December 2009

[Commentary] Here's the reality: Most of that stimulus money hasn't been spent. According to figures from the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, a government agency that monitors stimulus spending, only $234.2 billion had been allocated as of Nov. 20. And when you consider that almost one-third of the stimulus money is tax credits, the amount of cash actually being injected into the economy is even lower. As for the remaining money, well, spending such a large sum is a lot harder — and slower — than it looks. To understand why, and just how hard it is for the government to stimulate the economy, there's no better illustration than the repeatedly delayed attempts to get broadband stimulus funding to waiting Internet service providers.

Looking to strike while the iron was hot, the Consumer Electronics Association and CTIA: The Wireless Association -- backed by a host of computer companies and others -- sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission Wednesday asking it to reallocate spectrum to wireless broadband. The letter was timed to the announcement by the FCC that it was requesting comment on what broadcasters were using their spectrum for currently and how they might give some of it back. But the letter was general, talking only about getting more spectrum, not where it would come from. The support by the two groups was hardly surprising. Both have backed reclaiming broadcast spectrum. And they are preaching to the choir as well. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and broadband advisor Blair Levin have both been banging the drum hard for more spectrum, including targeting broadcasters for their beachfront property--witness Wednesday's comment request, which suggests broadcasters could give up some real estate without harming viewers, a point broadcasters dispute.

Some have expressed concern that the United States will not have spectrum sufficient to meet the demand for wireless broadband services in the near future and have urged the Federal Communications Commission to make available more spectrum for commercial uses. In response, the FCC is reviewing various spectrum bands to understand if all or a portion of the spectrum within these bands could be repurposed for wireless broadband services. After a review of the responses to the Spectrum for Broadband Public Notice, the FCC now seeks more specific data on the use of spectrum currently licensed to broadcast television stations. This inquiry takes into account the value that the United States puts on free, over-the-air television, while also exploring market-based mechanisms for television broadcasters to contribute to the broadband effort any spectrum in excess of that which they need to meet their public interest obligations and remain financially viable. This inquiry also seeks to understand what processes and incentives could ensure continuing spectral efficiency gains for broadcasters going forward. Comments are due December 21.

Here's what the FCC wants feedback on...

A. General Approach to Spectrum Assessment

1. 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?

2. 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?

3. What would be the impact to the U.S. economy and public welfare if the coverage of free over-the-air broadcast television was diminished to accommodate a repacking of stations to recover spectrum?

4. How do television broadcasters use the capabilities of digital television today? Please provide information on data rate allocations to HD, SD, multicast streams, bandwidth leasing arrangements, etc. and the business rationale behind these choices.

5. How do broadcasters plan to use licensed spectrum in the future?

a. What innovations in applications, services, or business models will create synergies between broadband and broadcast services, or other new value from currently licensed spectrum?

b. How should the Commission evaluate the future economic value of over-the-air digital television and new capabilities to offer mobile TV broadcasting? How does the financial community in general view that future value?

6. Consumers are migrating away from mass-market "appointment" viewing to more fragmented and time-shifted viewing. What impact will this trend have on the television broadcasting industry? What can the Commission do to help broadcasters participate in this evolution?

7. In the Telecommunications Act of 1996 , Congress instructed the Commission to conduct an evaluation of the advanced television services program within 10 years after the date the Commission first issued licenses for such services. Subsection (1), which requires an assessment of the willingness of consumers to purchase the television receivers necessary to receive broadcasts of advanced television services may no longer be pertinent in light of the completion of the digital transition. Please comment on subsections (2) and (3) of Section 336(g) that require the Commission to conduct:

a. an assessment of alternative uses, including public safety use, of the spectrum used for advanced television broadcasts; and

b. an evaluation of the extent to which the Commission may be able to reduce the amount of spectrum assigned to advanced television broadcast licensees.

B. Potential Approaches to Increase Spectrum Availability and Efficiency

There may be opportunities for broadcasters to share 6 MHz channels in a market without significantly disrupting the free over-the-air television service that consumers enjoy today. Stations sharing channels may be able to trade capacity (in Mbps) between or among themselves. We note that the number of broadcasting stations sharing a single 6 MHz channel would affect the number and type of signals that each can broadcast. 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.

1. What are the advantages of a channel-sharing approach to broadcasters' business? What are the disadvantages of this approach? What are the technical and business requirements to enable successful channel sharing?

2. What opportunities exist to free up broadcast spectrum through greater collocation of transmission facilities closer to the center of densely populated areas? There are numerous examples of broadcasters collocating facilities already. 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?

3. How will video capabilities improve over time using current MPEG-2 and 8-VSB technologies? What improvements could be gained by deployment of next generation technologies over that currently achieved under the ATSC standard? What would be required for broadcasters and consumers to transition to more advanced technologies?

4. To what extent would establishing antenna and receiver standards facilitate spectral efficiency and improved reception in broadcasting? What other actions could the FCC take to enable broadcasters to make more efficient use of their spectrum?

5. What percentages of broadcast programming streams are transmitted to MVPDs by over-the-air broadcast? What percentage of MVPD subscribers receive their broadcast TV stations via an over-the-air broadcast link (either directly or through the MVPD)? What would be the costs to replace over-the-air delivery to MVPDs and consumers with other means (fiber, microwave)?

C. Broadcasting and the Public Interest

Broadcasters have historically played an important role in advancing public interests through free over-the-air broadcast TV. What are the benefits of free, over-the-air television broadcasting, in particular with respect to public awareness of emergency information, local news, political discourse, and education?

D. Market Mechanisms for Spectrum Contribution

What market-based or other incentive mechanisms should the Commission consider to enable broadcasters to choose whether or not to make any spectrum (excess or otherwise) available for reallocation to wireless broadband use?

New America Foundation's Open Technology Initiative, together with a diverse consortium of 38 groups (including the Benton Foundation) responded to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and Rural Utilities Service's (RUS) Request for Information regarding changes to the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) and Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP) grant programs. The groups, representing urban and rural regions, applicants and potential applicants, and policy advocates and community organizers, proposed over two-dozen recommendations to encourage comprehensive, collaborative projects, scalable middle mile deployments, and smaller, innovative projects. Among the key recommendations:

1) Make all submissions public and available online in their entirety.

2) Prioritize Middle Mile ''Comprehensive Community" projects.

3) Create a comprehensive understanding of "anchor institution" and support a diverse range of public computer centers.

4) Target workshops to specific disadvantaged populations and proactively create avenues for collaboration among applicants.

5) Establish a Tribal Priority for Tribal Entities seeking to serve their own Tribal lands. 6)Set aside $50 million for a small grants program consistent with the goals of BTOP.