/
03.17.2010 12:00AM
Broadcast-to-Broadband: Relinquishment and Repacking
BroadbandWASHINGTON: The FCC’s 360-page National Broadband Plan, delivered to Congress yesterday, has sparked an outcry from broadcasters who stand to lose a huge chunk of spectrum. The plan calls for broadcasters to hand over 120 MHz of the 300 MHz they use to transmit TV signals--enough for 20 channels in every market.

The imposition comes as TV stations continue to swap out antennas in the wake of the digital transition. Repacking the TV spectrum for further efficiency would mean more such reconfigurations, and a likely increase in signal interference.


Repacking would supposedly occur after broadcasters voluntarily hand over their licenses. David Oxenford of Davis Wright Tremaine LLC in Washington, D.C. summarizes the FCC’s reasoning:


“Throughout the section of the report dealing with the potential recapture of TV frequencies, the commission suggests that the television frequencies are underutilized, and that television broadcasting is not the highest and best use for the channels. In the view of the commission, this spectrum is not being used efficiently at the moment, as many television stations have the ability to transmit their over-the-air signals in less than the full 6 MHz of spectrum allotted to each television station.


“While high-definition programming and opportunities for multichannel operations are possible on the current channel allotments, in the commission’s opinion, too few broadcasters are making full use of the spectrum.”


Throw in 15 percent reliance on over-the-air TV, and the FCC has a weighty argument that the spectrum would be put to better use for wireless broadband.


“Some stations may sell out entirely, while others could agree to share current frequencies--e.g. allowing two stations to each use 3 MHz of one 6 MHz TV channel, allowing the other 6 MHz to be reclaimed by the FCC for broadband use,” Oxenford wrote in DWT’s Broadcast Law Blog.


Broadcasters giving up spectrum would be compensated from resulting auctions.


“The details of how that auction could work are discussed in the report--suggesting that an auction by the FCC where a portion of the proceeds are paid to the broadcaster is the favored method, though a direct sale of spectrum by the broadcaster to the wireless company is an alternative,” he said. “Once stations agree to this voluntary plan, the FCC will take the remaining television stations and repack them into a smaller portion of the television spectrum, to clear up a large contiguous swath of spectrum for broadband users. Broadcasters may need to share spectrum or transmitter sites, reduce coverage, or otherwise modify their technical operations to fit into the more limited allocated television band.”


Oxenford provides further details of the FCC’s rationale for moving broadcasters off the spectrum, including a cost evaluation of the airwaves, at “
FCC National Broadband Plan - What It Suggests for TV Broadcasters’ Spectrum.”

(
Image by Michael Sauers)


Comments
Post New Comment
If you are already a member, or would like to receive email alerts as new comments are
made, please login or register.

Enter the code shown above:

(Note: If you cannot read the numbers in the above
image, reload the page to generate a new one.)

1.
Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Thu, 03-18-2010 - 2:06AM Report Comment
Free, Over the Air Television Broadcasters are being blindsided with a spectrum-grab on behalf of pay-to-receive providers... just after the government mandated the expense of moving from Analog to Digital. Each broadcast television station needs its full-channel bandwidth—as-is—to provide the full-quality HD and SD transmissions and other digital services that are just now beginning to be developed and deployed. I prefer the quality of directly-received over the air SD and HD television, compared to the re-compressed and lower quality signals squeezed into the current satellite and cable pipelines. It also doesn't cost me anything per-month aside from a few cents for power. Powering millions of additional Sat or IP receivers—many per home—may well off-set the supposed power savings the above poster touts. And frankly, IP over most paths to homes ain't ready for prime time yet. The federal government has quite a bit of useable spectrum it could make available by "repacking" its own spectrum useage. This 360-page spectrum grab makes me think of rounding up the Native Americans and herding them onto reservations far from their original homes, often more than once.
2.
Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Wed, 03-17-2010 - 8:05PM Report Comment
I see the transition from analog to digital as a HUGE waste of time and resources. I said this BEFORE the transition and I'll say it again. A much better plan would have been to have ALL analog TV stations move from analog to satellite and IP distribution thus freeing up ALL of the TV spectrum. Furthermore, there would be a HUGE energy as well as spectrum savings when all the earth bound TV transmitters went silent. Yes it takes energy for satellite and IP distribution but nowhere near the amount it takes to run the present system. Same with present day broadcast radio transmission. Move them to satellite and IP also!!!




Wednesday 9:02AM
Analysts: TV Regs 'Not as Dire as We Thought'
We feel the negatives are known and are a lot more comfortable recommending the space.


 
Featured Articles
Discover TV Technology