FCC Releases Long-Expected Spectrum Public Notice

The industry letter thanks FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski for his acknowledgment of the brewing spectrum crisis. “Our nation’s ability to lead the world in innovation and technology is threatened by the lack of sufficient spectrum available for wireless broadband applications and services,” it warns: “Without more spectrum, America’s global leadership in innovation and technology is threatened.”

The U.S. is in the middle of a “veritable revolution” in which “consumers and businesses rely on laptops, increasingly sophisticated smartphones, and other wireless devices to access bandwidth-intensive applications, content and services,” the letter said. “This has led to an explosion in innovation, technological improvements, job creation, productivity and consumer welfare gains. It will also create a real strain on the nation’s Internet infrastructure.”

“This letter is at a high level and is intended to show that these 100 plus companies -- with more than $625 billion in U.S. revenues, that employ more than a million people in the U.S. -- see an urgent need for more spectrum,” said Jamie Hedlund, vice president of regulatory affairs at CEA.

“The letter says nothing about licensed versus unlicensed. The letter says we need more spectrum,” Hedlund said. “The first step is to identify more spectrum. Then you move to a discussion of whether it’s licensed or not.” Hedlund said the FCC and NTIA should look broadly at all available spectrum, not just that in the hands of broadcasters, and he said CEA welcomed the notice. The CEA’s report on broadcast spectrum should be part of the discussions, he said. “We think that’s important data that the FCC should consider but it’s not the only data it should consider,” Hedlund said. “Focusing on just one swath [of spectrum] doesn’t make sense. They need to look at all of it.”

Several key advocates of last year’s FCC order permitting unlicensed use of the TV white spaces signed the letter, including Google, Dell and Microsoft. A number of other major high-tech players also signed on, including Apple, Amazon and Cisco. “We signed because Google believes in the bottom line position that the U.S. Government should ‘allocate more spectrum for wireless broadband as soon as possible,'” a company official said. “That allocation can come in the form of spectrum for licensed uses (as we have seen in the 700 MHz auction), and for unlicensed uses (as we have seen with TV white spaces).”

“We fully support the need for allocating additional licensed spectrum for commercial services and for public safety,” said Steve Sharkey, senior director of regulatory and spectrum policy at Motorola. “There is also great value in unlicensed spectrum and Motorola has also supported a balanced approach that provides spectrum for all of these requirements. The right approach for any particular band of spectrum will depend on the details of the spectrum.”

CTIA also welcomed the public notice. “We think this is a logical outgrowth of our recent filings suggesting that the Commission should consider reallocation of broadcaster spectrum,” said CTIA President Steve Largent. He promised that the group will provide the FCC with data substantiating carrier need for more spectrum. CTIA “will clearly show that while our industry is the most efficient user of spectrum, we need at least another 800 MHz within six years to meet the increasing consumer demand whether it’s for mobile Internet, mHealth, smart grids, or a number of other wireless uses that change the way we live and work,” Largent said.

Broadcaster Response in Works

Broadcast lawyers said possible future research by their industry on the value of radio waves used for TV may help make an economic case against reallocation, countering arguments made in the CEA paper. “There is an effort in the works to look at the economic impacts,” a broadcast official said. As others have pointed out, the wireless industry and their allies haven’t shown a spectrum shortage is on the horizon -- and Wednesday’s letter doesn’t change that, another official said. But so far in the debate, “the broadcasters are getting so creamed -- it’s embarrassing,” the lawyer said. “The inability to respond forcefully and convincingly is just validating the basic premise of the opposition,” even though it lacks merit.

“Conspicuously absent” from the letter’s signatories “were most of the TV set manufacturers” and those working on mobile DTV -- some of the largest electronics companies in the world,” said President David Donovan of the Association for Maximum Service Television. “I was surprised to see some companies that in the past have fostered unlicensed use in the TV white spaces. Under the FCC’s plan, this spectrum would now be auctioned, thereby reducing the so-called white space spectrum.” An NAB spokesman declined to comment on the letter.

