Broadcasters disagreed whether the number of FM6 “Franken FM” stations should be allowed to expand and whether interference protections for Channel 6 should be rolled back, in reply comments posted Tuesday in docket 03-185. Incumbent noncommercial educational stations should be allowed to move to Channel 200, NPR said. A “narrow proposal” to loosen interference protections “provides the framework" to benefit the public "without harming either group of licensees,” NPR said. There has been no interference testing involving ATSC 3.0 receivers, NAB said. “NAB urges the Commission to retain the existing channel 6 protection requirements at this time.” Disney and its station WPVI-TV Philadelphia also said interference protections should remain in place. Interference concerns about NCE stations on Channel 6 are based on outdated technology, said the Educational Media Foundation. “EMF, in all of its years of operating its reserved-band FM stations in Channel 6 markets, has yet to see any substantial interference caused to a Channel 6 station -- particularly since the digital transition.” A group of public media entities said the FCC should reject any proposals that would repurpose TV spectrum or threaten its integrity. “Any modification” of TV Channel 6 protection requirements “would run the risk not only of FM radio stations causing interference to current TV reception, but also causing material constraints on the availability of spectrum for television,” said America’s Public Television Stations, PBS and others. The record shows the FCC should allow new FM6 stations, said LPTV broadcaster Cocola Broadcasting. “It is purely speculative whether other stations would introduce new interference.” A group of existing FM6 licensees disagreed. “It is reasonable to limit FM6 service at this time to those stations with a significant history of FM6 service,” said the Preserve Community Programming Coalition. LPFM group REC Networks also objected to expanding FM6. “FM6 licensees have no true accountability to their communities through the lack of a public file requirement and have even fewer accountability requirements than LPFM stations,” REC said.
An anticipated FCC order on ATSC 3.0 multicasting is taking longer than expected and may be slowing aspects of the transition to the new standard, broadcast industry officials told us. The Media Bureau has continued to grant requests for special temporary authority as a workaround, but some say that’s not enough. “We have markets backed up where we aren’t going to be able to launch until we have this flexibility,” said John Hane, CEO of 3.0 consortium BitPath.
NPR and FM6 broadcasters now agree that existing FM6 stations should be allowed to continue and that Channel 6 should be made available for noncommercial educational stations, but NAB and public TV groups have concerns about repurposing spectrum needed for the ATSC 3.0 transition, according to comments posted in docket 03-185. “Any reduction in available spectrum could hinder both noncommercial and commercial television stations as they voluntarily and rapidly adopt NextGen TV,” said a public TV joint filing. Proposals to limit the number of FM6 broadcasters and drop Channel 6 interference protections also drew concern from broadcast commenters. “Limiting FM6 operations to those who happened to take a stab at investing in the technology for a six-month Engineering STA is an arbitrary cut-off,” said Common Frequency.
Radio communications and TV "hobbyist" Roger Davis, a self-described “rural resident at the fringe” of a small TV market in eastern Ohio, sees the ATSC 3.0 transition “as an opportunity for broadcasters to serve rural populations in ways never before possible,” said his filing posted Thursday at the FCC in docket 16-142. His were the very first comments received in the FCC’s NPRM on all aspects of 3.0, five years into its voluntary deployment (see 2207060019). On the NPRM’s call for feedback on the market availability of 3.0 receivers, “my perception as a consumer is that while receivers are available, they are extremely limited in terms of choice at this time,” said Davis. He has been researching new TVs from several top manufacturers, “but I see that the ATSC 3.0 tuner capable models are restricted to higher priced units,” he said. Since NextGenTV stations “are generally simulcasting on lighthouse transmitters with no additional content or features, there is no compelling reason for me to switch to a new expensive television at this time,” he said. The 3.0-capable SiliconDust gateway device he bought in October 2020 “is fine for my hobbyist needs right now,” he said. But he worries that “much of the promise of ATSC 3.0 will be left behind as streaming options become more profitable and more prevalent,” he said. NextGenTV’s backers cite the current availability of many dozens of 3.0-capable TV models from LG, Samsung and Sony, at price points starting under $500, with approximately eight more models on the way from Hisense later this year. Comments in the NPRM are due Aug. 8, replies Sept. 6.
Comments are due Aug. 8, replies Sept. 6, in docket 16-142 in the FCC’s NPRM on all aspects of the ATSC 3.0 deployment (see 2206220067), including the possible sunset of the substantially similar requirement, and whether 3.0-essential patents are being licensed on fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, said a notice for Thursday’s Federal Register. The NPRM also seeks comment on the availability of 3.0 devices to consumers.
An NAB-backed Senate bill to open a window to allow low-power television stations to upgrade to better-protected Class A status is opposed by some LPTV groups, but lawmakers are looking to move it this year, said legislators and LPTV industry officials in interviews.
In the FCC’s further NPRM on ATSC 3.0, released Wednesday in docket 16-142 (see 2206220067), the commission seeks comment on the extent to which patent licensing may be “inhibiting the development of 3.0 TV sets or other 3.0 equipment by non-patent holders.” Comments are due 30 days, replies 60 days, after the NPRM is published in the Federal Register.
The FCC unanimously approved a Further NPRM Tuesday seeking comment on all aspects of ATSC 3.0, including the possible sunset of the substantially similar requirement, and whether 3.0-essential patents are being licensed on fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms. The NPRM also seeks comment on the availability of 3.0 devices to consumers. “While broadcasters have incentives to provide the programming their viewers want, after making significant investments in ATSC 3.0 technology they may also have incentives to favor their ATSC 3.0 offerings,” said the NPRM. As expected (see 2205310047), the item is broad and doesn’t appear to contain tentative conclusions but seeks comment on the proliferation of 3.0, MVPD carriage, whether the ATSC A/322 standard should be allowed to sunset, and whether broadcasters have begun offering the high-quality viewer experiences 3.0 was supposed to provide. “Without the substantially similar rule, how can the Commission ensure that 1.0 viewers are able to keep watching the same programming they watch today, as well as any new programming offerings on a broadcaster’s primary channel?” asks the NPRM. The item also seeks comment on how long the transition is expected to take, and asks about the availability of cheaper converters. “We are not aware of any low-cost set-top boxes or converters (e.g., external tuners or dongles), or any converter devices that can be purchased offline in a ‘brick and mortar’ location,” said the FNPRM. Comments will be due 30 days after it's published in the Federal Register.
Cable groups should support an NAB proposal that would require broadcasters using ATSC 3.0 multicasting and channel hosting to submit a showing to the FCC that they could transmit all hosted programming on a single 1.0 facility if there’s a complaint, NAB told the Media Bureau in a call Friday, according to an ex parte filing posted Wednesday. ATVA said its members shouldn’t be responsible for policing broadcasters and filing complaints, but NAB argued in the filing that cable companies would be the ones most affected by capacity abuse. “NAB is puzzled by ATVA’s apparent assertion that cable companies will suffer severe injury from abuse of the rule but also that the injury will be so subtle as to escape notice,” the filing said. “That is an abundantly reasonable proposal to address a situation that will never actually arise in practice,” NAB said. Though the filing gives the date of the call as May 10, NAB confirmed it occurred Friday.
How well ATSC 3.0 performs commercially “is up to us in this room and the companies we represent,” CTA CEO Gary Shapiro told ATSC’s NextGen Broadcast Conference Thursday in Detroit. “It could be a total flop, or it could be a great success,” he said. He told the conference broadcasters will need to “promote the heck” out of 3.0 for it to become a commercial success (see 2206090065).