Aggregator

In this document, the Office of Managing Director of the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) adopts an Order that amends the Commission's rules to reflect the upcoming new address of the Commission's headquarters, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. It also makes changes to clarify that certain documents are now available for inspection through the Commission's website, removes references to a Commission copy contractor, and performs minor formatting corrections.

In this document, the Office of Managing Director of the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) adopts an Order that amends the Commission's rules to reflect the upcoming new address of the Commission's headquarters, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. It also makes changes to clarify that certain documents are now available for inspection through the Commission's website, removes references to a Commission copy contractor, and performs minor formatting corrections.

The author is chairman of Digital Radio Mondiale. Her commentaries appear regularly in Radio World.

After 11 months the FCC is to decide if, at the behest of the National Association of Broadcasters, it should allow AM radio stations to go all-digital with the in-band on-channel (IBOC) HD Radio. The hybrid (analog-digital HD) option never delivered, and interference was often seen as the main issue. To address this and other concerns a new all-digital HD Radio mode in medium-wave was developed and is not the subject of the impending FCC decision.

The U.S. is probably the largest AM market in the world, with about 4,570 licensed stations. More than half, 2,800, rebroadcast their content on FM translators licensed by FCC, but the content is the same in AM and FM. As to the AM stations with a hybrid analog-HD transmission, their number was probably to start with around 250 but many gave up the experiment.

[Read: NAB, DRM Spar Over AM Digital for U.S.]

Positive signals have come from the FCC ahead of the vote on Oct. 27. Al Shuldiner, now with the FCC but associated with IBOC in the past, noted “strong support” for the transition to voluntary all-digital AM. This might be so but the reality is that switching off the analog signal would make millions of analog radios redundant while only half of the cars on the road (about 60 million) have a digital receiver, even after 10 years of promotion.

Going all-digital in AM is not for the faint of heart, though there are countries which have done it successfully like India, China and Russia. And others, like Pakistan, are planning to do it.

It is notable that they all chose the all-band, open Digital Radio Mondiale standard. This has been tested under all conditions and on all continents. The same cannot be said about pure-digital HD Radio in medium-wave, only tested on one and a half American stations (one claimed success and another one gave up and reverted to analog). HD Radio, as a proprietary system, raises the issue of license fees and many large radio groups might be reluctant to take upon themselves such a financial burden in the middle of a pandemic crisis. (Xperi has offered AM stations a license for all-digital HD Radio in perpetuity without fees, though some see this more of a sweetener than a long-term and comprehensive commitment). And then there is the question of the receivers. It is the “chicken and egg” question we know so well. What comes first: the decision of the FCC, the regulator, and then the digital receiver, or the other way round?

Digital Radio Mondiale has faced this struggle and is noting success just now with 2.5 million car radio receivers on the Indian roads and receiver solutions for DRM and multistandard receivers powered by multistandard chipsets used both in the U.S., India and elsewhere. Recent developments have proven that DRM delivers excellent audio without interference, thanks to the adoption of the latest MPEG audio technology, xHE-AAC, superior to the old proprietary HDC codec used by HD Radio, lots of multimedia features and  emergency warning (as demonstrated in India and currently on air in Indonesia).

DRM is an excellent platform for making internet content available right at the radio set and even in remote or underserved areas. DRM can be an important tool for distance learning, an increasing advantage in these times. So, having waited so long to recommend a way for digitizing and saving AM in the U.S., why not perform some comparisons and choose the best?

One answer comes from NAB Associate General Counsel Larry Walke, “Before pulling the trigger on such a fundamental change to one’s operation, AM broadcasters need every confidence that HD Radio technology will remain the exclusive technical solution for all-digital transmission.”

According to Walke, moves to test or otherwise consider DRM as an alternative technology would undercut such confidence, discourage greater adoption of HD Radio and jeopardize the viability of all-digital AM. Regulatory certainty is a strong argument but it seems to work only one way, as Xperi is not averse at tentatively prospecting other markets, no matter what.

