WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission has kicked off the agency’s first spectrum auction in four years, an AWS-3 auction offering 200 5G-grade spectrum licenses that have lain fallow for more than a decade.

Bidding in the AWS-3 auction, formally designated as Auction 113, began the morning of June 2.

The auction involves spectrum licenses in the 1,695-1,710 MHz, 1,755-1,780 MHz, and 2,155-2,180 MHz bands and will offer more than 1.4 billion MHz-POPs (“Megahertz Population”) available for auction—a metric calculated by multiplying the bandwidth by the population covered by the licenses. The auction can be tracked here.

The licenses made available had been auctioned in 2014 for commercial use, but were the subject of defaults or bid withdrawals. As a result, these 200 licenses were not sold in the prior auction and the spectrum has remained unused in the FCC’s inventory ever since.

The license areas included in this auction are home to over 100 million consumers across 48 states, two U.S. territories and the Gulf of Mexico. They include major markets like New York, Chicago, Boston, Tampa, Fla., and Charlotte, N.C.

“Finally! The FCC is back in the game,” FCC Chair Brendan Carr enthused in a statement. “Spectrum auctions are the lifeblood of licensed wireless service, and it has been far too long since the FCC has run an auction. Today, we are kicking off a vitally important auction to pump more spectrum into the marketplace. There is a reason why the first item the Commission voted on at my first meeting as Chairman was to get the process going for this very auction. More spectrum means more building, lower prices, and stronger competition. The FCC’s Build America Agenda is restoring America’s leadership in wireless.”

The auction utilizes rules the FCC proposed and adopted last year. Procceeds will fund its Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Reimbursement Program (commonly known as “rip and replace”), which seeks to remove untrustworthy technology from U.S. communications networks.

Following the FCC’s 2020 decision to repurpose the lower C-Band from satellite broadcast contribution use to mobile wireless services, they are now looking to do the same for the upper C-band spectrum currently used for broadcast distribution, supporting the delivery of live news, sports, and entertainment programming to local affiliate stations and cable head-ends.

Currently, the upper C-band spectrum remains a critical part of traditional distribution infrastructure, but often utilizes older technology, is expensive to operate and offers a centralized distribution network without the ability to easily localize.

When the lower C-band spectrum was reallocated in 2020, the resulting auction raised $81 billion, with a portion of the proceeds allocated to help broadcasters relocate and modernize contribution workflows that suddenly lost access to spectrum.

That transition accelerated the industry’s move toward IP-based contribution and permanently changed how live content is transported. What might have taken a decade under normal conditions happened in a matter of years, driven by regulation and supported by government funding.

If the upper C Band spectrum is re-allocated similarly, at a time when the industry is heavily cost overhung, it could create opportunities for broadcasters to reduce costs and open up new sources of revenue, funded at least partially by the government.

Migrating from Satellite to IP Distribution
Currently, broadcasters deliver fully assembled channels via satellite to transmitters and cable head ends. There is limited content replacement for localization utilizing local ad servers triggered by SCTE triggers embedded in the signal.

In the future, content, schedules, and metadata could be delivered over IP in the distribution stream format, often in non-real time for file based content, to a lightweight playout server in the headend or transmitter site, which creates the channel locally, enabling:

• Lower infrastructure and distribution costs
• Increased revenue through hyperlocal advertising and targeted content
• Increased reliability with a multipath architecture and redundant, independently operating playout servers

To facilitate this, the IRD in the head end is replaced with either a small playout server or a lightweight cloud instance, connected to an IP network; the onward distribution network remains the same.

The server has a storage cache for file content and can switch to local live IP feeds. It also has a copy of the schedule downloaded to it, so if the network is lost, it can operate independently, either playing cached content or, if it has not been downloaded yet, evergreen emergency content.

The Business Impact: Lower Cost, Greater Flexibility
If the FCC chooses to fund the transition, broadcasters may face a rare opportunity to receive financial support to replace infrastructure that already limits flexibility and profitability.

Rather than treating the potential C-band claw-back as a like-for-like replacement exercise, station groups can use it as a catalyst to modernize distribution in ways that:

• Reduce long-term operating costs
  Typically, IP networks are less costly than Satellite time and the required equipment generally shifts from specialized high-frequency capable to off-the-shelf IT-based.
• Improve monetization flexibility
  With a server at the point of distribution, local content and advertisements can be added just for the region served, creating great flexibility to localize and sell local advertising.
  In addition, IP and software offer new and more flexible business models, such as pay-as-you-go and SaaS, which are ideal for providing pop-up channels for occasional live events.
• Simplify operations across linear and streaming
  Linear, streaming, FAST and VoD channels can be distributed from a common content pool, simplifying the supply chain and consolidating silos, further reducing operating costs.
• Increase reliability and reduce on-air incidents
  Utilizing IP technology enables multipath distribution and lower cost, off-the-shelf hardware, and provides for easy to implement redundancy strategies. The use of distributed networks and local servers provides a robust solution, reducing technical failures, on-air incidents and errors.
• Future-proof distribution against further spectrum or market shifts
  IP distribution provides a materially different cost and operating model for station groups and network operators, as well as providing them with insulation against further satellite bandwidth reallocation and the ability to localize content more easily.

Looking Ahead
This distributed IP architecture reflects the approach BCNEXXT has already implemented in the playout architecture behind Vipe, which was designed from the ground up for distributed, IP-based playout rather than centralized, hardware-dependent broadcast infrastructures.

As the industry evolves, this type of architecture provides broadcasters with a practical path to modernize playout and distribution, improving operational efficiency, unlocking new monetization opportunities, and adapting to change without disruption. The spectrum conversation may be the immediate catalyst, but the bigger opportunity is for broadcasters to rethink how distribution is built, operated, and monetized over the next decade.

WASHINGTON—FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has called for new spectrum auctions for wireless mobile as well as revisiting rules regulating TV loudness.

In a blog posted on Wednesday, the new chairman outlined his plans for the first FCC meeting scheduled for Feb. 27 and cited the aftereffects of Hurricane Helene to advocate for expanded wireless spectrum availability, particularly for first responders.

“Last Friday, I took my first official trip as FCC Chairman, visiting parts of North Carolina that were hit hard by Hurricane Helene,” Carr said. “I met with 911 operators who handled a sixfold surge in calls during the peak of the storm, first responders who led rescue and recovery efforts, telecom workers who quickly restored communications in difficult conditions, and local broadcasters who provided vital information to their communities. These visits only underscored the importance of robust, resilient, and affordable connectivity for Americans across the country. That is why we are taking action right out of the gate to get more spectrum into the hands of consumers—spectrum that can power new connections and innovations.”

To address these deficiencies, Carr said the commission will be “laser-focused on accelerating efforts that can get more spectrum into the marketplace. “

Carr characterizes the auction of AWS-3 spectrum licences—a band of RF used primarily for mobile broadband and public safety—as a “win-win.” He said he hopes to “kick-start” the process this month to complete it by June 23, 2026.

“It brings new spectrum into play for commercial use,” he said. “And the proceeds from this auction will also cover the costs of the national security initiative known as ‘rip and replace’—an effort that is removing untrustworthy technology, like Huawei and ZTE gear, from networks.”

In a move sure to get the attention of broadcasters, Carr also called for opening up additional portions of the C-band spectrum for 5G. Used mostly by TV and radio broadcasters for satellite downlinks, broadcasters have opposed efforts to expand usage of C-band over concerns of interference, particularly for ENG.

Carr hasn't been shy in advocating for more spectrum auctions. At last year’s Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC) annual meeting, Carr suggested that auctioning off additional broadcast spectrum would be on the block.

Carr also said the commission plans to vote on final rules to give emergency managers and consumers greater flexibility when it comes to Wireless Emergency Alerts, in particular, deciding when to issue alerts strategically in order to avoid so-called “alert fatigue” (aka “Boy Who Cried Wolf” syndrome).

Carr also said he will revisit the CALM Act, which was passed by Congress 15 years ago to require broadcasters to work with MVPDs to reduce the volume on TV commercials.

“Loud TV commercials are a frustrating headache,” Carr wrote. “You’re sitting there, chilling out, and then BOOM some commercial breaks in at a high volume. I don’t like them, and I’m pretty sure you don’t either. In fact, the FCC has recently seen an uptick in consumer complaints about excessively loud commercials.

“Back in 2010, Congress passed a law to address this issue, but given the rise in complaints I think now is the time for the FCC to revisit the issue,” he added. “Accordingly, we will consider a notice of proposed rulemaking to see if there are additional actions the Commission could take today to make sure TV viewers aren’t inundated by exceedingly loud commercials.”

WASHINGTON—The FCC is prepping for another spectrum auction to help with the development of 5G, this time for the 3.45-3.55 GHz band. FCC Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has shared a draft Order with her colleagues and plans for a vote at the March Open Commission meeting.

If adopted, the 100 MHz making up the 3.45-3.55 GHz band would be put up for auction for the express purpose of continuing to support 5G development across the U.S. In addition, Rosenworcel shared a proposed Public Notice seeking comments on procedures for the auction, which would have a tentative start date of early October.

The 3.45-3.55 GHz band is predominantly used for federal government radiolocation. However, sports and entertainment events have used portions of it as other areas of the spectrum have become crowded or unusable.

The proposed new rules allocate the 3.45-3.55 GHz band for flexible-use service. It would establish a framework for coordination of non-federal and federal use and establish a band plan,  as well as technical, licensing and competitive bidding rules for the band. It would also complete the relocation of non-federal radioloaction operators to the 2.9-3.0 GHz band and the sunset of amateur use in the 3.3-3.5 GHz band.

Last year’s Consolidated Appropriations Act featured a provision—Beat CHINA for 5G Act of 2020—that required the FCC to commence competitive bidding of licenses in the 3.45 GHz band by the end of 2021. This order would meet that requirement.

“We need to deliver the 5G that the American people were promised,” said Rosenworcel. “That means a 5G that is fast, secure, resilient, and—most importantly—available across the country.  This important auction is a crucial step toward making that a reality.  I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this proposal.”

The public draft of the proposed order, as well as the agenda and other drafts for the March 17 Open Commission Meeting, will be available on the FCC website as of Feb. 23. 

WASHINGTON—Perhaps not surprising following the announcement of a bipartisan bill last week that would mandate a public auction led by the FCC of the C-band spectrum to make way for 5G services, but the key takeaway from the C-band hearing in Congress on Tuesday, Oct. 29, was the support for that plan of action.

The hearing, hosted by the House Communications Subcommittee, took a close look at the Clearing Broad Airwaves for New Deployment (C-BAND) Act introduced by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and others. It also examined the proposal from the C-Band Alliance that was released on Monday, which would see spectrum cleared through a private auction.

Doyle, who presided over the hearing, called CBA’s proposal “deeply disturbing,” explaining that in a private auction the funds from selling the spectrum would go to CBA’s member companies rather than the U.S. Treasury, which is preferred by most legislators to help pay for broadband deployment and next-gen 911. He also called the C-band spectrum a “precious national resource.”

Other witnesses at the hearing supported Doyle and the preference for a public auction. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said that he did not believe that a CBA-led auction would deploy 5G any faster, and that an FCC-led auction would be fairer and more transparent. Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio), who also helped write the C-BAND Act, reaffirmed his support of a public auction.

Witnesses from outside of Congress also voiced their support for a public auction, including representatives from ACA Connects, Citizens Against Government Waste and Public Knowledge.

James Frownfelter, chairman of ABS, was one of the only witnesses to support a CBA-led auction, saying the FCC reclaiming and auctioning satellite spectrum in a public auction would be like satellite operators having their spectrum “largely confiscated without compensation.” He also said that about 25% of any proceeds from a CBA-led auction would be directed to the Treasury.

A witness for Cisco did not definitively take a side, but did point out that government-led spectrum transitions have been slow and difficult in the past, and that a private-led auction would be a carrot rather than a stick for band operators.

Claude Aiken, president of WISPA, which represents fixed wireless service providers, used his testimony to remind people that there were additional options beyond an auction, specifically a proposal by the Broadband Access Coalition that uses an auction and sharing spectrum to open up C-band.

The FCC is tasked with determining its plan for the C-band spectrum by the end of this year.

For a full roundup of Tuesday’s testimony, read Multichannel News’story.

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—FCC Chairman Ajit Pai testified to Congress on Tuesday, May 7, about the commission’s proposed FY 2020 budget and the plan for how it will be deployed. The main focus will be on the development and rollout of 5G and, as a result, another spectrum auction that will cover the 37 GHz, 39 GHz and 47 GHz bands.

