Will the House Pass the DTV Extension? - Dueling Congressional Letters Take Opposing Positions

As we wrote on Friday, the Senate has passed the Bill that would extend from February 17 to June 12 the deadline for full-power television stations to transition to digital operations.  This leaves the House of Representatives to once again consider the matter - supposedly in committee on Tuesday and perhaps by vote of the full House as early as Wednesday.  In preparation for that consideration, there have been conflicting letters released by Congressmen supporting the bill and those who are oppose.  The opponents claim that the ability of TV stations to transition before the end date, an option that was important to Senate Republicans who unanamously supported the extension of the transition date, may not in reality exist.  The supporters of the bill point to the over 1.85 million people who are on the waiting list for the $40 coupons to be applied against the cost of DTV converters to allow analog televisions to receive digital signals after the transition.  What do these letters add to the debate?

The Republican Congressmen leading the charge against the delay of the transition suggest in their letter that the ability of TV stations to transition before an extended June 12 DTV deadline is largely illusory, as they imply that most stations cannot transition until the last day because of interference concerns.  They have asked the FCC to immediately provide information about how many stations would be precluded from a transition until June 12 if the date is extended.  From our experience, while there are some stations that need to delay their DTV transition until some other station has changed channels, we would be surprised if most stations are precluded from doing so.  Many stations are simply going to continue on the channels on which they are currently operating their DTV transitional facilities.  Thus, if they are already operating their DTV stations on their post-transition channel, by definition they are not suffering from any preclusive interference issues.  And the vast majority of the remaining stations are planning to operate after the transition on their current analog channel which itself, in most cases, is free from interference as the analog operation would have in most cases precluded other stations on interfering channels from operating in too close a proximity to the area served by the station.   We are aware of many stations ready to transition early even if the deadline is extended until June 12, and we would think that these stations had reviewed their situations before deciding to do so, and would have been aware of interference concerns in preparation for their February 17 changeover.  In some cases they may have coordinated an early change with any station that would have presented an interference issue.  Thus, we would be surprised if the FCC report prepared for these Congressmen finds a great number of stations that will be forced to wait until June 12 to do their digital conversion even if they are inclined to make the change early.

The supporters of the transition point to number of people waiting for their coupons and, to make the point directly to each Congressman, they attach a list showing, by Congressional district, how many people from that district are on the wait list - numbers in almost every case in the thousands, and in almost every case about half of which are in households that only receive TV service over-the-air.  This would seem to show each Congressman that there are real people in their districts who would be hurt if the transition is not delayed.  One would think that this demonstration of the real impact on real people in each district would provide a powerful incentive for Congressmen to vote for the extension though, in the confused process that has been taking place, we'll only know for sure what will happen, when it happens.  Stay tuned.

 Update (February 3, 9 PM) - Acting FCC Chairman Copps has reportedly confirmed that 61% of all TV stations could transition early simply by turning off their analog facilities, as they are already operating in digital on their final channel.  He further speculated that most of the remaining stations may be able to do so as well.  This confirms the suspicions that we expressed earlier today.

Also, it appears that the House Rules Committee has reported out the DTV extension bill to the full House of Representatives, leaving it possible that the extension could be voted on tomorrow, February 4 and, if approved by a majority vote as expected, it would then only need President Obama's signature to become law.   

FCC Study Deals Blow to Television White Space Advocates

As the digital television transition continues, broadcasters have been concerned about the proposals made by a number of the major computer companies seeking the right to operate low power wireless devices in the spectrum used by television stations – in the so-called "white spaces" between channels. Because of the potential for interference, television obviously don’t operate on every channel in every city. The proposal by the tech companies, about which we wrote here, would allow unlicensed wireless devices to operate at low power within this spectrum, provided that such devices were “smart” enough to detect television signals and to avoid the use of channels that would interfere with these signals. Last week, the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology issued a report finding that the prototypes of these devices that had been made available for testing appeared to interfere with television signals. The report did note, however, that this testing should not be viewed as the end of the story on this issue, as further refinements to the devices might be able to eliminate the interference. The FCC has asked for comment on this report. Public comments are due on August 15, with replies on August 30.

The white spaces debate has been a very contentious one. The tech companies who favor it have argued that the efficient use of the television spectrum, and the congestion in other portions of the spectrum used by unlicensed devices, mandate attempts to allow these devices to operate in the television band on the condition that they do not interfere with TV uses. These companies contend that they should be able to create devices that can sense television stations and avoid interference to these stations.

Broadcasters, on the other hand, fear that the these devices will not be able to fully protect television signals. Especially in a DTV world, where a picture is either there or not (it doesn’t just get snowy as does an analog signal suffering from interference), the risk of allowing an interfering device are great. And given the fact that we’re now right in the middle of the digital transition, where there are bound to be issues even without the introduction of a whole new set of potentially interfering devices, it only makes sense to delay these devices for the the near term. Also, as broadcasters are now looking at introducing their own mobile devices reusing the digital television spectrum ( see our post, here), the Commission should not take any action at this time.

This issue has already been the subject of significant Congressional lobbying, as well as many meetings with the officials at the FCC considering the matter. Given the OET report, it would seem that the push to introduce the devices may slow for the near term. But given that the Commission's staff has left the door open to retesting new wireless devices to see if they can perform better than those initially tested, and the nature of the companies driving this proposal, don’t expect it to disappear for long.