WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission’s Office of Engineering and Technology and Media Bureau have released updated TVStudy software (v2.3.1).

TVStudy is open-source software developed by the agency to analyze the coverage area, population served, and potential signal interference when evaluating channel changes and station repacking for full-service digital and Class A television stations.

The TVStudy v2.3.1 software installation package, the TVStudy 2.3.1 Installation and Upgrade Guide, and the post-auction template XML file are all available on the TVStudy website.

As with prior updates, a full list of changes from TVStudy v2.3 is included in the “Differences Between 2.3.1 and 2.3.0” section of the change log in the TVStudy 2.3.1 Installation and Upgrade Guide.

The FCC reported that TVStudy 2.3.1 corrects an issue that caused applications for new low-power television stations to be considered incorrectly in TV Interference Check studies. TVStudy 2.3.1 also corrects several minor issues throughout the software and adds a handful of minor features.

For further information on the TVStudy software and to submit bug reports, contact Mark Colombo at 202-418-7611 or Mark.Colombo@fcc.gov.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The FCC’s Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau (Bureau) have issued a reminder that the third and final deadline is Sept. 6, 2022 for entities and stations seeking reimbursement by the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund for expenses associated with the repack of spectrum that were required after the FCC’s incentive auction of broadcast spectrum.

All low power TV and TV translator (LPTV/translator) stations, multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs), and FM stations, as well as a small number of full power TV stations that were granted extensions of the first or second invoice filing deadlines, must submit all remaining invoices in the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund no later than September 6, 2022, the agency said. 

The FCC also stressed that entities do not need to wait for the deadline to submit all remaining invoices and initiate close-out procedures and that all those seeing reimbursement are encouraged to make submissions as soon as possible.  

In 2012, Congress mandated that the FCC conduct an incentive auction of broadcast television spectrum as part of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 ("Spectrum Act"), the FCC said. “The Spectrum Act appropriated $1.75 billion to the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund for costs reasonably incurred by Full Power and Class A broadcast television licensees reassigned to new channels ("repack"), as well as Multichannel Video Programming Distributors ("MVPDs") that incurred costs related to continuing to carry the signals of reassigned broadcast stations,” the FCC said. 

The 2018 Reimbursement Expansion Act appropriated $1 billion in additional funds for the Reimbursement Fund and expanded those entities eligible for reimbursement to Low Power Television Stations ("LPTVs"), television translators ("TV translators"), and FM stations affected by the repack.

The FCC said that close-out procedures were announced over three years ago on February 16, 2019 and earlier this year the agency announced a final allocation and streamlined the close-out procedures.

Given the lengthy advance warning the FCC said that “extensions of the assigned invoice submission deadlines should therefore not be required” but added that “an entity requesting a limited extension will have to provide evidence that circumstances requiring the extension were outside of its control, such as local zoning or a force majeure event occurring proximate to the final submission deadline.”

The FCC also noted that the Fund Administrator “will initiate close out for any entity that has failed to initiate the process by the invoice filing deadline assigned to that entity.  Any unused allocations made to that entity’s account will be returned to the Fund and made available for allocation to other program participants.”

The FCC also reminded “participants that they must retain documents for a period ending 10 years after the date they receive their final payments from the Reimbursement Fund” and that they may be subject to “audits, data validations, and site visits at any time during the repack and reimbursement process.”

More information is available here. 

RALEIGH, N.C.—Hindsight brings perspective to any broadcast installation, particularly when we look back at the unique challenges of the recent repack. A Phase 5 project for MyTV affiliate WRDC-TV and CW affiliate WLFL-TV was no exception as we navigated the deadline-driven pressures of this particularly active phase. 

Both stations transmit to the Raleigh-Durham market from atop a candelabra tower, which has six top-mounted antenna positions with exceptional sightlines. To maximize signal coverage and reduce weight, we opted for a stacked omnidirectional UHF antenna system from Dielectric that would serve WRDC's Channel 14 assignment and WLFL's Channel 18 assignment.

TWEAKING THE DESIGN

The omnidirectional coverage is necessary due to the market's size and terrain. Since the antennas are stacked, both transmit into free space as true top-mounted arrays that do not interfere with each other. In a typical stack, the bottom array becomes directional due to the effect of the transmission line feeding the top antenna. Both the horizontal and vertical azimuth patterns are affected, with the vertical seeing more negative impact. 

The Dielectric engineering team overcame this drawback with an innovative design that results in the bottom of the stack being as omnidirectional in both polarizations as the top. This is a significant engineering breakthrough that assures WLFL will not suffer from interference issues.

The design includes plenty of vertical polarization to enhance signal reception through the region's rolling hills and valleys. Both stations broadcast NextGen TV content today, and that vertical signal component will increase in importance as more viewers consume NextGen TV content on mobile devices.

We scheduled a helicopter lift to raise the stacked antenna system, with WRDCÕs center of radiation (1,950 feet) roughly 60 feet above WLFL's (1,888 feet). A temporary Dielectric TFU-WB side-mounted antenna continued on-air operations while the old antennas were removed. The stacked system, which comprises two Dielectric slot antennas, positions WRDC's more compact custom 27-bay TFU-ETT antenna atop the larger 26-bay TFU-JBH structure. 

The new antennas are each fed by seven 3/16-inch Dielectric transmission line runs, with one newly installed digiTLine run. The post-installation RF sweeps confirmed that both overall system VSWR results were excellent, comfortably bettering our minimum requirements and enabling the transmitters to run at optimum efficiency.  

A NEW KIND OF FILTER

This system requires an unusually complex filter design for WRDC since it operates on Channel 14. A typical UHF transmission system requires a six- or eight-pole filter to reduce out-of-band emissions to meet FCC specifications. Channel 14 is unique in that it requires a very steep roll-off at the lower side band to prevent interference into land mobile frequencies just below the band edge.

Dielectric engineered a very sharp-tuned 12-pole filter to eliminate out-of-band emissions from WRDC's (Channel 14) 108 kW transmitter. While the 12-pole design creates a larger physical footprint, we worked closely with Acrodyne Services to ensure a clean installation in a tight space, including temporary use of their 20 kW MAT (Mobile Acrodyne Transmitter) outside the building to facilitate new equipment placement inside. The filter was floor-mounted alongside WRDC's six-cabinet transmitter, WLFL's four-cabinet transmitter and filter, a dual-channel combiner and all associated plumbing and switching systems.

Moving forward, we plan to install Dielectric's RFHAWKEYE to monitor antenna and RF performance for both stations over IP. That will add a new level of operational efficiency for our Raleigh-Durham engineering team, especially as we put more emphasis on ATSC 3.0 and NextGen TV signals in the years ahead. 

Dale Scherbring is the director of engineering for WRDC-TV and WLFL-TV. He can be reached at 410-487-3492.

For more information, please contact Jay Martin at Dielectric at 207-655-8138, or visit the company's website at www.dielectric.com.

The author of this commentary is director, business development for CommScope.

As the auction for the much-coveted C-band spectrum kicks off, we are another step into the complicated process to relocate or repack C-Band FSS earth stations.

While the process has been very well explained, it’s worth taking a little more time to discuss some more background and some of the impacts.

Let’s start off by highlighting the new band plan illustrated below in Fig.1.

The Federal Communications Commission has reallocated the lower 280 MHz of the band to be auctioned for new 5G uses and renamed it the 3.7 GHz Service.

This means that all the earth stations in the 3.7–4.0 GHz portion of the band will have to be repacked, or relocated, into the upper 200 MHz (4.0–4.2 GHz). The FCC also allowed for a 20 MHz guard band between the new 5G entrants and the relocated earth stations.

Repacking will be accomplished in two phases:

• Phase I – Earth stations in the lower 100 MHz of the band (3.7–3.8 GHz) must be repacked by Dec. 5, 2021.
• Phase II – Remaining earth stations must be repacked by Dec. 5, 2023.

Based on the FCC’s latest list of incumbent earth stations, there are close to 16,000 as shown in Fig. 2 seen farther below. Intel has put these into the following categories:

• Broadcast, Religious, Radio, Data: 9%
• Cable: 9%
• LDS: 19%
• Other: 63%

The majority of these earth stations are capable of receiving across the entire 3.7–4.2 GHz band. In addition, since these earth stations typically receive from several satellites, they are configured to operate across the full satellite arc. Thus, the challenge is compressing earth stations into 200 MHz from 500 MHz, possibly configuring to receive from fewer satellites and in some cases, actual physical relocation.

The effect of this moving or compression on the earth stations will be mostly related to modification of existing equipment including:

• Limiting their receive band to the 4.0–4.2 GHz range
• Re-orientation of antennas to different satellites as needed
• Possible filtering required to mitigate interference
• Possible physical relocation if new siting is required or desired

The main challenge for earth station licensees will be managing the logistics and timing required to make the changes needed to their respective systems.

Fortunately, earth station operators don’t necessarily have to foot the bill for this on their own.

The FCC proceeding for this band clearing / repurposing / auctioning is complex, but it affords earth station operators the opportunity to have repacking or relocation costs covered by the new 3.7 GHz Service entrants.

In late July, the FCC issued a Public Notice (DA 20-802) announcing publication of its “3.7 GHz Transition Final Cost Category Schedule Of Potential Expenses And Estimated Costs.” This catalog describes the potential expenses and estimated costs that incumbent earth station operators may incur as a result of the repacking or relocation.

The FCC worked with RKF Engineering Solutions LLC to develop the catalog. It includes any necessary changes that will allow the earth stations to receive C-Band services throughout the transition—and after the applicable relocation deadline once satellite operators have relocated their services into the upper portion of the band.

The FCC has noted that it is likely most earth stations that are repacking will require filtering to prevent interference from new 5G users operating below 3980 MHz. It is important to note that this conclusion is supported by a multi-stakeholder group representing a diverse collection of many different interested companies and organizations who assembled to study terrestrial-satellite coexistence during and after the transition.

The group (called Technical Working Group 1, “TWG-1”) created a best practices report concluding that: “3.7 GHz Service operators and earth station operators should work cooperatively to avoid interference problems during the network design stage and continue to work cooperatively to resolve interference problems that may arise.”

Members of the TWG discussed possible coordination between new 3.7 GHz Service operators and incumbent earth station operators — yet could not come to a conclusion on how to establish and manage a coordination process. Earth station operators may wish to keep track of the 3.7 GHz Service auction results and possibly contact auction winners in your area, particularly those operating in the 3.9–3.98 GHz portion of the band.

As mentioned, this is one of the most complex proceedings the FCC has undertaken, similar to the TV station repacking where all the TV stations above channel 38 were repacked into channels 2-31 to make way for new wireless operators.

The good news is that this completed with few major issues, other than taking a little longer than expected. So, as we continue stepping through this process, it’s helpful knowing this isn’t the first time. As well, there is plenty of information and help available to smooth the transition.

This story originally appeared on TVT's sister publication Radio World.

SOUTHWICK, Mass.—WHRO-TV, the Hampton Roads Educational Telecommunications Association pubic broadcaster serving Norfolk, Portsmouth and Newport News, Va.,  deployed a Comark 68kW Parallax UHF transmitter this summer as part of its TV spectrum repack work, Hitachi Kokusai Electric Comark has announced.

The station’s new HPTV-PRLX-U42 68kW transmitter, upgradeable to ATSC 3.0, consists of three rack cabinets each equipped with 14 UHF Asymmetric Broadband Doherty power amplifiers. The transmitter has dual Exact-V2 ATSC exciters (in main/standby configuration) and a liquid cooling system, the company said.

The company supplied the complete RF system, which includes Constant Impedance Filter (CIF) technology and high-power external hybrids for combining each of the transmitter’s PA cabinets. Comark managed shipping, offloading and placement of the new equipment in the station’s transmitter facility, it said.

The transmitter was needed to meet the station’s Phase 9 spectrum repack deadline. While mechanical work was completed in late March to meet the phase deadline, COVID-19 delayed the station’s actual transition till July 3. Comark assisted the station in turning on the new transmitter and performed complete proof-of-performance testing in late June, it said.

“COMARK worked with the management of WHRO to provide a complete solution for their repack requirements,” said Joe Turbolski, company vice president of Sales and Marketing. “The new transmitter installation was a tight fit into the existing facility, so we performed a detailed site survey and system design to ensure there were no surprises during the mechanical installation.”

More information is available on the company’s website.

WASHINGTON—The Land Mobile Communications Council (LMCC) and the FCC met on Oct. 22 to initiate discussions on what LMCC describes as “multiple incidents” of co-channel and adjacent channel interference to land mobile systems from newly authorized digital TV stations that came about as a result of the TV repack, agreeing to begin identifying potential solutions.

According to an LMCC filing to the FCC from August, there have been multiple instances of new DTV stations causing harmful interference to Part 90 private land mobile radio stations (PLMR), rendering the stations “entirely unusable.” Private land mobile radio systems are used by companies, local governments, and other organizations to meet a wide range of communication requirements, including coordination of people and materials, important safety and security needs, and quick response in times of emergency. 

LMCC says that such instances have occurred in Dallas, Houston, New York, Chicago and San Francisco, among others. 

 The two-year repack, which wrapped up in July  forced nearly 1,000 U.S. TV stations  to relocate their channel allocations as a result of the 2017 spectrum auction. This has caused two types of interference, according to LMCC: Co-channel interference from DTV stations operating in the 470-512 MHz band that had previously been allocated for PLMR use in major markets; then there is adjacent channel interference from DTV stations on Channel 14 impacting PLMRs operating in the UHF band below 470 MHz. 

“The interference with what had been reliable communications endangers the safety of employees, disrupts operations at affected facilities and poses a major threat to public safety in certain instances,” the LMCC told the FCC.

As a result of its meeting with the FCC, LMCC is forming a Working Group that will collaborate with the FCC in identifying potential solutions. 

LMCC President Klaus Bender says that some of these interference issues may be resolved by enforcing existing rules, but acknowledges that some will be more difficult because of the lack of spectrum alternatives for both land mobile and DTV licensees. However, he described the collaborative effort with the FCC as “a good start.” 

WASHINGTON—Several groups representing users of private land mobile radio (PLMR) systems are urging the FCC to enforce rules that prevent interference from TV stations that recently moved their transmission facilities during the three year-channel repack that recently concluded.

In a letter to the FCC, the Land Mobile Communications Council asked the commission to take action against numerous instances of radio interference from stations that moved to new channels as a result of the 2017 spectrum auctions that transferred portions of broadcasters’ 600 MHz spectrum mostly to wireless carriers seeking to upgrade to 5G. 

These PLMR facilities have been in operation for decades and provide essential fleet dispatch communications for a broad range of business and governmental users, including hospitals, school buses, roadside assistance, highway maintenance, refining, petrochemical production, high voltage electrical repair and firefighting.

Interference issues between the two systems is nothing new. In the mid-2000s, the FCC had to intervene when reports of garage door openers were also interfering with PLMR systems. Those situations and others like that, the LMCC said, were temporary and usually fixed in a reasonable time period and didn’t have the same impact. 

“This interference is so strong that it takes the PLMR systems off the air and is occurring for many hours several days a week or even multiple consecutive days,” the LMCC told the FCC.

LMCC says the situation represents a threat to public safety and to the loss of business. 

“This interference has rendered affected PLMR facilities entirely unusable in certain markets, resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars of lost revenue as customers of commercial systems are forced to search for alternative communication options and incurred expenses as licensees have sought remedial action by the broadcasters and/or acquired other spectrum to which their operations could be moved,” the LMCC said. “The interference with what had been reliable communications endangers the safety of employees, disrupts operations at affected facilities and poses a major threat to public safety in certain instances. The urgency of the problems demand FCC action to enforce those regulations and policies as promptly as possible and to avoid the creation of similar problems in the future.”

LMCC said it assumed that the stations causing the interference are ones that recently moved due to the repack and as such, are obligated to resolve the interference issue.

PLUS: Repack Crosses the Finish Line

“In such cases, the FCC has relied on its long-standing ‘newcomer’ policy pursuant to which new licensees are responsible for resolving interference caused by their operations even if all parties are operating in accordance with the rules and the terms of their authorizations,” it told the commission. “In this instance, it is vital that the newcomer DTV stations assume this obligation because there are no anti-interference solutions available to the PLMR licensees.”

Citing rules that require TV stations to identify potential interference before construction, the LMCC said the issue can be easily resolved if the FCC enforces those rules. 

“A number of new permittees have been diligent both in identifying potentially affected PLMR systems and, more importantly, in implementing the necessary filtering to avoid causing interference,” LMCC said. “Their success makes clear that those facilities can co-exist when appropriate interference mitigation measures are taken by the DTV station.”

The Enterprise Wireless Association echoed LMCC’s concerns and calls for action. 

“Some EWA members are so frustrated that they wonder if the reaction of a few TV stations might be ‘There is nothing we can do; the environment is the root cause; we didn’t want to move in the first place; or, maybe the PLMR incumbents will go away in time and leave us alone,’” said EWA President Mark Crosby. “Of course, these are unacceptable responses as the PLMR industry is as vital to the well-being of this country as are broadcasters, even if not as well known. The LMCC seeks only a fair hearing and the FCC’s active support towards a resolution. That should not be wishful thinking. EWA remains optimistic.”

The LMCC’s report citing specific interference cases is available here. 

WASHINGTON—The complicated task of switching the operating frequencies of nearly 1,000 full-power television stations in the United States is complete. Almost.

Starting on April 13, 2017 (which is when spectrum-hungry wireless companies finished bidding on broad swaths of spectrum being used by broadcasters), the “repack” ended on July 13 with only a handful of holdouts. The FCC estimated the cost at approximately $2.75 billion.

“There are six stations that were granted extensions beyond the July 13 deadline established by the commission as the final date on which all repack stations needed to vacate their pre-auction channels,” said Jean Kiddoo, chair of the FCC’s Incentive Auction Task Force. “The first such extension was to WFOX (Jacksonville, Fla.), where the commission unanimously found that circumstances beyond WFOX’s control justified a waiver of the deadline until Sept. 8, 2020.”

In the FCC order that pushed back the deadline for WFOX, the commission delegated the ability to make similar extensions to its Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau.

“The Bureau subsequently issued two extensions until August 3, and three more until Sept. 8,” Kiddoo said. “Each of the six stations faced unique challenges with its construction project that required a little more time. We anticipate the issues are being resolved within the extended timeframe established by the extensions.”

Looking back at the repack project, Kiddoo was struck by the complexity, and the eventual ability for all the moving pieces to slot together.

“This was an extremely complex project with lots of challenges, but one major one was that a ‘one-date-fits-all’ plan similar to the 2009 DTV conversion simply couldn’t work here due to interference concerns,” she said. “The commission therefore had to develop a scheduling plan that assigned repack stations to particular phases that took into account not only interference linkages among stations, but also resource constraints such as engineering support, tower crew availability, equipment supply chain limitations and the like.”