Therefore, we urge the FCC and Congress to take a robust and unbiased look at what is available globally rather than twist and turn to support a system because it is there but remains largely unknown and tested by the average American listener. A voluntary switch to a restricted digital AM would be the worst solution; neither eliminating AM and writing it off for good, nor revitalising it properly. The situation in 2020 is that multistandard receiver chipsets are available from big (and American) companies. FCC would prove its wisdom by allowing broadcasters to choose between a closed-source service with potential financial obligations and an international open standard adopted around the world for full digital and simulcast AM (supporting analog AM where required).

 

The post Digital AM — Revitalization or Annihilation? appeared first on Radio World.

How true is the adage that the more things change, the more they stay the same. That certainly seems to be the case in comparing the tumult and upheaval of the late 1960s to the tumult and upheaval of 2020 — when groups of impassioned young people decide to stand up for the rights of the unheard, to fight for justice for the underrepresented, to make a difference in their community.

But 60 years ago, without the buzz of social media to distract and divert, one medium regularly played a starring role in clarifying the noise and commotion of the late 1960s.

For the city of Boston, station WBCN(FM) was that place. Going on-air on analog 104.1 MHz in 1968, this community broadcaster became ground zero for passionate, talented, community-minded young people looking for like-minded voices willing to fight for civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights and against the use of police force at their city. Every caller, every staffer, every volunteer was met with the same mantra: At WBCN, you have a voice.

“The mission of the station was that every listener was important,” said Bill Lichtenstein, a former newscaster at WBCN and now a documentary filmmaker.

A long way away from the corporate-run morass of indistinguishable stations (which listeners here in 2020 often rail against) WBCN was a progressive rock station where the station’s DJs had latitude on the music they played and the causes they championed.

“There was just an intuitive sense during that period this [station] was an important place to be,” Lichtenstein said. “[It seemed that] almost anybody of note politically, socially, culturally, musically was there. If you crossed paths with Boston, you crossed path with WBCN.”

Bill Lichtenstein on air at WBCN. Photo: Don Sanford

Last year, the station and its impact on the community was memorialized in the award-winning documentary “WBCN and The American Revolution.” After a successful run on the film festival circuit, the film is being made available as a digital rental in partnership with the National Federation of Community Broadcasters (NFCB) and radio and film organizations across the country, giving voice once again to a radio station that was willing to stand up and call for change.

“WBCN came to our attention [in regard to a] panel about community radios past, present and future,” said Ernesto Aguilar, the program director at the NFCB. “It was a beautiful and compelling story about a unique time in history.” Soon after Aguilar and Lichtenstein struck up a conversation about helping modern stations link into that history and draw parallels for what we’re seeing today. “And to remind people that radio connects into a point in our imagination,” Aguilar said. “Radio has this very special place in people’s hearts.”

Soon after it opened its doors, the new WBCN began to find its voice.

It supported alternative news coverage and underground investigative reporting, airing live concerts and covering novel topics like the hazards of street drugs. The station engendered legendary music industry stories too, like airing the first interview of a young Bruce Springsteen or snagging bootleg recordings from major artists such as The Beatles.

Bruce Springsteen performs at the Harvard Square Theatre on May 9, 1974, from “WBCN and The American Revolution.” Photo: Barry Schneier

“Radio was really the access point to rock and roll and youth culture,” said Lichtenstein, who found a part-time job at the station when he was 14.

Even after the station evolved from the underground/progressive format of the 1960s to more mainstream album rock later on, DJs on WBCN still had relative control over the music they played and the conversations they started. The result was a varied mix of rock music peppered in with local music and the introduction of new acts like The Cars, The Ramones, The Clash and The Police. One day you might hear an interview with Jerry Garcia. The next you might hear a live performance by Patti Smith.

Through it all, WBCN became a beloved institution in Boston because it affirmed the idea that if you speak out, you can change things.

“I can’t think of any other cultural institution that [makes] people just melt [other than radio,]” Lichtenstein said. “There was such an affection for that station. There was this idea that you can speak out and change things. That media can change the world.”

For Lichtenstein, the idea to create a retrospective on the station was 50 years in the making. In an interview with the Boston Herald in 2006, Lichtenstein asked for readers to contact him if they had tapes of broadcasts, photos and other documents from WBCN. Material started pouring in, an influx of fossilized remains of tape and photos that chronicled the life of the station. Many of those moments that might have been lost to the ages were actually be out there, Lichtenstein said, held on to by fans, former DJs and hidden in the station’s back rooms. All in all, more than 100,000 audio and visual items were donated to the project including never-before-exhibited film clips by Andy Warhol and memorable air check segments from on-air moments.