Pai began his testimony, however, by speaking on how Congress’ surplus of funds in the FY 2019 budget helped, in one instance with auction funding. Congress provided $17 million in additional auction funding, which Pai says “enabled us to meet our statutory deadline to complete our rulemaking to implement changes to the TV Broadcast Relocation Fund and provide money to reimburse low-power television, TV translator and FM stations impacted by the post-Incentive Auction spectrum repack.”

Looking ahead to FY 2020, a key goal for the FCC with its planned budget is to continue the development of 5G networks throughout the country. “Our work on 5G will open the door to new services and applications that will grow our economy and improve our standard of living,” Pai said, citing not only improved connection abilities for people, but the potential to create three million new jobs, $275 billion in private investment and $500 billion in new economic growth.

To realize that potential, Pai outlined the FCC’s 5G FAST (Facilitate America’s Superiority in 5G Technology) plan. The plan is comprised of three key components: pushing more spectrum into the marketplace; promoting the deployment of wireless infrastructure; and modernizing outdated regulations.

That first point had led to the announcement of a new spectrum auction for the 37, 39 and 47 GHz bands. The FCC has already conducted two spectrum auctions in 2019, the first for the 28 GHz band that concluded in January and raised $702,572,410 according to Pai; and the 24 GHz auction that is currently in its assignment phase. The 24 GHz auction is reported to have raised just under $2 billion.

The next auction, which Pai described as the largest in FCC history, is currently slated to begin on Dec. 10. An expected 3.4 GHz of spectrum is expected to be released into the commercial marketplace. The possibility of the auction were first announced during the FCC’s open meeting in April.

“During the next fiscal year, we also intend to auction mid-band spectrum in the 3.5 GHz band,” Pai added. “We will continue our work to make additional mid-band spectrum bands available for flexible use, including in the 2.5 GHz and 3.7-4.2 GHz bands.”

In addition, Pai spoke as to why the FCC denied China Mobile USA’s application to provide international telecommunication services in the U.S., citing that they believed it to be a threat to national security. This impacts companies like Huawei, which Pai was asked about directly following this testimony by senators, and which he confirmed his belief that they pose a national security threat.

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.

WASHINGTON—FCC chair Ajit Pai said the FCC will be holding two spectrum auctions in short order, which means next November and soon thereafter.

That will depend on a congressional fix related to the auction process, but Pai appeared confident that can be resolved.

"I’m excited to announce today that it is my intention for the United States to hold an auction beginning this November of spectrum in the 28-GHz band, followed immediately thereafter by an auction of spectrum in the 24-GHz band," Pai said in a speech Monday (Feb. 26) to the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

He said the FCC will seek comment this spring on how the auctions should be conducted.

But the first order of business will be in legislators' hands, he said.

"In order for us to start an auction in November, we need the U.S. Congress to pass legislation by May 13 addressing the handling of upfront payments," Pai said. "Until now, this technical issue hasn’t impeded the FCC’s work because we’ve been busy getting spectrum we’ve already allocated ready to be auctioned. But we’re now ready to move forward with a major spectrum auction, and if we don’t get the problem fixed by May 13, our efforts to realize America’s 5G future will be delayed. I’m pleased that Congress is making bipartisan progress on this issue and am hopeful that we’ll be able to kick off a major spectrum auction in November."

That is a reference to a House FCC reauthorization bill that would resolve the issue, the issue being that the FCC currently has to deposit upfront payments from bidders in an interest-bearing account -- so the government's money can be making money -- but current financial regulations don't allow that. So, the bill would let the FCC deposit those upfront payments directly into the Treasury.

[The Spectrum Crunch Cometh]

House Energy & Commerce Committee chair Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and ranking member Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), are both looking to fix the FCC's problem and get more spectrum in the 5G pipeline.

"The race to 5G is a sprint, not a marathon, and the proposed spectrum auctions will help ensure the United States remains at the forefront of this emerging technology," they said in a joint statement. "Today’s announcement from chairman Pai is yet another reason to enact the bipartisan Ray Baum's Act, which includes the necessary fix to the upfront spectrum deposit payments. We are continuing to work with all parties to get this important legislation to the finish line.”

Wireless operators hungry for that spectrum were cheering Pai's move.

“CTIA applauds chairman Pai for scheduling a high-band spectrum auction in November and will work with the FCC, Congress and other stakeholders to ensure the auction timeline is met,” said the group's president, Meredith Attwell Baker. “The wireless industry needs the certainty of a spectrum pipeline, and chairman Pai’s commitment is a critical next step to meeting the United States’ 5G ambitions and creating millions of new jobs and billions to our economy.”

In its most recent spectrum auction, the broadcast incentive auction, the FCC freed up 84 megahertz of low-band spectrum for commercial and unlicensed wireless use. Now, it is looking to free up higher band spectrum.

This story first appeared on TVT's sister publication B&C. 

Now that the FCC’s broadcast spectrum, or repack, auction has ended, the hard work begins.

The auction presented significant financial opportunities for the many broadcasters who participated, however, there are now a variety of issues that must be addressed. The reality is that we’re currently in the process of essentially rebuilding some of the broadcast industry’s critical infrastructure, and we have 39 months to do it.

Check out the rest of this column at Broadcasting & Cable.

To follow our online coverage, visit our repack silo, www.tvtechnology.com/repack. 

CHELMSFORD, MASS.—The completion of the FCC’s spectrum auction could prove to be a boom for TV white space deployments in the U.S., per the WhiteSpace Alliance (WSA).

According to WSA, the completion of the incentive auction will free up more than 80 MHz of spectrum for license-exempt wireless internet access. “This newly available spectrum will support additional digital infrastructure development across the United States, and help foster the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT),” said Dr. Apurva N. Mody, chairman of WhiteSpace Alliance.

White space technology use available TV band spectrum to deliver fixed wireless broadband services at distances up to 30 km, which makes it useful for rural or remote areas. TV white space can also support current and emerging infrastructure applications, including machine-to-machine communications, IIoT, Smart Grid deployment and industrial automation.

“Making sufficient spectrum available to the marketplace is the final step needed to unleash a critical mass of innovative services,” said Dr. Mody. “WSA will continue to work actively with the Federal Communications Committee to evaluate and shape regulations for TV band white spaces.”

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission’s Incentive Auction Task Force and the Media Bureau will host a public workshop to review procedures related to the post-auction broadcast transition on Monday, March 13, 2017.

Following the auction, now in the assignment phase, the commission will issue a public notice beginning the 39-month period during which some full-power and Class A broadcast television stations must transition to post-auction channel assignments in the reorganized television band.

The workshop will include presentations and panels by commission staff focusing on post-auction procedures. The workshop will be held in the commission meeting room at FCC headquarters in Washington, D.C., and will be open to the public.

Additional details, including the exact times and format for the workshop, how to register, how to view the workshop remotely, and how to obtain reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities will be released at a later date.

WASHINGTON—The fourth and final forward TV spectrum incentive auction has now closed at $19,632,506,746, but the auction itself is not over. Forward auction winners will next vie for specific frequencies.

“The participation of these broadcasters and wireless carriers will enable the Commission to release 84 megahertz of spectrum into the broadband marketplace. These low-band airwaves will improve wireless coverage across the country and will play a particularly important role in deploying mobile broadband services in rural areas," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai in a statement.

The bidding went into lightning rounds of 40 minutes each Wednesday morning, Feb. 8. Fewer than 20 or so of the 832 licensing areas remained active in the lightning rounds. Most were small markets but unreserved spectrum in New Orleans crept back into play at one point. The commission pushed the auction further on Friday by boosting bids from 10 to 15 percent between rounds, and by making bidders go all in, i.e., increasing the activity requirement from 95 to 100 percent. The final forward auction closed after 58 rounds.

While this particular bidding phase of the auction is over, the auction itself goes on. Winners will proceed to the assignment phase in which they vie for specific frequencies versus the generic blocks they just won. (See, “FCC Clarifies Auction Assignment Phase,” Jan. 26, 2017)

The commission previously said that it would release an assignment phase pubic notice “within a few business days” after the end of the forward auction clock phase. The assignment phase PN will announce the start time and provide directions for bidders. It will be followed about a week later with a preview period, then a practice auction, a mock auction and finally, the real thing.

The assignment phase is expected to “take several weeks” given the number of wireless licensing partial economic areas, or PEAs. The United States and its territories are divided into 416 PEAs, compared to the 210 designated market areas that geographically define TV broadcast licenses.

The final funds will be divided into $10 billion ($10,054,676,822) for 84 MHz of broadcast TV spectrum, $1.75 billion to move TV stations into what’s left of the broadcast spectrum band, $225 million to pay for the auction, and $7 billion plus whatever is raised in the assignment phase, for the U.S. Treasury.

For more TV Technology coverage, see our spectrum auction silo.

WASHINGTON—Forward auction bidders will have to go all in, starting tomorrow, Friday, Feb., 10, when the incremental price between rounds will also increase from 10 to 15 percent, the Federal Communications Commission auction team announced today. The commission boosted the activity requirement and the opening bid price per round as the auction wears on with continued activity in fewer than 20 wireless licensing areas—15 when round 51 ended at 2:40 p.m. Eastern today (See table below.)

Since Feb.1, the opening price for spectrum blocks in each wireless licensing area is set for each round by adding a fixed 10 percent increment to the previous round’s posted price. Beginning Friday, Feb. 10, 2017, the increment will change to 15 percent, the commission said.

Also beginning Friday, Feb. 10, 2017, bidders will have to go all in. The commission said that “the activity requirement will increase from 95 to 100 percent.”

“Specifically, a bidder’s activity requirement will be satisfied when the bidder has bidding activity equal to 100 percent of its current eligibility. If this requirement is met, the bidder’s eligibility will not be reduced for the next round.

Bidding in the fourth and final stage of the TV spectrum incentive forward auction has now gone on for 51 rounds.

For more TV Technology coverage, see our spectrum auction silo.

WASHINGTON—OTA Broadcasting wants to be able to sell stations to wireless providers in a post-auction aftermarket. OTA specifically wants to the Federal Communications Commission to release its TV channel repacking data as soon as possible to see what stations that did not sell in the auction would be in the way of a timely repack. 

“Free-market forces also can be harnessed to simply eliminate some stations that present a bottleneck or that constitute part of a linked station set” OTA said in informal comments filed with the Federal Communications Commission. (Click on the image below to bring the filing up in a separate window.)

OTA did not mention its own intent to sell, but the Fairfax, Va.-based subsidiary of Michael Dell’s investment firm, MSD Capital, was identified as a seller that stood to make $4 billion its $80 million TV portfolio, according to a Jan. 13, 2016 article in The Wall Street Journal.

However, the $4 billion was based on opening bids set by the FCC that would have generated about $40 billion in revenues, while the auction is topping out at less than half of that amount. Also, a broadcaster’s participation did not guarantee the sale.

OTA said an aftermarket would expedite wireless provider access to spectrum they won at auction, and give those broadcasters who failed to sell spectrum at auction another chance, as well as giving channel-sharers an incentive to vacate spectrum before they complete construction on new facilities.

“Using the flexibility provided by the commission for temporary channel sharing, free market forces can be used to induce broadcast stations voluntarily to vacate channels in the new wireless band even before their new permanent facilities have been constructed,” the filing said.

At the 84 MHz to be cleared to make way for wireless broadband, a total of 1,274 stations will have to move to new channel assignments, according to the Sept. 30, 2016 Post-Incentive Auction Transition Scheduling Plan Public Notice, which also outlines the timeline and procedure of the repack. Of those 1,274 stations, 710 are “linked” to others in a sort of interference daisy-chain, thus moves must be coordinated among those linked stations.

The National Association of Broadcasters said the mandated 39-month move window was not enough time to repack 1,274 stations, particularly when more than half are tangled up with neighboring stations. OTA said an aftermarket will help move things along.

OTA owns KAXT and KTLN in San Francisco, KVOS in Seattle, WYNC in Boston, WEPA in Pittsburgh, WTBL in Lenoir, N.C.; W2ICK in Charlotte, N.C.; WEBR in New York; KUGB in Houston; KPSE and KMIR in Palm Springs, Calif.; and W24BB in Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, Pa.

For more TV Technology coverage, see our spectrum auction silo.

WASHINGTON—Broadcast attorneys are asking incentive auction organizers when they can talk, already. Now that the reverse auction is complete and new TV station channel assignments are being finalized, attorneys say there’s no more need for the quiet period that prohibited communications among broadcasters during the auction.