UNFORESEEN SITUATIONS

Other factors considered by the FCC and broadcasters included seasonal climate limitations, issues posed by certain complex tower locations, and a desire to minimize the number of times over-the-air viewers in a particular market would be required to rescan their TVs to continue watching a transitioned station.

“The plan that was adopted by the commission in 2017 took into account all of these types of constraints and considerations,” Kiddoo said. “It also incorporated sufficient flexibility to accommodate a myriad of other unforeseen situations, not the least of which was a global pandemic, while at the same time keeping the overall transition on schedule.”

One big concern shared by the FCC and broadcasters alike is the possibility of interference after stations have been shoehorned into considerably less bandwidth.

“Everyone has been so busy trying to get the repack completed that we have not had time to look at how the interference situation has played out,” said Bill Meintel, senior partner with broadcast consulting company Meintel, Sgrignoli & Wallace. “I expect that will get more attention over the next year or so as the industry looks to make other changes and roll out ATSC 3.0.”

Getting the work done was a full-out task for station engineers and companies that specialize in large RF systems. One of those companies was QCommunications, an engineering project management and installation vendor in Lee’s Summit, Mo., that has specialized in assisting clients navigate the waters of FCC relocation and repack projects since 1997.

According to John Owen, chief technology offi cer for QCommunications, the repack work was definitely not as simple as “insert Tab A into Slot B.”

“Installation of complex RF systems and transmitters required field modifications of pre-designed components, resulting in many after-hour and weekend brainstorming meetings between station and field engineers, project managers, vendors and manufacturers to overcome a melee of unforeseen field issues,” Owen said. “At times, obtaining critical RF components was harrowing and compelled QComm to utilize the [cumulative] 80 years we’ve spent building industry relationships to meet the aggressive repack schedules.”

In particular, Owen cited a difficult installation for WVVA in W.Va.

“The treacherous roads of the mountain location in West Virginia required painstaking logistics for crew ingress/egress to deliver components and tower crew equipment,” he said.

Another memorable installation for him was the twin GatesAir ULXTE-150 transmitters for WPSG and KYW at a common site in the Roxbury section of Philadelphia.

JUMPED ON THE WORK

One big broadcaster that jumped on the repack work was Sinclair Broadcast Group, which had 100 stations to shift. Early on, the company reported major weather delays for the tower crews, some vendor-delayed shipping issues and major delays in a few cities with local zoning permits. However, all Sinclair’s work was completed by the deadline.

Broadcasters were reimbursed for the work, of course. However, managing the reimbursement process when government oversight is involved can be a tricky process.

“The ever-changing and highly scrutinized review and reimbursement process added extra layers to an already complicated transition that was not foreseen by many stations,” said Tony zumMallen, president of QCommunications. “We give credit to the FCC team that worked tirelessly to help our team achieve the FCC and station repack goals. Without all the players working to achieve the same results, the process could have been more arduous.”

When the repack started, wireless companies had bid on spectrum occupied by broadcasters.

This “incentive auction” generated $19.8 billion, and approximately $10 billion of that was earmarked to reimburse broadcasters that gave up their spectrum. Some broadcasters went all-in on the process and ceased broadcasting—a total of 41 stations took the money and went off the air.

The remaining 987 stations have either all been repacked or are one of the six that are expected to be complete by September 2020. The FCC stated that these six holdouts will not delay the deployment of wireless services in the 600 MHz band.

NO TIME TO RELAX

With the repack work essentially complete, some might think that manufacturers, engineers and field staff could relax in the coming months. However, there is plenty more that needs to be done: The FCC said that as many as 15% of repacked broadcasters are currently operating on interim facilities, and will need to move to permanent facilities in the coming months.

“Major antenna and tower work and transmitter installations remain to be completed and will continue to stress tower crews well into 2023,” QCommunications’ zumMallen said.

In addition, tower crews that worked overtime to change out television RF equipment will now more or less immediately be tasked to install the wireless systems (including 5G) for which the spectrum was cleared.

With nearly all the work now done on the repack, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai praised broadcasters, manufacturers and industry groups for working together to meet the deadline. In particular, Pai singled out tower workers as genuine heroes.

“I think it’s fair to say that no group has done more [than tower workers] on the ground and in the air to make the benefits of the broadcast incentive auction a reality,” he said.

Other industry officials also weighed in on the repack project with praise for all the participants.

“I am incredibly proud of the broadcast television industry for its herculean efforts to meet the FCC’s aggressive repacking deadlines, despite complex and extenuating circumstances,” said NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith. “NAB thanks the FCC staff for its flexibility in working with stations to facilitate transitions and grant extensions when possible. We are also grateful to Congress for allocating the additional funds needed to fully reimburse broadcasters for costs associated with these mandatory moves.”

LOST IN THE SHUFFLE?

The repack schedule was so aggressive that a possible transition to ATSC 3.0 broadcasting was almost lost in the shuffle. However, the ATSC reports that there are 10 markets in the U.S. that now have ATSC 3.0 broadcasts available and 50 more markets by the end of 2020. These include major markets such as New York, Houston, San Francisco, Washington, Miami and Chicago, with many other markets large and small on the list. The ability of stations to update their RF systems for the repack helped to prepare them for ATSC 3.0 broadcasting, although costs related to ATSC 3.0 were not included in the reimbursement.

The past 15 years have been raucous in the television industry, with the digital transition just before 2010 and multiple waves of frequency shifts in what used to be the broadcast-exclusive UHF band. Will it be smooth sailing over the next few years, with no high-impact fast-turnaround demands from government regulators? Or will they ask broadcasters to return more spectrum?

We will know in a few years.

When it comes to the repack, there’s a difference between “meeting the deadline” and “being  nished,” (p.s.: this also applies to journalism as well).

For the FCC’s purpose, however, broadcasters did successfully “complete” the repack deadline last month on schedule. Nearly 100 stations transitioned in the final month alone.

But there’s still work to be done. Six stations were granted extensions ending in September, and LPTV and Class A stations have another year before they complete the transition. And then there’s the ongoing paperwork involved in reimbursement.

Perhaps the biggest concern among broadcasters is that a certain percentage (~15-20%) are operating at a lower power on an “interim facility,” (a complete list is available at tvanswers.org/transitioning.asp). Viewers in these areas will continue to have issues with over-the-air reception until those stations are back to full power.

Interim facilities (also referred to as “STAs” or special temporary authority) were integral to the repack, according to Brett Jenkins, CTO of Nexstar, the nation’s largest commercial broadcaster. Jenkins estimated that nearly 90% of the more than 100 Nexstar stations that repacked relied on interim facilities to stay on the air while permanent antennas, waveguide and transmitters were installed.

“Were we happy about operating at lower heights and lower powers? Probably not,” says Jenkins. “But I think in most cases we were able to find adequate designs that would come reasonably close to replicating coverage. We tried not to disenfranchise the over-the-air viewer as much as possible.”

The repack was among the most complicated tasks broadcasters have ever undertaken and required a coordinated effort among the industry, tower crews, manufacturers and local authorities; and doing all of this while dealing with the unpredictabilities of weather and pressures from the wireless companies, who were eager to move in.

Anthony Flores, owner of AFF Consulting had a very busy repack and was philosophical about how it was handled. “I think all in all, everyone’s done a remarkable job and the guys still left to cross the finish line will be close, even with Covid,” he told TV Technology in May. “There may be some delays because of Covid and perhaps, for maybe the next year or so, some projects to get things optimized.”

Broadcasters were already facing a very busy 2020, with the Olympics, election, repack and the deployment of ATSC 3.0. Add a pandemic and civil rights protests to the mix, and you have the makings of a year that will not soon be forgotten.

There’s something else, though that shouldn’t be forgotten. This was the first repack broadcasters had to undertake in response to a spectrum auction that was fought tooth and nail by our industry until it finally came to pass in 2017. (To be fair, the opposition wasn’t necessarily to the auction, but how it would be conducted to ensure fairness).

The demand for broadcast spectrum is not over. Broadcasters are currently in the midst of sorting out the best solution to the proposal to auction off C-band, a vital resource for newsgathering. And FCC officials have hinted that they may be interested in revisiting another auction of 600MHz in the future.

The best way to protect our industry from further encroachment onto the broadcast spectrum is right in front of us: ATSC 3.0. When the FCC approaches broadcasters in the future and asks us to make the best justification for retaining the spectrum, we need to ensure that we have taken the advantage of the best tools we have to remain relevant.

The most important tool we have is NextGen TV. Now that the repack is mostly done, we now have more time to focus on the future of TV.

WASHINGTON—There has been some confusion about just when the FCC's TV station repack actually ended—July 3, when the tenth and last phase concluded, according to the FCC's longstanding timeline, or July 13, which the FCC said Monday was the "deadline established for television stations to move off their pre-auction channel assignments."

Actually, it's a little of both, but it takes some explaining.

An FCC spokesperson did the honors:

"When we refer to July 13, 2020, we refer to the overall deadline for channels vacating their pre-auction channels and clearing the 600 MHz Band. The Commission in the Incentive Auction Report and Order created a 39-month transition period that ran from the date the auction closed, which was April 13, 2017, so the transition period ends pursuant to commission rules on July 13, 2020."

But wait, there's more.

"The Commission also delegated authority to the staff to create a more detailed plan to accomplish the broadcast transition. Pursuant to that authority, the Incentive Auction Task Force created the Transition Scheduling Plan, which was subject to notice and comment and was adopted in January 2017. It created a 10-phased transition within the 39-month period to implement the transition. The deadline assigned to phase 10 by the staff was July 3, 2020, which created a few days between the end of phase 10 and the 39-month deadline.

"The staff provided a few extensions from the end of phase 10 to July 13 today at 11:59 p.m. due to unforeseen circumstances, and the stations subject to those extensions are still transitioning within that period which are reflected on the change log on the commission’s website. In addition, there are a few additional stations that received extensions beyond July 13 but those will be completed soon and they do not implicate the 600 MHz band."

The FCC has given that last half-dozen stations until early September to complete their transitions because they do not implicate the spectrum bought by carriers, so the July 13 deadline for turning over the spectrum is still met. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai pointed out Monday (July 13) that they did not implicate that carrier spectrum because the channels were either in spectrum broadcasters are retaining or they were in the duplex gap, which is "buffer" spectrum.

So, as the FCC put it: "[A]ll of the valuable low-band airwaves sold in the ground-breaking broadcast incentive auction are now available for wireless mobile broadband services," as of July 13, which they said was the key deadline, and the one that was met.

But FCC officials added that they knew the job was not yet done until all stations, including some 15% of the 987-station total on temporary channels, were in new permanent homes, something the National Association of Broadcasters seconded in marking the July 13 deadline.

WASHINGTON—After 39 months, the FCC has announced that the post-incentive auction transition, which saw many TV stations take part in the repack from their pre-auction channels, has been successfully completed.

As of July 13, the 600 MHz spectrum that the TV stations have vacated and was sold during the broadcast incentive auction is now available for use by wireless mobile broadband services. 

This comes 10 days after phase 10 of the repack was scheduled to conclude on July 3. During the repack, 987 full-power and Class A TV stations were reassigned to new TV channels. To date, the commission says that 99% of those stations have successfully transitioned; those that have not yet made the move were granted short extensions due to unforeseen circumstances, but are still scheduled to complete the repack by the end of the summer. These remaining stations are currently located in the portion of the band allocated for broadcast TV or the duplex gap, and none are expected to delay the deployment of wireless services in the 600 MHz band.

PLUS: FCC Marks Complicated TV Station Repack Deadline(s)

The FCC will continue to work with stations on distributing their reimbursements for relocation expenses from the $2.75 billion TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund.

With the now available spectrum, the FCC says millions of Americans will benefit as it will now be used for the development and promotion of 5G, to help close the digital divide in rural America, ease congestion on wireless networks and spur job creation and economic growth.

“Today represents a milestone in the commission’s effort to repurpose spectrum to meet the demands of wireless consumers,” said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. “I want to thank the broadcast and wireless industries, the tower crews, the equipment manufacturers and the radio frequency engineers who support them for the hard work they have done over the past 39 months to make the benefits of the broadcast incentive auction a reality.”

The National Association of Broadcasters’ President and CEO Gordon Smith also provided a statement on the official end of the repack:

“I am incredibly proud of the broadcast television industry for its herculean efforts to meet the FCC’s aggressive repacking deadlines, despite complex and extenuating circumstances.

“NAB thanks the FCC staff for their flexibility in working with stations to facilitate transitions and grant extensions when possible. We are also grateful to Congress for allocating the additional funds needed to fully reimburse broadcasters for costs associated with these mandatory moves.

“There is still much work to be done. To meet FCC deadlines, many stations have been required to operate on temporary facilities that do not serve all station viewers. NAB will continue to work with the FCC to ensure that these stations are made whole and that affected viewers regain access to their local channels.

“In this uncertain time, it is vital that TV viewers have access to local news, entertainment and lifeline information.”

WASHINGTON—Phase 10 of the FCC’s TV spectrum repack that saw nearly 1,000 full-power and Class A television stations changing channel assignments ended July 3, bringing to a close the 39-month project—sort of.

Some stations, such as WFOX-TV, the Cox Television station licensed to Jacksonville, Fla., received an extension from the FCC to delay completion of their moves. Many others, especially stations in Phases 9 and 10 completed their move using interim facilities and side-mount antennas.

A review of the FCC’s Licensing and Management Systems reveals more than 40 requests for technical-related Special Temporary Authority (STA) by or on behalf of Full-Service Television licensees to operate from interim facilities, with reduced or alternate parameters (i.e. lower power), or with some other variance to enable stations to stay on air while awaiting installation and commissioning of their final facilities.

Some distributed Transmission Service broadcasters and Class A stations filed similar requests for STAs but in fewer numbers, according to the FCC’s LMS records.

STAs were “an effective tool” in enabling the repack to stay on schedule, says Brett Jenkins, CTO of Nexstar, the nation’s largest commercial broadcaster. Jenkins estimates that as many as 90% of the more than 100 TV stations the group repacked relied on interim facilities to stay on air while permanent antennas, waveguide and transmitters were installed.

“Were we happy about operating at lower heights and lower powers? Probably not,” says Jenkins. “But I think in most cases we were able to find adequate designs that would come reasonably close to replicating coverage. We tried not to disenfranchise the over-the-air viewer as much as possible.”

Joe Davis, a consulting engineer and president of Chesapeake RF Consultants, says most of the 120 stations he worked with on the repack relied on STAs to operate from interim facilities at some point—often to sidestep a shortage of tower crews to remove old antennas and transmission lines and install new ones.

“We were short on tower crews and that has aggravated the situation with the final operations,” says Davis, who co-authored the 2013 Widelity Report looking at the anticipated challenges and costs of the repack. “I have clients who were able to get their tower crew and install their interim antenna, and they were able to affect the cut-over with that, but then they had to wait for that crew or another crew to come back and do the final antenna.”

While viewers in the fringe of coverage may have suffered, broadcasters and consultants interviewed for this article report that operations from interim facilities effectively covered viewers in their stations’ DMAs or those of their clients.

Further, the repack gave broadcasters an opportunity to maximize coverage from their permanent facilities, meaning that in the long run viewers will be better off than they were prior to the repack.  

“In all cases, we tried to maximize our clients’ coverage area because their pre-transition facility may have been boxed in on an existing frequency,” says Ryan Wilhour, consulting engineer at Kessler and Gehman Engineering Associates.

“But the whole world got shook up. Everything got shuffled, so there were new opportunities. I would say that is a gain in the market for everybody, especially in rural areas.”

Longer-term, the most important effect of the repack may be how it positions stations to launch ATSC 3.0 service at some point in the future. While qualifying repack expense reimbursement requests were limited to like technology, many stations chose to pay up-charges to add capabilities, such as vertical or elliptical polarization to their new antennas, that better position them for NextGen TV service. Many also replaced tube transmitters with modern solid state models with software upgradeable exciters that can easily be converted to 3.0.

Gray Television is among the broadcasters that used the repack as an opportunity to get ready for 3.0, says Robert Folliard III, senior vice president, Government Relations & Distribution at the station group. “Absolutely [the repack was a chance to prepare for 3.0]. That was part of the strategy,” he says. 

“As soon as we were given our repack assignments and told which stations had to do what and when, the very next question was how can we make this better? How do we future-proof this? What else can we do with this?” he says.

While the scope and demanding schedule of the repack caused many in the broadcast industry to be skeptical of the undertaking, overall the effort has been a success, says Jenkins.

“My hat’s off and thanks to the FCC Media Bureau because I think this really could have been a disaster had they not had some ability to be flexible, extend certain deadlines [and] move stations from one phase to another,” says Jenkins. “I think the flexibility, the liberal use of granting STAs, all of those tools I think made this happen.” 

WASHINGTON—WFOX-TV, a Cox Television licensee in Jacksonville, Fla., has been granted an extension to complete its repack transition due to “circumstances beyond the station’s control” by the FCC in a unanimous vote.

WFOX-TV, which had an original post-incentive auction broadcast transition deadline of July 3, now has until Sept. 8 to complete its transition process.

The FCC says the station needs additional time to resolve interference concerns with land mobile operations on its new channel. Had the extension not been granted, the commission says that WFOX-TV would have gone off the air, which would have left its community without its station programming during the coronavirus pandemic still ongoing.

According to the FCC, this extension will not delay the transition of any other station. In addition, because WFOX-TV’s current channel is below 37, it will also not slow the delivery of new 600 MHz wireless broadband to consumers.

PLUS: Repack Heads Into the Home Stretch

Jean Kiddo, chair of the Incentive Auction Task Force, said that more than 90% of the 987 TV stations affected by the repack have vacated their pre-auction channels over the last three years. “Indeed, even during a global pandemic that caused some temporary work stoppages over the last few months, many TV stations have been able to successfully meet their transition deadlines, and we anticipate that the vast majority of remaining television stations will meet their July 3 deadline,” Kiddo added.

The July 3 deadline was supposed to mark the end of the 10-phase repack plan. The FCC said that there are 92 stations that still need to make the transition, but that it only expects a few other short extensions based on unforeseeable circumstances, like WFOX-TV.

As the channel repack enters its final segment—Phase 10—broadcasters are facing some unexpected headwinds in the form of the coronavirus pandemic. In March, the FCC announced that it would give those broadcasters who had not met the May 1 deadline to complete their repack in Phase 9, the opportunity to extend their project into Phase 10—the final phase—which began May 2 and is scheduled to end July 3.

