Aggregator

A spectrum repack process that has been described as “extraordinarily complicated” by some observers has another deadline looming in a few days.

This one is specific to satellite provider SES.

For operators of registered C-Band Earth stations in the United States that declined the FCC’s lump-sum option to cover the costs of their repack realignment, the satellite fleet operator is asking users of its services to decide by Oct. 14 if they prefer to self-install dish equipment needed for the transition.

[Read: How Westwood One Views the C-Band Migration]

SES anticipates that certain dish owners will prefer to install equipment for the transition on their own, according to a spokesperson. For such self-installations, SES requests the Earth station operators notify them by email of their intentions.

Competitor Intelsat has a separate transition plan of its own.

The C-Band is spread across 500 megahertz and used by satellite operators serving U.S. broadcasters and programmers to provide TV and radio programming to nearly 120 million American homes and critical data transmission services.

The FCC is repacking existing C-Band services into the top 200 MHz of the band. In all the FCC will clear 280 MHz (3.7–3.98 GHz) of the C-Band for 5G fixed wireless services. The lower 120 MHz of C-Band spectrum is expected to be made available for 5G mobile services as soon as December 2021.

The FCC counts approximately 6,000 registered/licensed C-Band users in the country, some operating multiple sites. Fewer than half of those users chose the lump-sum option by the Sept. 14 deadline, according to people familiar with developments. In all, there are approximately 20,000 receive-only dishes in the contiguous United States, according to the FCC.

SES is offering FAQ guidance for its users faced with making a decision on self-installation here.

Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) earth station operators who need new passband filters and dishes “should face no out-of-pocket [expenses] as SES will offer a turnkey solution,” according to the SES spokesperson. “If they do have out-of-pocket costs they can personally go to the reimbursement clearinghouse and seek monies for out-of-pocket.”

Registered dish owners who declined the FCC’s lump-sum payout now must work with satellite companies like SES and Intelsat to receive “free filters and free dishes for the transition,” either to be self-installed or installed by those satellite companies.

Incumbent Earth station operators may procure equipment on their own and therefore seek reimbursement directly through the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse rather than looking to SES to cover the cost of the equipment, SES says. That clearinghouse is not yet operational.

“Those who request SES-provided equipment must provide SES with a list of the equipment that is required for each incumbent Earth station. SES expects most Incumbent Earth Station operators to request SES-provided equipment, but this is a choice each Incumbent Earth Station operator can make,” according to SES.

Broadcasters who self-install will receive remote assistance via SES’s help desk as needed to support the installation, according to SES.

Chris Imlay, general counsel to the Society of Broadcast Engineers, told Radio World in an email: “I don’t know of any incentive for a licensee to do self-installation since the FSS service provider is willing to do it. It is not always just a filter, and many broadcast engineers would want the supplier to do it.”

SES says receive only dishes may also need to be retuned or repointed.

Those who accepted the lump-sum payment are on their own, according to one expert, must buy filters and dishes and schedule installation of gear before the December 2023 deadline. “Most of those businesses are happy because they get to choose the products and labor they want. Most should end-up with a windfall-surplus after buying needed gear,” that observer said.

Earth station owners who did not register dishes with the FCC prior to the C-Band order being issued will not be eligible for reimbursement of expenses to transition equipment, according to SES. Industry observers have estimated that 20% to 30% of broadcasters failed to register their dishes.

A final clarification of many repack details is expected to come in December when the FCC’s clearinghouse becomes operational, according to the industry source. In the meantime, SES says Earth station owners can also contact the relocation coordinator with questions: RSMRelocationcoordinator@rsmus.com.

Meanwhile competing satellite provider Intelsat filed for bankruptcy earlier this year. The company’s Chapter 11 filing in May will allow it to continue serving U.S. broadcast and cable TV providers.

 

The post SES Offers Some Answers to Radio’s C-Band Questions appeared first on Radio World.

If you have an FM station and plan to seek reimbursement for costs related to the big TV repack in the United States, here’s a note from the FCC regarding filing deadlines.

The Incentive Auction Task Force and the Media Bureau announced deadlines for eligible entities to submit remaining invoices and other documentation. But don’t sweat just yet, you have a little bit of time.

FM stations fall in the “all other entities” part of the discussion, and the deadline for their final submission is Sept. 5, 2022. (“Entities are encouraged to initiate close out procedures as early as possible and we emphasize that they need not wait for their assigned final invoice filing deadline to do so,” according to the statement.)

In July of 2023, any “unobligated” amounts in the Fund will be rescinded and handed back to the U.S. Treasury.