The notice started with two questions that ask relatively broad questions about spectrum reallocation. “What factors should the Commission consider when examining and comparing the benefits of spectrum used for over-the-air television broadcasting and those of spectrum used for wireless broadband services?” it asked. “What would be the impact to the U.S. economy if insufficient additional spectrum were made available for wireless broadband deployment, in terms of investments, jobs, consumer welfare, innovation, and other indicators of global leadership?” Most of its questions delved more specifically into TV spectrum.

The notice asked several questions raised by the consumer electronics and wireless industries while acknowledging the benefits of terrestrial TV. Those questions included whether the FCC should start an inquiry under Section 336(g) of the 1996 Telecom Act to assess alternative uses of DTV spectrum and “an evaluation of the extent to which the Commission may be able to reduce the amount of spectrum assigned to advanced television broadcasts.” Broadcast lawyers have contended that section was made moot by the DTV transition, but CE and wireless officials noted that Congress intentionally kept the section in DTV legislation, in 1997 and 2005 (CD Nov 23 p1). The notice also asked about reallocation plans that Executive Director Blair Levin of the Omnibus Broadband Initiative (OBI) is said to have floated in private conversations with broadcasters.

Noting possible opportunities for stations to share 6 MHz channels in a market “without significantly disrupting the free over-the-air television service that consumers enjoy today,” the document said broadcasters also could trade the capacity among themselves. “Spectrum sharing arrangements may also entail geographic consolidation, if broadcasters who previously used different transmitting sites share spectrum at a single transmitter closer to the center of densely populated areas,” it continued. “What are the financial and other benefits of collocation? What are the tradeoffs for broadcast TV stations and consumers in terms of signal coverage and local programming efforts?”

Related to Levin’s conversations with the NAB, the notice sought comment on the data rate allocated by stations to HD (CD Nov 20 p14). It also asked about what’s used for standard definition and multicast video streams. “How do broadcasters plan to use licensed spectrum in the future,” the document asked. “What innovations in applications, services, or business models will create synergies between broadband and broadcast services.” The notice asked what portion of program streams are sent terrestrially to multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) and the portion of subscribers who view stations directly over-the- air or through a provider that in turn gets the signal using an antenna. “What would be the costs to replace over-the-air delivery to MVPDs and consumers with other means (fiber, microwave)?”

The notice didn’t ask questions that could have clued in broadcasters to the specifics of spectrum reallocation plans floated by FCC staffers, Donovan said. “Public comment and transparency are important, because it is not clear whether the commissioners, Congress or the public will have the opportunity to comment on the task force’s specific proposal before a report is submitted to Congress in February” under the National Broadband Plan, he said. “Surprisingly, there is no specific question regarding the negative impact on the $40 billion just spent by consumers for off-air digital reception. Also there is no attempt to look at any other sources of spectrum.”

All of the notice’s questions can be answered without knowing how much spectrum the commission seeks to repurpose, an OBI spokesman said. “Since we continue to seek spectrum from multiple sources, it would be premature to say how much spectrum is needed from any particular source.” OBI staffers “continue to have productive dialogue with all spectrum holders,” he said.

Broadcasters can help the commission expand broadband to underserved areas “without stifling growth opportunities of free and local TV stations and the millions of viewers that we serve,” the NAB said. “We would hope policymakers would remember that after spending $15 billion upgrading to the next generation of television, broadcasters just returned to the government more than a quarter of the spectrum used for free and local TV service.” Several other broadcast officials noted that retailers such as Nebraska Furniture Mart -- which they don’t consider a nationally known chain -- were among the signers of the CEA-led letter. That no signatories provide services free to consumers “speaks volumes about the motives of these companies, many of which flood Wal-Mart with products from offshore sweatshops,” said an industry official.

Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, said release of the notice took “significant courage and foresight” on the FCC’s part. “At the same time, we want to make certain that as the Commission looks at different uses for all of the broadcast spectrum, it continues to recognize the importance of the ‘white spaces’ between digital TV channels which have been set aside for unlicensed uses, and which show substantial promise in bringing broadband service to rural areas.”