As one of the most complex and time-sensitive projects ever undertaken by U.S. broadcasters, nearly 1,000 TV stations are involved in moving their channels to make way for the 600 MHz spectrum that was auctioned off several years ago, to be taken over by the wireless carriers who obtained the winning bids. But it’s not only TV stations that have been affected, it’s also impacting other tenants on the towers, including FM radio stations. 

TV Technology recently sat down with Anthony Flores, owner of AFF Consulting, who has spent the large part of the last several years working with broadcasters on repack projects. Here is an edited transcript:

TV Technology: Welcome Tony, can you give us some background about yourself?

Anthony Flores: I’ve been an independent contractor since 2007, prior to that I worked for Richland Towers. I was also with AT&T as a director of site development. I’ve been in the business since 1987 doing either cellular wireless and since 1997 on, mostly broadcast. 

I understand the whole process of going from concept design to on the air, it’s helped me fill niches wherever they are. I’ve also worked for tower companies as well as some TV and radio broadcasters.

TVT: How were things going with your work on the repack prior to March?

AF: Pretty busy. As the repack started to ramp up a few years ago, it was obvious to a lot of broadcasters that they didn’t have the internal resources needed for various necessary tasks. For some groups it was engineering and administrative tasks such as RF and structural engineering, planning and design, and entitlement/ permits  to get their projects out of the chute. Some broadcasters needed construction management assistance. They wanted people to manage the field effort to get things done, to get the tower modifications, antennas and transmitters changed out. I’ve pretty much assisted with all of the above. 

A lot of groups have been very organized and were looking down the road a lot further so they were working towards all of these tasks much earlier in the process. Some  planned to install and use a broadband standby system capable of both their existing and new channel. They worked to have these in place prior to their Phased transition date. Then, they would replace their main antennas at a time that worked for that station. Some elected to go on their standby systems to maintain their current channels while they put all their new channels top-mounted or main systems in place and then cut over to those after the transition dates. They would then go back after the transition and replace their standby antennas.

There were the other groups that were a little less organized or maybe didn’t have all the funding they needed. Those groups struggled to do the best they could. Some made their transition just in time and some did not. 

The push here at the end has been somewhat of a challenge just because of the nature of the repack: Not having enough resources across the board, be it transmitters, antennas, installers, tower contractors, structural engineers, etc. Those who felt it could be done as quickly as they originally thought may not have understood all of the complexities or didn't quite understand the scope of what it took to fulfill the requests. 

So, given that there were already a lot of challenges, go ahead and throw in this pandemic at the last minute and that didn't help. 

PLUS: LPTVS to Receive 85% of Repack Reimbursement ASAP, Says FCC

TVT: How much of the problem would you attribute to lack of planning as opposed to not being aware that something like this pandemic could have an impact?

AF: How can you be ready for a global pandemic? You already have a lot of headwind and you're already going uphill. Now throw on this 500 pound weight and that's all it took to make a difficult situation worse. 

For example, you’re working on a building permit, things are pretty much moving along to your planned schedule. Then the pandemic hits. Due to some state or county shelter-in-place orders, some jurisdictions cut their office hours or their staff was sent to work from home. Now your planned schedule doubles or triples. What may have taken four to six weeks now can take eight to 12 weeks or longer. 

That’s just on the regulatory side. On the field resource side, some vendors and contractors were concerned about employee safety. Whether on the manufacturing floor or in the field, evaluations had to be made to determine whether to keep working or suspend operations until they could understand how the virus might impact them. 

That’s on the repack side of things. Then there's the rest of the broadcast business already working and operating. The broadcasters that have nothing to do with repack rely on many of those same resources to help them every day, whether it’s normal maintenance, or an emergency. Some of these broadcast resources have long-term relationships with these broadcasters and they're doing their best to squeeze them into the already difficult workload. 

All of the above doesn’t even consider the weather. During the 2018-2019 winter, we had problems—we had either incredible rain or wind events that stopped construction completely or increased the work schedule by weeks. That, of course, had a domino effect on other project schedules into spring and summer. 

All of those realistic real world things happen, repack or not—they happen with any major undertaking. To expect to be able to move almost 1,000 TV stations in 36 months was more optimistic than realistic. So whether it was phase 9, 8, 6 or 3, it started off with a challenge and never really got better. 

Regardless, coming into phase 9, with some Herculean efforts, the dedicated vendors and contractors made it happen. I think most of the stations—at least the ones I was involved with—were successful. 

TVT: Do you agree with the FCC's assessment that the repack is on schedule?

AF: That's a subjective question—”On schedule according to what?” On schedule that someone gave up that channel when they were supposed to? Perhaps that's correct. That they're hobbling by on some less than optimum antenna and have lost significant coverage in their market? I think that you’ll find a number of those cases. 

And now, broadcasters that are trying to complete phase 10 or complete their transition by installing a new antenna or transmitter are finding that the resource pool has been encumbered by a pandemic. They have to ask themselves: Is it safe to go into New York or Baltimore? That becomes part of a tower contractors’ job: safety analysis, just like climbing a tower, is it safe to climb? Now, we have to ask whether it is safe for me to put six guys into a market where they might be exposed.

Some care and some, not as much. Regardless, I’m sure no one wants to get sick or bring something home to a family member or significant other, 

TVT: Which has been the bigger problem during this pandemic, is it the logistics or have there been shortages of tower crews? 

AF: It's a little of both. There was always a shortage of resources, that was a given from the start. 

We made our way into phase 9 without a pandemic or at least that burden, but we were already scrambling to get things to happen. While the pandemic may not have stopped things, it certainly slowed things down even more because people were becoming a little more tentative—“how do I get my crews there, are there any hotels open, what's the protocol?” 

And now I have to set up another level of training for my people to make sure they stay healthy and what are all the ramifications if somebody gets sick, So there was kind of a “pumping of the brakes” if you will, with all the vendors and contractors.

TVT: Are you finding out that even for those people who are planning ahead, the fact that there's no personnel at city hall anymore and that people are scattered is a problem? It can’t all be done online right?

My office is in Northern California and I always try to do as much as I can online but there are jurisdictions that just aren’t as sophisticated or set up to do that and they require somebody in person. I'm on a plane going to that market or I have a local associate that I can work with to be my arms and legs in that market. 

And it still requires me to physically see somebody else, and yes, when all of the shelter-in-place orders started to occur in different places, some jurisdictions were very quick to say, “we need some time to figure this out and see if we can switch to a more remote process.” 

TVT: Do you think the deadline will be extended beyond July?

AF: I don't think so. I know, on the other side, the new spectrum licensees, obviously, are very anxious to get that 600 MHz deployed. And I get that, I understand because especially now, the cellular networks are being taxed in a way that they weren't before. 

The auction was a big big deal for some of these guys and they had already started to deploy the 600 MHz. They can't just turn it on, they have to wait for this guy to turn it off before they can turn it on. 

Some have been very supportive, willing to help and offer more resources to assist. They want to have that spectrum as soon as possible and now especially because with the pandemic. Network use profiles have changed. Network demand has shifted from the cities and office parks to more residential areas where they have less network capabilities. 

When you take an undertaking like this, no one has a crystal ball, but looking back, there may have been more optimism than the resource pool could support. I don't know where those assumptions came from, but that’s not unusual, I run into that all the time. 

I think all in all, everyone’s done a remarkable job and the guys still left to cross the finish line will be close, even with Covid. There may be some delays because of Covid and perhaps, for maybe the next year or so, some projects to get things optimized. 

WASHINGTON—Low power TV stations (LPTVs) can start seeing their repack reimbursement payments soon, as the FCC has announced that it is making 85% of the funds—which comes out to more than $87 million—available to eligible stations immediately.

In 2018, Congress approved $150 million for reimbursement of LPTV/translator station costs incurred during the repack transition process. There were 947 LPTV/translator stations that applied to be considered eligible for reimbursement funds, of which upon review by the Fund Administrator 844 were deemed eligible.

The eligible stations estimated that reimbursement would come out to $143,633,411. After review of those estimates by the Fund Administrator, a verified estimate of $102,437,198 was set for repack reimbursement. With the FCC’s decision to make 85% available immediately, the current available funds total $87,071,619.

Full power stations and MVPDs also received a portion of its reimbursement funds at the onset, but in that case it was 52% (62% for noncommercial stations). The FCC says it is helping stations avoid undue financial burden by having funds available right away, but acknowledges that it could revise the initial cost estimates if additional allocations are warranted.

“We believe it is important to make an initial allocation promptly and without waiting for greater visibility into any future changes so that LPTV/translator stations can begin to be reimbursed for their expenses, which in some cases have already been incurred,” wrote the FCC. “However, the existence of these upward pressures and consideration of the total $150 million designated for LPTV/translator means that we also need to take appropriate measures to avoid the need for future allocation reductions and claw-backs and assure that we allocate funds fairly and consistently across all eligible LPTV/translator stations.”

Each eligible station is set to receive a direct email that describes the precise allocation and the estimates that it was based on. Stations can also immediately begin to submit documentation of the actual expenses incurred for approval to be drawn down against their individual allocation.

More information on the reimbursement process is available by contacting Reimburse@fcc.gov.  

KANSAS CITY, Mo.—Low-power television stations and TV translators looking to be reimbursed for expenses associated with the FCC’s repack of television spectrum rejoice. The numbers, as of today, show you will be reimbursed for 100% of your eligible expenses.

That’s the preliminary assessment of Tony zumMallen, president of QComm, a Lee’s Summit, Mo. -based engineering, project management and installation vendor that is specializing in the repack.

“The maximum allocated by Congress for LPTV and TV translator stations has always been $150 million,” says zumMallen. “As of Feb. 19, the dollars potentially used for repack expenses is $138 million. If you divide that into $150 million, you’re at 100%.”

To arrive at this and other repack-related numbers, zumMallen’s company has regularly combed through the FCC’s License and Management System since Nov. 14, 2019, the deadline for LPTV and TV translators to submit documentation to prove expense reimbursement eligibility and request specific dollar amounts.

“We have been grabbing the data and the numbers people have submitted and tallying them up,” he says.

As of Feb. 19, QComm’s total shows that of the 925 reimbursement applications submitted by LPTV stations, the FCC has determined that 785 are eligible for reimbursement and 113 are not. The eligibility of 27 others has yet to be determined.

“That’s fantastic news, when everyone thought before the process started that expense reimbursement would probably be in the range of 50% to 70%,” he says.

Of course, zumMallen’s assessment comes with a few caveats. For instance, the process has not yet been completed, and requests must be reasonable. “They can’t be for a Ferrari. It has to be a transmitter,” he says with a laugh.

But he adds there is nothing funny about the seriousness of this process and the expense reimbursements for LPTV stations and TV translators, many of which are shoestring operations.

“So, mom and pops won’t have to come up with $100,000 or more,” he says. “Potentially, they will have to come up with nothing. Merry Christmas!”

Monitoring the reimbursement filings in the LMS has revealed a few other interesting facts. For example, the smallest amount requested is $872, while the largest is $2.2 million. QComm also has found that 600 stations account for about $75 million in reimbursement requests, he says.

The QComm president recommends that stations notified by the FCC of their ineligibility should continue to pursue reimbursement if given the opportunity to modify their showing.

“The FCC has been very good to work with on this,” he says. “If there is a question about what you submitted, you will receive an email from the FCC saying: ‘Based on the information you provided, we find you to be ineligible’ and here are the reasons why.”

Frequently the agency will give stations 10 days to provide the information requested, which could flip a filer from ineligible to eligible. “They basically spell it out for you. If you provide this information, they will find you eligible.”

The agency should be commended for the way it has worked with LPTV stations and TV translators on the reimbursement of repack expenses, he says.

“Our experience is they are not looking to find any and every way that you are ineligible. It’s the exact opposite,” says zumMallen. “We have worked with a lot of these television stations that are low power and translators, and we have not had a negative comment.”

Working with the station’s lawyer or consulting engineer could prove worthwhile if it means producing the documentation needed to qualify for reimbursement, he says.

“I wouldn’t just take the FCC’s email and say, ‘Oh, well, we’re not eligible,’” says zumMallen.

QComm can be reached via its website.

RAYMOND, Maine—As the spectrum repack continues, Dielectric has announced that it is supporting three Maine stations in Phase 8, with one recently completed for WMEA-DT, a Maine Public Broadcasting Corporation station.

Using Dielectric antennas to deliver over-the-air PBS stations, WMEA-DT in Biddeford, Maine, has completed its repack transition from UHF Channel 45 to Channel 36; it’s official switchover is scheduled for March 11. Dielectric also provided a system that would support a large power increase, nearly triple the station’s previous TPO—50,000 to 149,000 Watts—according to Dielectric.

Installation took place in November, with WMEA purchasing Dielectric’s TLP-12E side-mounted auxiliary antenna, which will serve as a temporary Channel 45 up to March 11. Dielectric worked with WMEA-DT to design an antenna system that used its same directional pattern on a different frequency.

As of the March 11 transition, WMEA will operate from a Dielectric TFU Series UHF end-fed antenna, with vertical polarization. When installed the antenna was connected to an existing Dielectric digiTLine rigid transmission line that will be re-usable for Channel 36. The stations also installed a new Dielectric mask filter and a new transmitter.

In addition, the TFU antenna is equipped with a non-pressurized, protective radome to deal with the weather elements.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The repack is approaching the home stretch, according to the latest update provided by the FCC that details that 697 of 987 repacked stations have moved from their pre-auction channel (71%).

Those numbers, included in a FCC report from Dec. 9, were accurate as of Dec. 6.

In addition to the nearly 700 hundred stations that have made their move to their new channel, the FCC says it anticipates about another 80 stations in Phase 7 will make their transition be the phase completion date of Jan. 17, 2020. There are 10 total phases scheduled to complete the repack, with the current date for completion of Phase 10 set for July 3, 2020.

“We are optimistic that the stations in the last three phases will similarly be able to meet their phase completion dates. We will continue to monitor and work with those stations to ensure the continued success of the Transition Scheduling Plan,” the report read.

Of the 697 stations that have moved off their previous channel, the FCC says that 79% have fully completed their transition to permanent facilities as of Dec. 6. The remaining 21% of stations have been granted permission to operate on an interim basis at variance from what was agreed to in their post-auction construction permit.

The FCC also updated its cost estimates from full power, Class and MVPD stations. Initially, estimates were more than $2.1 billion for all stations, but as of Dec. 6 the estimates for all stations totaled $1,951,302,007. To date, the FCC says it has reimbursed $886,033,437 to stations—$860,144,147 to full power TV stations; $25,664,778 to Class A stations; and $224,512 to MVPDs.

The commission also noted that it has helped educate consumers needing to rescan their over-the-air TVs to find the repacked channels. It reports that its FCC.gov/TVrescan webpage has received 2.1 million hits since launching in 2018. It has also issued radio and print ads, and launched a dedicated call center in 2019.

There are some in the industry, however, who question whether or not the repack can be fully completed in the timeline laid out by the FCC.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The FCC Media Bureau announced the opening of a filing window to resolve the state of new rural digital LPTV stations left in a limbo created by the TV spectrum incentive auction and repack.

Qualifying new, rural LPTV stations have between now and Jan. 31, 2020, at 11:59 p.m. EDT to amend pending applications to specify a new channel between 2 and 36.

These stations originally filed to be licensed as new rural digital LPTV or translator stations after the Media Bureau began accepting applications for this service in 2009. However, the FCC froze those applications as the agency moved forward with the incentive auction and spectrum repack.

According to a Media Bureau public notice, “it is appropriate to give these applicants an opportunity to amend their applications to specify a new digital in core channel” now that the auction is completed.

To qualify to amend an application, applicants must have a pending application for a new digital LPTV/translator station displaced by the incentive auction and repack.

The bureau has set up three criteria to be considered “displaced,” one of which must be met to be eligible. They include:

• being subject to a displacement by a full-power or Class A TV station on the repacked TV band resulting from the incentive auction;
• having proposed a frequency repurposed for new, flexible use by a 600 MHz band wireless licensee; or
• having proposed a frequency that will be used as part of the 600 MHz guard band.

Besides amending applications to specify a new in core channel, applicants have the option to modify technical specifications submitted as part of the original application as long as the changes don’t include a relocation of a transmitter site more than 48 kilometers (29.825 miles) from the reference coordinates originally submitted, the bureau said.

Further, transmitting antenna site coordinates must be more than 121 kilometers (75 miles) from the reference coordinates of DMA 1-100 markets. (The north latitude and west longitude of each of these markets is provided in Appendix A of the notice.)

The bureau will treat the application amendments of qualifying stations, filed in compliance with the restrictions outlined in the notice, as “minor” amendments. The agency will not charge a fee to file an application amendment, the bureau said.

The Media Bureau also laid out procedures for how mutually exclusive applications will be resolved in the notice.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

CINCINNATI—GatesAir announced it shipped its 400th transmitter to stations affected by the TV spectrum repack in October and anticipates it will pass 500 by the end of the year.

To date, it has shipped 17,000 power amplifiers, or more than 11.2 Megawatts for transmission power, it said. Further, 60% of the equipment shipped has been installed and is now on the air.

“GatesAir has successfully met all shipping deadlines thanks to detailed capacity planning, resulting in key manufacturing initiatives to handle the volume,” says Bryant Burke, vice president of Operations, GatesAir. “I’m very proud of the work our team has done. Many of our shipments are well ahead of the customer phase requirements, which reduces uncertainty around planning.”

Only a handful of higher power repack orders remain to be filled, said GatesAir CEO Bruce Swail, adding that the company will now pivot to meeting the needs of low-power television broadcasters affected by the repack.

GatesAir has expanded its range of LPTV transmitters. More than 2,000 stations are being displaced by the channel reassignment of full-power broadcasters in repack phases 0 through 10, the company noted. The filing period for LPTV broadcasters is underway and will continue through the middle of the month.

More information is available on the GatesAir website.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—Ever since the use of wireless microphone technology exploded several decades ago, virtually all TV broadcasters—large and small—“cut the cable,” deploying wireless mics both in the field and in the studio. Ditto with live music, Broadway and Hollywood adopting wireless mics for sound reinforcement and motion picture production.

Paradoxically, as the popularity and use of these devices has risen, the amount of permissible spectrum for their deployment continues to shrink, beginning with the TV channel repack 10 years ago, which made the 800 MHz spectrum “off-limits,” and continuing today with the cap being lowered to 608 MHz.

The FCC issued a “heads-up” notice addressing this as the most recent TV spectrum auctions were ending, advising that wireless mics could still be used in 600 MHz spectrum as long as there was no interference to TV broadcasters or wireless broadband operations. The commission also established a firm “line in the sand” deadline of July 13, 2020, for a complete cessation of wireless mic operations in the 600 MHz spectrum deeded over to the telecoms.

