FCC Should Survey Broadcaster Equipment Before Repacking, Says CTIA
The FCC should do a survey of broadcasters to determine the “pricing and capabilities of broadcaster equipment,” as part of the process of creating a “fairly exhaustive” catalog of expenses to be reimbursed after the post-incentive auction, said CTIA in reply comments filed in docket 12-268 before Monday’s comment deadline. The FCC needs to expand the “Catalog of Eligible Expenses” to ensure broadcaster certainty about the repacking process, and a survey is the best way to ensure the catalog’s comprehensiveness, said CTIA. The American Cable Association, NCTA and a group of broadcasters also backed the catalog to consider costs for multichannel video programming distributors broadly. If a wide range of costs aren’t reimbursed, the repacking’s detrimental effects on broadcasters “will lead directly to less and lower quality local service to all affected communities,” said a group of stations owned by Block Communications.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Without an inventory of existing broadcasters, the FCC “has no benchmark to determine the reasonableness of repacking reimbursement costs and will be unable to make rational decisions concerning broadcast repacking,” said CTIA of its proposed survey. The survey should ask broadcasters operating in the UHF spectrum affected by the repacking for information about their transmitter facilities on a confidential basis, said CTIA. Along with surveying broadcasters, the commission should survey TV equipment manufacturers on their capabilities and for pricing data, CTIA said. That’s important because most commenters in the catalog proceeding haven’t included pricing data, said CTIA. Such a survey would have uses beyond reimbursing costs, CTIA said. “The Commission will be positioned to make informed decisions on several important issues, including which broadcasters to prioritize for repacking, how to mitigate costs, and how to minimize repacking time."
However the commission prepares, some costs from the repacking may be unrecoverable, said the Block stations. As signals and antennas are shifted around during the repacking, some stations -- even those that don’t participate in the auction -- may be required to temporarily use interim facilities with less power, many broadcast industry officials have said. “Lowering the stations’ power could create the appearance that the stations are ‘weaker’ and can no longer be depended upon by national advertisers to reach their intended targets,” said Block. Some broadcasters operate a mix of full-power and low-power TV stations, and since LPTV station relocation isn’t reimbursable or guaranteed, broadcasters could lose revenue if their LPTV stations don’t find new homes during the repacking, the filing said. “That reality should lead the FCC to adopt repack and reimbursement rules that maximize the repack costs that broadcasters can recover."
To further minimize that disruption, the commission should reimburse broadcasters up front, said the Block stations, echoing comments made earlier in the proceeding by PBS and National Religious Broadcasters (CD Nov 6 p3). “Providing upfront funds to broadcasters would avoid the administrative burden of having broadcasters incur those charges then seek reimbursement for them from the Commission,” said Block. “Since many stations may incur 7-figure reimbursement costs, the financing charges for those expenditures will be significant.” As NRB had suggested, Block proposed that differences between the upfront estimate and the actual repacking costs could be squared up after the repacking, with continued validity of broadcasters’ licenses as collateral in the meantime. “The FCC knows where to find TV stations it suspects may have inappropriately applied repack funds and has the licensing and other regulatory tools it needs to conduct any necessary investigations,” said Block.
The FCC should make sure that multichannel video programming distributor “soft” costs are also eligible for reimbursement, said ACA and NCTA. Operators in rural areas are “more likely” to have to lay fiber or make other costly changes to receive broadcast signals in the wake of the repacking, said ACA. The commission should also consider that “smaller operators often pay higher prices than larger operators for the same equipment,” said ACA. As reimbursements are calculated, the commission shouldn’t prioritize broadcasters over cable operators for repayment, “if there is any chance that reasonable expenses will exceed the amount in the reimbursement fund,” said NCTA.
The FCC should make wireless mic operators -- the spectrum of which is likely also going to be affected by the repacking -- eligible for reimbursement, said audio equipment manufacturer Shure, echoing comments from others in its industry earlier in the proceeding. The wireless mic industry is still “struggling to absorb the significant costs and disruption” of being bumped from the 700 MHz band, Shure said. Though NAB has said it supports reimbursement for wireless microphone operators, CTIA weighed in against the proposal. “If wireless microphone manufacturers failed to make new wireless microphones capable of operating throughout the UHF spectrum, this oversight should not be remedied at the expense of new forward auction licensees,” said CTIA. -- Monty Tayloe (mtayloe@warren-news.com)