Published:  TV Technology

Issue:  9/11/97



Broadcasters Lose Spectrum in Budget Bill

by Joe Fedele



WASHINGTON, D.C.--Question: What does the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997, signed 

into law last month by President Clinton, have in common with the Broadcast Auxiliary Service 

(BAS) microwave band?  

        

Answer: Auctions.

        

Referred to in a mere 22 pages of the 1,334 page budget bill, Congress has provided for an 

"extension and expansion of auction authority" to the FCC for the purpose of collecting an 

estimated $26.3 billion over the next five years. The now-legendary FCC spectrum auctions 

have come to be synonymous with the words "balanced budget."   

        

In yet another attempt to squeeze dollars from the airwaves, Congress appears to have agreed 

on language that could translate into a big loss for broadcasters.  As of this writing, the FCC will 

be "obligated" by the bill to allocate not less than 100 megahertz of spectrum located below 3 

GHz to be available for auction by September 30, 2002.  

        

The new budget targets several chunks of bandwidth between 1,710 and 2,150 MHz for the 

auction block to help ease the country's budget woes.  And some of this will come from spectrum 

currently being used by 

broadcasters.

        

The BAS band extends from 1,990 to 2,110 MHz and is primarily used by broadcasters for ENG 

and programming back haul from the field. The BAS band now consists of seven channels that 

are 17 MHz wide (with the exception of the first channel that is 18 MHz wide).

        

This "ENG band" has previously been the target of the auction block when, back in 1991, the 

FCC first considered it as prime real estate for the emerging Personal Communications Services 

(PCS) band.  Extensive lobbying efforts on the part of the broadcast industry successfully 

thwarted those efforts and saved the BAS in its entirety. 

        

But earlier this year the FCC announced its intentions to make modifications to the existing BAS 

band.

        

The First Report and Order (docket 95-18) for the Reallocation of Spectrum for Use by Mobile 

Satellite Services (MSS) consists of removing 15 of the 120 MHz of spectrum used by BAS and 

then sliding the remaining band up in frequency to start at 2,025  MHz.  Adhering to changes 

scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2000, broadcasters would continue to operate seven 

channels but at a reduce bandwidth of only 15 MHz on each channel. (see chart 1)

        

The latest attack on the BAS band appears to be much more deadly, as broadcasters could lose 

an additional 35 MHz of bandwidth to pay off the national debt.  In its present form the budget bill 

calls for the FCC to reallocate 40 MHz of spectrum in the band extending from 2,110 to 2,150.  

This cuts a 20 MHz slice off  the top of the newly proposed BAS band as well as over half of the 

Fixed Service Microwave band.  (see chart)

        

The bill also calls for the reallocation of 15 MHz of spectrum from somewhere within the band 

extending from 1,990 to 2,110.  Depending on where the FCC selects the 15 MHz of bandwidth, 

it could mean an additional loss of spectrum for broadcasters.

        

As a result of both the budget bill and the MSS reallocation proposal, the BAS could shrink from 

120 MHz to a mere 70 MHz.  This leaves broadcasters with approximately four channels in the 2 

GHz band to work with.  

        

Such diminished capacity would be devastating to broadcasters in major markets like New York 

and Los Angeles where the existing seven channel band is shared by twenty or more TV 

stations, networks and cable 

operators.

        

The President, Congress and the Commission are counting on advances in digital technology to 

resolve some of the problems created by the loss of spectrum.  In fact, the FCC hopes 

broadcasters will "adopt more spectrally efficient technology [in order to] "take advantage of 

digital compression techniques."  This, they anticipate, will allow broadcasters to utilize smaller 

band space for comparable quality and performance.

        

The change from 17 to 15 MHz of bandwidth per channel would force broadcasters to "tighten 

up" considerably on their microwave transmitters' deviation, retune the center frequencies and 

require better 

filtering.

        

In comments filed as part of the First Report and Order, the Society of Broadcast Engineers 

(SBE) states that "channels of 15 megahertz are possible, but that narrowing BAS channels must 

be accompanied by new equipment capable of tuning to the narrower channels and having 

narrower intermediate frequency bandpass to avoid degradation in adjacent-channel rejection."  

But most professionals agree that this change is workable.

        

"Full bandwidth operations at 15 MHz appears to work fine," said Rick Hollowell, director of 

Portable Products and Systems for California Microwave (headquartered in Redwood City). 

"There is a possibility that half channel operation in the new 15 MHz channel plan may work as 

well, but there still needs to be much more system testing before anyone can guarantee any kind 

of success."  

        

Dealing with a reduced band of only 70 MHz is another matter that may require some creative 

reconfigurations.  One option, for instance, could be to subdivide the band into seven 10 MHz 

channels.  Hollowell implied that such a plan could work, assuming that high order modulation 

techniques, such as 64-QAM were used in association with MPEG-2 compression.

        

"There is a big tradeoff when using high order modulation techniques in the overall system gain," 

he adds. "A loss of up to 12 dB in RF power is predicted using this method, which could impact 

the viability of any such systems."

        

Other modulation plans that are less sophisticated may also be used that do not incur such high 

signal loss, although more testing and research has to be done before manufacturers will stick 

their necks out and say the technology is fool proof.  

        

Although most engineers have focused on BAS as an ENG delivery mechanism in the major 

markets, it is also a major resource for long haul microwave in many rural areas.

        

Andrew Suk, director of engineering for Cordillera Communications and the SBE Frequency 

Coordinator in Idaho, points out that "in the intermountain West there are large microwave 

backbones across the states that connect various stations, networks and news facilities.  

Montana and Idaho, in particular, have large installed bases of microwave gear.  Many of these 

paths are in the 2 GHz band due to the robustness of the frequencies over long path lengths 

(greater than 75 miles)." 

        

Broadcasters are generally willing to accept some signal degradation when it comes to brief ENG 

feeds during the local news, but cross country, multi-hop microwave links that carry 

programming to air 24 hours a day is still a big concern.  It is unclear if even the most advanced 

digital modulation and compression schemes could provide the high level of quality required by 

an STL link given the extreme narrowing of these channels.  

        

The budget bill also seeks to "promote the most efficient use of the spectrum" and require that 

the FCC "take into account the cost to incumbent licensees of relocating existing uses to other 

bands of frequencies or other means of communication."

        

But the bill does not specify who will bare the cost of such changes or how the changes will be 

implemented.

        

The FCC’s Report and Order, however, states that the estimated $171 million cost of relocating 

BAS must be borne by MSS providers and that they "must guarantee payment of all relocation 

expenses, build the new 

microwave facilities at the relocation frequencies, and demonstrate that the new facilities are 

comparable to the relocated facilities."

        

There are provisions in the bill giving the President the authority to create exemptions if "such 

spectrum cannot be reallocated due to the need to protect incumbent Federal systems from 

interference" or that allocation of other spectrum "better serves the public interest, convenience, 

and necessity." Other frequencies can be chosen if it is proved that they can "reasonably be 

expected to produce greater receipts."

       

 But few expect a Presidential "pardon" for the BAS band.  And many wonder how legislators can 

force change in anticipation of future technology's ability to bare the extra load.  

        

“I find it amazing," concludes Suk, "that our political leadership can mandate changes in 

technology through feeble legislation for budget concerns.  Perhaps we can have them legislate 

less gravity so I won't 

weigh so much."