“I am writing to encourage the FCC to expeditiously clarify that its incentive auction prohibited communications rules no longer apply to information concerning the actions of any broadcast television station in the reverse auction,” said Kathleen A. Kirby, co-chair of the Telecommunications, Media & Technology Practice Group at Wiley Rein LLP in Washington, in a Jan. 30 filing with the Federal Communications Commission.

In its auction Bidding Procedures Public Notice released Aug. 11, 2015, the commission said it would impose a “prohibition on communicating information relating to bids or bidding strategies, such as non-public information that bidders may access in the auction system, to broadcast licensees eligible to participate in the reverse auction or to forward auction applicants, subject to specified exceptions,” involving joint ownership and channel-sharing arrangements.

The quiet period kicked in more than a year ago. The closing conditions of the auction were met Jan. 18 when forward auction bidding reached two necessary fiscal thresholds.

Kirby noted that the commission’s “Post-Incentive Auction Transition Scheduling Plan,” released last Friday, said that “Since the final stage rule has been met, bidding in the reverse auction is complete, although forward auction is still ongoing. Accordingly, some relief from the prohibition for communications among broadcasters may be appropriate, particularly where doing so would assist the public interest in a smooth post-auction transition.”

So what’s the hold-up, Kirby inquired.

“Absent further clarification, the ongoing uncertainty regarding the prohibited communications rules threatens to undermine the commission’s repacking efforts,” she wrote.

Preston Padden, former ABC lobbyist who represented a sellers coalition earlier in the auction process, sounded a similar note last week:
“It is hard to understand why the FCC continues to fret about communications that could reveal broadcaster ‘bids and bidding strategies’ even though broadcaster bidding is over—finished,” he said in an email accompanying his filed comment. 

See more TV Technology coverage at our spectrum auction silo.

Also see....
Aug. 19, 2015
“Shh! Public TV Questions Auction Quiet Period”
Public stations are not alone in their quest for quiet period details. DTV Utah, a consortium of eight TV stations serving the Salt Lake City market, also asked the FCC how they can navigate the quiet period.

WASHINGTON—The TV spectrum incentive Stage 4 Round 11 forward auction raised a total of $23 million ($23,013,000) when bidding in the round concluded Thursday afternoon. All told, before discounts, the auction has raised a total of $18.5 billion ($18,545,525,787), inching up in successive rounds since closing conditions were met on Jan. 18.

Bidding in this final stage of the forward auction will resume tomorrow at 10 a.m. Eastern, with a second, two-hour round starting at 2 p.m. Eastern. Starting Monday, Jan. 30, 2017, and continuing each business day until further notice, the bidding schedule will increase to four, one-hour rounds per day, the commission said.

The schedule will be 10 to 11 a.m.; noon to 1 p.m.; 2 to 3 p.m.; and 4 to 5 p.m., all Eastern times.

The Federal Communications Commission said subsequent schedule changes could be made based on the auctions progress. The four-round schedule was posted on the FCC auction dashboard page through next Wednesday. Any changes will show up there. 

“Bidders logged in to the Auction System can check the schedule of upcoming rounds at any time by clicking on the Auction Schedule link in the navigation bar,” the schedule announcement said. It also offered a caveat to bidders. ”Caution: Bidders must ensure that they submit their bids before the end of each round. If a bidder fails to submit a bid for a product for which it has processed demand, the Auction System will consider that to be a missing bid. A missing bid will be treated as a request to reduce demand to zero. If that bid is applied partially or in full, the bidder’s eligibility may be irrevocably reduced. Bidders should have firm back-up arrangements—which may include calling the Auction Bidder Line—ready for immediate implementation in case they encounter any difficulties accessing the Auction System.”

OAKLAND, CALIF.—On Jan. 18, two days before he left office, former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler released a statement lauding the completion of the incentive auction. “[T]he benefits of the auction are indisputable,” he said. “We will repurpose 70 MHz of high-value, completely clear low-band spectrum for mobile broadband on a nationwide basis. On top of that, 14 MHz of unlicensed spectrum—the test bed for wireless innovation—will be available for consumer devices and new services. The auction will provide $10.05 billion to broadcast television licensees who participated and billions toward deficit reduction.”

The commission and the overall business environment may look quite different with the passage of enough time to see whether the promises of new public service delivery are achieved in practice. But even now, some caveats are in order after the applause dies down and before we ever embark on an incentive auction like this again.

MANY WILL LOSE TV, BUT NEVER SEE NEW BROADBAND SERVICES
Successful wireless bidders in the forward auction will be given a 12-year license term. They will be given six years to provide reliable signal coverage and offer wireless service to at least 40 percent of the population in the license area. In 12 years they will be required to offer reliable wireless service to 75 percent of the license area. They will never be required to offer service to all or substantially all the areas being served.

Television broadcasting, which will be degraded through the loss of many bought-out stations and through removal from Channels 38-50, will see a march backward from what is now almost universal coverage. Nielsen universe estimates for the 2016-2017 season put at 96 percent the number of homes with televisions receiving traditional TV signals via broadcast, cable, DBS or telco. The role of over-the-air TV is growing, not declining. As of the second quarter of 2016, Nielsen reported that 94 percent of households had an HDTV, up from 91 percent in 2015. This compared with smartphones (83 percent), subscription video-on-demand (45 percent), and any tablet (52 percent).

THE AUCTION DISRUPTED, DISFIGURED BROADCAST TV; MORE TO COME
The auction formally began a year ago, when broadcasters were required to submit a form stating their interest by 6 p.m. Eastern Time, Jan. 12, 2016. On that date, strict confidentiality regarding bids and bidding strategies went into effect. Actual bidding started on May 31, and continued until the merciful conclusion on Jan. 17. Because the amount of the spectrum kept changing, TV owners could not know whether their own station would have to move or be displaced. They did not know what monies might be forthcoming, because each stage involved new bids. Because of strict nondisclosure beginning on Jan. 12, 2016, the auction immobilized station sales and equipment upgrades.

Incentive auction winners will be required to surrender their licenses promptly. Their studios, offices and transmitters will become scrap and their staffs will be largely pink-slipped. Up next: Staff publication of a Channel Reassignment Public Notice will start a 90-day period for stations assigned new channels to apply for changes consistent with their new frequencies. Then they will have 36 months and a set-aside of $1.75 billion in reimbursements to get this done. The time and the money were decided long ago, and no one knows whether either one will be adequate.

Claims that reverse auction payouts to broadcasters will be re-invested in TV broadcasting are hard to fathom. By definition, a payee who gives up its channel no longer has it to refurbish. The use of proceeds is unconditional, so that the real “beach front property” may be the one where the former TV broadcaster constructs a retirement villa.

AUCTION PLANNERS OVERESTIMATED THE DEMAND
FCC planners foresaw a revenue bonanza, by projecting from the result of the Advanced Wireless Services Auction (AWS-3), which closed on Jan. 29, 2015, with bids of $41.33 billion for blocks at 1695 MHz and up. But the final stage rule was met with only $18.2 billion offered for 70 MHz.

The wireless companies are still digesting their AWS-3 wins. But they also are beginning to realize that the “beachfront” at UHF may be harder to exploit than cleaner, higher bands. Doug Lung observed (in TV Technology, June, 2015): “As cell sites become more overloaded, wireless carriers increase capacity by adding more sites, so each one serves a smaller number of customers. As the service area of each site is reduced, the long-range coverage of UHF frequencies becomes less important and limiting interference more complicated.” We will have to wait and see how zealous the carriers actually are in building out and marketing for these bands.

U.S. TREASURY BENEFIT OVERSOLD
The incentive auction was sold to Congress as a painless way to reduce the deficit without raising taxes. As Wheeler testified at a House Appropriations Subcommittee, March 27, 2014, “The commission welcomed the statutory authority to initiate and operate incentive auctions because of its benefits to consumers and stakeholders, as well as the Treasury.” It’s now clear that the overage from payments and administrative costs will only be billions in the single digits. With a new Congress hankering for large tax cuts, that windfall is hardly going to live up to its initial PR.


AUCTION CREATED WHITE-SPACE PROBLEM IT IS ‘SOLVING’
Wheeler noted: “14 MHz of unlicensed spectrum—the test bed for wireless innovation—will be available for consumer devices and new services.” But without the removal of Channels 38 to 50 from TV broadcasting, white space was open and available already, throughout the TV band, and the technology existed to exploit it on the local level without destructive interference.

The reservation of 14 MHz for a white space, being set aside nationwide, makes it more likely that this technology will be developed and controlled by a few very large national entities. Ironically, the extinguishing of TV spectrum is being monetized, the wireless spectrum is being repurposed monetized, yet the approach to white spaces makes them available “for free.”

AUCTION REVERSED NATIONAL POLICY FAVORING UNIVERSAL PUBLIC TV
TV stations typically operate on channels reserved for them, under a fundamental FCC policy since 1952. Public TV stations by law may not accept advertising, and their revenue potential is circumscribed by a number of FCC and IRS rules and policies, and in many cases by institutional licensing to government and education. In the incentive auction, no distinction was made between commercial and non-commercial. The public TV stations may be easy or willing targets, but by deliberately killing them off, the incentive auction is an inversion of the long-term policy goal stated in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 that “it is necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to complement, assist and support a national policy that will most effectively make public telecommunications services available to all citizens of the United States.” 47 U.S.C. Section 396(a)(7).

REPACKING MAY SEVERELY DAMAGE RURAL TV RECEPTION
When stations are moved out of the sold spectrum and repacked in Channels 36 and below, the 2012 enabling law instructed the FCC to replicate, as far as possible, the area and population currently covered. In many cases, full service TV stations depend on extended terrestrial coverage, over mountain ranges and into valleys, by means of rebroadcasting TV translators. This coverage is factored into their TV ratings, their maps, their sales brochures, and their rate cards. Yet the planners of the incentive auction decided to treat these translators and their coverage as though they did not exist. Consequently, in the repacking, rural residents in Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and several other states will face loss of their only practical means of reception.

In the set aside of $1.75 billion to compensate full service TV stations for their moving costs, no funds are provided for TV translator relocation costs. This is in contrast to the DTV transition, where the Department of Commerce had a reimbursement program for rural translators that upgraded to digital. Many of these translator stations are operated by local government and non-profit entities who will be hard pressed to find the money to cover this unfunded Federal mandate.

AUCTION WILL DEGRADE OR DEMOLISH LPTV SERVICE
Class A low-power TV stations have co-equal protected spectrum rights, along with full service TV's. In February, 2013, the Media Bureau began issuing citations based on minor deficiencies such as late or missing children's TV quota reports. The stations were threatened with large fines, up into the five figures. Thirty-seven such letters were issued in one day, on February 12. But the FCC licensees were told that, if they would simply downgrade to LPTV and surrender their Class A spectrum rights, all would be forgiven and the fines would be waived. The cynicism in these actions was clear because, if the stations downgraded, they would no longer even need to do any children's programming at all. This was a brute-force band clearing measure.

Low-power TV stations (non-Class A) have no spectrum rights or compensation rights in the repacking. If anything, the threat to their business from the drawn-out auction and its uncertainties was worse than for full service TV stations. A study by the General Accountability Office looked at possible LPTV losses, based on a survey conducted in the summer of 2016, that obtained 115 responses, representing approximately one-fourth of the licensed 2,063 LPTV stations, and more than 40 percent of the 3,660 licensed translators. The report, published in December, predicted substantial repacking losses of niche programming by LPTV, including specialized cultural programs, foreign language, and Tribal program services. One estimate had the population of licensed TV translators and LPTV's in Channel 38 to 50 at 2,332.

CONCLUSION
The FCC has pursued consistent policies since 1952 that favored a fair, efficient and equitable distribution of radio services among the several states and communities, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 307(b), with first TV service being a foremost goal. Now universal coverage is largely achieved. Homes that never subscribed to cable, satellite or telco TV, or who dropped their subscription were estimated by the end of 2016 as 26.7 million homes, or 21.9 percent of households, up by more than four million homes since 2014, according to a report by Convergence Research Group Ltd. (Canada). The growth of “cord cutters” and of those who never had a TV cord to cut are bringing healthy competitive balance to the overall TV marketplace. Only time will tell whether the sacrifice of these values serves a higher goal, or proves to be a mistake.

Michael Couzens is a communications attorney in Oakland, Calif. A long-time supporter of low power TV and rural TV translators, he is currently vice president-legal affairs for the National Translator Association.

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission added another $59 million in auction proceeds after Round 5 concluded Monday afternoon. Bidding reached more than $18.4 billion at the close of the round—around $700 million up from first round bids. Round 6 will commence at 10 a.m. Eastern on Tuesday, Jan. 24.