WILL THERE BE ANY ‘WHITE SPACES’ LEFT?

With the deadline less than a year away, like broadcasters, wireless mic users face the loss of more than 80 MHz in the region between 608 and 692 MHz where mics had been allowed to operate (minus, of course, spectrum occupied by TV stations that were operating in that range). This lost chunk of spectrum is in addition to the 100 MHz or so that was reallocated for wireless broadband use when TV channels 52 to 69 “went away” in the aftermath of the 2009 transition to DTV.

The FCC is still allowing unlicensed wireless mic operation on any unoccupied UHF (or VHF) TV channel, but the gotcha is that with the current consolidation of stations into an even smaller neighborhood, there are fewer and fewer unoccupied channels anymore, especially in metropolitan areas—where the great majority of wireless mic users are found.

Admittedly, a wireless mic requires a lot less operational spectrum than a TV station, but users are feeling the pinch nonetheless.

“The reallocation of the UHF Band for mobile and other services is the single largest regulatory challenge that has faced the wireless microphone industry globally,” said Mark Brunner, vice president of corporate and government relations at Shure. “Reduction of TV band spectrum has occurred while demand by productions for wireless microphones and related pro audio equipment has steadily increased. The TV spectrum has been the primary home for wireless microphones since the beginning, and this spectrum is ideally suited to the RF performance characteristics desired by technical crews.”

Karl Winkler, vice president of sales and marketing at Lectrosonics, echoed Brunner’s observations.

“The popularity and utility of wireless microphones has not waned at all despite the loss of a significant portion of the spectrum,” he said. “The convenience, freedom of set design and movement, and the ability to rapidly respond to evolving news situations have all contributed to this popularity. Thus, the loss of spectrum has forced the industry to respond with newer technologies and features, along with the need to offer assistance to customers who have been displaced.”

Winkler noted that this assistance has been in the form of rebates, trade-ins, special pricing and other incentives being offered by wireless mic manufacturers, and observed that while broadcasters were being compensated for the changes forced by the reduction in spectrum, this was not the case with mic users.

“The government has not offered any compensation for wireless users the way they have for broadcasters to repack or go off the air,” he said.

Joe Ciaudelli, director of spectrum affairs within Sennheiser’s Research and Innovation division, also weighed in on the issue.

“The repurposing of spectrum from traditional over-the-air broadcast to mobile broadband is an issue of distribution of content,” said Ciaudelli. “It slices the distribution ‘pie’ into smaller slices. Conversely, the content creation ‘pie,’ which requires wireless microphones and similar devices, continues to experience exponential growth. Furthermore, productions continue to advance in technical sophistication.”

This has put engineers in a very difficult position, according to Ciaudelli.

“Many producers and directors don’t know the details of the spectrum crunch and regulatory changes,” he said. “They understandably are focused on nontechnical aspects of the production. They just expect the engineers to make it work, without realizing the magnitude of the challenge the engineers face.”

JUST HOW BAD IS THE PROBLEM?

While an exact headcount of wireless microphones, IFB systems and beltpack intercoms in the United States isn’t available, James Stoffo, the chief technology officer at wireless intercom manufacturer Radio Active Designs, offered what he believes to be a good working estimate of the number of such systems that are now competing for spectrum.

“My partner Geoff Shearing and I went to the FCC on multiple occasions on behalf of the broadcast and production communities, and tried to enlighten them as to how many wireless microphones and intercoms were out in the United States,” said Stoffo. “When we first went, the FCC thought there were less than 1,000 wireless in the entire country. Actually, at that time there were closer to 2.5 million devices, and that caused a couple of jaws to drop.”

Stoffo, who has been in the wireless business since the 1980s, and has served as RF coordinator for numerous large events for years, noted that even three decades ago the number of wireless systems in use was close to 2 million and has been growing steadily.

“At the NBC studios in New York, in one building there are probably 500 devices,” he said. “In Broadway theaters—in just a three-block radius—there are probably 1,500 wireless devices. And in Disney World alone there are almost 2,000 devices.”

Obviously, the diminishing spectrum for these devices is a huge issue and one that is not going to go away. So, with the loss of the 600 MHz TV channels, can there still be a “business as usual” attitude among users?

THE SHOW MAY STILL GO ON, BUT NOT WITHOUT CAREFUL PLANNING

Jim Dugan, president of wireless microphone company Wisycom USA and Jetwave Wireless, a firm that specializes in wireless technology deployment, has been involved in many large-scale wireless system deployments during his three decades in the business. These include ABC’s “Dick Clark’s New Year’s Rocking Eve” Times Square broadcast, along with many other big-ticket sporting and music events, Presidential inaugurals and more. He was asked about the prospects of being able to “go wireless” at future events, given the contracting spectrum situation.

“It’s all about coordination,” said Dugan, pointing out that he acts, on a volunteer basis in conjunction with the local Society of Broadcast Engineers, as frequency coordinator for special events in Washington, D.C., and also works to coordinate wireless device use for many of the really big events just mentioned.

Dugan cites the most recent NHL All-Star game as a good example of the challenges of frequency coordination.

“There were 500 frequencies in coordination—really a lot of stuff going on,” he said. “We’re in the process of revisiting this whole usage and coordination model right now. I’m also involved in coordinating the New Year’s Eve Time Square broadcast origination. This is really big—ABC does a show, NBC does a show, Fox does a show, CNN does a show. Then there are the international broadcasters who will be there, plus all the musical acts that play at 45th Street—this will be a separate remote for ABC.

“During the past several years we’ve been looking at six TV networks with probably 500 wireless mics,” Dugan added. “There have also been maybe 10 wireless cameras in use too, along with the thousands of people with their cell phones generating RF noise. This is a really good test of the technology.”

Dugan starts notifying the networks in October, but adds that once the coordination plan was established it has pretty much stayed the same over the years.

“This year may be different,” Dugan said. “Due to the repack, we are going to be re-evaluating what’s doable and what’s not within the remaining spectrum.”

EDUCATION IS KEY

Loss of spectrum because of the repack is not the biggest problem facing the wireless mic arena, however, according to Dugan.

“I think it’s spectral efficiency and spectrum management [band planning],” he said. “This problem shows up differently for different verticals. If you’re an ENG operator you want to have 20 or 30 MHz between transmit and receive frequencies for talent. In broadcasting bigger installations, band planning is very important. A lot of people turn these things on and don’t realize that they interact.

“I tend to look at everything in terms of inbound and outbound frequencies,” he added. “People seem to understand this the least. There’s really a big gap in the understanding of ‘best practices’ by a lot of operators t there. It can’t be a situation anymore where ‘planning’ is accomplished by just issuing a purchase order for wireless mic equipment.”

While it appears that post-repack wireless mic usage can continue—along with over-the-air TV broadcasting—there will be fewer and fewer parking slots. This just might be a good time to check out your old tried-and-true corded microphones and cable sets to make sure they’re serviceable, just in case the wireless broadband folks start eyeing some of those remaining parking places.

So, What Exactly Is Left Spectrum-Wise?

With the UHF spectrum above Ch. 36 (602-608 MHz) fast becoming “verboten,” just where can wireless mics, wireless IFB systems and beltpack intercoms operate?

According to the FCC, this depends. Rules allow such unlicensed devices to freely navigate both the VHF and (remaining) UHF spectrum, provided there is no licensed entity operating there. With the repack forcing some very close channel adjacencies, and even movement from UHF down to low VHF slots (there will even be 11 stations operating on Ch. 2 when the dust settles, according to www.rabbitears.info), broadcast spectrum that might be used for wireless mics and similar devices seems to be in short supply, especially in larger markets.

The FCC, in a recently-issued bulletin (“Operation of Wireless Microphones”) rather optimistically states:

“Many frequencies in the TV bands that had been available for wireless microphone use prior to the auction will continue to be available after the transition period.”

Notwithstanding the reality of the highly-compacted post-repack spectrum, there is a glimmer of hope that operation of these devices will still be permitted above 608 MHz within “certain frequencies” in both the wireless broadband’s 614–616 MHz “guard band” (just above TV Ch. 37) and in its “duplex gap” (657–663 MHz for unlicensed mics) and (653–657 MHz) for licensed devices. However, the commission’s memorandum does not specify what the “certain frequencies” may be. (Definitely off-limits are the 617–652 MHz and 663–698 MHz regions.)

The Commission also requires that anyone selling or leasing wireless mic gear capable of operation in these latter two spectrum blocks must inform customers that they “must cease operating on these frequencies no later than July 13, 2020.” It goes on to say that this “sunsetting” may even take place sooner if interference to licensed services (those of wireless broadband providers) occurs.

The FCC memorandum also recognizes some “bands outside the TV bands for wireless microphone use.” Specifically, these are the 169–172 MHz region, some 900 MHz spectrum, as well as 1,435–1,525 MHz in the UHF band, and 6,875–7,125 MHz in the SHF (super high frequency) microwave region. A license is required to “fire up” a wireless device operating on any of the frequencies in these ranges, however, this may not be the easiest thing to get unless you belong to a certain group.

This is spelled out clearly in FCC rules dealing with low-power auxiliary stations (LPAS) licensing and operation, with only large entities such as TV and motion picture production companies, cable TV operators, performance venues or professional sound reinforcement companies that “routinely use 50 or more” such low power devices eligible for a license.

If you don’t fall into this group of “super users,” the commission also sanctions wireless mic operation in some other spectrum blocks, but these are shared, and are not always the best neighborhoods. They include 902–928 MHz (also referred to as the 33-centimeter band), and 1,920–1,930 MHz, along with some additional territory in the microwave region (portions of the 2.4 gHz and 5 gHz spectrum bands.)

If you opt for 33-centimeter spectrum, you’ll be sharing it with industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) RF equipment users, as well as radio amateurs. The 1,920–1,930 MHz block is shared with licensed “Fixed and Mobile” users, as well as some cordless telephones. Also, the commission forbids the plunking down of conventional FM wireless mics (or other communication devices) in this region. As it’s shared, any unlicensed device must perform continuous monitoring and only produce RF where no other signal is detected, which requires a specialized class of wireless mics. You’re also going to have some company in the 2.4 gHz and 5 gHz regions too, with such things as ISM devices, cordless phones, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth transmitters, and even garage door openers and microwave ovens vying for spectrum.

(Note: The spectrum usage information is only a summary of applicable FCC rules and regulations, and is not intended to replace careful reading and observance of the complete rule set. For detailed information on wireless mic operation, refer to the FCC’s 15-100 “Report And Order,” which was released Aug. 11, 2015.)

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

TV Technology contacted the FCC’s Office of Media Relations for their input Oct 15, two days prior to Chairman Pai’s statement to the Senate Financial Services Subcommittee. The following statement was issued by Neil Derek Grace, Senior Communications Advisor, FCC:

“The broadcast repack is progressing as designed and is right on schedule. Overall, the number of stations that moved off their pre-auction channel in the first few phases of the transition schedule was actually ahead of the number of stations we planned to have completed because a number of stations asked to move earlier than their originally planned transition date. As of today, of the total 987 stations included in the 39-month Transition Scheduling Plan, 546 have already moved off their pre-auction channel. This is fully consistent with the number of transitioned stations anticipated when the Plan was prepared at the beginning of the transition period. With the end of Phase 6 scheduled at the end of this week we anticipate that number will increase by another 100 plus stations.

The transition scheduling plan anticipated resource constraints, weather impacts, and other factors, and includes flexibility to work with individual stations that face unforeseen challenges on a case-by-case basis to adjust requirements in a manner that does not negatively impact the overall transition scheduling plan. We’ve worked with stations who needed to implement interim measures or move to a later phase as a result of unforeseen delays. As of today, we’ve granted over 190 phase changes, moving some stations to earlier phases and some to later phases. We have also granted special temporary authority to operate a variance to many stations and extended construction permit deadlines. We moved the deadline five days later for all Phase 5 stations phase to assure that viewers would not be required to rescan their TVs during Hurricane Dorian and risk missing important emergency news and information. We anticipate that all stations will transition by the end of the transition period, July 3, 2020. If individual stations face challenges completing their permanent postauction facilities, we will continue to work with them as we have throughout the transition by applying the flexibility included in the overall plan.

Background

• Our data shows that 423 of the transitioned stations are operating on their new channel without any variance, which is more than 77% of the total transitioned stations. It is not accurate in many cases to equate interim facilities with poor coverage or with transition delays. Some stations that have not entirely completed their construction may be using interim facilities with little or no decreased coverage or population loss but instead closely match their permitted facilities. Some station’s interim facilities have coverage that is better than the station’s pre-repack facilities and the remaining work to be done is to complete post-auction maximization. Some stations have loss in coverage on interim facilities that is due to causes separate from the repack.

• Counting the number of transitioning stations by month of the transition is not a reasonable approach. The Transition Scheduling Plan grouped all transitioning stations into 10 phases and assigned each phase a phase testing period start date and a phase completion date, or deadline. Stations may transition any time after the start of the phase testing period and must be off their pre-auction channel by the phase completion date. Many stations have elected to transition at the phase completion date, in some instances due to the need to coordinate with other stations that are in linked sets due to interference considerations. Therefore, for instance, in Phase 5 and 6, most of the 100 plus stations in the phase elect to transition at the end of the phase.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

ALEXANDRIA, VA.—Last month, as the latest phase of the television broadcast spectrum repack was wrapping up, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai advised the Senate Financial Services Subcommittee that all was going well and “on schedule.”

“We want to make sure it is a smooth transition for everybody,” he said. “And thus far it is.”

However, a number of those within the industry—engineering consultants, station groups, tower contractors—have a somewhat different take on things.

“The wheels are coming off the repack,” declared Bill Meintel, principle of the Meintel, Sgrignoli, & Wallace firm, in reflecting on his experience with some of his television clients and the repack statistical homework he’s done.

REPACK GETS ‘C’ GRADE AT BEST

In examining the numbers of channel transitions fully completed during the first five phases of the repack, Meintel determined that only about 73% of the stations had fully met their objective of moving to a new channel with coverage equal to what they provided with their pre-repack facilities.

As defined by Meintel, a fully successful repack means that a station met its repack deadline fully, is licensed according to the terms of its construction permit, and is providing service comparable to what was offered on its original channel prior to the repack—in other words, no STAs.

In compiling his repack “score,” Meintel said that he drew on a number of resources, determining that at the end of Phase 5 (which was officially concluded on Sept. 19), a total of 528 stations should have been operating on their new channel assignments. However, based on data available in late September, only 388 stations—just 73.5%—had completely finished repacking activities. He observed too, that out of the 984 stations identified as repack candidates, 496 of these were assigned to Phases 6 through 10.

(It should be noted that this article was compiled at the time Phase 6 was ending, and complete data was not available for determining the exact number of stations that were fully transitioned in that phase. However, based on Meintel’s numbers for Phases 5 and earlier, “fully successful” transitions ranged from a low of 45.6 % to a high of 92.5% in those phases, so it’s doubtful that all of the 126 stations assigned to Phase 6 were fully transitioned. Based on Meintel’s numbers for phases five and earlier, it would appear that nearly two-thirds [60.6%] of the overall repack work will have to be completed within the remaining nine months or so in order to make the July 3, 2020, deadline.)

Meintel observed that at the completion of Phase 5, only about 39.4%— perhaps less—of stations being repacked had completely wrapped up their channel moving exercises.

“At 30 months into the schedule, this averages out to 12.9 stations repacked per month,” he said. “At this rate, it will take another 46.2 months [almost four years] to complete the repack. The repack is well behind schedule.”

Meintel is not alone in his belief that progress on the repack has slipped considerably.

“I don’t expect it to be fully completed by deadline—maybe 80%,” said Stephen Lockwood, a senior engineer and partner of the Seattle-based consulting firm of Hatfield and Dawson. “Scheduling problems and the other things that we’ve talked about over the years are serious bottlenecks. Also, a number of entities have not planned appropriately, considering the limited availability of tower crews, qualified personnel to do antenna testing—once they’re in place, structural engineers to work out tower modifications, and even the manufacturing end of things for such things as transmission line.”

John Hidle, a consulting engineer with the Virginia-based Carl T. Jones consulting firm agrees.

“It’s going very slowly,” said Hidle. “A number of the stations we represent are typically making the transition with temporary facilities. We’ve been pretty much able to keep up in Phase 6 with about 40 % of them making the transition. The remaining 60% have been working furiously to put up temporary antennas.”

Hidle said that his firm is working with about 100 stations spread across various phases of the repack, and that the end-point shortfall number predicted by Meintel is likely correct. And as with others interviewed for this article, Hidle identifies the root of the problem as an FCC goal that was way too ambitious; a position that most in the industry voiced when the 36-month construction timetable was announced.

“There are just not enough qualified people,” he said. “A factory can only make so many antennas, and I’ve been told that the two major ones are running at least two shifts every day of the week to keep up with the demand. But people get tired; I’m tired. Everybody is trying their best. Nobody is slacking off. It’s a matter of just how much people can do in a given amount of time.”

SOMETIMES THINGS JUST HAPPEN

And it’s not just delivery of antennas, transmission lines and new transmitters that are factoring into schedule slippage. Accidents happen, humans make mistakes, weather is not always perfect.

Pete Sockett, director of engineering and operations at Raleigh-Durham’s WRAL-TV, related a critical industry shortage that impacted his station’s repack plans.

“We’re behind the repack curve too,” said Sockett. “We converted in Phase 5 and had planned a helicopter lift in October for our two stations and the three others on our tower to replace our top-mounted antennas. However, there’s a shortage of helicopter crews, which disrupted our planning, and now has delayed things until early in 2020. We’re operating with an STA for a temporary side-mount antenna until then.”

Lockwood also cited delays caused by lack of qualified crews to do antenna testing and measurements once a new radiator is in place, and noted that on several occasions his firm has been called in at the last minute to do this because manufacturers’ crews weren’t available.

Harvey Arnold, corporate vice president of engineering for Sinclair Broadcast Group, is overseeing the reworking of facilities for some 100 stations—or about half of the Sinclair television properties— and has seen even the most carefully planned transition schedules fall by the wayside due to unforeseen or unintended difficulties.

“Wind, rain and ice can cause delays, but in our experience, it’s primarily been the wind,” Arnold said. “We’ve had situations where it’s a beautiful day on the ground, but at 1,000 or 1,500, feet up, the wind is blowing so hard crews can’t work. We would schedule a job for two or three weeks and it would take six months. It doesn’t always happen like that, but that’s where schedules can really get delayed and our tower projects get backed up.”

There are many other reasons for unplanned delays. Arnold observed that one of these surfaced at an Oregon antenna site common to several broadcast operations.