The documentary is now serving to start a conversation with community radio stations, to help them link into that 1960s history and draw parallels for what we’re seeing today.

It also makes clear how difficult things were in certain areas, Lichtenstein said. “Women were verboten to be on the radio or have a broadcast job. And it took courageous steps to shatter that wall. So how you go about creating change?”

WBCN air staff circa 1970 in record library at 312 Stuart Street studios in Boston Photo: Peter Simon

“Radio continues to serve an important role in that process,” he said. “It has a way of bringing people together that’s different from TV or print.”

What stood out to Aguilar about the documentary was that it showcased a station that was offering listeners in 1968 something they wouldn’t ordinarily hear or experience. There are also are obvious parallels to what’s happening today, he said. “[Radio is still] able to tap into people’s disaffection. To remind everyone that as a whole, we can come together about things we want to have a conversation about. Radio is never is going to go away as long as people want to have conversations,” Aguilar said.

According to Lichtenstein and the NFCB, the film has been successfully used as a fundraising platform by stations in up and down the East and West Coasts. Ultimately, Lichtenstein and the NFCB hope to support many more stations with this campaign.

Documentaries like this one are key to the work the NFCB is doing, Aguilar said. “What we’re seeing right now — with so many fluctuations in media, lots of layoffs and the FCC changing the main studio rule — is that these smaller organization depend on a variety of people in their communities to provide radio programming.”

When theaters around the country began closing one after another due to the pandemic, one of Lichtenstein’s first thoughts was to reach out to radio stations with this documentary.

“I do think public radio in a way is largely driven by national programs, agenda, discussions,” he said. “To me the tradition of WBCN lives on most in these communities.”

Screenings of the WBNC documentary “WBCN and the American Revolution” are ongoing. Public stations interested in participating in a screening of the film can contact Eliza Licht and Alice Quinlan of the film’s community outreach team at screenthefilm.com or Screenthefilm@LCMedia.com.

 

The post Honoring the Rollicking Radio Revolution Led by WBCN appeared first on Radio World.

The author is a contributor to Radio World who writes frequently about radio history. Opinions are his own.

Dear Editor:

In announcing a “#Radio100” celebration, the National Association of Broadcasters has chosen to declare Nov. 2 as the centennial of the day that radio was suddenly and magically born into this world. In doing so it is recognizing KDKA as the country’s pioneer station. But many early experimenters and broadcasters also contributed to the creation of radio broadcasting, and NAB does them a disservice by recognizing only KDKA as the “first” broadcaster.

[Visit Radio World’s Radio@100 Page for Related Articles]

In fact, WWJ in Detroit, KNX in Los Angeles and KJR in Seattle all trace their beginnings to dates that were earlier than KDKA, as I have written in the pages of Radio World; and many other stations that no longer exist also predated KDKA.

The first commercial broadcasting license did not go to KDKA; that honor went to WBZ in Boston in 1921. KDKA was licensed as a “Commercial Land Station,” a category that had existed for many years before, and on the night of its Nov. 2 election returns it was using the call sign 8ZZ. Licensing of broadcasting was not created until the art was well under way, and so it should not be used as a basis to single out one broadcaster.

In fact, in 1942, the NAB proclaimed that it was officially recognizing WWJ as being the true “first” broadcaster in the country. This announcement created a firestorm that resulted in Westinghouse Broadcasting withdrawing its NAB membership for eight years. Finally, in 1947, Kenneth Baker of the NAB stated that the organization was unable to take a position on which broadcaster was first.

It is accurate and appropriate to claim 1920 as the year that broadcasting was begun in the United States, and the NAB campaign is a wonderful celebration of that fact. But it is not appropriate for the NAB, which represents all broadcasters, to claim that just one date or one station deserves that honor. Many pioneers worked in parallel to develop what became radio broadcasting, and none of them deserves preferential treatment; they should all be considered “first.”

The post Letter to the Editor: KDKA Does Not Stand Alone appeared first on Radio World.

From our Who’s Buying What page, Thum+Mahr has helped BBC Cymru Wales integrate a total IP workflow.