The auction will conclude when demand no longer exceeds supply, which it did in 191 wireless licensing areas, referred to as “partial economic areas” or PEAs, after Round 4 bidding ended. Demand continues to be highest in small to mid-sized PEAs. It came up highest in Pendleton, Ore. (PEA No. 297) after Round 4, at 12-to-four. Corpus Christi, Texas (No. 132) was next at 11-to-four.

Among the PEAs where demand outpaced supply, spectrum was priciest in Chicago (No. 3), the largest market still in play, at a Round 6 opening price of $144.8 million. Next was Cleveland, (No. 14) at $25.2 million. Of smaller markets with more costly spectrum, Winchester, Va., (No. 103) ranked at the top at nearly $4 million.

The smallest market still in play was the U.S. Virgin Islands, No. 414 out of a total of 416 PEAs. Spectrum there was Round 6 opening priced at $350,000 per paired spectrum blocks referred to by the FCC as “product.” Product in Guam (No. 413) was considerably cheaper at $53,000 per.

Moberly, Mo., (No. 367) stood out among small markets for having a Round 6 opening product price of $914,000 for unreserved spectrum and $828,000 for reserved spectrum—a nationwide set-aside of 30 MHz for wireless bidders with minimal low-band spectrum holdings. Just 25 miles up Highway 63 from Moberly, Macon, Mo. (No. 393), was priced at $483,000 for unreserved spectrum and $438,000 for reserved spectrum. Hannibal, Mo., (No. 385) 60 or so miles east of Macon and about 115 miles north of St. Louis on the Mississippi River, also stood out at $404,000 for unreserved spectrum and $365,000 for reserved. By comparison, prices in markets between Moberly and Macon (PEA Nos. 367 to 393) ranged from $9,000 in Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. (No. 379) to $81,000 in Ontario, Ore. (No. 391) $177,000 in McCook, Neb. (No. 389) and $291,000 in Colby, Kan. (No. 372).

Spectrum auction proceeds after each round in this, the fourth stage of the auction, are as follows:
Round 1: $17.7 billion
Round 2: $18,208,164,087
Round 3: $18,299,482,587
Round 4: $18,354,882,127
Round 5: $18,413,831,687

WASHINGTON—The closing criteria of the television spectrum incentive auction have been met at $18.2 billion in bids for 70 MHz of public airwaves. The closing criteria—i.e., clearing costs plus expenses and a benchmark bid price— were finally met after 43 weeks and four separate stages targeting progressively less spectrum.

Stage 4 targeted 84 MHz, which participating broadcasters agreed to vacate for $10 billion in the fourth-stage reverse auction that ended Friday, Jan. 13. The clearing cost criteria comprised this $10 billion ask, plus the $1.75 billion Congress allocated to move broadcasters as well as the administrative costs of holding the auction, for a total of just over $12 billion.

Bidding in the fourth-stage forward auction commenced at 10 a.m. Wednesday, Jan. 18. By noon, the clearing cost criteria was met with bids totaling more than $17.7 billion from participating wireless providers, or $17.2 billion after discounts for rural and smaller entities, but still enough to cover the $12 billion. However, bids fell less than three cents short of the benchmark bid price of $1.25 per MHz/Pop (one megahertz of spectrum passing by one person in a given market area), triggering a second round of bidding.

Second-round bids totaled $18.2 billion, or $17.7 billion after discounts, and slightly surpassed the $1.25 MHz/Pop benchmark at $1.2570, for the 70 MHz available out of the 84 MHz clearing target after consideration for guard bands.

The next step involves implementation of the spectrum reserve rule in which “each Category 1 product for which at least one reserve-eligible bidder has processed demand at the time is split into two products: reserved and unreserved,” according to the Federal Communication Commission’s auction dashboard. “Reserve” refers to 30 MHz of spectrum set aside in each wireless geographic area for wireless providers who hold less than one-third of available low-band spectrum in a license area.

“In order to provide bidders with additional time to bid in the first round after the spectrum reserve has been implemented, round 3 will be extended to six hours. It will be held tomorrow, Jan. 19, from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. Eastern.”

There will be no bidding on Friday, Jan. 20, due to the inauguration. Bidding will resume in two-hour increments on Monday, Jan. 23, at 10 a.m and 2 p.m.

The auction will close when demand no longer exceeds supply, as it now does in several wireless geographic units. Once the auction closes, an assignment phase where winning bidders of generic frequency blocks will be able to bid on specific frequencies, will begin.

Addendum: Outgoing FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler issued the following statement after the final stage rule was met:

“The world’s first spectrum incentive auction has delivered on its ambitious promise. Reaching the Final Stage Rule means the benefits of the auction are indisputable. We will repurpose 70 MHz of high-value, completely clear low-band spectrum for mobile broadband on a nationwide basis. On top of that, 14 MHz of new unlicensed spectrum—the test bed for wireless innovation—will be available for consumer devices and new services. The auction will provide $10.05 billion to broadcast television licensees who participated and billions towards deficit reduction.

“There is still a long road ahead to successfully implement the post-auction transition of broadcast stations to their new channels and bring the new wireless and unlicensed spectrum to market. This will be an extremely important task for my successor and the new commission; I wish them well.

“Now that we are assured of a successful auction, however, it is appropriate to acknowledge and thank some of those who helped us get here; a list that begins with our staff. For more than four years, Gary Epstein, chair of the Incentive Auction Task Force, has led a team of professionals more than 100 strong to assure that our actions were carefully coordinated and considered the public and stakeholder interests from all angles. The Task Force has worked tirelessly on this auction since 2012 and they have my deepest thanks.

“Congress made the incentive auction possible – both by passing the Spectrum Act in 2012 and through its continued guidance and oversight – thanks to the leadership of Reps. Upton, Waxman, Walden, Eshoo, and Pallone, and Senators Rockefeller, Thune, and Nelson. Committee staff, together with the staff of our federal agency partners, including NTIA and OMB, collaborated to draft a momentous piece of legislation designed to advance the goals of making more spectrum available for licensed and unlicensed use, funding an interoperable public safety network, and reducing the federal deficit.

“My predecessors as chair, Julius Genachowski and Mignon Clyburn, set the process in motion for this auction as well as for the 2014 AWS-3 auction, together with fellow Commissioners Robert McDowell, Jessica Rosenworcel, Ajit Pai and Mike O’Rielly. Congratulations to all on a job well done.”

WASHINGTON—Bidding in the Stage 4 forward auction is tentatively scheduled to begin Wednesday, Jan. 18, the Federal Communications Commission said today. The commission said it would confirm the date on Jan. 17, when it also will announced the initial bidding schedule. The announcement follows another issued Jan. 4 stating that bidding in the fourth stage reverse auction—in which participating broadcasters accept or reject a provisional bid—would conclude this Friday, Jan. 13.

While the Jan. 18 forward-auction start date is not yet official, the commission told bidders to be ready.

“We anticipate that Stage 4 forward auction bidding will begin on Wednesday, Jan. 18. Forward auction bidders should be prepared for bidding to begin that day,” the announcement stated.

Bidding in Stage started Dec. 13 after the auction failed to close during three earlier stages targeting progressively less spectrum. The fourth stage clearing target is 84 MHz.

The auction started in March of 2016 with a first stage clearing target of 126 MHz. Broadcaster ask came in at $86 billion, wireless bidders offered $23.1 billion (before discounts) for the 100 MHz of spectrum offered. The Stage 2, 114/90 MHz configuration brought a $54.6 billion versus $21.5 billion spread. Stage 3 which broadcasters asked $54.6 billion and wireless bidders offered $21.5 billion for the 90 MHz offered. Stage 3 targeted 108/80 MHz and yielded a $40.3 billion $19.7 billion gap.

See more TV Technology coverage at our spectrum auction silo.

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission today announced the bidding schedule for the remainder of Stage 4 of the reverse auction. The current schedule of three rounds per day will be used through Monday, Jan. 9, 2017. Beginning Tuesday, Jan. 10, the bidding schedule will change to four rounds per day.

Under that bidding schedule and the current decrement, the base clock price will reach $0 in round 52, which will be held Friday, Jan. 13, concluding the fourth stage reverse auction.

As a reminder, it is possible for the auction to take up to two additional bidding rounds beyond the point at which the base clock price has reached $0 if the final bidding status has not yet been determined for any VHF stations. As such, we are adjusting the bidding schedule on January 13th to allow for up to five rounds of bidding that day if necessary. Thus, the schedule for the remainder of Stage 4 of the reverse auction will be as follows:

Continuing through Monday, Jan. 9
Bidding Round. . . 10 - 11 a.m. Eastern Time
Bidding Round. . . . 1 - 2 p.m. ET
Bidding Round. . . . 4 - 5 p.m. ET

Tuesday, Jan. 10 – Thursday, Jan. 12
Bidding Round. . . 10 - 11 a.m. ET
Bidding Round. . . 12 - 1 p.m. ET
Bidding Round. . . . 2 - 3 p.m. ET
Bidding Round. . . . 4 - 5 p.m. ET

Friday, Jan. 13
Round 50. . . 10 - 11 a.m. ET
Round 51. . . 12 - 1 p.m. ET
Round 52. . . . 2 - 2:30 p.m. ET
Round 53. . . . 3 - 3:30 p.m. ET
Round 54. . . . 4 - 4:30 p.m. ET

As always, bidders should have firm back-up arrangements (which may include calling the Auction Bidder Line) ready for immediate implementation in case they encounter any difficulties accessing the Auction System.

Bidding in the fourth stage reverse auction commenced Dec. 13 after the auction failed to close in three previous stages, each respectively comprising a smaller spectrum clearing target than the one before. The fourth stage clearing target is 84 MHz.

The auction started last March with a first stage clearing target of 126 MHz, for which broadcasters asked a total $86 billion and wireless bidders offered $23.1 billion (before discounts) for the 100 MHz of spectrum offered. Stage 2 brought the target down to 114 MHz, for which broadcasters asked $54.6 billion and wireless bidders offered $21.5 billion for the 90 MHz offered. Stage 3 targeted 108 MHz, for which broadcasters asked $40.3 billion and wireless bidders offered $19.7 billion for the 80 MHz available.

See more TV Technology coverage at our spectrum auction silo.

Well, in what I can only say is stunning, the second stage of the spectrum auction concluded immediately following the end of the first round of bidding in the forward auction portion. You may have noted that the broadcasters' ask dropped from $88.4 billion to $54.6 billion. What was interesting is that after round one of the second stage forward auction, the wireless offers went from $23.1 billion to $21.5 billion. At the time of this writing the reverse portion of the third stage is just underway with a clearing target of 108 MHz.

I did some crude math for some non-technical colleagues at the end of the first stage of the auction utilizing the raw clearing target and came up with broadcasters asking for about $701.5 million/MHz and the wireless carriers offering about $183.4 million/MHz. I know there are better ways to actually calculate the value of the spectrum but I wanted something easily explainable, kind of like the way mining ore value is estimated per ton. Expanding on my math, I note that even though the wireless providers’ total offer was lower than their previous offer, the reduction in the amount of spectrum being offered actually increased the wireless offer to about $188.6 million per megahertz. But that is a fairly insignificant increase and still way below the broadcasters' ask of approximately $478.8 million/MHz.

BEACHFRONT PROPERTY

On the reverse auction side what I find interesting is how relatively unchanged the cost per MHz offer is despite the increased scarcity of the spectrum available based on the reduction in the clearing target. Less “beachfront property” (as the UHF band has been called), should force a higher price per unit available and while the price per unit did rise slightly, it doesn't appear to be commensurate with the change in the clearing target. The amount of beach front available was reduced by about 10 percent but the marketplace price offer only rose by a little less than 3 percent. It looks like the wireless industry is or has already established a price and that is possibly in the $200 million/MHzrange, maybe a little less or maybe a little more.

I thought about extrapolating the numbers out between the reverse and forward portions to see where they would cross but I doubt that the data would be meaningful. At this point in time there are only two data points to use for extrapolation and estimating the deviation between the stage 2 and stage 3 numbers for the reverse portion is problematic. It is interesting to note however that in the Public Notice DA 16-1095, the FCC used 114 MHz and 84 MHz for their phased clearing scenarios. Since the 114 MHz clearing target stage ended after just one round in the forward section, 84 MHz may be where the FCC thinks it will ultimately end up as the final target. There are certainly clearing targets below 84 MHz but they may not provide enough national coverage to make it worthwhile for the wireless industry.

If I am correct about the $200 million/MHz wireless price, that would put the proceeds from the auction at just about $17 billion which is still quite a stretch when you look at the current broadcasters offer. As I said above, this math is crude and was designed for having a conversation with some non-technical colleagues and was designed to provide just an indication that there is a significant gap between how each side is valuing the spectrum in question and that there is a lot more work to do to make the auction work.

