FCC Weighing ATSC 3.0 Comments, Could Consider Phased Approach

The FCC could consider a "phased approach" to the transition to ATSC 3.0 and could be open to changes to broadcaster public interest requirements, said Media Bureau Chief Michelle Carey at an ATSC conference (see 1705170033) Wednesday, saying the agency is "drilling down" into comments on the ATSC 3.0 NPRM. ATSC 3.0 is a "top priority," Carey said, saying the recent comments created a "robust record" and staff are working on the new standard as fast as they can.

A phased approach to the transition might be able to account for the issue of simulcast partners not being as available later in the process, Carey said. One simulcast issue the agency will consider is whether stations will be limited to simulcast partners within their community of license. Carey compared the issue to channel sharing -- channel sharing connected to the incentive auction wasn't limited to community of license, but post-auction sharing was. The FCC will be "trying to limit viewer disruption," Carey said. Asked whether the FCC should require notification of consumers, Martin Doczat, chief of the Technical Analysis Branch of the Office of Engineering and Technology, said they'll need some sort of warning since the new standard isn't backward compatible.

Broadcasters want a "light" system for FCC oversight of simulcasting, as opposed to the multicasting and licensing approaches teed up in the 3.0 NPRM, said Wiley Rein broadcast attorney John Burgett. The licensing model would allow noncommercial educational broadcasters to be simulcast partners with commercial broadcasters, but is seen as burdensome, Burgett said. The multicast model would minimize the need to seek FCC approval for simulcast arrangements but would squeeze out NCE stations, Burgett said. Under the "light" model proposed in many broadcaster comments, the FCC would issue a new license for the simulcast arrangement after receiving a letter similar to a request for a minor modification, Carey said. The FCC needs to know where a broadcaster's signal is originating, Carey said, and it's seeking to keep the process from being "administratively burdensome."

Since ATSC 3.0 has extra capabilities for functions like emergency alerting and advertising, public interest requirements governing such processes might be changed to apply differently to broadcasters using 3.0, Carey said. Other requirements, such as children's broadcasting rules, likely would be unchanged for 3.0 broadcasters, she said. Doczat said the commission would require "at a minimum" the same quality and signal strength requirements standard required for DTV. Channel-sharing broadcasters are required to produce at least a standard definition stream, Carey said.

The commission is also considering comments on how the transition could affect repacking rules, Carey said. "Stakeholders all agree" the changeover shouldn't disrupt or delay the post-incentive auction repacking, Carey said. If broadcasters are able to combine their repacking efforts with upgrading their equipment in preparation for the new standard, the transition affecting the repacking may not be an issue, she said. The test will be when the FCC begins evaluating broadcaster repacking reimbursement forms, she said.

Several MVPD industry commenters said concerns about how the new standard will be leveraged in retransmission consent negotiations show repacking rules need to be considered (see 1705100072). Though retrans rules may be part of the upcoming media deregulation effort, Carey said that process will take too long to address retrans concerns connected with ATSC 3.0, especially with the FCC working to resolve that proceeding speedily.