Read the detailed announcement including background about the reimbursement process.}

The FCC says so far the participants in the reimbursement fund include 89 FM stations.

The program for most TV stations began in 2017 and was expanded in 2019 to include FM and LPTV/translator stations. FM radio spectrum was not subject to repacking in this huge national project, but some FMs whose antennas are on or near a tower supporting a repacked TV station antenna incurred costs due to construction of repacked television facilities.

Some FMs have already incurred their costs and others may still do so as repacked TV stations complete transition to their final facilities. The commission said it is aware that FM stations may incur costs toward the end of repacked stations’ construction projects.

The FCC has a Reimbursement Help Line at (202) 418-2009 or e-mail Reimburse@fcc.gov.

 

The post FCC Sets Deadline for Repack Reimbursement appeared first on Radio World.

Call him the FCC’s top cop. Axel Rodriguez is the new field director of the Federal Communications Commission Enforcement Bureau.

His job: “leading the bureau’s field office staff in its work combating harmful interference to authorized uses of the airwaves, supporting restoration of communications after disasters, and investigating rule violations and other illegal activities.” The field director oversees 13 field offices that investigate rule violations.

[Read: FCC’s Pai Taps Rosemary Harold to Head Enforcement Bureau]

The commission noted in the announcement, “Field agents are the eyes and ears of the commission across the country, and their work is crucial to ensuring that wireless communications operate as expected.” The first field director, Charles Cooper, was named in 2015 at a time when the FCC was in the process of closing 11 of what had been 24 field offices. Most recently, Ron Ramage, regional director in Region 2, had filled the post in an acting capacity.

The Rodriguez announcement was made by Rosemary Harold, chief of the Enforcement Bureau. He started in the role in late September.

“Because of his earlier work at the commission, Axel knows how the latest wireless devices are supposed to work in the real world,” she said in the statement. “And thanks to his military service and intelligence work, Axel has considerable understanding of many private and government uses of the spectrum, including terrestrial wireless, broadcasting, and satellite operations.”

Since 2013 he’s been a supervisor in the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology lab. Before that he was an electronics engineer at the Defense Information Systems Agency, the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab and the Army Research Laboratory’s Directed Energy branch. “Mr. Rodriguez also has two decades of both active duty and reserve experience in the U.S. military including as a cyberwarfare officer, communications director, and battalion signal officer.”

He has a bachelor’s degree from Lehigh University and master’s degrees in engineering and electrical engineering from the University of Maryland and George Washington University respectively.

 

The post FCC Names New Field Director appeared first on Radio World.

In this document, the Commission adopts changes to its rules to prepare the 3.45-3.55 GHz band for commercial wireless services. It removes the secondary, non-federal allocations in the 3.3-3.55 GHz band for radiolocation services and the amateur radio service. These services will continue in alternate spectrum; radiolocation operations will be moved to the 2.9-3.0 GHz band, already home to similar operations, and amateur licensees will be able to relocate their operations to other frequencies already available for amateur operations. Clearing this band of secondary services will allow the Commission to auction the 3.45-3.55 GHz band for commercial wireless services on a co-primary basis with federal radionavigation and radiolocation operations.

.

.

.

.

.

GettyImages/wildpixel

Re the article “Blacks Are Few in U.S. Radio Engineering” (RW Sept. 2):

I am a part-time independent audio engineer; among my radio clients are some with whom I’ve worked since 1973. I also do live sound for local venues.

A couple of years ago we needed to add live sound engineers to replace some we had lost. Our production manager was under some pressure to find some minority and diverse staff. It was a folk music club in Berkeley, Calif., and we needed to reflect some of the local community.

But it was impossible to find any non-White qualified personnel. Our team of eight engineers includes four women, but no Asian or Black sound people ever applied.

Lou Judson, Intuitive Audio

The post Letter: Radio Tech Diversity appeared first on Radio World.

.

.

Public Notice announcing filing deadlines for eligible entities to submit remaining invoices and documents for reimbursement from the TV Broadcaster Relocation Fund

.

.

.

Protecting the unique nature of locally oriented and nonprofit low-power FM stations is a priority for the Federal Communication Commission — and breaking those rules comes with consequences.

For one Rhode Island LPFM station, that led to a consent decree and civil penalty of $15,000.

One of the key tenets of both noncommercial educational and LPFM stations is that it provides commercial-free radio service to listeners that is uniquely oriented to the local community. In addition to prohibiting the airing of commercial ads, the FCC also prohibits LPFM licensees from ownership of other stations, prohibits unauthorized transfers of control of LPFM stations, and prohibits LPFM license transfers or assignments within three years of the date of issue.

