ATSC ‘Pleased’ With FCC's 3.0 Compromise 5-Year A/322 Mandate, Says Richer

Though whether to include A/322 in the rules was a big point of contention in the 3.0 proceeding, “we didn’t take a position on it because we have different perspectives on it and different philosophies” among the ATSC membership, Richer said. “Either way” that the FCC would have weighed in on the A/322 controversy, Richer was “fairly confident” that the industry would “follow the ATSC standards," he said. “Also keep in mind that everything we’re talking about is in the context of the United States. And while obviously it’s a huge and critical and really important market, there’ll be other countries implementing, too, and their rules might be a little bit different.”

Richer is “happy that we’re getting to this major milestone at the FCC authorizing use of ATSC 3.0,” he said. “That’s really my whole focus.” Richer hopes a favorable vote “will go through” Nov. 16, “and the FCC will adopt this rulemaking, and we’ll be able to move forward with this,” he said. “From an ATSC standpoint, that’s what we care about the most, that the industry can implement our standard, and that we can work with the industry on implementation and deployment issues.”

The ATSC chief doesn’t worry that the order might well carry on a split, party-line vote at the FCC, he said. “Obviously, we would prefer a unanimous vote for our standard, but that’s not an issue for us. As long as it gets approved, and the industry can move forward, then I think that’s great. I live in Washington. It’s a tough town. One thing I can say for sure is that there’s no partisan fighting within ATSC. Everybody works together in incredible collaboration. Once we get past this particular milestone, then I think the industry will move forward, and we’ll continue to work with the industry to do our part.”

As the FCC moves closer toward 3.0 “adoption,” Richer is “just as excited now” as he was when the commission adopted ATSC's existing DTV system years ago, he told us. “It’s gratifying,” he said. “I think I can speak for everybody involved in the development of the standard. That’s hundreds of people from around the world, and really some of the best and the brightest. I can say that we’re really proud where we got with ATSC 3.0, and what the future holds.”

Though the FCC, as petitioned by CTA, NAB and others, adopted by reference only the A/321 and A/322 documents in its 3.0 rules, Richer has “a high level of confidence” that broadcasters voluntarily will adopt most of the rest of the 23-standard 3.0 suite, he said. The first DTV transition in the U.S. “was more government-led,” he said. “This is more industry-, market-led.” Richer recalls that “way back when,” the commission “did not adopt the video formats” in the first DTV transition, “and everybody was nervous about that,” he said. “But we were confident that the industry would follow the ATSC standard regardless, and that’s what they did, and I think that’s the same thing here.”

Richer wants 3.0-watchers to “keep in mind that there’s so much flexibility built into the standard at every layer, that it’s very likely that broadcasters and consumer electronics manufacturers are going to do what they want to do within the context of the standard,” he said. “That’s because we got out of our own way to build in so much flexibility. There’s good reason for the industry to want to stick with standards because the whole point of doing standards is to optimize and ensure interoperability. If you don’t follow industry standards, then you probably won’t have interoperability and you make it a lot harder to implement a service.”

The FCC thinks requiring A/322 for a “limited period will benefit consumers and other stakeholders,” said the draft order. It found persuasive arguments by LG, A/322's biggest backer, that device manufacturers and MVPDs “may not be able to reliably predict what signal modulation a broadcaster is using unless broadcasters are required to follow A/322,” said the draft. “This uncertainty could cause manufacturers to inadvertently build equipment that cannot receive Next Gen TV broadcasts or could render MVPDs unable to receive and retransmit the signals of Next Gen TV stations. These outcomes would harm consumers.”

The commission wasn't convinced, however, of the need to require broadcasters to use A/322 “indefinitely,” said the draft. The 3.0 standard “could evolve,” and the FCC worried that “stagnant” commission rules “could prevent broadcasters from taking advantage of that evolution,” it said. The FCC agrees with the “basic principle” of NAB’s proposal that the A/322 requirement be made to “sunset automatically” after three years, but thinks five years is the more “appropriate amount of time” to keep the A/322 rule on the books, it said. “Three years, as proposed by NAB, would sunset the requirement within (or only shortly after) the incentive auction repacking period and likely before many stations have had a reasonable opportunity to implement Next Gen TV broadcasting,” it said. “We find that a time and scope-limited adoption of A/322 strikes an appropriate balance of all interests reflected in the record.”

LG is “very pleased” the FCC draft order included A/322 as a requirement, "and we really don’t have a position” on the five-year automatic “sunset” provision, spokesman John Taylor told us Friday. ”We’ve said all along it’s really important to include A/322 in the rules because it addresses interference concerns and provides the certainty that manufacturers need.” LG long has viewed A/322 as “the on ramp to innovation” with 3.0, said Taylor. “It’s such a critical part of the standard that will unleash the vast capabilities of ATSC 3.0.”

A/322's biggest opponent, Sinclair’s One Media, continues to believe “broadcasting, like other regulated platforms, should simply be required to meet interference criteria established by Commission rules,” Jerald Fritz, executive vice president-strategic and legal affairs, emailed us Friday. “That said, a requirement to include A/322 for a temporary, transitional period limited only to the primary video stream is a regulation that hopefully will only minimally restrain innovation, especially for non-television data applications enabled by the Next Gen standard.” Pearl TV, which also opposed requiring A/322 in the final 3.0 rules, has no “issue with the five years as a compromise, as it will take time to buildout transmission systems and drive consumer adoption of new ATSC 3.0 televisions and home gateways,” Managing Director Anne Schelle emailed us Friday.

The 110-page draft order was relatively brief in discussing the FCC’s conclusion that tuner mandates are “unnecessary at this time given that the deployment of ATSC 3.0 will be voluntary and market-driven and that broadcasters will continue to transmit ATSC 1.0 signals indefinitely.” The commission agrees with those who argue that consumer demand, rather than federal regulation, “will drive the inclusion of ATSC 3.0 tuners” in TVs, it said. “We also agree with commenters that the incorporation of ATSC 3.0 tuners into smartphones and other mobile devices should be driven by consumer demand,” said the draft, which largely ignored the weeks-long back-and-forth in commission docket 16-142 involving T-Mobile, handset OEMs, components suppliers and Sinclair over the practicality of building 3.0 reception into smartphones (see 1710060031).

In sticking with the FCC’s tentative conclusion in the February 3.0 NPRM that tuner mandates aren’t necessary at this time (see 1702270059), the draft order rejected arguments by the Advanced TV Broadcasting Alliance of low-power TV interests -- one of the few parties to explicitly seek mandates on smartphones and TVs -- that 3.0 reception requirements for TVs and smartphones were “critical to the preservation of LPTV service.” The commission expects “that once broadcasters begin transmitting in ATSC 3.0, consumer demand for the advanced features of Next Gen TV will propel the manufacture and distribution of TV receivers with ATSC 3.0 tuners,” said the draft. Alliance representatives didn’t comment Friday.

For five years, the order requires that programming aired on any ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel to be “substantially similar” to the programming aired on the ATSC 3.0 channel. "This means that the programming must be the same, except for programming features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0, advertisements, and promotions for upcoming programs," said the order. "While we conclude that this requirement is necessary in the early stages of ATSC 3.0 deployment, it could unnecessarily impede Next Gen TV programming innovations as the deployment of ATSC 3.0 progresses," said the draft. "We intend to monitor the ATSC 3.0 marketplace, and will extend the substantially similar requirement if necessary." The "enhanced capabilities" exception to the rule specifically includes "enhanced formats made possible by ATSC 3.0 technology," such as 4K resolution and high dynamic range, it said.