“Two stations were being repacked and one was not,” he said. “We found that the antenna we’d planned to use for this site wouldn’t work properly at the lower channel frequency and we had to order a whole new antenna. Replacing the antenna was one issue; finding a tower crew when we needed it was another.

“When you’re dealing with these ‘community’ systems,’ things can take much longer,” Arnold added. “Having to work around FM stations that use the same tower can be tricky, as some have to be shut down when working near these FM antennas. Another issue can arise when you’re combining very high-power transmitters into a single antenna and you have arcing and other problems that weren’t discovered at the factory, as they couldn’t do testing at full-power conditions.”

Arnold related other unplanned situations that resulted in lost time, including misplaced or lost structural drawings in situations where tower modifications were necessary.

“Every call sign is different,” he said, referring to the numerous stations Sinclair has acquired. “I wish we had greenfield sites, but every one was an existing site, and most all have had modifications. It’s pretty complicated. We had an early repack job in Toledo which we found was going to require about half of the tower to be taken down and rebuilt.”

Arnold says they couldn’t wait and and elected to go on the air with lower power and a temporary antenna.

“Needless to say, our coverage was impacted, but we did make the transition date,” he said. ”We have a few markets that are operating at significantly reduced service until we can complete the required tower work.”

LESS THAN OPTIMUM

Sinclair currently has 26 stations operating with STAs, according to Arnold.

“We had five past STAs that have now been cleared for full power,” he said. “So far, that’s a total of 31 stations with STAs. I don’t have an actual count, but hundreds of STAs have been issued for lower power operation so far. You can look at the FCC records.

“We’ve had to go with side-mount antennas and low-power transmitters—five kW—at some sites. I’m sure that we, and other broadcasters, never envisioned temporary antenna systems going on for very long, but here we are.”

And such reduced power operations have inevitably resulted in a loss of service to viewing audiences.

“Many people are viewing over-the-air television, and we’re getting a lot of calls and complaints from the viewers now because of the low-power situation,” said Arnold. “But what can you do? We work hard to provide good over-the-air service. It’s frustrating when we’re not able to reach our viewers.”

Others mirrored Arnold’s comments about operating with less than optimal facilities in order to make the tight channel clearing deadlines.

Bill Harland, vice president of marketing at ERI, a company that manufactures antennas and handles tower work, also acknowledges that stopgap measures are part of the repack landscape.

“We believe the spectrum to be cleared will be cleared by the July 2020 deadline,” he said. “[However] some television stations may not be operating with their fully authorized facilities.”

Brady Dreasler, director of television engineering at Quincy Media, Inc. (QMI), which has stations in multiple U.S. markets, reported that although his company has now cleared the Phase 0, 1, 2, 6 deadline hurdles with only a single station operating with FCC special temporary authorization, that may not be the case as the repack moves into its final months.

“For our remaining stations in Phases 7, 9, and 10, we’ll likely be utilizing STA’s for some time,” he said.

‘NEVER TIME TO DO IT RIGHT; ALWAYS TIME TO DO IT OVER’

The temporary facility aspect of the 2017-2020 repack is a common theme among those interviewed for this article, with all bemoaning the fact that many transitions were having to be done on a temporary basis with a lot more work ahead. When July 3, 2020 rolls around, crews will have to go back and turn temporary substandard facilities into the permanent ones specified under the terms of the station’s CP and license.

“A lot of time and effort is being expended in putting up temporary facilities when we could be completing facilities,” said Hidle. “It’s a matter of ‘oh my God,’ we have to get on the new channel and we have to do something to get to the new channel and then live with this until we can get back to it. The stations that we’re working with are all absolutely serious about getting on their new channels in time. The FCC is pushing this hard and is granting STAs right and left just to say the stations have moved to their new channels.”

“We’re going to have to take some time after the deadline has passed and go back and rework some of the sites as originally planned,” said Arnold. “I know we’ll have to go back and rework more than 25 stations, and we’re probably going to be well into 2021 before it’s all done.”

Dreasler pointed out that work remaining to be performed at QMI’s “completed” sites include two transmission facilities that were awaiting the return of tower crews to raise auxiliary/ interim antennas to the proper height, installation of transmission line switches, completion of HVAC work, as well as repairs to site parking lots that were damaged during tower modification or construction work.

He said that the push of the repack had also left a number of transmission facility maintenance and repair operations on hold, including tower inspections, lighting system replacement, coating of guy wires, tower painting, repairs to radomes, and replacement of microwave dish antennas, or in some cases, new microwave link installations.

Dreasler said too that there were continuing issues involving stations that weren’t repacking, but which operated on a common tower where others were repacking, and are now having to transmit with their licensed auxiliary facilities at reduced power levels.

“We have excellent vendors,” he said. “But they can only do so much. I don’t see the tower crews catching up until late 2021.”

Meintel opined that he had no reason to believe that the repack pace would pick up during its final phases.

“The handicapping factor has not changed,” he said. “There were never enough resources to meet the demand. While I believe that all 984 stations affected by the repack will be operating on new channels by July 3, 2020, a significant number will likely be providing inferior service caused by this completely unrealistic buildout schedule.”

Hidle shared Meintel’s pessimism.

“I do not believe the whole transition will be done by next July,” he said. “Even though all repacked stations might have migrated to their new channels and met the phase deadlines, it’s likely going to take at least another year-and-a-half for these stations to fully complete their authorized permanent facilities.

“There is only so much people can do,” he added. “It’s now the middle of October and the repack is supposed to be all finished by next July—nine months. You can have a baby in nine months, but I don’t think the repack can be finished in nine months.”

The FCC has issued a response to these claims.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—Happy rescan day to any antenna users whose local TV stations took part in phase six of the post-incentive spectrum repack. Starting today, those who use an antenna to access their TV programs will need to rescan their TVs to continue watching as stations move to their new channels.

Multiple stations in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee are officially transitioning to their new digital frequency locations. Stations gave their viewers 30-day notices of the impending change, and many local stations and news outlets have been posting stories online all week to remind viewers.

The repack was conducted to make room for 5G and other mobile broadband services.

The FCC does provide resources on how to properly rescan televisions to ensure viewers keep access to local stations. They also offer an online service where viewers can enter their address and see if they are impacted by this current phase of the repack.

Phase six of the repack officially ends on Oct. 18. The entire repack process is expected to conclude in July 2020.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The post-incentive auction repack is entering the home stretch, according to testimony given by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai in front of a Senate oversight committee on Thursday, Oct. 17. And thus far the repack has been going well, per Pai.

The Senate Financial Services Subcommittee conducted the hearing to get an overview of the FCC’s entire spectrum auction program. Pai spoke on how previous and upcoming spectrum auctions are helping the U.S. stay at the forefront of wireless technologies, like 5G, as well as generating revenue.

Pai was specifically asked to give an update on the post-incentive auction repack by Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.). Pai informed the committee that the fifth phase of the repack was completed in September—after extensions were given by stations impacted by Hurricane Dorian—at which point 533 of the 987 stations required to move to channel had successfully done so.

Phase six ends today, Oct. 18, with Pai saying he expected an additional 100 stations to have completed their moves. If those numbers prove accurate, the repack will be more than two-thirds complete.

“The process for compensating stations for their relocation costs as a result of the post-incentive auction spectrum repack,” Pai said. “And wireless carriers are already using much of the 600 MHz spectrum that they won at the auction to provide service across the country. Looking forward, we’ll keep our eye on the ball and make sure that this repack is brought to a successful conclusion.”

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The FCC is giving low power TV stations and television translator stations an extra month to file applications to be reimbursed for expenses related to the channel repack.

After receiving requests from the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition and the National Translator Association, the commission extended the deadline for filing Form 2100 Schedule 399 (Form 399) from Oct. 15 to Nov. 14; the deadline for FM stations remains Oct. 15. Congress allotted $150 million in reimbursements.

The LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition, applauded the move.

"A big thanks to the FCC for extending the filing deadline for relocation funding. It could assist many of the 1500+ eligible LPTV and TV translator licensees complete their funding requests in a more timely manner,” said Mike Gravino, coalition director. “The initial 60-day deadline was proving to be too quick a process, with many consulting engineers, legal counsel, and equipment vendors not having enough time to assist all that needed help in this unique process.

With an extra 30-days to file a much broader participation rate of those which are eligible should lead to a much better outcome for the industry,” Gravino added. “And since the LPTV and TV translator reimbursement process is not tied to the incentive auction timeline, this extension will not affect that timeline at all."

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

WASHINGTON—With Hurricane Dorian threatening multiple states in the southeast, the Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau have announced that the completion date for phase 5 of the repack has been extended from its original date of Sept. 6 to Sept. 11 at 11:59 p.m.

“There remains considerable uncertainty about the future path of the storm and therefore its implications for the completion of construction projects related to the transition, but we are mindful that phase 5 includes a significant number of stations in areas that may be affected by the storm, including North and South Carolina,” the public notice reads. It was also determined that because many of the stations potentially affected by the storm may provide critical information to its viewers, requiring them to rescan their TVs during this time was not prudent.

Despite the extension, the Media Bureau asks that stations not impacted by Hurricane Dorian continue on their previous schedule for phase 5 and complete their transition by Sept. 6. There will still be the option for stations to adjust their transition schedule on a case-by-case basis.

There are no further plans to amend any other start or completion dates for other phases, but the FCC will continue to monitor the storm and make any changes if warranted. 

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

ALEXANDRIA, VA.—Money is on the minds of America’s low-power TV station owners these days.

With the FCC announcing last month that it is now taking applications for repack reimbursement funds from the TV Broadcasters TV Relocation fund, LPTVs who have paid heavily to switch frequencies under the FCC’s spectrum repack are anxiously awaiting the check in the mail. These LPTVs and others are also looking to ATSC 3.0 and the opportunities it might bring to their broadcast sector—and some believe that these opportunities are huge.

MIXED FEELINGS

Many LPTVs are having to change channels under the spectrum repack; a process that is compelling them to invest heavily in new/rebuilt transmission infrastructure.

In some cases, changing channels can leave the LPTVs with poorer coverage than they had before. Such is the case for Mike Tonges, owner of the northwestern Ohio LPTVs WIVM39 (Canton), WIVX13, WIVD22, WIVN29, and W27DG-D 27.

Tonges started with WIVM in 2001, which eventually moved to Canton. Today, due to the twists-and-turns of the spectrum auction and the resulting repack, his expenses have piled up while his LPTVs’ coverage area has degraded.

“Our original Canton, Ohio Channel 39 had a very good omnidirectional signal covering our area,” said Tonges. “Now with all five of our stations combined on VHF channels and crowded UHF channels, we will barely have our previous footprint.”

Meanwhile, “we currently are bearing the cost of displacement due to the spectrum auction completely on our own,” said Dean Marini, general manager of Tonges’ five LPTVs. “While reimbursement is promised—and a plan announced—we’re not sure when that money will be given or exactly how much, so we need to do what we can to get the stations onto their new channels as cost-effectively as possible. I would suspect the majority of low-power owners are in the same situation.”

The FCC announced a 60-day filing window for $150 million in LPTV relocation funding on August 15. “Once all of the filing and qualification forms have been submitted, the FCC will first qualify them [prove they were on the air nine of 12 months before the auction started], and then see how much of the $150 million has been asked for,” said Mike Gravino, director of the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition. “Actual release of the funds could start in later Q1 2020 or Q2. There will be about 1,500 [or less] LPTV and translators which may qualify for the funds, so the average will be about $100K, but will widely vary depending on each unique relocation situation.”

Other LPTVs have had an easier time—for instance, Meredith Local Media Group owns WHSM-LD, a Class A LPTV in Springfield, Mass., which has to move from Channel 21 to 20 due to the repack. But WHSM hasn’t had to move yet, because “there is another channel that was going to displace us has elected to go dark for now,” said Tom Casey, Meredith’s vice president of engineering and technology. “So we haven’t made the transition to date.”

Univision Communications owns 14 Class As; nine of which have been affected by the spectrum repack. But the move, which cost Univision $600,000, “has actually been positive,” said John Buergler, the company’s senior vice president of Growth Initiatives/Local Media.

“This is because a lot of our Class As are redundant, and can be used for other purposes,” he said. “For instance, we already have two full-power stations in Dallas, So we moved our Class A transmission site to a new location and increased the power, so that we now cover the core of Fort Worth/Dallas/Arlington. This has turned into an economically viable asset that we can use.”

OPPORTUNITIES IN NEXT GEN TV

ATSC 3.0—which combines broadcast and IP—offers data-carriage capabilities that excite many LPTV owners, who believe the new standard offers them real money-making opportunities.

The reason many LPTVs believe this has to do with the law, according to Gravino. “Unlike full-power TV broadcasters, LPTVs don’t have to simulcast in ATSC 1.0 when they turn on ATSC 3.0 services,” he said. “We can cut to 3.0 right away, and lease whatever bandwidth we don’t use for broadcasting content, to transmit data on behalf of third-party customers.”

For LPTV owners, the true datacasting potential of ATSC 3.0 occurs when they combine their LPTV channels together into big swaths of bandwidth. This approach allows them to maintain HDTV service while creating multi-megabit channels for paid third-party carriage. “The question right now is what’s the business model?” Gravino mused. “How will it work?”

One possible money-maker: Providing software updates to today’s cars and trucks. “Today’s vehicles are basically huge computers,” said Dave Folsom, retired CTO of Raycom Media and now a consultant with the Pearl TV Group. “They need updates on a regular basis. It would be far more cost-effective for manufacturers to send these updates via ATSC 3.0 with its one-to-many reach, compared to using one-to-one on 4G cellular or taking the vehicles into dealerships.”

Cars and trucks aren’t alone in requiring software updates. Computer-controlled systems in the emerging world of IOT (internet of things) can be found in all areas of business and consumer technologies, and many could use ATSC 3.0 to keep these systems up to date.

Offering paid data carriage using ATSC 3.0 appeals to Larry Morton, owner and manager of KTV Media, which operates 12 LPTVs in Arkansas.

“One of our transmission sites in northwest Arkansas has five LPTVs together, and has 18 MHz of contiguous bandwidth available, with 30 MHz of bandwidth in all,” Morton said. “At the same time, we want to wait to pick the best opportunity we can. So we’re not in a rush to try things with ATSC 3.0; we’re local broadcasters content to let the bigger players lead.”

Gregory Herman, president of WatchTV, which owns/operates LPTV KOXO-CD on Channel 20 in Portland, Ore., is bullish about ATSC 3.0’s paid datacasting possibilities and is one of the reasons why WatchTV applied and received the first ATSC 3.0 LPTV license in the United States last spring.

At the same time, Herman sees ATSC 3.0 as being not only “the best digital broadcast standard to date,” but one that “eliminates the coverage issues experienced by conventional LPTVs, which gave full-power stations an advantage,” he said. “With 3.0, the playing field is level, both for broadcasting and datacasting.”

If these LPTV ATSC 3.0 advocates are correct, this new standard could be the break they’ve been waiting for since the FCC started licensing LPTVs in 1982. In the meantime, these same stations are waiting for repack reimbursement checks to arrive from Washington, so that they can get ready for the next stage of broadcast television.

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

For a comprehensive source of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see ourATSC3 silo.

The deadline for Phase 4 of channel repacking in the FCC’s incentive auction has passed and it appears to have been the most challenging one to date. This month I’ll outline some of the Phase 4 experiences and lessons for future transitions, and provide some tips on helping viewers with rescan and reception issues.

I was on the 90th floor of One World Trade Center in New York with the transmitters on Aug. 1 when many stations in Hartford, Conn., New York, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. transitioned to their new channels. The switch took place at 1 p.m., in the middle of the day and not at the 11:59 p.m. Aug. 2 deadline. Boston changed channels at 1:05 p.m. the next day.

Switching channels in the middle of the day has several advantages, the main one being more staff available to help resolve problems or answer viewers’ calls. While the FCC set the phase deadlines on Friday just before midnight, stations can transition anytime during the FCC test period before the deadline on the condition they provide proper public notice and coordinate with other stations.

The Phase 4 deadline was not the trainwreck many feared, but not all stations were able to operate with their final facilities. In at least two markets, New York and Boston, many stations were not able to transition to their final antenna or power because work could not start on the final facilities until the old channels were shutdown. In both cases, however, this had little impact on coverage.

ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER

UHF stations at One World Trade Center were all operating on the upper antenna (RFS PEP40 panel array) on their old channels at reduced power while the RFS combiners (two are necessary to achieve variable polarization) associated with the lower antenna (RFS PEP96L) were tuned to the new channels. You can see a snapshot of the job configuring and tuning the One World Trade Center combiners for the new channels in Fig. 1.

On Aug. 1, One World Trade Center UHF stations switched to the lower antenna and combiner system. For some stations, this was the antenna authorized in their construction permit, but even though they were able to test individually at full power they had to reduce power before all the UHF stations (WCBS-TV, WLIW, WNBC/WNJU, WNYW, WWOR-TV, WPXNTV) could operate on the antenna with a good safety margin. The impact on coverage from use of the One World Trade Center lower antenna and power reduction is minimal, thanks to the overall height of the antenna.

The channel changes occurred on time without incident thanks to the cooperation between all stations involved, including those out-of-market stations receiving interference during testing. Kudos to the tireless work by Joe Giardina and his team at DSI, along with the engineers from RFS, configuring the combiners and Durst Broadcasting’s John Lyons management of the project with what seemed like 24/7 availability.

In Boston, UHF stations on a tower owned by American Tower switched to a shared auxiliary antenna system, which closely matched predicted coverage from the main antenna system now under construction.

An easy way to check whether a station is operating at its final power level on its licensed facilities is to use the LMS search feature under “Technical Data” for the station (https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/public/tv/publicSearchLanding.htmlorwww.rabbitears.info).

On www.rabbitears.info, a nonprofit website that tracks broadcast RF developments, “DTV-STA” indicates the station is operating under FCC special temporary authority, usually at reduced power or height. “DTV-LIC” indicates the station is licensed while “DTV-PL” indicates the license is pending. “DTV-CP” indicates the station still has a construction permit for the final facility. For Phase 4 stations, the CP expiration date was Aug. 2, 2019. Stations that were unable to complete construction of their final facilities were allowed a six-month extension of the construction permit to Jan. 29, 2020.

In my last column I described the importance of testing facilities before transitioning. At some of the stations I was working at, this turned out to be a valuable step as problems were discovered (and fixed) prior to the transition that would have caused major problems if they occurred after the switch to the new channels.

In situations where the channel was already in use in the market, the only way extended testing was possible was for the testing station to carry the ASI stream from the current channel occupant during the testing, avoiding any impact to that station’s viewers. Unfortunately, post-transition I saw some problems arise that were not caught during testing. Fortunately, the ones I’m aware of did not take the stations off the air for extended periods of time, but did result in some power reductions and temporary loss of coverage. Extended testing, for as much time as possible, prior to the transition date, should be a priority.