T+M installed a DHD Audio IP audio system. A release said, “DHD Audio will be the future platform

of the entire radio division of BBC Cymru Wales new Broadcasting Centre in Cardiff.”

[See Our Who’s Buying What Page]

Every workstation and work group has access to all audio and control signals in the network. In addition, all groups can operate autonomously.

Send news and photos of projects to Radio World at radioworld@futurenet.com.

 

The post Thum+Mahr Aids BBC in Wales appeared first on Radio World.

While many organizations cheered the way in which the Federal Communications Commission revamped the rules for dealing with FM translator interference complaints, others are asking the commission to stop and reconsider some of its decisions.

Among those asking for reconsideration were a group of four — including the LPFM Coalition; Fellowship of the Earth/KGIG(LP) in Salida, Calif.; Skywaves Communications; and Charles M. Anderson — all of whom filed petitions in July 2019 asking the commission to reconsider parts of the order it released within “Amendment Part 74 of the Commission’s Rules Regarding FM Translator Interference.”

[Read: Latest U.S. Station Totals Reveal Boom in Translators]

Among the new rules were adopted were these three: FM translators causing or receiving interference with another station now have the flexibility to change channels using a minor modification application; interference claims must now follow a standardized process that sets a bar for a minimum number of listener complaints and sets a new undesired-to-desired (U/D) data ratio around signal strength; and a rule that says the only interference complaints that will be considered are those with an outer contour limit of 45 dBu signal strength.

A petition filed by two of the filers — the LPFM Coalition and Fellowship — stated that a low-power FM preclusion study should be included every time a translator files a modification application as dictated by the Local Community Radio Act. The FCC disagreed with this argument, though, saying that the LCRA refers to new FM translator stations not modification applications. “Requiring such preclusion studies would be contrary to the aim of this proceeding, namely, to streamline the translator interference rules and to expedite the translator complaint resolution process,” the FCC said in its response.

The FCC also fielded an argument by Fellowship that charged that the nonadjacent channel change rule for translators violates what is known as the Ashbacker doctrine. That doctrine held that grant of a waiver requesting that a single long-distance transmitter move as a minor modification could potentially violate a competing applicants’ rights. The Supreme Court ruled in this case that where two applications are mutually exclusive, the grant of one without considering the other violates the rights of the second applicant.

But the Ashbacker doctrine does not apply to prospective applicants, the FCC said, only to those who have filed timely, mutually exclusive applications. The goal of many of the changes made in the order is to simplify the process, not make it more complex, the FCC said. In this particular case, the goal is to allow FM translator stations to deal with interference by treating channel changes as minor.

“To treat these changes as major, and therefore subject to competing applications, would undermine our efforts to provide FM translator stations with an efficient means to remediate interference,” the FCC said.

The FCC also dismissed a number of other arguments, including one by Anderson who argued that the minimum number of listener complaints should be changed from three to six. The FCC declined to consider this, saying it already thoroughly considered this issue during the original proceeding.

The commission also denied an argument from the LPFM Coalition regarding how it should handle multiple complaints from a single building. The FCC ruled that any consistent interference problem must stem from listener evidence gathered from multiple, unique locations. The commission did agree, however, that an operator must address each valid interference complaint, even if they all originate from the same building.

The commission also rejected Skywaves’ suggestion to allow listeners complaints from anywhere within the complaining station’s protected contour — even if the listener location does not satisfy the ratio of undesired to desired signal strength (the U/D test).

The U/D data requirement serves as a threshold test to eliminate obvious instances where the translator could not be the source of the alleged interference, the FCC said. “For example, a listener could be located on the opposite side of the protected contour from the translator station, with the complaining station’s transmitter located in between,” the FCC wrote. “In this situation, the translator could not possibly be the source of the alleged interference, yet under Skywaves’ proposal, we would accept the listener complaint as valid.”

The FCC said it is also not persuaded that extending the range of potential listener complaints to include all of the complaining station’s protected contour area is necessary.

“If a ‘real and consistent’ interference problem caused by a translator should occur, we anticipate that the affected station will be able to readily obtain the required minimum number of listener complaints from within the zone of potential interference.”

