Segment 3 will connect Neah Bay to the network and complete the District backbone.
PEI.BO146-0432-99/dfl~ 50
2
3
4