RESCAN REMEDIES

With channel changes comes the need to rescan. What happens, however, if during the first rescan the viewer is unable to receive the channel, perhaps due to the new channel operating at reduced power or height? Here are some tips that may help these viewers.

For technically savvy viewers, some TV sets have a signal quality indicator. If other stations are transmitting from the problem station’s location, optimizing the antenna using this signal meter may allow a rescan to pick up weaker stations. Viewers that are less technically savvy are likely to be confused by this solution.

A simpler option, which can avoid the need for a complete rescan, is to tune the TV set to the RF channel and program number (“Physical Channel” in the Rabbitears listing) of the station. For example, in the case of WRC-TV in Washington, D.C., the RF channel is 34 and the program number for NBC is 3. Punching in 34.3 on a TV set’s remote should take the TV direct to NBC, and, once locked, the displayed channel will change to 4.1.

Channel up to see the other subchannels. If there is no reception, the TV set should stay on 34.3, and the viewer can move the antenna to try to find a location or orientation where the signal can be received. Note this only works in markets where the RF channel and program number combination are not in use as a virtual channel by another station that’s been previously scanned. This should work on most TV sets, but I’d appreciate hearing from readers on the results of using this direct tuning method, noting the make and model of TV if possible.

For many broadcast engineers, www.rabbitears.info is the first stop for information on TV stations. The site provides excellent coverage maps showing contours and field strength as predicted using the Longley- Rice terrain sensitive model. The site has a new feature in beta—the Rabbitears Search Map—available at www.rabbitears.info/searchmap.php. You can enter an address in the box on the lower left of the map, then use the “Move Pushpin to Center of Map View” to put a marker on the exact location, as shown in Fig. 2. An example of the output is shown in Fig. 3.

In markets with stations using mechanical beam tilt on antennas on high mountains, such as Los Angeles, the results from the Rabbitears Search Map will be much more accurate than those from other coverage prediction sites like www.tvfool.com and even the FCC’s www.fcc.gov/media/engineering/dtvmaps. The reason is that many of the antenna patterns stored in the FCC’s database for antennas with mechanical beam tilt are based on the horizontal plane radiation pattern—the power going straight out from the antenna and never hitting the ground. This is why the antenna patterns for Mt. Wilson stations appear to be aimed at Lancaster rather than Los Angeles. Where actual un-tilted antenna pattern is available, Rabbitears uses that pattern rather than the highly distorted horizontal plane antenna pattern, resulting in a much more accurate representation of signal on the ground.

The Rabbitears Search Map should be handy for engineers taking calls from viewers with reception problems as they can enter the address into the map and see what stations the viewer should be able to receive and at what signal strength.

ODDS AND ENDS

Finally this month, I have heard from some sources that Winegard has discontinued or will be discontinuing my favorite indoor/outdoor antenna, the Winegard Freevision FV-30BB. I hope that is not true. The antenna still shows up on Winegard’s website for $39.99 and remains available at some Home Depot stores.

This is the antenna I’ve been using for field strength measurements as it is small, works well on high-VHF, and even does a passable job on low VHF. I was surprised how well it worked picking up WPVI’s Channel 6 signal in Philadelphia during testing there. There are other antennas that have more gain and will do a better job at UHF and VHF, but none I’ve found that are as small as this one—easy to hang on a wall; easy to throw in a car trunk with the mast connected; easy to support on an extendable pole.

One thing I’ve noticed, as have some on www.avsforum.com/forum/25-hdtvtechnical, is that the antenna performs much better than the specifications and patterns from Winegard would indicate. I hope Winegard continues to manufacture it.

As always, I welcome your comments and questions atdlung@transmitter.com. Responses may be delayed if I’m busy, bug me again if you don’t get an answer in a week or two.

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

WASHINGTON—Now that the FCC has opened a 60-day filing window for LPTV, translator and FM broadcast stations impacted by the channel repack, the commission has announced that it will hold an informational webinar on Aug. 28 to answer filers’ questions.

Scheduled for 11 a.m.-noon Eastern Time, the webinar will be hosted by the Incentive Auction Task Force and the Media Bureau and will cover topics including:

• Filing FCC Form 2100, Schedule 399 (Reimbursement Form), including the certification demonstrating that an entity meets the eligibility criteria for reimbursement (Eligibility Certification);
• Providing estimates of reimbursement costs;
• Submitting invoices for actual expenses incurred;
• Overview of the allocation and payment processes and additional topics related to the reimbursement process

Attendees will have the opportunity to submit questions via email during the live webinar and a recording of the event will be available afterwards.

The broadcasters have until Oct. 15 to submit paperwork.

Visit this link to join the webinar.

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

WASHINGTON—The item in the Aug. 14 edition of the Federal Register might as easily have been labeled “Existential Threat Averted,” but instead it was called “Final rule; announcement of compliance date.”

But the former more aptly describes what publication of rules establishing a 60-day filing window for LPTV and TV translator stations to apply for reimbursement of TV spectrum repack-related expenses amounts to for many such stations, says Mike Gravino, director of the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition.

“… [D]espite a movement to end the LPTV service, our industry has prevailed over those forces and is now poised with [a] new next gen TV standard to blaze the trail into the future, once again,” he says.

The newly opened window gives LPTV stations and TV translator stations displaced by the repack a way to apply for repack expense reimbursement from a $150 million fund Congress established in 2018 to address a segment of the TV industry overlooked when it initially authorized the TV spectrum auction.

“The opening of the filing window … for the Post Auction LPTV Displacement Funding, some $150 million in Congressional funding, is an historic step in keeping over 1,500 of the nations’ secondary TV stations in business and is most welcomed in many small and large communities across the country,” says Gravino.

The coalition director sees the filing window as the culmination of a process that has taken the FCC more than six years to complete.

The coalition of more than 300 LPTV and TV translator licensees is appreciative of “the careful attention to detail” the agency has paid to make sure “as many as possible LPTV and TV translator qualifying entities” have quick access to the reimbursement funds, he says.

Gravino also is urging displaced LPTV stations, in particular, to get busy with their expense reimbursement filings. As opposed to the TV translator community, most LPTV operators affected by the repack haven’t yet begun the preparatory steps, he says.

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

ALEXANDRIA, VA.—As if the last “spectrum reallocation” and subsequent repack hasn’t provided enough drama, there’s another move afoot to further trim broadcasters’ operational resources. This one hasn’t received the notice that the big “reverse auction” commanded, but it has the potential to send TV, radio, and cable system operators scrambling, should the FCC (and wireless providers) have their way.

This time, the government has its sights on the 3.7 to 4.2 gHz block of C-band spectrum used by one-to-many satellite distribution of content, contending that it’s needed to build out 5G wireless networks.

A 2017 FCC “Notice of Inquiry” hinted at repurposing this spectrum chunk that’s seen heavy use during the past three decades or so, and the Washington wheels are grinding even faster and more noisily following a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued last year.

In that NPRM, the commission contended that this “mid-band spectrum is well-suited for next-gen wireless,” and suggested that some or all of the 3.7-4.2 gHz real estate be turned over to 5G developers. And if they get the whole enchilada, current C-band deliveries could migrate to Ku-band birds, fiber or even the internet.

PLENTY OF FEEDBACK

The FCC also urged C-band users to register their sites and to speak their minds about accommodating 5G. Response was good in both areas. Some 10,788 earth stations were added to the 3,800 that the FCC already knew about. And many players chimed in, including TV station groups and networks, wireless providers and even Google.

Some offered suggestions for easing the pain brought on by placing 5G ops in the band, while others called for restraint and moderation in any plans that might rock the C-band boat:

“The commission should proceed cautiously where it looks to make intensively utilized spectrum—as is the case in the C-band—available for new uses.” (Comcast/NBC Universal)

“…Commission action that repurposes spectrum in the C-band cannot undermine the existing, essential pipeline that relies upon the C-band to bring video content to American viewers. That pipeline must remain undisturbed, reliable, smooth and efficient.” ( Joint filing by the ABC Television Affiliates Association, CBS Television Network Affiliates Association, FBC Television Affiliates Association and NBC Television Affiliates)

“The record affirms that proposed changes to the C-band downlink spectrum… could significantly disrupt the television content distribution ecosystem to the detriment of more than 100 million U.S. television households, particularly if the Commission does not engage in a sufficiently transparent and robust review and oversight of any reallocation process.” (NCTA - The Internet & Television Association)

“Significant questions remain unanswered regarding how this distribution architecture can be protected while reallocating a portion of the C-band for mobile use, and the Commission should move forward in this proceeding only after those questions are fully and publicly addressed. Airy and unspecific commitments regarding the accommodation of current C-band users will not mollify American viewers and listeners when their favorite programming is interrupted.” (NAB)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—the single largest stakeholder in the fray, with nearly 3,500 registered C-band receive sites—was quite insistent about protecting its interests:

“Given the past investment in, and importance of, the C-Band to consumers and existing users, the Commission must reject proposals to intensify terrestrial use of the C-Band absent a robust record demonstrating that existing services will be protected from new, potentially-interfering services. Since the Commission first proposed altering and expanding the use of the C-Band, Comcast and others have posed numerous questions about how existing services will be protected. Yet, the administrative record remains largely devoid of detailed answers to those questions.”

The organization also voiced concern about expenses arising from changes.

“If a permanent solution to this issue requires the Church to limit its use of the C-band, the Church is open to discussing that solution. But fair is fair. If the Church is required to reconfigure its distribution network to ensure the availability of spectrum for other services, it should be reimbursed for the cost of that transition.”

C-BAND WORKAROUNDS

Among those entities promoting moderation in any C-band makeover, the CBand Alliance, a group of four satellite operating companies—Eutelsat, Intelsat, SES and Telesat—propose to allow 5G occupancy of the lower 200 MHz of the band, and accommodate current C-band services within the remaining 3.9 to 4.2 gHz chunk. (A 20 MHz guard band at the top of the 5G berth, along with the special installation filters on all TVROs would ensure interference-free operation.)

Based on comments received in putting this article together, there seems to be something of a consensus as to the workability of the CBA proposal, if indeed 5G has to become a bedfellow. One of those favoring band sharing is Sherrod Munday, a TV and radio consulting engineer who has been closely following the matter.

“I would say that the CBA has the largest amount of industry support,” said Munday. “A large number of players are behind it. The FCC’s proposition and public notices seem to give this a fair chance of success. If the CBA’s proposal to reallocate 200 MHz can happen without loss of service, this would go a long way to satisfy the [5G] requirement.”

Munday doesn’t really believe that the other suggested alternatives are realistic, given the need for the rock-solid delivery in all types of weather, and the difficulties and vulnerabilities that come with a fiber or internet solution.

“A Ku-band downlink is not always comparable to C-band,” said Munday. “Yes, it can be done, but reliability might suffer. And I’m not sure that I would be comfortable with internet program distribution either. You need an active backup. The internet is effectively non-controllable—not all outages can be routed around or fixed. If there’s a major attack on the internet, all bets are off. I would be much more comfortable with satellite for large-scale distribution.”

Munday added that while point-to-point fiber is highly reliable, the approach does not scale economically.

“Many telcos and organizations like the Broadband Access Coalition [an alliance of tech companies advocating the use of “white spaces” to provide broadband in rural areas] have said that there is not an economical model that makes sense for providing fiber to rural customers,” Munday added. “[For example], in the middle of Kansas, there’s no way to run fiber cost-effectively to a site. You’re looking at perhaps $20,000 per mile to run fiber to a rural location.”

Munday said that while fiber can replace satellite in major cities, it probably can’t be done economically. Google, for example, announced in 2016 that while they would continue to support existing fiber service, no further expansion was planned.

“If Google has backed out of their fiber distribution plan, what does that tell you about replacing C-band with fiber?” Munday asked.

John Joslin is director of sales and marketing for satellite company Dawnco, and has been involved in communications satellite endeavors for more than three decades. He noted that CBA says they’ve tested their concept and that it works.

“However, all C-band downlink users will have to obtain an LNB filter [a waveguide-type device that mounts just behind a dish’s LNB or low-noise block downconverter] and get it installed,” he said. “Right now, the FCC is authorizing the use of 3.65 gHz for WiMAX purposes, and this is very close to the satellite spectrum, which starts at 3.7 gHz. Use of LNB filters makes this possible.”

Joslin said such filters employed for this are based on new technologies and can provide some 45 dB of rejection.

“They allow you to have an interfering signal very close to your C-band satellite frequency and still have things work,” he said. “These newer designs should work to reject 5G interference.”

WILL THERE BE A HAPPY ENDING?

Even though Joslin praised the CBA’s approach, he admitted that there could be a small number of sites that may have issues. Others too, although trying to remain optimistic about a C-band/5G skirmish, also noted that the outcome might not be entirely favorable for satellite users. As expressed by one consultant, who asked not to be identified, but whose firm handles FCC matters for several very large broadcast and media groups:

“Syndicated programming has to get to the stations somehow, and they don’t truck videotapes around anymore. C-band is very reliable and remains the best option. However, you can register all of your downlink sites twice if you want to, but if they decide to take that spectrum, they will.

NEW YORK—With the channel repack entering its final year, Durst Broadcasting—which manages the broadcast antenna facility atop One World Trade Center—announced this week that it had successfully completed phase four of the repack. The organization urged New York City residents to rescan their TV sets in order to receive the channels in their new spots on the spectrum band.

The channel repack is a result of the 2017 FCC spectrum auctions, which requires nearly 1,000 U.S. television broadcasters to move to new channels to make way for new wireless companies to occupy former broadcast spectrum. For New York, where most of the TV stations host their antennas on top of One World Trade Center, Durst has been planning and coordinating the transfer for years, according to John Lyons, assistant vice president and director of broadcast communications for The Durst Organization.

“We have been working with the broadcasters and equipment suppliers for well over a year to make this transition a smooth one,” Lyons said. “Thanks to the efforts of the New York City broadcast community, equipment supplier RFS Myat and systems integrator DSI RF Systems Inc., we were ready for this operation on Aug. 1 as scheduled. Within a few minutes, the stations were on their new channels.”

The stations involved include:

WCBS

WLIW

WNBC

WNJU

WNYW

WWOR

WRNN

WPXN

Planning for the repack began before the World Trade Center Broadcast site became operational in mid-2017 and involved the installation of a redundant combiner and antenna systems that allowed all the stations to continue operations while Durst updated existing hardware.

Consumers who watch television over the air will need to rescan their TV sets in order to receive the new channels. Subscribers to satellite or cable TV do not need to rescan. Viewers should also rotate their antennas toward One World Trade Center for the best reception.

For more news and insight on the repack, visit TV Technology'srepack silo.

WASHINGTON--The FCC has cancelled a planned construction permit auction for low power and translator TV facilities affected by the channel repack.

The commission adopted rules that gave LPTV/Class A TV facilities that would be displaced by the repack until July 22, 2019 to enter into agreements that would resolve mutual exclusivity. On Friday, it announced that it had accepted and approved all dismissal requests or settlement proposals surrounding the issue.

LPTVs and Class A/translator stations are not protected in the channel repack, which is scheduled to be completed a year from now. 

"It is good to see that these displacements from the incentive auction repacking process have been resolved, and that the spectrum can be quickly put into productive use," said Mike Gravino of the Next Gen TV Coalition, an organization representing LPTV/Class A stations. "These are along with the 1,456 displacements filed, and the 1,390 which have been granted, and 66 pending. 

"The FCC's Video Division and Media Bureau have served the industry well with this efficient and user-friendly process," Gravino continued. "And along with the thousands of those not impacted by the auction or repack, the LPTV industry can say for sure it survived and has great potential going forward and into next gen TV. We trust this bodes well for the $150 million displacement fund process next fiscal year, as those funds need to be equitably distributed." 

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

This article has been updated. 

WASHINGTON—While the recent summer heat wave has melted nearly everything frozen, the FCC is doing its own kind of melting with the Media Bureau announcing a lift on the freeze imposed on the filing and processing of minor modification applications for full power and Class A stations.

Thanks to the now reopen application process—which was initially ceased on April 5, 2013—full power stations can apply for an increase to its noise-limited contour, while Class A stations can file to increase its protected contour, in one or more directions beyond the station’s authorized facilities. These actions are limited to full power and Class A stations that were reassigned to new channels as part of the repack and have yet to complete the transition to their post-auction channels.

While the freeze was in effect, stations had to apply for a waiver to complete their transition in instances of an antenna not exactly matching the previously authorized antenna pattern or the authorized height of the antenna on a station’s tower differs from the actual installed height. Lifting the freeze is designed to relieve stations of these steps as they move through the repack process.

The freeze is only lifted for the qualified stations, remaining in place for all others.

Minor modification applications will be processed on a first-come-first-served basis, with the filing of an acceptable application cutting off the filing rights of subsequent, conflicting applications.

More information is available by visiting fcc.gov/media.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—Attention repack shoppers! The Federal Communications Commission has updated the cost guide for its reimbursement for moving expenses in the post-incentive auction move of TV stations to smaller spectrum quarters, boosting that cost estimate by 2.8%.

That cost guide is a catalog of expenses eligible for reimbursement from the TV Broadcasters TV Relocation fund Congress set up to compensate broadcasters for moving expenses and new equipment, as well as some MVPDs for re-tuning head-ends to receive the shuffled stations.

The guide is not an exhaustive list, but covers the most likely expenses incurred, providing a redetermined dollar amount that can be used in the absence of an actual price quote.

The FCC adjusts the price guide annually per the Bureau of Labor Statistics Producer Price Index (PPI), which was updated May 9.

Asked for an update on the repack at a congressional budget hearing earlier this year, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said he thought it was going well and that he thought there would be enough money to hold all those stations (and cable operators) financially harmless in the move. But he said it was not just a case of handing out money, but of verifying covered costs.

Pai said he wanted to be able to report back to Congress that the FCC did not spend a "single dollar" on something broadcasters should be covering themselves. But he said the "core promise" of the incentive auction that broadcasters would be transitioned without having to pay "out of their own pockets" for a relocation not of their own making, was being kept.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

It has been a few months since my last RF Technology column and a lot has happened since then, including the NAB Show in Las Vegas and the FCC Phase 2 repack deadline. This month I’ll attempt to cover the highlights from these and some more interesting items I discovered along the way.

NAB SHOW

The hot topics for discussion among those interested in RF transmission at the NAB Show were the FCC’s incentive auction repack and ATSC 3.0. The main question about the FCC repack was when it would “go off the rails” after stations failed to meet deadlines and blocked other stations from changing channels.