The FCC also reaffirmed the establishment of an outer contour limit of 45 dBu signal strength of the complaining station. Outside of this limit, interference complaints will not be considered. The commission also reaffirmed that all of the newly adopted rules will be applicable to applications or complaints that are pending.

As with many of the arguments in the filings, the FCC reminded the petitioners that it has set rules on what it reviews: reconsideration is generally appropriate only when new information is raised or if the petitioner can show the FCC made a mistake.

More comments on the Report and Order can be found within the FCC’s ECFS database using Media Bureau Docket 18-119.

 

The post FCC Addresses Reconsideration Petitions on FM Translator Interference Rules appeared first on Radio World.

A new look for the SBE website.

A welcome surprise awaits visitors to the Society of Broadcast Engineers webpage: a modern, sophisticated, redesigned website — with a cheery bouncing SBE logo — that is both pleasing to the eye and easier to navigate.

The redesign includes new drop-down items that break key SBE areas into easy-to navigate silos, from a section on education to one on certification to another on membership. A scrolling layout in the news and headlines section highlights personnel announcements, scholarship recipients, regulatory deadlines and updates on the organization’s national convention.

[Read: Mark Persons Receives SBE Lifetime Achievement Award]

The catalyst for the new website redesign came from the last SBE strategic planning effort held in 2018, said Chriss Scherer, member communications director for the Society of Broadcast Engineers. Previously, updates and enhancements had been added in here and there, which resulted in more workarounds as website technology management evolved.

This redesign gives SBE a fresh start and gives the organization greater flexibility going forward, he said.

The most notable change is obviously the look, Scherer said, which is cleaner and more streamlined. Another significant change goes on behind the scenes and is invisible to users. “The new site is built on a content management system,” he said. “With the CMS approach, the site is now optimized for use across multiple device platforms: web browser, tablet and mobile.”

A new look for the SBE website.

The previous site was built on discrete pages, which was an accepted method at that time, Scherer said. “The redesign also allowed us to refresh many areas of the site and reorganize all the information we present there,” he said.

The site allows users to easily search for other SBE members as well as search for suppliers and contract engineers. The site also highlights a monthly, virtual program called SBE WEBxtra, which provides information on broadcast technology and SBE itself. While it’s not intended to replace a local chapter meeting, SBE members who do not have a chapter near them — or miss a chapter meeting — can connect with SBE WEBxtra online to stay involved.

In addition, the site also gives users easy access to frequency coordination tools including an easy-to-skim list of local coordinators and details on the volunteer frequency coordinator accreditation process.

Scherer said there are more enhancements in the works, which will be rolled out as they are developed.

“We spent the first week after the relaunch checking links and information after the launch,”  he said. “Some older files may not be available yet, and there could be a broken link here and there.” If site visitors find something that isn’t right, please let Scherer know by emailing comms@sbe.org.

 

The post New SBE Website Redesigned from Inside Out appeared first on Radio World.

Fig. 1: WD-40 Multi-Use Product is available in various packages and applicator formats. The company also makes specialty versions for purposes like heavy-duty degreasing; removing rust by soaking; lubricating bike chains; and dry-lubing table saws and drills.

It’s WD-40 time again!

For readers in the Northern Hemisphere, colder weather is coming. Before that ice and snow arrive, it’s time to eliminate “cold” failures around your site. Go grab your can of WD-40 and let’s get to work.

Before we start, do you know the story behind this ubiquitous product?

WD-40 is the registered trademark for a multi-use product made by WD-40 Company. From the company’s history page:

In 1953, in a small lab in San Diego, California, the fledgling Rocket Chemical Company and its staff of three set out to create a line of rust-prevention solvents and degreasers for use in the aerospace industry.

It took them 40 attempts to get their water displacing formula to work, but on the 40th attempt, they got it right in a big way. WD-40 Multi Use Product was born. WD-40 stands for Water Displacement, 40th formula. That’s the name straight out of the lab book used by the chemist who developed the product.

The first company to use WD-40 Multi-Use Product commercially was Convair, an aerospace contractor, to protect the outer skin of the Atlas Missile from rust and corrosion. The product worked so well that several employees snuck cans of WD-40 Multi-Use Product out of the plant in their lunchboxes to use at home.