[Read: Arizona Licensee Gets Green Light on License After Agreeing to $15K Consent Decree]

As early as May 2016, the Enforcement Bureau began receiving complaints that low-power FM station WRRI(LP) in Coventry, R.I., owned by Marconi Broadcasting Foundation. Concerns were also raised about Marconi’s compliance with the cross-ownership rule, the LPFM assignment and transfer of control laws, and the holding period rule. Questions continued to be raised in October 2016, October 2018 and most recently in January 2020.

In May 2018 and April 2019, the truth began to be revealed. Marconi admitted that it had broadcast at least 17 announcements on behalf of for-profit entities over a period of at least 16 months. It also revealed that its director, Christopher DiPaola, was previously a board member of Marconi while also serving as sole owner of DiPonti Communications, which is licensee of station WBLQ(AM) in Westerly, R.I.

Marconi also revealed that it entirely revamped its board of directors in March 2016, a little more than a year after it received its license in January 2015. This transfer of control was not approved by the FCC and the necessary Form 316, which asks the FCC for consent to transfer control, was not filed by Marconi until March 2019.

After reviewing the issues, the FCC and Marconi agreed to enter into a consent decree. Among the stipulations is the requirement that Marconi designate an outside attorney to serve as a formal compliance officer. This individual will be responsible for ensuring that applications and forms are filed in a timely manner, that proper licensee ownership structures are maintained, and that Marconi follows all rules in regard to the airing of commercials.

The FCC also imposed a $15,000 civil penalty as part of the decree.

 

The post Breaking of LPFM Rules Leads to $15,000 Penalty for R.I. Station appeared first on Radio World.

The Digital Radio Mondiale Consortium is highlighting Europe’s December digital radio milepost as a useful marker for other parts of the world while reminding the industry that even in Europe, there is more than one standard.

In a press release, the consortium said it welcomes the European Electronic Communications Code of 2018 that is now taking effect. That code “recommends in a technology-neutral form that any car for rent or sale should have a radio receiver capable of receiving services provided via ‘digital terrestrial radio broadcasting’ (without specifying any particular digital standard),” DRM noted.

EU member countries are supposed to turn that code into national legislation by Dec. 21 of this year. Several countries including Germany, the U.K. and Italy have introduced relevant regulations while others have started the process.

[Related: WorldDAB Urges EU Members to Meet Digital Radio Deadline]

DRM wrote that the EECC initiative in Europe “serves as a good example to all the countries and administrations around the world adopting or considering the rollout of DRM technology.”

WorldDAB has said recently that “DAB is now firmly established as the core future platform for radio in Europe.”

But DRM stated in its own release: “Even within Europe, digital terrestrial radio broadcasting covers more than one standard. With international DRM transmissions on the air in Europe and from other parts of the world into Europe, such an overarching act [as the EECC] can hasten radio digitization. Existing multistandard chipsets allow for one or two complementary standards to be used so that listeners have access to a variety of services provided nationally and internationally.”

“So even in Europe, adding DRM to car receivers in addition to DAB+ would be a good service for listeners as programs are available, and this would be fully be in line with EECC.”

Sign marks the future site of a DRM transmitter for Radio Pakistan.

Chairman Ruxandra Obreja thinks the act will cause the car industry to take note “and work even harder for the multi-standard solutions that could be introduced even in Eastern Europe and parts of Asia and Africa.”

DRM also wrote that since 2018, “disaster and emergency warnings have become crucial, and including the related digital radio feature EWF as a mandatory feature would strengthen the act.”

Separately, DRM said that Pakistani public broadcaster Pakistan Broadcasting Corp./Radio Pakistan recently announced a three-stage plan to digitize its operations using DRM technology. “The budget for each phase of the project is currently under the consideration of the government,” it stated on its website. “Radio Pakistan has now decided in principle to install a 100 kW digital transmitter on the land of Sariab Quetta.”

 

The post DRM Says EECC Sends “Powerful Message” appeared first on Radio World.

The House Antitrust Subcommittee Majority Report on competition in online markets drew mixed reactions inside Washington’s the Beltway.

The subcommittee report, which was released Tuesday (Oct. 6) and culminated a year-plus investigation into Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple, found that tech giants had monopoly or near monopoly power that they abused to hurt competitors and protect themselves.

