NAB Comments Look Beyond the FCC Auction

FCC’s 39-month deadline for completion of the transition may be ‘overly optimistic’

As the FCC’s forward auction of TV spectrum to wireless carriers continues to crawl along, slowed by lackluster bidding and a diminishing chunk of spectrum on the block, the federal agency has been trying to look ahead, notifying repacked stations of their new channel assignments before the incentive auction is completed.

Although the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) generally applauds the FCC’s diligence, the association issued a caution today that one size will not fit all when it comes to post-repack administration.

“The Commission understandably seeks to develop a repacking schedule ahead of time based on a systematic, software-driven approach that can rapidly categorize and assign stations to different phases,” stated a comment that the NAB issued this morning. “However, the record of this proceeding suggests this is unlikely to produce a workable and efficient plan in practice.

“Instead, commenters urge the Commission to adopt a flexible, dynamic plan for the transition that can be readily amended based on particular circumstances of individual stations as the transition unfolds. In particular, the Commission will need to retain flexibility to adjust phase assignments and deadlines as broadcasters and the Commission itself learn more about the work required and available resources. We urge the Commission to incorporate changes to its proposal that promote agility and flexibility in response to challenges both predictable and unforeseen.”

As part of that “flexible, dynamic plan,” the NAB’s comments urged the FCC to reconsider its 39-month deadline for completion of the transition, suggesting that it might have been “overly optimistic” and could result in lost service to viewers.

Other post-auction issues addressed in the new comments concern “creative solutions” advocated by the NAB to facilitate the transition into the new broadcast landscape. These include allowing temporary channel-sharing arrangements on a wholly voluntary basis, as well as the use of temporary channels during the transition in some cases.

However, those recommendations have elicited pushback from the NCTA (the Internet & Television Association, formerly the National Cable & Telecommunications Association), the principal trade association for the U.S. broadband and pay-television industries, equipment suppliers, and providers of services to the cable industry. The association contends that the deployment of channel-sharing arrangements and the use of temporary channels would invalidate must-carry and retransmission-consent rights, an interpretation that the NAB characterized as a “parochial and cramped reading.”

Click here for the full comments document.