The predominant opinion was that problems would arise later this year as the gap between the phases shortened. However, while I heard a number of horror stories from installers and manufacturers about stations not being ready, most of the station engineers I talked to felt they would make the upcoming deadlines, even if not with their final facilities.

At the Broadcasting Engineering and Information Technology Conference, I was on the “No More Broadcaster Silos: Lessons from the Repack Phases 1 and 2” panel with John Lyons (Durst), Nick Wymant (RFS) and Stephen Kolvek (Myat), moderated by Josh Gordon. We talked about manufacturers’ challenges in the repack along with tips for stations and I discussed issues with dependencies in the repack with a focus on the Phase 4 repack in the Northeast. FCC shows dependencies for some New York City stations from as far away as Ottawa! More on that later.

ATSC 3.0 was everywhere at the show. All manufacturers I saw selling transmitters in the United States were offering ATSC 3.0 options, more test equipment was available, and while assembling a working ATSC 3.0 facility isn’t simple, there were several demos of working systems including components from various vendors.

DS Broadcast was showing a complete “end-to-end” system that had everything needed to provide an ATSC A/324 STLTP stream to a transmitter and monitor the over-the-air result. ATSC A/324 enables connecting a source to multiple transmitters in a single frequency network. The standard has been widely adopted by transmitter manufacturers and an excellent example of its use was the SFN NAB set up with multiple transmitters from different vendors in the North Hall and LVCC lobby outside Central Hall.

Two other items caught my eye at the show. I described use of the Sixarms drone-based RF measurement system for doing antenna pattern measurements in my column “Verifying TV Facility Coverage” (February 2018). At the NAB Show, Sixarms showed another drone-based system, this one designed for field measurements. It simply goes up and comes down, providing an aerial equivalent of a 30-foot mast. It can take measurements from multiple stations, and is small enough to be easily deployed from a small SUV or even a rental car. This could be an ideal alternative—at significantly lower cost—to a large van with a pneumatic mast or to the simple field measurement system I described previously, although at many times the under-$300 cost of that setup.

There were several options for ATSC 3.0 monitoring at the show, including a notebook-based system from Triveni and the Airwavz Redzone ATSC receiver now available with Windows software that includes the ability to display video.

I had my Redzone receiver with me at the show, but the only software I found for download was an updated version of the API and some simple tools similar to what I previously reviewed. It looks like the Windows software is available if purchased as a complete kit with the Redzone receiver.

Various Triveni packages provide everything needed for a wide range of ATSC 3.0 measurements, but display of RF characteristics will depend on the capability of the dongle or receiver used with it. I was particularly interested in Triveni’s new StreamScope XM Verifier.

I’ve been a fan of Avateq’s monitoring receivers since they introduced their 8VSB receiver several years ago, which provided RF modulation measurements and monitoring/logging capability at a price low enough to install at every transmitter site. Now that transmitters are being deployed with ATSC 3.0 there are very few options for extensive ATSC 3.0 RF modulation measurements. Avateq was showing a range of RF measurement receivers, including the compact AVQ-200 off-air “Signal Inspector,” which seems ideal for fieldwork. The off-air instruments have the capability to display echoes in an ATSC 3 SFN and identify echoes by transmitter ID.

REPACK REVISITED

As I write this, the FCC April 12 Phase 2 deadline has come and gone and the Phase 3 deadline will have passed by the time you read this. The Phase 4 repack, which has an Aug. 2, 2019 deadline, will be one of the most complicated ones in the incentive auction repack as it involves densely packed stations from North Carolina to Maine and west into Ohio and Canada.

One of the challenges will be finding time to test antennas at full power before the deadline. Because this phase involves many stations swapping channels, sometimes in the same market, just firing up on the antenna for testing won’t work.

Stations will have to coordinate times to test with each other, most likely overnight. If the interference isn’t excessive, in between markets for example, both stations may want to agree to accept interference to avoid losing the audience in their core coverage area. If a station’s new channel is on the channel currently occupied by another station in the same market, and if that station can provide the testing station an ASI stream (everything matching what it would be transmitting from its own transmitter), its viewers will only see a momentary interruption as the transmitters are swapped.

Conversations I’ve had with FCC staff indicate that as long as new interference to any existing station is under 2%, no FCC approval or even coordination with impacted stations is required for testing or early transition within the test period, (although it is recommended).

However, if interference to any station exceeds 2% for testing or an early transition, then an engineering STA is required and the other station(s) must agree to accept the interference. If the station that would receive interference goes off the air during the testing, instead of staying on and accepting interference, no engineering STA is required. 

TOOLS FOR REPACK AND FIELD MEASUREMENTS

Keeping track of dependencies for testing post-repack facilities can get complicated, especially when dependencies of dependencies have to be considered. To make them easier to track, I’ve created a simple tool, TVDepTester, available at www.transmitter.com/tools.

For Windows 10 systems, download TVDepTester8.exe and all the .csv data files from the site and put them in the same folder. For any operating system that has Python installed, download TVDepTester8.py and the .csv files (again in the same directory) and run with Python. The “8” is the current version number and will be incremented as I fix bugs and enhance it so by the time you read this, that number may have changed. Run the program and type in the call letters in UPPER CASE and it will search for dependencies through multiple levels. Note that if the program closes without showing results it may be the station is sharing a channel. The FCC lists I’m using only include the host stations.

I’ve been working on making the field measurement program I wrote for the Hauppauge WinTV dualHD USB tuner easier to install and use. Linux is still required, but only the ready-to-use programs, “dvb-tools,” “dvbsnoop” and “w-scan” (for channel scanning) in the Ubuntu repositories are required.

In the www.transmitter.com/tools folder look for “Sample-Test-Script-(Los Angeles).sh” and “channels(Los Angeles sample).conf” for the program and channel listings I used for L.A. measurements. The channels.conf file only needs entries for the stations used in the test script. Edit the list manually to add test channels not found in the scan. Lists from w_scan will need VSB-8 changed to 8VSB. I have written a very simple Python program to tabulate the results from measurements into a single csv file with measurements by time in rows and stations in columns. It’s not quite user-hostile, but email me if you want a copy so I can explain how to use it.

Please contact me or the vendors I’ve mentioned for more information. You can email me atdlung@transmitter.com. 

BORDEAUX, France—As broadcasters continue to deal with the repack, Sutro Tower in San Francisco is collaborating with two WorldCast Group companies to update its equipment. WorldCast Systems and CONNECT are the two selected to develop and supply an Antenna Switch Controller System and a unified monitoring platform for RF operations.

As part of its repack process, the 977-foot Sutro Tower, which handles both radio and television in San Francisco, is replacing several antennas, adding additional RF feeds and replacing its existing antenna control system. The WorldCast product that will be installed incorporates hardware and software from both the Eresco (RF) division and CONNECT.

Based on the new Eresco Switch Controller, the system is designed specifically for the Sutro Tower and is responsible for moving the RF switches as commanded by customers. The system monitors/records data for real-time display and analysis. Each ESC can manage five motorized RF switches and is built on FPGA hardware that will link the controllers to a network to manage connections. One controller will be installed in the suite for each broadcaster customer at Sutro Tower.

Initially, Sutro Tower has ordered 10 controllers for TV and five for radio, which will control approximately 35 motorized RF switches. The expected product delivery is some time in 2019.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

LOS ANGELES—The spectrum repack has produced unique challenges and situations to almost every affected broadcaster. Perhaps no case study is as compelling, or rare, as being repacked from UHF to low-band VHF.

Such is the case at KWHY-TV in Los Angeles. One of the first TV stations to broadcast in the city (as KBIC-TV in 1954), the station has served Los Angeles’ Spanish-speaking community since 1991, operating on UHF Channel 42 since its transition to digital in 2009. As an independent broadcaster—Meruelo Media purchased the station in 2016—it became clear moving to VHF would be our most economical option. As part of the TV Repack, the station received its Phase 2 Notice with a VHF Channel 4 assignment, broadcasting from a shared tower site on Mt. Harvard.

A CHALLENGING SWITCH

The move presented several technical concerns. For one, indoor VHF reception is a challenge, and would require proactive viewer education about antenna selection. Second, the fact that KWHY was moving to low-band VHF—an even scarcer scenario—left few professional supplier options. Third, with a fairly short, shared tower structure, a much lighter and condensed antenna was required versus the traditionally very large, low-band VHF systems.

Of the companies evaluated, only Dielectric could meet these three requirements, while also delivering the broad coverage patterns KWHY needed.

Following a mechanical analysis that determined that the tower structure could not support a low-band VHF panel antenna array, Dielectric engineers custom-designed a segmented helical antenna, borrowing technology from its DCR radio antenna family.

Widely used in high-power FM radio transmitter sites, the Dielectric DCR series of antennas provides full bandwidth, high-power handling capability and excellent elliptical polarity axial ratio. Dielectric’s low-band DCR-Q VHF antenna offers all of these features, plus the directivity required to fulfill the KWHY FCC construction permit and maximize their coverage over the L.A. market signal.

Consisting of eight circularly polarized ring-style radiating elements, the DCR-Q reduces the weight, wind load and required tower space to a fraction of that required by a traditional low-band VHF panel antenna system. The DCR-Q design is also ATSC 3.0-ready.

EXPANDING COVERAGE

The station was originally allotted 3.7 kW of power, which would serve only a small percentage of the Los Angeles DMA. Following legal challenges, the ERP was increased to 35kW when station representatives presented a directional pattern that matched the contour of the largest station in the market. In a clever arrangement, the directional pattern is created by the positioning of the radiating elements in relationship to each other and the metal tower structure.

Dielectric’s outstanding customer service extended into (and beyond) installation. The design team continued its work as tower crews prepared to bring the old antenna down and run new transmission line, also supplied by Dielectric. A 60-foot structure was added to the top of the tower, allowing KWHY to operate both antennas for a brief period and make a clean break to VHF.

The new Channel 4 system, which includes a GatesAir Maxiva VAXTE air-cooled transmitter, went on the air on April 10—just days before the Phase 2 deadline. With the coverage and performance solidly meeting our expectations, KHWY continues its efforts to educate viewers on antenna selection, with the goal of serving and supporting the local Hispanic community.

David Gray can be reached at 760- 275-9897, or via email atdgray@meruelomedia.com.

For more information on Dielectric, visit the company’s website atdielectric.comor call 800-341-9678.

RAYMOND, Maine—Two Dielectric stacked antenna arrays with Adaptive Polarization Technology (APT) are on their way to American Tower for use in Dallas and Boston as part of the FCC-mandated TV spectrum repack, the company announced today.

APT enables broadcasters sharing an antenna array to select their own polarization ratio regardless of what other stations operating on the same array choose to do. Adding a vertical component improves reception of both ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 signals.

“Most antennas of this nature require that the polarization ratio is defined and locked in upfront,” said Dielectric VP of sales Jay Martin.

However, the arrays destined for American Tower are anchored by Dielectric’s TUM-APT series UHF panel antennas for the vertical real estate company’s master antenna TV station clients, while customized antennas for other stations are on top of the stack.

“The TUM-APT panel antenna offers our customers an enormous advantage by allowing for polarization ratio changes inside the transmitter room. And while these arrays are optimized for ATSC 3.0 broadcasting in the future, they will provide increased power density to improve indoor reception for today’s ATSC 1.0 broadcasts,” said Martin.

A dual-channel, center-fed elliptically polarized TFU series UHF array for KUVN-DT and KSTR-DT tops the stack in the Dallas setup, while the Boston installation for WGBY-DT adds a circularly polarized TDM series VHF array above the TUM-APT, according to Dielectric.

The design of the stacked arrays offers improved azimuth pattern performance when compared to traditional main and side-mount antennas, which can disrupt the azimuth pattern and cause reception problems due to the tower, the company said.

Stacking the arrays enables them to be top-mounted and unencumbered by the tower, eliminating tower scattering effects and allowing for a stronger, interference-free pattern, the company said. The TUM-APT design also locates the transmission line for the top-mount inside the mast, eliminating distortions to the azimuth pattern associated with locating the line outside the mast as is traditional.

Following the installation of a TUM-APT panel antenna, station engineers have the ability to optimize antenna polarization in the combiner room with no modifications to the antenna required, Dielectric said.

This feature is well suited for stations wishing to use the TUM-APT with horizontal polarization today but planning to add elliptical or circular polarization in the future to support signal delivery to mobile devices under ATSC 3.0, it added.

The antennas headed to American Tower have the bandwidth and high-power handling capability to accommodate more stations and their specific polarization needs in the future, the company said.

The TUM-APT structure is designed to support the weight of stacking an additional array on top due to splines designed to support both arrays from a single installation point. Both antennas are designed to be lifted by helicopter to expedite installation. The antennas are due to go on air in the summer, the company added.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The spectrum repack is getting to the point where it will be impacting the public, and as a result the FCC is offering some pointers on what needs to be done for those watching over-the-air TV through an antenna.

With local TV stations across the country changing their over-the-air broadcast frequencies between now and July 2020, the FCC has released a YouTube video that shows how viewers can rescan their TVs, explaining that it is the same scan that is done when setting up a TV or converter box for the first time.

The FCC emphasizes that this is only needed for those who use an antenna to receive local channels. Service providers will do it for cable and satellite TV subscribers.

This is another part of the FCC’s $50 million, Congress-approved public information campaign to assist viewers as the repack process continues. The FCC previously announced a special call center meant to help people rescan their TVs and has a TV Rescan web page.

You can watch the FCC rescan video below.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

WASHINGTON—All those TV station employees wondering whether they dodged a bullet in the 2017 broadcast incentive auction can now search for that info, which shows that there were 858 stations willing to give up spectrum, or a little under half of the 1,800 stations the FCC was interested in getting bids from. Those 858 bids totaled a whopping $187,391,861,235.

The FCC announced the broadcasters who successfully bid to go off the air or share channels in the auction soon after it closed, but placed a two-year hold on publicizing which broadcasters got outbid.

That two-year moratorium expired Monday (April 22), and the information, plus more data on the reverse auction, has now been made public, with thousands of bids now available for perusal.

The FCC had already revealed that a total of 175 TV stations got payouts for giving up spectrum in the broadcast incentive auction, and 50 wireless bidders—including Comcast/NBCU and Dish—got that spectrum, with the largest single TV station payout $304 million. The largest payout for a noncommercial station was $194 million.

There were 2,200 stations that could have participated—commercial and noncommercial full-powers, plus Class A low powers—but that number was reduced to 1,800 because there were stations that the FCC knew going in they didn't need, for instance in smaller markets where they could get the spectrum out of what was laying fallow.

The legislation creating the broadcast incentive auction had not required the FCC to keep the losing bidders identities secret beyond the end of the reallocation of the spectrum in the forward auction involving wireless bidders on that reclaimed spectrum, but broadcasters had sought a moratorium on unsuccessful bids, ideally in perpetuity.

They had pointed out that "if an unsuccessful bidder’s participation were made public, it could be construed by competitors, investors, advertisers, employees, viewers, and others as a statement by the licensee that it is no longer committed to investing in the station’s programming and operations going forward."

The FCC staked out a middle ground in its final rules for the auction.

"Delaying the release of confidential information regarding unsuccessful bids until two years after the effective date will permit sufficient time to pass to ameliorate the potential competitive harms identified by commenters," it said at the time. 

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

The winds of change are upon us again. Incentive auction. Reallocation. Repack. Different words with the same meaning to the broadcaster.

Not too long ago, we were figuring out what to make of repack. Initially, there was a feeling that broadcasters were getting pushed around by this gigantic entity known as the Wireless Industry. It feels really bad losing the channel you are long known for and then moving somewhere else. Will the viewers continue watching with the new channel? Will the signal be the same? Are we going off air?

On the other hand, broadcasters are getting brand-new stuff and much more, paid for by the FCC. You can replace anything that needs replacement, as long as the FCC approved of it. True, they will not approve a nuclear reactor, even if you fancy one. However, you can be getting brand-new, top-of-the-line transmitter, antenna, transmission line, cooling equipment, electrical equipment, monitoring equipment, etc. That exchange is not bad at all. It is something you don’t see in a long time or even in a lifetime.

The day came that the repack was approved and the actual auction happened. That was when the real action began. We started the paperwork, then the project planning, scheduling and then the actual implementation of the project.

Two of our stations were to undergo a repack. The new channels are 16 and 18. The first one to be worked on was the station moving to Channel 16.

Replacing a high-power UHF antenna is a major project because the antenna alone may weigh 10,000 pounds or more, and it is sitting hundreds of feet up on top of a really skinny guyed tower. We often hire tower crews, and we are somewhat familiar with a number of tower service companies in the south. But if you need to evaluate a tower company, a guideline from TIA can be found at http://wirelessestimator.com/publicdocs/ANSI-TIA-1019-Standard.pdf.

The plan was to install a new main and a new standby antenna. Each would have its own transmission line going into the RF switch inside the transmitter building. The standby antenna was used for broadcast while they were working on the main.

These heavier loads meant added structural reinforcement on the tower. The reinforcing was only done on the lower sections of the tower because that was where all the additional forces were concentrated. They also added new guy wires and guy anchors. This tower was built before 2006 and it is not up to the current TIA 222 G standard. Because of the reinforcement work, the tower was also upgraded to standard G.

After the reinforcement work and the installation of new guy wires and guy anchors, the crew worked on installing the spare antenna and its transmission line. This transmission line was a flexible Heliax instead of the usual rigid lines. The spare antenna was installed about 60 feet from the base of the old antenna.

After that, they started working on the main antenna by first installing a gin pole on top of the tower. This was a slow process because the gin pole itself is like a mini tower. The old antenna cannot be dismantled and the new antenna cannot be installed without the gin pole.

Like any major project work, this one went through some delays. We were expecting a day or two of off-air time, but in the end, the station was off during daytime for more than a week.

SAFETY FIRST

The first thing that somewhat affected the pace of work was an accident that happened on April 19, 2018 at another TV station.

A different tower company, working on another repack project, got into a terrible accident at their job site. The tower they were working on fell down while they were still on the tower, and as a result, the foreman of the tower crew was killed. This happened on a 1,892-foot tower in Fordland, Mo.

Because of this accident, our tower crew took no chances in every step and made doubly sure that everything was safe and within specs. In fact, instead of taking down the whole antenna at once, they cut it into two pieces so as to lighten the load on the way down and make it a bit easier for the crew and the equipment.

The other thing that further delayed our project was that the upper sections (more than 100 feet) of the old transmission line going up the antenna was in the way of the rigging lines. They had to move these sections of the transmission lines to the side before any rigging could be done. The contractor considered using a helicopter to help in the main antenna installation, but then elected not to.