[Read: NAB: Local Journalism Under Threat From Dominant Digital Platforms]

“NAB thanks Chairman [Rep. David] Cicilline and the House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee for its important investigation into the dominant competitive power of digital technology platforms,” said National Association of Broadcasters Pres. Gordon Smith. “We applaud the subcommittee for examining the challenges this presents to local media outlets, including radio and TV broadcasters, as they compete online for advertisers and audiences, and the impact on the future of local journalism. America’s broadcasters are committed to working with the subcommittee and Congress on bipartisan solutions that level the playing field and preserve local journalism.”

NAB has submitted comments in the investigation arguing that dominant online platforms put TV and radio stations at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to monetizing their online content.

The subcommittee majority staff report definitely supported that conclusion.

Consumer Reports applauded the Hill report’s conclusion.

“The House staff report lays out clearly how our online marketplace is increasingly stacked against us, and is not serving consumers fairly,” said Consumer Reports Pres. Marta Tellado. “A handful of powerful companies are restricting and controlling the choices of everyone else, in order to enrich and entrench themselves. When we hear from American consumers through our survey research, we know that a majority of people are aware, and they care, about the power and control that these companies have built up. There is a better way, and people across the political spectrum continue to tell us they want these companies held accountable for how they treat consumers.”

The Computer & Communications Industry Association, whose members include Amazon, Facebook and Google, saw it quite differently.

“As an organization advocating for a competitive tech industry for nearly 50 years, we appreciate the House Judiciary Committee’s efforts to better understand the digital economy,” said CCIA Pres. Matt Schruers. “If the goal is simply to knock down successful U.S. businesses, then perhaps this plan would score a hit. But if the goal is to benefit consumers, which has until now been the standard for antitrust policy, it is hard to see how this would do anything but invite regulators to micromanage business models.”

“As countries from Europe to India and China ramp up their own tech sector to drive economic recovery from the pandemic, proposals to saddle competitive U.S. companies with heavy regulation seem shortsighted and risky,” he added. “New rules specific to a handful of prominent U.S. digital services won’t necessarily create an industry of equally dynamic small companies: it could instead hobble U.S. leadership and cede ground to foreign competitors.”

“Some of the proposals are downright radical, and are controversial even among the committee itself. The suggestion to resurrect long-repealed Depression-era financial regulations and apply them to internet companies is neither feasible nor beneficial for consumers.”

 

The post D.C. Reacts to Hill Dems’ High Tech Smackdown appeared first on Radio World.

Roy Burnette

The author is general manager of Five Forty Broadcasting Co. in Sylva, N.C.

After reading Randy J. Stine’s article “AM Advocates Watch and Worry” in the Sept. 30 issue, I ask myself: “What is an independent and local broadcaster to do?”

As correctly stated in the article, an AM station must stay active in order for the broadcaster to have access to an FM translator. In our case, the owner of the real estate upon which the broadcast tower has been located for over 50 years is selling the property for commercial development. Fortunately, less valuable real estate was found and a new tower is to be erected by the end of the year.

[Read: Special Report: AM Advocates Watch and Worry]

If the trend from Stine’s article is correct, the new AM tower will be obsolete before the construction is complete. Having to make this investment is a difficult choice considering the bleak future for AM and perhaps all radio.

It is a vicious cycle. Audio quality deteriorates, then listeners and advertisers find something else. Unfortunately, AM stations that are doing it right tend to get lumped in with those who are not.

Should the AM decide to make the move to all-digital, the cost for upgrading the ground system, tower and transmitter would be substantial and risky.

In my opinion there needs to be a nationwide effort to upgrade the technical quality of AM stations, perhaps something along the line of public-private partnerships such as is happening with rural broadband.

Recently an engineer described to me how he did minor repairs to a station’s ground radials and retuned the ATU and turned a horrible AM signal into one with very good sound and much improved coverage.

Perhaps AM stations with 500 watts or less on high frequencies could be allowed to go silent if their FM translator reaches a sufficient portion of their audience and help remove some of the nighttime clutter, even from 35 watts.

We all have likely become annoyed at background interference when we tried to listen to a baseball game or something from a low-frequency AM hundreds of miles away.

As the rebuilding of AM produces a much better product, owners and associations then must promote AM. For AM stations with an FM translator, the programming is the same, so the defining difference is audio quality.

Finally, corporate owners should divest themselves of underperforming AM stations and provide willing local broadcasters the opportunity to do local radio again. Possibly nonprofits could operate those broadcast properties as a commercial enterprise and rid themselves of low-power FM and all its limitations or possibly, with approval, allow the LPFM to become a translator for the AM station.

Submit letters to the editor at radioworld@futurenet.com.

 

The post Letter: What’s a Local Broadcaster to Do? appeared first on Radio World.