A little closer to home, this spray compound works wonders on internal lock mechanisms. Spray some in the keyhole and work the locking mechanism. For combination locks, spray a little into the open hasp and rotate the combination dial. Fighting frozen locks in the middle of winter is no fun, so go enjoy a nice fall day and apply some now on all your locks: fences, access panels, doors and gates.

WD-40 can also be used to lubricate door hinges and latches. Wipe the rubber gasket of a garage door to keep it from freezing; spray the compound on the garage door rollers and tracks makes for smooth operation. Spray the door panel hinges (Figs. 2 and 3).

Fig. 2: Note the metal filings, which look like dirt, and the smudge mark beneath the hinge.

 

Even dual hinges at the door edge wear if not lubricated properly.

D-40 also removes gummy labels, bumper stickers and decals without damaging the vehicle finish. It’s also good for removing pine tar or other road debris.

The spray can also help lubricate cables being pulled through a conduit.

In the past we’ve described how you can seal the ends of conduit or other exterior wall holes using stainless steel or copper wool in combination with expandable foam sealant. Well, if you spray WD-40 on your hands before working with that sticky foam adhesive, the cleanup will be a snap.

On remote vehicles, WD-40 will remove scuff marks, road tar and dried insects while protecting metal and chrome parts from corrosion and rust. It works wonders in removing residue from Gaffers or Duct tape.

At home, a spritz of WD-40 will loosen a stuck zipper on a winter jacket, and keep it zipping smoothly all winter long. (Get this: It also can be used to remove chewing gum or glue from your child’s hair!)

As engineers, we’re constantly getting our hands dirty. WD-40 is an excellent degreaser, especially if you’ve been working on a greasy generator engine. Keep a roll of paper towels and a canister of WD-40 at each transmitter site.

When the snow falls, a liberal coating on snow shovels and down the throat of snow blowers will keep the snow flowing and prevent clogs. It also works well on a satellite dish; if you spray the dish ahead of time, snow slides off.

There are thousands of uses including removal of grease and dirt from metal tools. You may have your own favorite; send it to me at johnpbisset@gmail.com.

To see new products the company offers, head to www.wd40.com.

Cable tester update

Bob Calder’s career goes back 40 years to the early days of 45s and cart machines. Over the past couple of decades, he has worked as an independent project engineer for multiple FM antenna sites and broadcast studios in western Canada. His home is in Victoria, British Columbia.

Today Bob does small projects and keeps in touch with developments in broadcasting through trade journals like Radio World.

Bob sent in a suggestion regarding our XLR tester, developed by Buc Fitch and described in our Workbench column in the Aug. 19 issue.

If the three pushbuttons were replaced with a three-position rotary switch, both of your hands would be free to check for troublesome intermittent connections by flexing and wiggling the cable.

Bob adds that if the rotary switch has a couple more positions, the tester becomes even more valuable.

A fourth position could be labeled “off” and a fifth could diode isolate all three lights so they are all “on” at the same time. This allows you to check more quickly for cable intermittents as the cable is flexed. Bob acknowledges that the risk in adding this “quick” test feature somewhat defeats the main purpose of the device, which is the all-important polarity test.

Whups! Our bad!

And speaking of that cable tester, thanks to Radio World friend Jerry Arnold and all you other eagle-eyed readers for gracefully pointing out that the picture I included with the schematic for that project showed a box with two male XLR connectors! See Fig. 4. Kind of hard to test a typical mic cable that way.

Fig. 4: No, your eyes aren’t playing tricks. When you build the Buc Fitch project that we told you about last month, the box should have male and female XLRs. (The box on the right is a balanced-to-unbalanced converter.)

Neither your author nor Buc are losing our minds; the photo was for another tester that Buc had proposed, and I simply mixed up the photos. (Too bad it wasn’t an April 1 column!)

John Bisset has spent over 50 years in the broadcasting industry and is still trying to learn XLRs. He handles western U.S. radio sales for the Telos Alliance, holds CPBE certification with the Society of Broadcast Engineers, and is a past recipient of the SBE’s Educator of the Year Award. Workbench submissions are encouraged and qualify for SBE Recertification. Email johnpbisset@gmail.com.

The post Workbench: Time to Prepare for Ice and Snow appeared first on Radio World.

.

.

.

.

.

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.

.

.