Another factor that affected the job was the terrain and woods around the tower site. The area is on top of a hill. Two of the guy anchors were down the slope, and the heavy equipment driver had to be extra careful in moving on the slopes to prevent turning over. This would not have been a problem if the terrain was all flat. Thankfully, the large and heavy motorized winch still had a place on the small flat area of the site.

Stations are well aware that tower lighting is a very important safety and regulatory aspect of the tower structure. When the old antenna was brought down, the top beacon was moved from the old antenna to the new one, and we decided to replace the bulb and other parts inside the enclosure. This would hopefully save on tower crew service trips in the future.

The new antenna was raised and installed without a problem. A sweep of both antennas was done, and they were all within specs. Thankfully, after all the tower and antenna work was done, there was no accident or injury. For me, having no incident during this complicated and dangerous job is a major accomplishment indeed.

In theory, the standby antenna should be on-air while the new antenna was being brought down, but this did not happen 100 percent of the time. As you can imagine, to dismantle and lower the old antenna and install the new one, the whole thing would have to pass through the aperture of the spare antenna. The result was that we were not able to use the spare antenna during daytime, only during nighttime and early morning.

From the antenna propagation study, the spare antenna was supposed to have little difference from the coverage area of the main antenna. However, some viewers were not able to receive the signal with the spare antenna. These viewers who used to receive our signals are just a few miles away.

The other thing I noticed was that the old antenna is actually directional (i.e., a cardioid with a small tail), with the main lobe facing away from the target area. This seemed odd, because less signal goes to the target area. Now, the new antenna will just follow this pattern. (The station was built decades ago and I came in only in 2015).

For sure, there must be a reason for this. However, when I asked around, nobody seemed to know why. I learned later that this was done because the area was too mountainous and the signal would just reflect back to the target area, resulting in severe multipath. It was also to protect our main channel from interference. The main channel tower was just 48 miles from this station.

After the work on Channel 16, the tower crew immediately went to work on the other station. Unlike the Channel 16 work, the Channel 18 antenna installation did not have many issues. The reinforcement of the tower was done by a second tower crew. They did an excellent job and, in fact, they had finished the reinforcement even while the other group was still working on the Channel 16 installation.

The spare antenna and transmission line were installed next. They were able to bring down the old antenna and installed the new antenna without any problem. The station off-air days were fewer.

However, once we got on-air, we experienced the same problem of viewers not able to receive our signal. These viewers are just 40 miles from the antenna tower. One thing I noticed is that the beam tilt was increased by 0.05 degrees with the new antenna. The new ERP is also lower than the old ERP. However, upon looking again at the Longley-Rice propagation study, the old and new antenna actually nearly have the same coverage areas. The 0.05 beam tilt increase is needed to achieve this parity.

For the first site, we had an old Axcera 2 kW transmitter which ran at only 1.4 kW. It sometimes had some issues, but by and large, it was a dependable unit. The new unit is a 3 kW Rohde & Schwarz, and it will run at 2.5 kW, which is a kilowatt higher than old transmitter power.

The old ERP was 66.4 kW while the new one is 52.6 kW. It would look like the new ERP was low, but the coverage area would actually be the same. The antenna-transmitter combination was all decided upon based on the FCC-mandated parameters.

The old transmitter was re-tuned from Channel 26 to Channel 16 and was used as the main transmitter.

One thing that was not considered earlier was a directional coupler at the RF output switch. This coupler was needed so that we can have RF power monitoring on the main transmission line and reading for our remote-control system. The coupler will be added later.

For the second site, we have an old Advanced Broadcast Systems (ABS) IOT transmitter. The brand is not well known but the transmitter proved to be reliable. In fact, the two IOTs ran a whopping 136,000 hours each and were still running until the transmitter’s last broadcast. I believe this is an endurance record for a dual IOT transmitter.

The new transmitter is also a Rohde & Schwarz. The old ERP was 780 kW while the new one is 420 kW. Again, the combination of antenna and transmitter was based on FCC requirements.

For the RF monitoring, a Dielectric RF Scout Monitor Plus was used. The output of this monitor was also used for our remote monitoring system. The new transmitter has its own power meter, but the RF scout is monitoring the power after the mask filter. Thus, it is measuring the actual power going into the transmission line.

KEEP YOUR COOL

The Channel 16 transmitter site needed a new air-conditioning unit because of the additional cooling load of the new transmitter. The same is true for the other site. It sometimes happens that engineers just pull out numbers from somewhere and then from there decide the size of the cooling equipment. The result is an improper size of AC units. Sometimes even the AC contractor does not know how to size air-conditioning units. Cooling loads must be properly calculated and the units be properly chosen using Manual J and Manual S procedures. You can check with the Air-Conditioning Contractors of America (ACCA) on how to do these procedures. [See “How to Beat the Summer Heat,” RWEE Aug. 8, 2018, or type that headline into the search field at radioworld.com.]

The other thing was calculating the overall electrical load of the site. The pole transformers must be sized big enough to handle both new and old transmitters running. Again, engineers are just used to estimating the actual electrical load of the site using theoretical transmitter efficiencies. This can be a big mistake and, at worst, may cause an electrical fire due to overloaded cables. You need to actually measure the total amperes using a clamp-on AC ammeter, or better yet, an actual AC power meter.

This was our experience and thankfully we did actual current measurements and eventually found out that the capacity of the pole transformers was inadequate to meet the additional load. We ended up replacing the pole transformers. We also replaced the service entrance main breakers and cables. New three-phase power meter, phase-loss sensor and surge arrestors were also installed.

Days before the cutover day, we tested the transmitter and made the proof-of-performance at full transmitter power. The new transmitters were silent compared to our old transmitter. The lack of noise initially felt a little odd. It seems that our senses got used to the noise, and it’s weird when it’s gone.

REPACK TO RESCAN

One thing that I thought about was viewer experience on the day they had to rescan their receivers. Some of us think that rescanning a TV is a simple task, but a lot of folks out there get confused with rescanning their TV sets. There was that chance that we might lose viewers simply because they do not know this process.

What I did was to list most of the well-known brands of TV and write down their actual rescan steps using the remote. When you go to YouTube, there are actually videos on how to rescan a TV, but they were mostly generalized presentations and would not be of much help. In fact, in some TV brands, rescanning is different from model to model.

So, I thought it was important to look at how scans are done on different brands of TV. The list was distributed among the staff so that they can assist anyone having difficulty with the rescan. Sure enough, there were calls during the cutover day and even days afterwards.

The last lesson came from our GM about the cutover day: Do not say to the viewers that you are “changing channels.” One time, someone asked him about the repack and he said, “We are changing channel and moving to Channel 16.” The person then asked, “Are you taking over the Fox channel?!” He had a lot of explaining to do after that.

Yes, we indeed changed the RF channel, but the virtual channel remains the same. That means that the TV will receive it on a different frequency but will still assign it to the same virtual channel. In a sense, the station did not really lose its original channel.

This repack project is a once-in-a-lifetime experience, and station engineers must be thoroughly involved in it. They need to have a good mental grasp of the nuts and bolts of the project. This will not only benefit them but the network as well.

With as large and complex project as the repack, it is likely that things will not happen according to plan and expectation. The engineers must be aware of this, and they are likely to be asked of critical decisions during the project.

Sometimes contractors, who have done this type of work many times, may fall into a bit of complacency in planning and preparation. It is a concern when they change things on the fly or scribble a technical drawing on the day of the project. With money available for virtually any needed equipment, services and tools, it is reasonable to expect from the contractor the highest quality of work possible.

John Marcon, CBRE, CBTE, 8VSB, is chief engineer of Victory Television Network in Little Rock, Ark.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The FCC's Media Bureau has waived some post-incentive auction reporting requirements for TV stations in three phases of the FCC's 10-phase repack, including the phase ending next month.

The FCC has both quarterly status report requirements, plus a status report 10 weeks before the completion date for each phase.

Because the phase 3, 5, and 8 completion dates are close to the quarterly report deadlines, the FCC has concluded that to require both reports is redundant.

So, since the phase completion date reports were due April 12, 2019 (phase 3), June 28, 2019 (5) and Jan. 3, 2020 (8), the quarterly reports that would have also been due April 10, July 10 and Jan. 10, respectively, have been waived.

Most of a thousand TV stations are being repacked as the FCC is moving them into smaller spectrum space to make room for advanced wireless. Some have moved early with the financial help of some of those wireless companies.

The repack is scheduled to wrap up in July 2020.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission today adopted a Report & Order implementing Congress’s directive to expand reimbursements to cover the expenses of certain LPTV and TV translator stations as well as FM broadcasters affected by the agency’s TV spectrum repack.

The vote adopting a Report and Order fulfills the March 23, 2019, deadline set up by Congress in its 2018 Reimbursement Expansion Act (REA) that allocated additional funds to reimburse the eligible expenses of LPTV and TV translator stations, FM broadcasters as well as full power and Class A stations, MVPDs and set aside funds to educate consumers.

LPTV and TV translator stations must meet two eligibility requirements to receive repack-related expense reimbursement payments, including having filed an application with the FCC’ Special Displacement Window and obtaining a construction permit as well as being licensed and transmitting for at least nine of the 12 months prior to April 13, 2017.

The R&O also covers repack reimbursement expenses of full and low-power FM stations and FM translators, licensed and transmitting on April 13, 2017, that have facilities impacted by the TV spectrum repack.

Qualified expenses of FM stations include the cost of permanently relocating, temporarily or permanently modifying facilities or purchasing or modifying auxiliary facilities to maintain service while work on repacked TV stations proceeds.

The R&O also sets up a mechanism to reimburse these newly reimbursement-eligible broadcasters.

Responding to the vote, NAB EVP Communications expressed appreciation for the FCC staff’s expeditious work to implement REA. “Under a tight timeline, the staff worked incredibly hard to reach a balanced outcome that is as fair as possible given the challenges presented by the repack. We are committed to working with the Commission to ensure that tens of millions of viewers and listeners do not lose radio and TV service as the repack continues,” he said.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.

RAYMOND, Maine—As San Francisco DTV broadcasters KGO-TV and KRON-TV prepare for their repack, they will be getting an update to their antenna courtesy of a newly designed THV series directional pylon antenna from Dielectric. The stacked antenna array will be installed atop Sutro Tower in San Francisco later this year.

As Dielectric customizes its THV series of antennas for its customers, the company cited specific challenges with this latest model due to the strict earthquake code antennas must comply with in the San Francisco Bay area, as well as other environmental considerations and the ability to support antennas for both stations.

“These design considerations called for a grade of steel that is much thicker and stronger than that which is customary for antenna construction,” said Keith Pelletier, vice president and general manager at Dielectric. “By design, the stack will be cable of handling the extra weight, and compliant with all earthquake restrictions.”

Pelletier says that a third-party structural engineering firm is currently reviewing the design to ensure it meets the earthquake code. If approved, the antenna array will be constructed during the second quarter of 2019.

For the installation, the stacked antenna array will be affixed to one of Sutro Tower’s three “candelabra” arms, reinforced with guy wires in accordance with the earthquake code, a unique feature for the Sutro Tower. The antennas feature slotted coaxial designs to avoid possible interference between antennas. It also features a low windload and an auxiliary antenna (TLSV series) to ensure no off-air time during the repack process.

“Since KGO is already operating in the VHF band, we will install an auxiliary antenna lower down on the tower that allows them to operate on channel 7,” Pelletier said. “That frees up the tower top and allows us to install KRON and KGO new antennas on top of the tower and allows KGO to remain on air. Once that’s completed, KGO can move to its permanent antenna on top and Sutro Tower will remain outfitted with an auxiliary VHF antenna.”

Sutro Tower is scheduled to be repacked during phase nine. KGO-TV will be repacked from channel 7 to channel 12, while KRON-TV will go from UHF channel 38 to the vacated channel 7.

Dielectric will showcase its VHF antennas, including the THV series, at the 2019 NAB Show.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.

ROSSLYN, Va.—A series of new rules and proposals are in the pipeline from the FCC in regards to the areas of ATSC 3.0 and interference issues regarding FM translators according to comments from FCC Chairman Ajit Pai.

Pai spoke on these topics to the Association of Federal Communications Consulting Engineers last Friday, as well as providing an update on the TV spectrum repack.

Broadcasters were first allowed to use ATSC 3.0 as of November 2017. The FCC issued rules for the next gen standard officially took effect in July 2018, though IT work is still in progress for designing a new form in the Licensing and Management System, according to Pai. He believes the database changes will be completed in the second quarter of 2019.

In addition, the FCC’s Media Bureau is drafting a new order in the ATSC 3.0 proceedings to address issues like how to handle local simulcasting requirements if a station doesn’t have a viable simulcasting partner and another order to resolve certain issues raised in petitions for reconsideration.

When it comes to the TV repack currently underway, Pai emphasized progress made since the close of the incentive auction. He highlighted that 143 stations had made their transition to new spectrum during Phase One, which concluded on Nov. 30, 2018, putting them “ahead of schedule.” Now in Phase Two, Pai said that 20 stations of an expected 115 have already moved. With a deadline of April 12, Pai noted that tower crews, broadcast stations and engineers are looking at a busy two months.

Pai also spoke about the funds designated to assist stations as they move during the repack. In a blog post earlier this week, Pai mentioned that the $1 billion awarded by Congress in addition to the $1.75 billion previously set aside for the repack gives the FCC “the resources to help stations do the job.” He said that $350 million in reimbursements had already been approved.

On the radio front, Pai noted that as more AM stations have obtained FM translators, complaints from primary FMs about interference have increased. An NPRM was launched last May to address these concerns; it proposed allowing translators to change to any available channel to avoid interference. Having taken industry feedback, Media Bureau is drafting a new order, for which Pai said the FCC expects to take “action this spring to make translator interference resolution a faster and less contentious process.”

Pai closed his speech by bringing up the 1980s U.S. Men’s Olympic Ice Hockey team, which celebrated the 39th anniversary of the “Miracle on Ice” Friday. Alluding to how the team had to keep their focus after beating the Soviets to go on and beat Finland for the gold medal, Pai encouraged the crowd “to keep our eyes on the prize and keep working together to seize these opportunities for the American people.”

For all the latest news and insight on the repack and ATSC 3.0, visit our silos for the two, repack and ATSC3.

WASHINGTON—On the agenda for the FCC’s March 15 meeting is a vote on a Report and Order that will establish the rules of disbursement for the $1 billion in repack funds that Congress approved to aid broadcasters last year in their transition. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai outlined the meeting’s agenda in a recent blog post.

“[L]ast year Congress approved an additional $1 billion to cover broadcaster transition costs, and it expanded the list of entities eligible for reimbursement to include affected low-power TV stations, TV translators and FM radio stations,” wrote Pai.

The $1 billion in funds, which was part of the RAY BAUMS Act, is for the FCC to compensate broadcasters for things like new equipment, tweaked equipment and moving costs as stations transition to new spectrum following the incentive auction in 2017 where wireless carriers won the rights to previous occupied TV spectrum.

The 10-phase process of the repack is currently underway. Phase one concluded on Nov.30, 2018, with all stations meeting their deadline save for those granted extensions or moved to other phases. All stations that are part of the repack will have until July 3, 2020, to complete the move.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.

RAYMOND, Maine—After a pair of meetings over the last five months, the FCC has heard from a number of broadcast companies and representatives about issues concerning repack site completions. Following the most recent meeting on Jan. 31, where the FCC Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau met with these representatives, there seems to be a key takeaway:

“The FCC will be flexible in considering STA applications, and extensions if justified, potentially allowing more stations to use interim antennas to meet phase deadlines,” said Keith Pelletier, vice president and general manager of Dielectric, which was one of the companies that attended the meeting.

Severe winter weather and a shortage of qualified tower crews are part of the reason why there is concern over whether broadcasters will be able to meet phase deadlines. As these delays continue to build, they could eventually impact the implementation of permanent antennas.

“Some of our customers have been forced to place their permanent repack antennas in storage,” said Pelletier in a press release. “Stations that fail to vacate their channels in time could prevent stations in future phases from staying on schedule,due to the critical linked changes in the transition plan. We see potential for a serious bottleneck in phases three through six.”

Dielectric contends that because there are more crews capable of safely installing side-mounted broadband antennas, installing these interim solutions could help keep the repack schedule on track.

“The FCC had indicated their willingness to approve interim facilities for reimbursement with suitable engineering support, demonstrating that the interim facility does not significantly harm the station’s over-the-air viewership,” said Jay Martin, vice president of sales for Dielectric. “If the choice becomes going off-air or staying on the existing channel and disrupting critical linkages, operating an interim facility may be a viable compromise for all concerned.”

About 143 stations moved during phase one of the repack, which ended Nov. 30, 2018, with another 115 scheduled to move by the April 12 deadline for phase two. More than 30 of these stations are now operating under STA approvals. More than 400 stations are expected to move channels in phases three to six between mid-April and Oct.18.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.

WASHINGTON—The FCC has released its status report on the post-broadcast incentive auction TV station repack, which involves most of 1,000 full powers and 2,000 low powers in a 10-phase plan, and as FCC Chairman Ajit Pai signaled last week, the commission is ahead of schedule. It is also freeing up more money for the TV station transition.

"We are pleased to report that the transition is off to a very strong start on all counts, and that the Transition Scheduling Plan and the Commission’s rules, procedures, and systems are operating as designed and anticipated," the Incentive Auction Task Force and Media Bureau said. "[T]he transition is ahead of schedule both in terms of the number of stations that have already vacated their pre-auction channels and the amount of 600 MHz spectrum that has been cleared and therefore made available for use by wireless auction winners.

The FCC said that among the wireless carriers, T-Mobile, the auction's biggest winner, said it has already launched service using its broadcast spectrum in more than 1,500 cities in 37 states and Puerto Rico.

The auction closed April 13, 2017, with 84 MHz of spectrum raising almost $20 billion, including $7 billion for deficit reduction. The stations being repacked into new channels so the 84 MHz can be used by wireless carriers have until July 3, 2020, to make the move.

Only 175 stations agreed to give up spectrum, but another 987 stations had to be reassigned to new channels to free up that 84 MHz spectrum.

Those 175 stations have already been paid over $10 billion, the FCC said.

Of the 175, only 41 went off the air, with 30 changing from UHF to VHF licenses and the other 104 striking deals to share channels with another station.

Phase one of the 10-phase transition ended Nov. 30, 2018, with all stations meeting their deadline, except those granted extensions or moves to other phases. Even so, some other stations in other phases moved early, so that 172 stations have made the move, or 17% of the total 987 repacked stations vacating their pre-auction channel.

The FCC announced that it would be allocating an additional $68.1 million to 316 full power and Class A stations from the incentive auction repack fund created by Congress, boosting the total allocated so far to $1,808,722,301.

For all the latest news and insight on the repack, visit our repack silo.