CTIA, NAB Disagree Whether FCC Should Rethink Deadline for Broadcasters To Move After Incentive Auction

NAB submitted a study Friday by Digital Tech Consulting saying the deadlines are unreasonable. The three-month window for filing for construction permits “falls well short of the actual time needed to submit and process the applications for the 860 to 1,164 stations that will likely be required to move to new channels,” the study said. DTC said 12-18 months is more reasonable. An industrywide transition that would follow will also take more than three years, DTC said. “At best, between 297 and 445 stations can complete the required tasks in that time period, assuming normal conditions.”

DTC said the biggest potential bottlenecks are the small number of qualified crews for implementing tower changes and installing antennas and transmission lines, and an expected shortage of antennas. “There are other possible delaying factors, such as waiting for zoning and building permits, negotiating tower lease modifications, navigating the bureaucracy associated with federal and state-owned lands where some transmission sites are located, and both seasonal and extreme weather that will likely occur in many cases,” the study said.

DTC said only two "industry-accepted” manufacturers make the main type of antennas used by broadcasters here “and they currently operate at minimum capacity due to the current lack of demand.” The broadcast supply chain in general is “much diminished” seven years after the completion of the DTV transition “and is unlikely to regain the robustness it exhibited during the more than 10-year transition from analog to digital TV broadcasting,” the study said.

CTIA fired back Monday. “CTIA strongly opposes any efforts to delay consumer access to the 600 MHz band,” said Scott Bergmann, vice president-regulatory affairs. A successful incentive auction “assumes carriers will bid substantial sums, and that cannot happen absent certainty that they will receive timely access to the spectrum purchased,” Bergmann said. “The FCC’s current repacking process is fair and achievable for the broadcast industry, has been affirmed by the D.C. Circuit as reasonable and even extends six months past the timeline suggested by NAB in its own proposals to the FCC during the rulemaking process.” The FCC’s path is clear, Bergmann said. “It should maintain its existing repacking process to the benefit of American consumers.”

“The duration and cost of Repacking is a serious issue deserving of careful consideration,” emailed Preston Padden, former Expanding Opportunities for Broadcasters Coalition executive director. “Hopefully, market response to high demand for tower crews and antennas will stimulate more supply than a static analysis would suggest.”

“Competitive carriers need certainty to invest in spectrum and are rightly concerned about getting access to and deploying this low-band spectrum as soon as possible," Steve Berry, president of the Competitive Carriers Association, said in a news release. "The Commission’s proposal of 39 months is an adequate amount of time to transition legacy broadcast services to new channels while meeting consumers’ increasing demands for faster more reliable wireless broadband connections."

NAB also filed a letter Monday questioning how it makes sense to impose the 39-month deadline before the auction starts. Commission officials have said repeatedly they won't know how many broadcasters have to move until the auction is complete, NAB said. The FCC’s “one-size-fits-all deadline is manifestly unreasonable; clearly, the deadline for repacking 200 stations should not be the same as the deadline for repacking 1,200 stations. The draconian consequences for failing to repack within the Commission’s deadline only compound this problem,” said the letter in docket 12-268.

NAB General Counsel Rick Kaplan told us NAB and CTIA made progress on post-auction issues, but couldn't agree on a revised approach to the transition period. "The FCC has been saying all along when it comes to timing of repacking, we don’t know how many stations will be repacked, and they’re absolutely correct,” Kaplan said. Why not wait until the auction is over to make a decision on deadlines, he asked.

Broadcasters aren’t looking for a new number to replace 39 months as the standard, Kaplan said: “We’re not asking the commission to replace that number with a new number that in many respects might be just as arbitrary.” Kaplan said broadcasters understand carriers want certainty, but “the worst thing you can do is tell someone an arbitrary deadline that is completely wrong.” The 39-month deadline was a hot topic at the Competitive Carriers Association’s recent show. Patrick McFadden, NAB vice president-spectrum policy, predicted years of pain ahead for the industry if the FCC fails to get the deadlines right (see 1510080026).