IEEE BTS SYMPOSIUM

Enough about the auction, let’s talk about the repack. At the IEEE BTS Annual Broadcast Symposium in Hartford, Conn., Oct. 12-14, I attended a DTV Spectrum Repack presentation by Joe Davis from Chesapeake RF Consultants that was very intriguing. The Symposium took place between the end of the reverse portion and start of the forward portion of stage two, so while there were a lot of unanswerable questions, one point that intrigued me was why did the broadcasters' ask in the reverse auction drop by such a large amount. Did that many broadcasters actually drop their prices? Listening to Joe’s presentation as well as a few others, I am of the opinion that there may have been some small reduction from some of the participating stations but I suspect the lion's share of the reduction was from the FCC making a few key assumptions. The spectrum target reduction and the economic indicators from stage one and the reverse portion of stage two probably have allowed the FCC to estimate what an achievable clearing target will end up being.

Using that knowledge they could make some strategic assumptions. For example, the spectrum from many stations in the uncrowded areas (such as Iowa) will not be needed so they could have been removed from the pool and their asking amounts removed from the total. My opinion has been that it is highly unlikely that many stations in small to medium markets will get any significant revenue unless their spectrum is needed for a nearby large market. With this reduction in the clearing target, the spectrum from these stations may become available through repacking rather than payment.

Another factor that may be coming into play is the relocation from UHF to VHF that some stations may have offered. This could easily be viewed as “low hanging fruit” as it reduces the amount that a station needs to receive to make the move and the costs are borne by the station rather than the repack funds. This concept should give all stations in the VHF band some pause. I know many VHF stations are not giving a lot of thought to repack scenarios but if a significant number of stations move into the VHF bands, disregarding repack simply based on the idea that this is a UHF only issue may lead to some unpleasant surprises.

MOVING TO LOW VHF

One other point raised by my friend Dennis Wallace of Meintel, Sgrignoli and Wallace, had to do with the concept of stations moving to low VHF. Dennis noted that there hasn’t been much equipment production in low VHF for some time so a station looking for a transmitter in that band will find it extremely challenging. I visited the GatesAir website that shows only VHF Band 3 (174 to 240 MHz) products. Similarly, the Comark and Rohde and Schwarz websites also show only VHF Band 3 products. A move to low VHF may require the use of used equipment or getting something custom built. Both of these alternatives have sustainability concerns over time.

Long story short, if you are in the VHF band—whether you are participating in the auction or not—you need to have a repack plan. I also note that many VHF stations are among the oldest facilities, which may mean older towers, so even minor changes can have a huge impact. As a hypothetical example, IPTV’s station in Des Moines, Iowa, is on an Ideco Dresser tower that dates from the mid 1960’s and shares an antenna with another high-band VHF station. There is also a low VHF station on the tower as well as an FM. A repack to any one of the three TV stations would probably necessitate a new tower.

So, regardless of whether or not a station is participating in the auction process, every single station regardless of channel needs to have a repack plan. Regardless of where the new UHF core ends, whether a station is in the new core or not, repacking will happen. Using the estimate from the aforementioned PN, if the clearing target ends up being 84 MHz, then approximately 1,300 stations will need to move to new channels. There are probably about 400 or so television stations operating above channel 36 so about 900 of the stations that need to move will be in the core. It would seem to me then that planning for a repack is not an option but a necessity.

Bill Hayes is director of engineering for Iowa Public Television. He may be reached via TV Technology.

WASHINGTON—Give us liberty from the 39-month repack deadline, or give us a waiver process, the National Association of Broadcasters told the Federal Communications Commission in comments filed on the commission’s post-incentive auction channel repacking proposal.

“While all five commissioners have publicly stated that no station will be forced off the air if it is unable to meet the FCC’s arbitrary 39-month cutoff, that is precisely what the current rules provide,” the NAB said in comments filed Friday. “The analysis reflected in the Public Notice setting forth the proposed scheduling plan confirms that the commission anticipates more than 1,100 U.S. stations will need to move to new channels at an 84 MHz clearing target. While broadcasters have every incentive to move as quickly as possible, there is no reason for the commission to make television stations and their viewers unnecessary victims of a deadline that has little chance of being met and only risks creating inefficiency and delay. At a minimum, the commission should set forth a clear and predictable waiver standard in the event its deadline proves unachievable.”

The FCC’s Public Notice, issued Sept. 30, laid out a proposal to repack TV stations on a market-by-market basis. (See, “FCC Proposes DMA-Level Repack,” Sept. 30, 2016.) The repack process will begin when the incentive auction—now in its third stage with a clearing target of 108 MHz—closes. This clearing target has dropped with each success stage as bidding failed to cover the price at which broadcasters have been willing to sell, plus meet the statutory funding of the repack and of conducting the auction.

LINKED SETS
At 84 MHz, a total of 1,274 stations will have to move to new channel assignments, according to the Public Notice, which also outlines the timeline and procedure of the repack and all the administrative steps necessary for the move. (See, “FCC Repack Plan Key Points,” Oct. 5, 2016.) Of those, 710 are “linked” to others in a sort of interference daisy-chain, thus moves must be coordinated among those linked stations. The NAB, along with the participants of a recent Wiley Rein repack event, say 39 months is not enough time to get the job done.

“No station in television history has ever attempted to construct new facilities while more than one thousand other television stations are doing so simultaneously,” the NAB noted. “While the record of this proceeding reflects disagreement concerning the level of resources available to complete the transition of repacked broadcasters to new channels, the scope of repacking should at least give the FCC pause in presuming that the time allowed for a single station to construct new facilities will prove adequate to move more than a thousand stations at once.”

The NAB further said the three-month window for filing construction permits and cost estimates “will force stations to make estimates and assumptions that will likely prove inaccurate” and inadvertently dry up the $1.75 billion repack reimbursement fund authorized by Congress.

VENDOR PRESSURE
The NAB also said there’s no assurance that vendors will line up according to the FCC’s 10-phase repack plan: “In many cases, vendors will process orders on a first-come, first-served basis, regardless of a station’s assigned phase. Some vendors also have preferred-customer arrangements with broadcasters that will be far more important to those vendors than the commission’s phase assignments.”

Furthermore, many stations will have to build temporary facilities to meet the 39-month deadline if they’re not willing to go off the air temporarily, creating even more demand of the limited number of vendors who can move a TV signal to another frequency. The resulting pressure feasibly could lead to more accidents among tower crews, the NAB said.

The broadcast lobby had no objection to the 10-phase repack approach per se, but suggested the FCC wait until stations complete engineering and structural studies before assigning them to a phase, allow stations to request reassignment to a different phase, and to be flexible on the deadlines within each phase.

“The commission’s proposed scheduling plan makes no accommodation for predictable weather events, including heavy snowpack in some areas, hurricane season and tornado season, all of which may cause delays. The commission’s proposed scheduling plan also does not take into account programming complications, such as ratings periods and the mid-term political window. Forcing stations to change channels during such periods could be disastrous for those stations,” the NAB said.

INFO EXCHANGE
The NAB also said the commission should facilitate communications among stations during the repack. E.g., when a station in a linked set has a handle on its completion date, that information would be reported to the FCC and shared with other stations in that set. This would allow stations to coordinate view education efforts and minimize the number of rescans households will have to do to tune in over-the-air channels.

The NAB asked that the quiet period be lifted for broadcasters once the final stage rule of the auction is met. The FCC has said it would assign channels during the last clock phase of the forward auction once the final stage rule is met, and notify each station by confidential letter. The NAB asked that stations be able to share that information right away versus waiting for the commission to issue its “Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice” after the auction formally closes.

The NAB said the commission should also consider enabling temporary channel-sharing and allow associated costs to be reimbursed, and to let stations voluntarily accept additional interference to change phase assignments, break daisy-chains or “expand facilities beyond those assigned by the commission.”

See more TV Technology coverage at our spectrum auction silo.

WASHINGTON—The planets will have to align just so if broadcasters are successful in transitioning to new or shared channels following the spectrum auction with a limited amount of money and time.

That was the takeaway at Destination Repack, a conference sponsored by the law firm Wiley Rein, Wednesday, which assembled representatives from the FCC, lobbyists, vendors and broadcasters at their Washington headquarters. Discussions focused on planning, coordination, cooperation and dealing with the myriad red tape that comes with such a complex process. In short, there are enough moving parts to keep even the most experienced engineering consultants awake at night.

The FCC has given broadcasters affected in one way or another by the channel repack—which has been estimated at nearly 2,000—39 months to complete their transition, whether to a new channel or sharing a channel. Details of the phased in repack plan are available here.

The general consensus among most speakers and panelists was that the amount of time and money will not be enough.

“There are so many issues for full-power Class A stations,” said Jay Adrick, a consultant for GatesAir. “I think the biggest of these is how are we going to do all of this in 39 months and whether the $1.75 billion [budget] is going to cover it. I don’t think anyone originally thought that there would be this many stations that would be repacked. It looks like the $1.75 billion allotted will be woefully short.”

Broadcasters participating in the auctions are currently operating in a so called “quiet period” that prevents them from discussing specific details of their plans, which frustrates engineers involved in the process. “This quiet period is really tough on consulting engineers and vendors,” said Kevin Fisher, with the Smith and Fisher engineering consulting firm. “We’re not allowed to know anything, we can’t do any preliminary analysis.”

Representatives from the FCC encouraged broadcasters to provide specific, constructive feedback to the public notices that will be released in the near future regarding the repack process, particularly with the transition scheduling. “We are really looking for very specific comments during the input period, not just ‘we don’t like this,’” said Dorann Bunkin, ‎chief policy counsel, video division & legal advisor, Incentive Auction Task Force at the FCC.

Patrick McFadden, associate general counsel with the NAB, emphasized the importance of planning ahead and ensuring that broadcasters have all their i’s dotted and t’s crossed well in advance of the three-month deadline for broadcasters to submit their plans after the transition schedule is released.

“You should get your cost estimates in as early as possible,” he said. “Include everything you’re going to need and make it as accurate and complete as you possibly can.”

As broadcasters head towards the repack, coordinating the transition with the move to the emerging ATSC 3.0 standard provides an “historic” opportunity for broadcasters, according to Dennis Wallace, with the engineering consulting firm Meintel, Sgrignoli & Wallace.

Final approval of the final sections of the 3.0 standard is expected early in 2017, according to Dave Siegler vice president of technical operations for Cox Media Group, adding that commercial launch is expected within “a couple years.”

“The FCC is considering a change to the rules to allow us to voluntarily use the physical layer of ATSC 3.0,” Siegler said and that ”there is a possibility of overlapping the 3.0 change with the repack. We think this would bring minimal disruption to the consumer and there’s a lot of value in that. It’s a challenge but it’s also an opportunity.”

Adoption of 3.0 could prompt more broadcasters to use single frequency networks as a distributed transmission system to fill in coverage gaps, which could help ease the transition to the repack. 

“If we’re looking down the road to SFNs, that could easily play into the decisions that are made during the three-month period” said Fisher. “Give some serious thought about ATSC 3 and where you want your station to go.”

For equipment vendors, including antenna manufacturer Dielectric, the repack may mean new business but it will also require coordination among all affected broadcasters. “Get your orders in place so that the vendor can actually start to work towards the schedule as he proceeds to fill those orders,” said Keith Pelletier, general manager for the company. “That’s one of the reasons why we’ve said the phased-in schedule starts on day one. It’s going to be in the interest of everyone to get those orders in as quickly as possible.”

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission today announced that 62 applicants will be bidding for TV spectrum in the forward incentive auction. The FCC Public Notice indicated the forward auction will begin Aug. 16, 2016.

The list of the willing includes Cellco Partners d/b/a Verizon and AT&T, as expected, plus a host of regional and rural wireless providers, including East Kentucky Network in Ivel, Ky.; Iowa RSA 2 Limited Partnership, NE Colorado Cellular, Inc., and Northeast Nebraska Telephone Co. Many of the smaller entities will receive bidding credits, which amount to a discount on spectrum. Of the total 62 applicants, 19, or 30 percent, received a bidding credit related to rural service or a small-business revenue threshold.

These bidding credits are described in the Forward Auction User Guide. A bidder who qualifies for a rural service credit receives a 15 percent discount on “a winning bidder’s bid.” Bidders who qualify for the small business discount get either a 15 or a 25 percent discount off whatever price at which they may win spectrum.

