‘ATSC 1.0 Must Go’

NAB SHow
(Image credit: Phil Kurz)

Sinclair/ONE Media’s kiosk in the ATSC booth at the 2026 NAB Show said it simply and succinctly: “ATSC 1.0 Must Go!”

Sunsetting the original digital TV standard on a certain date (or dates) is essential to the future success of the broadcast industry, ATSC 3.0 proponents say.

While 3.0 channel-sharing has served its purpose, neither broadcasters nor the public can truly realize the full benefit of NextGen TV without an end to 1.0. In other words, as things stand, broadcast spectrum cannot be used to its full potential.

Laurence Zimmerman, a wireless industry veteran, agrees. On April 15 as the broadcast industry was traveling to Las Vegas for its annual gathering, Zimmerman’s company, Landover Saturn 5 LLC, filed a petition with the FCC seeking a rulemaking “to permit the repurposing of UHF Channels 28-36 (554-608 MHz) into a contiguous nationwide block of low-band spectrum for flexible 5G and future 6G use.”

In the petition, Landover proposes serving as a “neutral Sponsor” coordinating broadcaster participation, managing spectrum clearing, repacking broadcasters below channel 28 and “implementing the monetization” of the repurposed spectrum—for a cut of the proceeds.

The company says it can generate more than twice as much money for the federal government –some $15 billion—as the FCC’s Auction 1001.

Whether or not Landover’s proposal has merit is for the commission to decide. In the end, it may derail the efforts of U.S. broadcasters to make better use of their spectrum via 3.0. Ironically, it would enable 5G and 6G wireless providers to leverage the spectral efficiency of 3.0 to clear the desired 50MHz block of TV spectrum and as a consequence inhibit broadcasters’ full ability to develop a new, recurring revenue stream as wireless data service providers.

Regardless of the petition’s datacasting implications, however, the proposal identifies ATSC 3.0 channel sharing as one of two key lynchpins (the other being relocation) for clearing the spectrum without forcing broadcasters to give up their local voice. As the petition puts it: “Broadcasters retain their market presence and program distribution rights by transitioning to shared ATSC 3.0 capacity below Channel 28, at no cost to Broadcasters.

“This allows them to continue delivering their full broadcast signal while simultaneously aligning with industry-wide movement toward streaming distribution. In other words, Broadcasters will convert under-monetized spectrum into immediate enterprise value without forfeiting brand identity, local programming obligations, retransmission eligibility or the growing opportunities that ATSC 3.0 offers for data, multicast, and digital-first delivery.”

NextGen TV proponents have told the commission for some time that continued, indefinite 1.0 and 3.0 transmission is a path to nowhere. As a Gray Media senior executive has put it, the current approach delivers the “worst of both worlds” for broadcasters and viewers alike.

Perhaps the Landover petition will underscore for FCC Commissioners why there’s little room to move forward—whether that’s for licensed broadcasters or a third-party disrupter with a new point of view—when the vast majority of TV spectrum in a market is devoted to transmitting via 1.0.

While individual broadcasters may or may not favor Landover’s petition, Sinclair’s NAB message and the petitioner’s appear to have something in common: “ATSC 1.0 Must Go!”

Phil Kurz

Phil Kurz is a contributing editor to TV Tech. He has written about TV and video technology for more than 30 years and served as editor of three leading industry magazines. He earned a Bachelor of Journalism and a Master’s Degree in Journalism from the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Journalism.