FCC Releases National Broadband Plan

Plan Recommends Reallocation of 120 MHz from the Broadcast Television Bands by 2015

http://www.lermansenter.com/i/leventhal-logo-new.jpg

The FCC today delivered to Congress its National Broadband Plan that sets forth policy recommendations to the Executive Branch, Congress, and state and local governments for greatly expanding the nationwide availability of broadband, high-speed internet access.  This memo focuses on Plan issues of direct relevance to television broadcasting.

In order to fend off what the FCC describes as a looming shortage of wireless spectrum, the FCC generally recommends making 500 MHz of spectrum available for broadband services within the next ten years, of which 300 MHz would be made available for mobile broadband use within five years.  The FCC proposes that 120 MHz of spectrum would come from the broadcast television band.  Specifically, the FCC recommends completing rulemaking proceedings by 2011 so that the reallocated spectrum could be available for flexible, mobile broadband use by 2015.  According to the FCC, these interrelated rulemaking proceedings should address the following four recommended actions that focus primarily on major television markets where the broadcast TV bands are most congested and the need for additional spectrum for broadband use will be greatest.

Update FCC Rules on TV Service Areas and Distance Separations, and “Repack” Channel Assignments.  According to the FCC, updating its technical rules defining TV service areas and required distance separations between stations may enable stations on the same or adjacent channels to operate at currently prohibited spacing without increasing interference to unacceptable levels.  The FCC also indicates that “repacking” existing 6 MHz channel assignments more efficiently to relocate current stations into fewer total channels could free up to 36 MHz of spectrum from the broadcast TV bands.

Authorize Two or More Stations to Share a Single 6 MHz Channel.  The Plan recommends exploring a different approach under which broadcasters would give up spectrum voluntarily.  A current 6 MHz channel assignment is capable of transmitting data at a rate of 19.4 megabits per second (“Mbps”).  High definition (“HD”) video signals require approximately 6-17 Mbps, while standard definition (“SD”) video signals require approximately 1.5-6 Mbps.  According to the FCC, two stations could generally broadcast one primary HD video stream each over a shared 6 MHz channel, although it acknowledged that a single 6 MHz channel would not be sufficient for two stations to maintain current HD picture quality if both are transmitting highly complex HD programming simultaneously.  In the alternative, more than two stations broadcasting in SD could share a single 6 MHz channel.  Stations that shared a single 6 MHz channel would likely not be able to multicast additional video streams via digital side channels and/or mobile DTV streams given the additional bandwidth needed to ensure reception quality of those signals.

Determine Rules for Auction of Reclaimed Broadcast Spectrum.  The FCC recommends that it conduct an incentive auction of some or all of the nationwide, contiguous spectrum recovered through the processes described above, an auction in which broadcasters would receive a share of the proceeds.  However, Congress would have to authorize the FCC to conduct such an incentive auction.  Following such an auction, stations would receive channel assignments according to a new Table of Allotments, modified licenses if they are sharing a channel with other stations, and reimbursement from auction winners for any expenses incurred as a result of repacking.

Alternative Mechanisms.  In the event that the FCC does not receive authorization to conduct incentive auctions, or if such auctions do not yield a significant amount of spectrum, the FCC recommends the pursuit of the following alternatives through the rulemaking process to reclaim broadcast TV spectrum:

Ø  Transition to Cellular Architecture on a Voluntary or Involuntary Basis.  Transitioning stations to use of cellular architecture (i.e., using many low-powered transmitters that collectively provide coverage similar to current single high-powered transmitters), such as Distributed Transmission Systems/Single Frequency Networks (“DTS/SFN”), could reduce or eliminate the need for channel interference protections that result in only a fraction of the total spectrum allocated to broadcast TV being used directly by stations.  However, the Plan recognizes that moving to cellular architecture would be expensive, take a long time, and potentially could introduce substantial operational challenges for broadcasters.  Although voluntary transitions on a station-by-station basis would free up spectrum, greater spectrum efficiency would be achieved by coordinating the transition for all stations in major markets.

Ø  Auction of Overlay Licenses.  In a cryptic, incomplete manner, the Plan recommends that the FCC could auction what the Plan calls overlay, flexible-use licenses that would have secondary rights in the broadcast TV bands.  Overlay auction winners would negotiate with broadcast TV stations and other licensed users to clear their respective bands.  However, the proceeds of such an auction would be significantly lower than an incentive auction due to uncertainty over the amount and the timing of the spectrum recovered.

Ø  More Extensive Channel Sharing.  The FCC could modify station licenses to require channel sharing where necessary.

In addition to the foregoing band-clearing options, the FCC makes the following recommendations that it says would enable more efficient use of the broadcast TV spectrum:

Ø  Full-Power TV Spectrum Fees.  If authorized by Congress, the FCC should consider assessing spectrum fees on commercial, full power broadcast TV licensees as part of its review of the broadcast ownership rules and public interest obligations.

Ø  LPTV Transition.  The FCC should establish a deadline for LPTV stations to complete the transition to DTV -- by the end of 2015 or after the reallocation of spectrum from the TV band is complete.

Ø  VHF Reception Issues.  The FCC should examine additional options to address VHF reception issues, such as increased power limits or adoption of enhanced antenna and receiver standards, to avoid additional VHF stations requesting channel reassignments to the UHF band, which would complicate efforts to reallocate spectrum from that band.

Ø  Trust Fund for Public Media.  Congress should consider legislation to establish an endowment to fund public interest media from auction proceeds or spectrum fees.

Although the Commissioners unanimously approved a two-page mission statement addressing the overarching goals of the Plan, they did not vote on the Plan itself.  Individual statements by several Commissioners indicated some areas of disagreement on the specific approaches that the Plan outlines.  For example, Commissioner McDowell indicated that the FCC should explore using its authority under Section 336 of the Communications Act “to provide television broadcasters an incentive to lease their spectrum,” which he characterized as a “voluntary mechanism” that “may be an easier path to accelerating deployment of advanced wireless services than more coercive means.”  From a different political perspective, Commissioner Clyburn also counseled caution on the proposals relating to broadcast spectrum, noting that the Plan doesn’t contain a rigorous analysis of the impact of its proposals on the public interest generally and does not study the particular impact that “a spectrum sell-off would have on women and minority-owned broadcast television stations.”

Should you have any questions concerning the FCC’s National Broadband Plan or its impact on broadcast television, please contact your primary attorney in our office.

March 16, 2010

 

Follow Lerman Senter on Twitter

 

This memorandum is intended only as a general discussion of these issues and should not be regarded as legal advice.

We would be pleased to provide additional details or advice about specific situations if desired.

Copyright © 2010, Lerman Senter PLLC

2000 K Street NW, Suite 600 | Washington, DC 20006-1809
tel. 202.429.8970 | fax 202.293.7783 | www.lermansenter.com

To Unsubscribe: Unsubscribe  |   To Update Client Info: Update Client Info