For example, if Iowa RSA 2 Limited Partnership, which has a rural service bidding credit, wins a block of spectrum in Des Moines at the minimum opening bid price of $1,850,000 (as defined in Appendix F of the upfront payments Public Notice), then Iowa RSA 2 Limited Partnership will have to pay only $1,572,500 for the block of spectrum in Des Moines. These discounts are capped at $10 million for rural service providers and $150 million for small businesses in all but small markets, where the cap is $10 million.

Of the 62 qualified bidders, 13 will receive the rural service provide bidding credit of 15 percent. Another 12 bidders listed their revenue range at less than $20 million. Two more still listed revenues at between $20 million and $55 million. These 62 bidders must lay out $86.4 billion to cover the cost of spectrum sold by broadcasters in the forward auction, plus $1.75 billion to move displaced broadcasters, and another $207 million for the FCC’s administrative costs—chiseled down from a previous estimate of $226 million.

The forward auction system will become available to the 62 qualified bidders on Tuesday, July 19. It will include files on impaired spectrum where interference is expected. The commission has said that it reached its 126 MHz clearing target with 99 percent of spectrum unimpaired.

The FCC will conduct forward auction practice the week of July 25-29. Two scenarios will be covered—one in which the final stage rule of auction is met, and the other, if it is not and an extension round is needed. (See, “FCC Releases Forward Auction Bidding Guide,” July 13, 2016.) During the practice auction, bidders will not be bidding on the spectrum they’ll be vying for in the live auction. The idea is to get comfortable with the system. A mock auction, more reflective of the live event, will be held Aug. 11-12.

“The scenarios that will be used for the practice auction are designed so that within several rounds of bidding, bidders will experience key forward auction events or benchmarks,” today’s Public Notice states.

Today’s PN also was accompanied by a list of bidding applicants who did not qualify to participate, many of whom are listed by individual names.

Also see...
“Q&A: Strategy& Dan Hays on Auction Price Point Divide”
Given this, an outlay of $86 billion seems highly unlikely at this time. To put it in perspective, this is two to three times the typical annual capital spending of the industry. That’s an awful lot to bite off in one big chunk.

For comprehensive coverage, see our Spectrum Auction silo.

WASHINGTON—“Big Wireless, Inc.” is the name given qualified forward-auction applicants who can bid on all spectrum parcels and some reserved spectrum, but who don’t get bidding credits reserved for smaller outfits and rural service providers. That’s according to the Forward Auction User Guide released today by the Federal Communications Commission. The guide is a directive for applicants who qualified to bid on the 100 MHz of available TV spectrum generated through the reverse auction, which concluded June 29.

As of early June, 99 parties had made it through the FCC’s forward-auction hoops, according to the commission’s public notice setting July 1 as the deadline for making upfront payments, or deposits, on spectrum blocks. Another public notice with a final list of bidders is expected to be released any day, with the forward auction starting no sooner than 15 business days after its release, so early to mid-August.

Bidders in the forward auction will contend for spectrum in the 600 MHz band divided into 416 partial economic areas. Each of these PEAs is divided into a number of bidding units as defined by Appendix F of the upfront payment PN. The amount of each bidder’s upfront payment will determine how many bidding units they can bid on. These bidding units further will be offered in 5 MHz paired blocks to support two-way wireless broadband operations.

The forward auction must raise at least $86.4 billion to cover the aggregate price offered to broadcasters in the reverse auction, as well as $1.75 billion to move displaced broadcasters and a lesser amount for administrative costs. (See “126 MHz Cleared at $86 Billion,” June 29, s016.)

As with the reverse auction, bidding will occur in several rounds. If the final stage rule is met after the first round and there is no excess demand for Category 1 spectrum, then it will be split into reserved and unreserved spectrum. Category 1 comprises spectrum with 15 percent or less interference, or “impairment,” in a given PEA. Reserved C1 spectrum becomes available only to those forward auction bidders who don’t already possess at least one-third of the available licenses for low-band spectrum—namely, not Verizon nor AT&T.

The final stage rule is a revenue floor that’s met when “total proceeds of the forward auction exceed the product of $1.25 per MHz/pop times 70 MHz times the total number of pops for the high-demand PEAs with at least one Category 1 block in this stage,” according to the FCC.

If all conditions are met, this so-called “clock phase” of the auction will be followed by the “assignment phase.”

If, however, the final stage rule is not met, but within 20 percent of being met, an extended round will be held. If it is met during the extended round, the auction will proceed in regular rounds. If not, this stage of the auction will end and the incentive auction will restart with a lower clearing target. The initial clearing target of 126 MHz was reached in the reverse auction, with 26 MHz of that dedicated to buffer zones and other uses, yielding 100 MHz for the forward auction.

The “FCC Incentive Auction Forward Auction Clock Phase Bidding System User Guide” is available for downloading here.

~ See our Spectrum Auction silo for previous comprehensive coverage.

ALEXANDRIA, VA.—The U.S. incentive auctioning of television broadcast spectrum has been shrouded in uncertainty ever since it got underway, with broadcasters and others expressing a growing list of concerns. However, there is one item that hasn’t received a lot of attention—the potential of RF interference to both repacked TV operators and wireless broadband operations from Canadian and Mexican television stations.

Can U.S. DTV and wireless broadband co-exist with transborder broadcasters in a repacked world? PHOTO CREDIT: Peter Starke, American Tower Corp.

Although the FCC developed software for modeling repacking scenarios on a market-by-market basis (including potential for both TV station interference and impairment to blocks of 600 MHz spectrum cleared for auction), and contends that the potential for interference is very low in border markets, there are skeptics.

“It would be nice if Canada and Mexico would fall in line with the repack in a timely way,” said Chares W. (Charlie) Rhodes, long-time TV Technology columnist and a recognized industry expert in interference issues. “However, the last thing that either country would stand is for the United States to dictate TV coverage in their countries, especially if there is no ‘quid pro quo,’ and right now there isn’t any. Memorandums of understanding between countries don’t mention compensation, and it’s not the usual practice in situations like this to give without taking.

“This is one of the items that I think may be unresolved in this auction,” Rhodes continued. “The FCC is being very close-mouthed about it and the Department of State has said nothing. There are a whole bunch of issues, any one of which could delay the availability of spectrum for stations along the border to shift frequencies.”

NO INCENTIVE
Rhodes’ concerns were echoed by Bill Meintel, senior partner at the RF consulting firm, Meintel, Sgrignoli, and Wallace.

“There’s no incentive for the Mexican and Canadian stations to move unless their governments force them to, but I doubt if this would happen,” said Meintel. “On the other hand, it could come down to the wireless carriers putting up money for such moves.”

Meintel said that he had television clients in border areas that could be impacted, but it was too soon to know if they might face interference problems.

Bill Meintel

“You’re not going to know what the situation will be until you know what channel they’re going to land on,” he said. “My understanding is that the FCC is going to use the scheme in the 2014 Report and Order to determine if they can use particular channels. They’re going to look at a station’s existing service in 2012 as the baseline. There has to be a reasonable effort to maintain this coverage. They will look at the points where service exists now that’s not impacted and then look at how much interference this new entry will cause, and they’ll allow up to one-half of a percent new interference. I think there is potential for additional interference, because each evaluation is one-on-one.

“My concern is that if they start having problems trying to make this work in getting the amount of spectrum they want, they may renege on this half-percent interference,” Meintel continued. “They could claim that it’s in the public interest to allow more interference so there can be more spectrum for wireless broadband. We’ll see how this all goes, but I’m skeptical.”

NAB SEES POSSIBLE CHALLENGES
Dennis Wharton, executive vice president of communications for the National Association of Broadcasters, was asked to share his thoughts on possible cross-border interference issues.

“Throughout all of the [spectrum auction] discussions, all stakeholders have identified border areas as areas of complexity,” said Wharton. “There is no mechanism in place for funding moves in [Canada and Mexico] and no timeline. We can’t predict when this will happen. We really have no position on this, other than it could potentially pose challenges, but it is up to broadcasters in those countries to move.”

Wharton praised the FCC for their work in obtaining the agreements for cooperation that are now in place and noted that the NAB had worked with the FCC in setting up methodologies for predicting interference cases and reiterated the commission’s pledge to U.S. broadcasters.

“The FCC adopted a zero interference policy for broadcasters; they can’t be interfered with.”

WIRELESS BROADBAND INTERESTS FACE PROBLEMS
It’s not just U.S. broadcasters who harbor concerns; telcos could face some thorny issues too.

“The broadband people have told the FCC that there are problems, but the FCC said ‘no, our computer modeling says otherwise,’” said Rhodes, noting that he’s measured interference thresholds to wireless broadband services from television stations and it’s far from zero, and that such warnings have been published in ITU proceedings, but ignored by the FCC.

Rhodes observed that wireless networks would likely have coverage holes if Canadian and Mexican broadcasters don’t follow suit with those in the U.S. in repacking.

“Who is going to want a mobile phone that doesn’t play anywhere and anytime?” Rhodes mused. “This doesn’t happen now, but the situation will be quite different when interference sources are megawatt ERP TV transmitters. However, the FCC continues to push forward with a ‘whatever happens, happens’ attitude.

“I believe that the broadband interests are going to be very hesitant about committing money for spectrum if they don’t know when they’re going to get to use it,” Rhodes continued. “The FCC needs to resolve this before the auction. Telco managements will need to know when the spectrum will be available.”

In accordance with spectrum auction confidentiality, wireless broadband service providers are not allowed to comment publically about the auction; however, some are voicing concerns about unresolved interference issues. One member of the wireless industry, speaking under conditions of anonymity, stated that while there were agreements in place between respective governments, “the challenge is that there is currently no timeline, nor any reimbursement funds for TV station moves in Canada and Mexico,” and noting additionally that Mexico’s refusal to adopt the U.S. band plan will further complicate matters.

“If Canada and Mexico do not timely move, border markets will remain impaired, so we anticipate that there will be continuing challenges at the border,” the source said.

IS THERE A WORKAROUND?
Meintel related that an interference “solution of sorts” was achieved following a wireless carrier’s purchase of TV Channel 52 spectrum and the recognition of potential interference issues with Channel 51 broadcasters.

“The concern was not so much that they would be interfering with TV stations, but that TV stations would be interfering with them,” said Meintel. “Technically, they had to protect the television station’s service contour, which meant they couldn’t operate inside it and the market they wanted to cover was the same as the TV station’s. The only way they could operate was to get stations to accept the interference potential. This happened in a number of situations. The stations figured that they were reaching enough people on cable and were OK with the interference potential if the wireless broadband company was willing to write a check.

“On the other hand, there were stations who not only said no, but ‘hell no!’”

WASHINGTON—The opening round of the 2016 TV spectrum incentive auction has officially ended, marking the launch of a weeks-long process to reassign broadcast TV channels for use by wireless broadband providers. The Federal Communications Commission opened first round of the reverse auction Tuesday morning at 10 a.m and ran it through 4 p.m. ET. An FCC spokesman said nothing is likely to change on the commission’s auction dashboard after the first day except for the “Current Round” indicator.

The FCC opened the auction with a 126 MHz clearing target, which would leave 100 MHz to actually auction off for licensed use. The remaining 26 MHz would be assigned as guard bands and for use by unlicensed devices, including wireless microphones. The reverse auction rounds—where broadcasters accept or reject bids for relinquishing all or part of their spectrum, or for moving to less desirable spectrum—will continue until the commission reaches the 126 MHz target. The wireless providers and other qualified bidders then will participate in a forward auction, the proceeds of which must cover broadcasters’ asking prices as well as their moving fund. If they do, the auction closes. If they do not, the reverse auction will resume with a lower clearing target.

In order for the auction to close at 126 MHz, Wells Fargo Analyst Marci Ryvicker estimates that proceeds must reach $37 billion.

This $37 billion equals 89 cents per MHz/pop for the broadcasters and $1.18 per MHz/pop for forward auction bidders she said.

“Our bottoms-up analysis suggests a range of $28 billion to $37 billion for the forward auction” she wrote. “At $28 billion, the FCC would need to move to a subsequent stage [with a] 114 MHz clearing target. At $37 billion, the auction might just clear at 126 MHz.... We do caveat that the amount could end up being much higher or lower--it all depends on the broadcasters' respective walkaway prices.”

Ryvicker said clearing 126 MHz would be a “positive catalyst” for Comcast, Dish Network and Nexstar, in particular. Among those TV station groups most likely to benefit in the reverse auction are CBS, Fox, NBC, Sinclair, Media General and Tribune, she said. AT&T and T-Mobile have the “best chance of winning a material amount of spectrum in the forward auction,” she said.

The reverse auction will comprise 52 rounds, including one each on May 31 and June 1, and then two per day starting June 2. Ryvicker said the Wells Fargo team expects the reverse auction to continue through June and the forward auction to start after the July 4 holiday weekend.

“Once the reverse auction ends, we won’t know who won, but we will know the total clearing cost—meaning what the forward auction needs to produce in order to satisfy the final stage rule—one of the most complicated yet important parts of this entire auction. The forward auction will have as many rounds as necessary to deplete demand.”

CADILLAC, MICH.—Donald Trump made a campaign visit to Cadillac in March—the first visit by a presidential candidate since George Wallace campaigned in 1972. 

Eric Wotila (right) and Political Correspondent Benjamin Arie report from a Donald Trump rally.

Like all of the candidate’s events, Trump’s visit drew enormous crowds, far bigger than any venue in the town of 10,000 could hold. All the local media plus several national outlets, including CNN and Fox News, were in attendance. However, of all the broadcast media at the event, only one TV station, WMNN-LD, broadcast the rally live and in its entirety. 

I built WMNN five years ago, after being interested in TV for as long as I can remember. I got my start in the industry by running a camera for football games at the local public access station at the age of 13. By the time I was 16, I had an internship in the news department at the local Fox affiliate—a small enough station that the running joke was, “go send the intern to cover the fire.” I would regularly be put on assignment due to the station’s small staff.

By the time I was 18, I had convinced Charter to launch “Local Edition,” a local news cut-in on CNN Headline News, in an underutilized time slot provided by the network. I partnered with the cable company to produce a five-minute local news cut-in, which was inserted once every hour on the cable system in the Cadillac area.

When the recession struck, the plug was pulled on “Local Edition.” Around the same time the newscast was cancelled, the Federal Communications Commission opened their 2009 low-power TV filing window. I applied for a construction permit to build a station in Cadillac.

That CP was granted in December 2010, and WMNN—a 425 W, digital LPTV station operating on RF Channel 14 (with a virtual channel number of 26, due to PSIP conflict with the local PBS station), signed on with its first newscast two months later. I was 22.

OFF AND RUNNING

When it signed on, the station was staffed by three volunteers who believed in the project and would stop by its studio after their day jobs to produce daily segments, such as news headlines and weather. Over the last five years, the station has grown to employ a full-time staff of five as well as numerous part-timers. On our primary channel, we maintain a 24/7 local news format, occasionally cutting away from news for other local programming, like multi-camera, HD productions of local sports games from our three live trucks. We also broadcast five subchannels: Antenna TV, Laff, Grit, Escape and Buzzr, which, combined with our flagship, HD local news channel, make up one-third of all the broadcast channels available in the market, despite the other content coming from 10 different transmitters.

Chief Photojournalist Wyatt VanDuinen and Photojournalist Dakota Pike

As WMNN has grown, we’ve purchased our own building and increased our power to 1.97 kW. We’ve even moved from rented space on a local tower to our own, which was constructed last year and has space for other tenants. A local full-power radio station is scheduled to move to it in the near future.

Our model has been so successful that I was hired to consult with another LPTV station group. I’ve helped that group launch a network of local news stations, and I plan to launch additional stations of my own in the future.

This entire business was made possible by low-power television, but its existence is threatened by the increasing amount of spectrum that could very well be reallocated to commercial wireless providers in this year’s spectrum auction.

When the spectrum auction was announced—just a couple of years after the DTV transition was completed and the FCC opened a filing window encouraging new LPTV stations to sign on—I was extremely concerned about the possible implications for the future of our industry. Of course, the amount of spectrum being reallocated has always been a moving target, but for quite some time now, a clearing target of Channel 38 on up seems to have been a pretty commonly accepted number tossed around.

When the FCC announced a clearing target of 126 MHz on April 29, my concerns grew, as did those of many LPTV operators.

UNCERTAIN FUTURE

We’re in a small market, with only eight full-power transmitters in a 25 county area. Of those, only two are on channels above 38. However, if Channel 29 on up is cleared, as many as half of the stations in our market will need to move to new channels, and that’s assuming nobody conflicts with the new channel numbers of stations in nearby markets.

An even bigger concern is what happens after this year’s spectrum auction. When the digital transition occurred in 2009, Channels 51-69 were reallocated. Now, just a few years later, we’re looking at losing Channels 30-51. What’s stopping the FCC from deciding in a couple more years that they need Channels 14-29 as well?

While I own a construction permit for another LPTV station and have plans to acquire more, those plans for further expansion have been put on hold as the spectrum auction moves forward. 

I’d love to do what we’re doing in Cadillac in other markets—and I’m eager to get more stations on-air—but when we’re being constantly threatened with the possibility of losing our channels, it’s hard to commit to growing the LPTV industry.

Despite the looming threat of the spectrum auction, I hold high hopes for the future of WMNN, though I’m very concerned for the future of stations in larger markets, especially if the 126 MHz clearing target moves forward.

If that’s the case, and channels above 29 are gone, a good number of stations in markets just a bit bigger than ours could very well be knocked off-air for good, and that means a huge reduction in the selection of free, over-the-air programming available via public airwaves—all to make room for more paid services with constantly increasing prices. Those are just the sort of services that, in recent years, people are have been dropping due to cost, and replacing with antenna TV. How ironic is that?

As our station has followed the campaign trail, broadcasting visits by not only Trump, but also John Kasich and Bernie Sanders in their entirety—something no full-power TV station in the market was able to do—I found another bit of irony in the plans for the spectrum auction:

At a time when the very future of LPTV is in question due to decisions by our government to reallocate spectrum, local LPTV stations like ours can often be the stations in the best position to provide in-depth coverage of politics, whether that’s a presidential campaign visit or a small local issue. Whether covering politics or not, LPTV truly has the ability to remain true to our own station’s slogan, “More Local. More Often,” a point that’s important to remember as the future of our industry is determined as the spectrum auction moves forward.

WASHINGTON—Following the FCC’s announcement of its clearing target of 126 MHz for the incentive auction, the National Association of Broadcasters has responded. In a letter to the FCC, NAB spectrum auction point man and general counsel Rick Kaplan called the target “appropriately aggressive,” but also argued that in light of it the FCC should back off of its vacant channel proposal.

For more information, read the full article on TV Technology’s sister publication Broadcasting & Cable.

WASHINGTON—AT&T is endorsing a regional repack and calling on regulators to get cracking on a plan.

“Execution of large-scale projects with complicated requirements like those contemplated by a robust broadcaster repacking plan contain inherent challenges and risks,” wrote AT&T’s Joan Marsh in a March 14 filing with the Federal Communications Commission. “We’ve seen this play out time and again, including with the DTV transition—which took well over a decade to complete and merited three Congressional extensions of time—and with the 800 MHz rebanding effort, which commenced June 27, 2005 for a proposed 36-month timeframe but is still ongoing today.”

The 800 MHz rebanding involved a repack of public safety radio users in spectrum adjacent to cellular frequencies. AT&T, expected to be one of the biggest buyers in the upcoming TV spectrum incentive auction, wants to take possession of that spectrum as soon as reasonably possible.

Debate continues over how long it will take to repack the TV stations that remain after the auction into whatever amount of spectrum is left.

Current FCC rules lay out a 39-month window for several hundred TV stations to move to a new channel assignment. The National Association of Broadcasters has been saying for some time that 39 months is inadequate, and that fewer than half of the stations that will need to move could be accommodated in this timeframe. This primarily would be due to potential constraints in the necessary supply chains, including tower crews. T-Mobile, however, also expected to bid in the auction, disputes this.

Though Marsh, vice president of Federal Regulatory at AT&T, was decidedly stern about the timeframe, she neither advocated nor opposed the 39-month window.

“The 800 MHz rebanding effort began with the belief that the band could be fully re-organized within 36 months,” she wrote. “We now know, in hindsight, that the effort will in fact take more than a decade to complete.”

Marsh went on to outline AT&T’s proposal for a repack plan and suggested the FCC be ready to release one within three to six months after the auction closes. She suggested that the commission appoint a Transition Administrator to start collecting data now for a regional repack in order to avoid a “daisy-chain effect.”

“A schedule slip by a single station could impact the ability of other broadcasters or an entire region of broadcasters to complete their relocation,” she wrote.

It would be up to the Transition Administrator to define the regions where channel moves would take place first based on several variables, including population, weather concerns, international coordination and availability of tower crews. Marsh and others reason that a regional repack will allow tower crews to move from one market to the next versus bounce from job sites on one end of the country to another.

It also would fall to the Transition Admin to handle waivers, which Marsh said the FCC should anticipate—in some cases due to circumstances beyond anyone’s control. Hurricane Katrina compelled a modification of the 800 MHz rebanding plan, Marsh noted.

“The FCC must have resources in place that can review waiver filings as soon as they are completed and act quickly to resolve issues raised in such filings to keep the broader transition activities on track,” she said.

Marsh also emphasized the need for “extensive outreach” to affected broadcasters who will have to commission engineering studies, order equipment, modify facilities and obtain the necessary permits in coordination with neighboring broadcasters, cable operators, FM radio broadcasters, public safety agencies, wireless licensees and wireless microphone users.

She said the Transition Administrator should be maintained to track the repack, provide quarterly progress reports and identify any potential complications. She also said consumers need to know what’s going on.

“As regions are cleared, impacted broadcast stations will need to flash cut to their new channel assignments on a designated date and consumers in each region will need to be educated on the steps they will need to take to continue to receive over-the-air broadcast content from stations that have relocated,” she said.

The question of whether or not to participate in next year’s broadcast spectrum incentive auctions, and the battle over whether or not there are enough protections in place for broadcasteers, continues to vex our industry. Is it too much to ask for some guarantees? Or at least a bit more fairness on the part of the FCC?

At stake are those stations that could end up being relocated in the “duplex gap,” the portion of spectrum between wireless up- and downlinks. For those broadcasters that have to move channels after the repack, some of them may end up in this portion if the FCC can’t find a channel for them. When the commission made the proposal earlier this year, opposition was swift and fierce. And proof of the potential interference was outlined in the pages of TV Technology by veteran columnist Charlie Rhodes, formerly chief scientist with the ATSC Test Center and who now conducts his own research on interference. Rhodes outlined his concerns in his column, “Assessing Post Channel Repack Options,” and his warnings were summarized in comments filed by Sinclair Broadcasting in September.

“Using the commission’s recently adopted ISIX model [the FCC’s adopted interference model, based on Longley-Rice], Mr. Rhodes cautions that harmful interference will indeed occur and be far greater with the aggregation of ‘super blocks’—10 MHz wide assignments—by wireless carriers,” wrote Mark Aitken, vice president of Advanced Technology for Sinclair. “ISIX interference can arise from signals offset in frequency by more than 6 MHz. In fact, Mr. Rhodes notes that two Super Blocks of 10 MHz each may generate third-order distortion products spanning a significant 27 MHz. In short, broadcast and wireless broadband will demonstrably interfere with each other, and that will be exacerbated by placing broadcast channels in close proximity to wireless users in the duplex gap.”

The NAB, likewise, warned the FCC that placing stations in the gap will limit those stations’ ability to expand their service areas or take advantage of new innovations in broadcast technology. The association also decried the commission’s lack of fairness to stations that decide not to participate in the auctions, hinting that the commission’s latest notice on auction procedures could punish such stations by placing them in the duplex gap, which is also occupied by wireless carriers in other markets.

“For a long time, the FCC had been suggesting that broadcasters would be randomly selected to be placed into the wireless band, and it would not be based on whether, and to what extent, they participated in the auction,” wrote Patrick McFadden, vice president of spectrum policy for NAB in September. “Obviously it would be alarming if the FCC made judgments based on participation.”

“The recent Procedures Public Notice, however, could be read to suggest the FCC has decided that only non-participating stations will be placed in the wireless band, if the auction successfully closes at the initial clearing target,” McFadden said. “In addition, it appears that the only other stations that could be added to that list are broadcasters who participate but drop out in one stage, only to see the auction move on to another stage because it could not close. In other words, if the auction fails to close at that initial stage, the only additional stations that can be relocated to the wireless bands are stations that drop out because their asking price is too high. This doesn’t exactly sound ‘voluntary’ to most broadcasters.”

Despite the “moving target” aspect of the spectrum auctions and pressure from Congress to initiate them to satisfy budget revenue projections, the FCC needs to remember and hold fast to its central core mission: to protect spectrum and manage the airwaves to minimize interference, particularly post repack. Sinclair’s Mark Aitken again:

“Interference protection is the raison d’etre of the FCC,” he, said. “The laws of physics have not changed, and repacking broadcasters in bands reserved for mobile wireless broadband highlights the commission’s challenge.”

We couldn’t agree more. Add to that the results of a recent study by Digital Tech Consulting that predicted that the FCC’s 39-month window may not allow enough time for more than 400 stations to be relocated to new channels and it’s clear that the commission is not doing enough to ensure a methodical transition. Adopting more stringent rules to protect those stations that remain operating after the auction could go a long way in helping to improve their image in the eyes of our industry, and more importantly, protect a valuable public resource.

HAWAIIAN ISLANDS—After the FCC incentive auction is complete, likely before we transition to ATSC 3.0, many UHF TV stations will have to move to new channels. Many TV translator stations will have to find new channels, if they can.

Once the new channel table is published, stations will have three months to file applications for their new channel and have three years or less to move to their new channel. The exact timetable will depend on how the FCC structures the channel moves. Some markets may have to transition earlier and it is possible the timeline could be on a station-by-station basis depending on the impact a station has on other stations.

W28EH tower and antenna at the translator site in Adjuntas, Puerto Rico

The FCC’s auction procedures public notice notes that one of the priorities in the repacking will be to avoid channel changes. However, it is reasonable to expect that if the FCC is able to take 84 MHz from broadcasters, every station transmitting above Channel 37 will have to change channels unless the FCC sticks them in the 600 MHz wireless band. It also seems inevitable that some stations below Channel 37 will have to change channels, to make room for those moving down from above 37.

What can stations do to prepare for the change? The FCC’s auction rules unfortunately have no provision for reimbursing stations that have to change channels for expenses incurred before they are assigned a new channel. However, there are reasons why it might be worth spending some money now to avoid pain in the future.

TIME FOR A NEW TRANSMITTER?
Many stations are using transmitters installed 15 years ago at the start of the DTV transition or are using older analog transmitters converted to DTV at the end of the DTV transition. Old IOT UHF transmitters are inefficient and maintenance is becoming increasingly difficult and expensive. It might make sense to spring for a new, high-efficiency, solid-state transmitter now, perhaps with some incentives from the local utility, and avoid the pain of keeping the old transmitter running for another three years. While details on exactly how channel change reimbursements will be handled haven’t been released, the FCC may not cover the total cost of a new transmitter if all that’s needed to change the old transmitter’s channel is a new exciter, some driver amplifiers and mask filter. Any incremental cost will likely have to be paid by the station.

With the huge increase in demand for transmitters and installation talent during the repacking period, waiting to replace a transmitter near end-of-life could end up costing more, even with the reimbursement, than replacing it now.

Many high-power UHF stations use slot antennas, which will have to be replaced if the channel changes. Replacing antennas during the limited period allowed for the repacking will be difficult. Weather limits the seasons when tower work can be done in many parts of the country—snow and ice in the northern states, hurricanes and tornados in the southern states. Work will have to be coordinated with other stations (TV or radio) on the tower. Aside from creating an inventory, having a structural analysis of the tower and planning the steps required for antenna replacement, not much can be done until the final channel is known. With a few exceptions, the antenna pattern on the new channel will have to match that from the old channel.

The FCC will allow stations predicted to receive more than 1 percent new interference to modify their facility, even using a different channel, if this can be done without causing interference to other stations or wireless operations.

One way stations that need to replace an old antenna—perhaps to add vertical polarization or resolve problems with the original antenna—can avoid going through the process again during the repack is to use a broadband panel antenna. While broadband antennas are more expensive than single-channel antennas and put greater load on the tower, multiple stations can share the same antenna, reducing the total number of antennas on the tower, and splitting the cost among multiple stations.

Stations with nondirectional antenna patterns should have no problem switching to a broadband panel antenna, but problems arise if a directional pattern is required and it has to precisely match the pattern of the old antenna. Panel antennas have more ripple in the azimuth pattern (peaks and nulls). The maximum effective radiated power (ERP) of stations with directional antennas will be limited by the ERP in the broadband antenna peaks. This will result in a reduction in ERP in the nulls and a reduction in coverage.

The W28EH tower and antenna serves the town of Adjuntas, Puerto Rico.

There are ways to provide different patterns with one broadband antenna—Merrill Weiss did it with his design of an RFS panel antenna on Mount Wilson several years ago, but it isn’t easy and there is a practical limit to the number of patterns one antenna can support.

Considering that antenna changes are likely to be a major stumbling block in the repacking, it would make sense for the FCC to allow more variation in antenna patterns and transmitter locations in a market. With a more flexible approach than is currently proposed, the broadcasters left after the auction, working as a group in adjacent markets, would be able to agree on facilities that are easier to build, reduce interference and ensure coverage in their primary market.

This will require more than 90 days for filing applications. However, extending that period to 180 days, or perhaps longer, could shorten the time required for repacking, particularly in congested markets like the northeast United States, by allowing more use of nondirectional antenna patterns and more sharing of antennas and transmitter sites.

It could also reduce the cost of repacking by making it attractive for antenna companies to build shared broadband antenna sites for temporary use during the repack and permanent use, as a main or backup site, after the repack.

TRANSLATORS AND DOCRS
Translators are often required to provide over-the-air TV in rural areas, but finding channels for them may be difficult after the auction. One approach I’ve found that works well in terrain-isolated areas is the use of echo-canceling digital on-channel repeaters (DOCR).

In one system I’m working on, interference between two DOCRs and the main station is predicted to be minimal, even without considering that in many cases the interference will fall within the ability of the DTV receiver’s equalizer to remove it as multipath. I’ll have more on DOCRs in a future column.

Translators from GatesAir and Anywave Communications offer an option allowing them to be used as echo-canceling onchannel “translators.” While DOCRs cost a bit more than a conventional translator and require careful planning, making the change now will help ensure that viewers depending on translators will not lose service after the auction.

I’ve developed some Python programs to allow analysis of co-channel interference and coverage then given an array of field strengths created by another propagation analysis program. I’m using SPLAT.

If you want more information on them, email me atdlung@transmitter.com.

For more information on the Spectrum Incentive Auction, join TV Technology, B&C and auction experts discussing what must be anticipated in the months to come regarding planning for, and participating in, the auction, in a live Webinar on Thursday, Nov. 5 at 2:30 p.m. ET. Please register at https://nbmedia.wufoo.com/forms/spectrum-auction-preparation-pp86mny0bbremz/.

WASHINGTON—Eight months remain to plan for the Television Spectrum Incentive auction. The Federal Communications Commission is considering a date certain of March 29, 2016, reflecting its previously stated goal of getting it done during the first quarter of next year.

David Oxenford of Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP, found the date in the FCC’s Items on Circulation on Friday, a day after the commission was originally set to vote on it and several other auction components. The item simply states: “Broadcast Incentive Auction to Begin March 29, 2016; Procedures for Competitive Bidding in Auction 1000, Including Initial Clearing Target Determination, Qualifying to Bid, and Bidding in Auctions 1001 (Reverse) and 1002 (Forward) ”

The date is not yet set in stone, as Oxenford wrote in Broadcast Law Blog, “One cautionary note, this notice with the March 29 date refers merely to an item being circulated—it could be voted down or modified before it becomes final. This date, as well as detailed procedures for the auction, will become more definitive after the FCC meeting on August 6. But this notice certainly gives us a look at where the FCC is heading in their incentive auction planning.”

(July 16, 2015 update—An FCC official emailed TV Technology with the following comment: “No new data was released—it was just a visualization of already-released data to help clarify the analysis, as some parties had requested clarification of the data. The data was released in two tranches in December 2014 [pg . 92] and May 2015, so there was no new information released, it was a different presentation of the data.”)

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission has postponed Thursday’s vote on its incentive auction procedure. The item involved contested TV channel repack simulations released under a Sunshine Act waiver just six days before the meeting. The maneuver caught the attention of key lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who told FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to pull the item.

Commissioner Ajit Pai released a statement saying the item had been pulled. He welcomed the action and called the lawmakers’ action “critical.”

“First,” he said, “The staff did not give stakeholders sufficient time to analyze the new data, attempt to replicate it, and provide the commission with fully informed feedback. Second, the staff did not disclose all of the data that had been requested. And third, the chairman’s office did not afford the commissioners enough time to analyze either the data or the comments about that data.”

The repack simulations—intended to reduce the number of TV stations that would end up in the wireless guard band, or “duplex gap”—were released on Friday after business hours. The National Association of Broadcasters promptly started sending letters and making phone calls Monday morning. The NAB’s Rick Kaplan wrote to FCC Incentive Auction Task Force chief, Gary Epstein, on Monday, requesting more details. Among other things, Kaplan said that surely there were more than two simulations for each of three spectrum clearing targets. (See, “NAB to FCC: Two Repack Simulations Arent Enough.”) When it was revealed that there were indeed just two each, the NAB lobbied the commissioners’ staffs.

House Energy & Commerce leadership got into the game on Tuesday afternoon. Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) released a letter they’d sent to Wheeler asking him to back off of the vote.

“Stakeholders now find themselves in the unfortunate position of being handed an incomplete document at the 11th hour that lacks the underlying data to support its conclusions,” they said. (See, “Lawmakers Call on FCC to Postpone Thursdays Vote.”)

The NAB’s Dennis Wharton released the following statement:

“The FCC’s original incentive auction order fashioned a careful compromise allowing licensed wireless microphones and unlicensed users to operate in the duplex gap. The FCC could easily have voted tomorrow on an order maintaining this balanced approach and not delayed the process. Instead, the commission has produced no explanation for its about-face and has left stakeholders baffled as to why it is walking away from previous commitments. It’s time for the FCC to engage stakeholders in a transparent, data-driven manner, and come to a successful resolution of this issue.”

The commission has moved the item to its Aug. 6 regular meeting, along with the Mobile Spectrum Holdings item also originally on this month’s agenda.

Editor’s note:
TV Technology and sister publication B&C will be hosting a Webinar on what to consider in preparation for next year's incentive auction. Sinclair’s Mark Aitken, Howard Symons of the FCC, Preston Padden of the EOBC and Rick Kaplan will join B&C’s John Eggerton and Deborah McAdams of TV Technology to discuss financial considerations, strategic planning, the rollout of ATSC 3.0, and the impact on larger broadcast ecosystem for vendors, programmers and syndicators. Registration information is available here.

SAN FRANCISCO—Sutro Tower, home to nearly a dozen Bay Area TV stations, has retained the services of Osborn Engineering, a Cleveland-based engineering consulting firm, to study the effects that the FCC’s upcoming spectrum auction and channel repacking will have on Sutro Tower Inc., which manages the structure and the leasing and use of its spaces.

The FCC plans to hold a reverse auction of broadcast television spectrum in 2016 with plans to auction it off to the wireless industry. Depending on their status after the auction, many stations remaining on air will have their channels repacked or shared for more efficient operation and reception.

“The FCC DTV Spectrum Auction and Repacking of tenants at San Francisco’s iconic and complex Sutro Tower structure has prompted the owners to accelerate future planning,” Sutro Tower said in a statement, which added that “this massive undertaking is now underway.”

Osborn will examine FCC regulations, proposed coverage patterns, as well as the option of switching some stations to VHF, and other equipment reconfiguration concerns at the existing site and possible new sites including DTS/Same Frequency Network scenarios. Osborn will coordinate its reports to match the FCC’s early 2016 anticipated auction schedule and repack. It will also take into consideration the effects that the ATSC 3.0 standard could have on channel repacking or sharing.

The two engineers from Osborn Engineering—Don Archiable, executive vice president and director Technical Architecture, Engineering and Technology, and Mark G. Fehlig, P.E., CPBE senior engineer of RF Spectrum—led the FCC DTV Auction efforts and are described by the company as “seasoned broadcasters and as well as architects and engineers with decades of experience with major networks and manufacturers.” Eric Dausman, vice president and chief operating officer for Sutro Tower, has a long industry record, including technical management positions with the NBC Television Network, WNBC‐TV New York, and KGW‐TV Portland, Ore.

NEW YORK—Four of the most well-known incentive auction authorities will join the editorial teams of B&C and TV Techology on July 23, 2:30 p.m. ET, for a Webinar on how to prepare for the event. Mark Aitken, vice president of Advanced Technology for Sinclair Broadcast Group, Howard Symons, vice chair of the FCC’s Incentive Auction Task Force, Rick Kaplan executive vice president and general counsel for the NAB, as well as Preston Padden, executive director of the Expanding Opportunities for Broadcaster’s Coalition, will participate.

This online event Webinar series will begin with an in-depth look at the upcoming auction and help those considering participation navigate the rhetoric and develop a plan of action. For more information on the event and to register, click here.