U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

27–146 2018

THE BROADCAST INCENTIVE AUCTION: UPDATE 

ON REPACKING OPPORTUNITIES AND 

CHALLENGES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 

Serial No. 115–53 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

energycommerce.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

Chairman 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

Vice Chairman 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

DAVID B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana 

MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma 

RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

Ranking Member 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, New Mexico 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, III, Massachusetts 

TONY CA ́ RDENAS, California 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

Chairman 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

Vice Chairman 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Tennessee 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio) 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

Ranking Member 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey (ex 

officio) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Tennessee, opening statement ............................................................................ 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 3 

Hon. Michael F. Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania, opening statement ................................................................... 3 

Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 5 

Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, opening statement .................................................................................... 6 

Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New Jersey, prepared statement ........................................................................ 83 

WITNESSES

Scott Bergmann, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, CTIA ................................ 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 10 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 122 

Rebecca Murphy Thompson, General Counsel and Executive Vice President, 

Competitive Carriers Association ....................................................................... 26 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 28 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 124 

Rick Kaplan, General Counsel and Executive Vice President, National Association of Broadcasters ........................................................................................ 41 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 43 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 128 

Patrick Butler, CEO, America’s Public Television Stations ................................. 49 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 51 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 132 

Lyn Plantinga, Vice President and General Manager, Newschannel 5 Network ....................................................................................................................... 56 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 58 

Jim Tracy, CEO, Legacy Telecommunications, Inc., National Association of 

Tower Erectors Chairman ................................................................................... 65 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 67 

SUBMITTED MATERIAL

Op-ed entitled, ‘‘Something for Cellphone Users to Celebrate: The FCC’s 

Air Waives Auction Provides a Much-Needed Boost to Main Street,’’ by 

Billy Tauzin, Washington Times, May 7, 2017, submitted by Mr. Long ......... 112 

Statement of Electronics Research, Incorporated, submitted by Mrs. Blackburn ....................................................................................................................... 114

Statement of the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition, submitted by Mrs. Blackburn ....................................................................................................................... 117

Press release from T-Mobile, August 16, 2017, submitted by Mrs. Blackburn .. 120 

(1) 

THE BROADCAST INCENTIVE AUCTION: UPDATE ON REPACKING OPPORTUNITIES AND 

CHALLENGES 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in room 

2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Marsha Blackburn 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Blackburn, Lance, Shimkus, Latta, 

Guthrie, Kinzinger, Bilirakis, Johnson, Long, Flores, Brooks, Collins, Cramer, Walters, Costello, Walden (ex officio), Doyle, Welch, 

Clarke, Loebsack, Dingell, Eshoo, Engel, Butterfield, Matsui, 

McNerney, and Pallone (ex officio). 

Also Present: Representative Green. 

Staff Present: Elena Hernandez, Press Secretary; Zach Hunter, 

Director of Communications; Bijan Koohmaraie, Counsel, Digital 

Commerce and Consumer Protection; Lauren McCarty, Counsel, 

Communications and Technology; Alex Miller, Video Production 

Aide and Press Assistant; Dan Schneider, Press Secretary; Jennifer 

Sherman, Press Secretary; Evan Viau, Legislative Clerk, Communications and Technology; Hamlin Wade, Special Advisor, External 

Affairs; Jeff Carroll, Minority Staff Director; Alex Debianchi, Minority Telecom Fellow; David Goldman, Minority Chief Counsel, 

Communications and Technology; Jerry Leverich, Minority Counsel; Lori Maarbjerg, Minority FCC Detailee; Jessica Martinez, Minority Outreach and Member Services Coordinator; Dan Miller, Minority Policy Analyst; and Andrew Souvall, Minority Director of 

Communications, Outreach and Member Services. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The Subcommittee on Communications and 

Technology will now come to order. And the chair recognizes herself for 5 minutes for an opening statement. 

And I do want to begin by welcoming everyone to the Communications and Technology Subcommittee with our hearing titled 

‘‘The Broadcast Incentive Auction: Update on Repacking Opportunities and Challenges.’’ And I want to thank our witnesses for 

2 

being here today. We appreciate having your perspective on this 

issue. 

Mobile connectivity has become an essential component of our everyday lives. Today, Americans are consuming more mobile content 

than ever before. Since 2010, data traffic delivered over wireless 

networks has increased by a factor of 35. Last year alone, Americans have generated over 13 trillion megabytes of wireless data 

traffic. That is the equivalent of 1.5 million years of streaming HD 

video. Now, that is what is running over our networks. 

All of this consumption has led to a pressing need for more mobile broadband spectrum. This committee, along with the FCC, 

NTIA, and the private sector, has worked to identify opportunities 

to feed the spectrum pipeline. The broadcast incentive auction presented a rare opportunity to make a significant block of spectrum 

available for mobile broadband use. 

After years of discussion on auction design and preparation, the 

first two phases of the auction have been successfully completed. 

Earlier this year, the reverse and forward auctions concluded, raising $19.8 billion in revenues, the second largest auction in FCC 

history, and contributing over $7 billion to Federal deficit reduction. 

We have now begun the third phase of the auction. This is the 

repack. In crafting legislation that authorized the auction, this 

committee worked very hard to strike a balance between the needs 

of broadcasters and the consumer demand for wireless service. Discussions involving stakeholders from all sides of the auction resulted in agreement on the postauction transition timeline and 

budget. The FCC has done its part to carry out the first part of the 

auction and set the parameters for the repack. It is now time for 

industry to work together to ensure that this agreement is honored 

and that the repack is completed on time. 

This morning, we will hear about the ongoing challenges with 

completing this phase of the auction. Our witnesses will discuss 

outstanding issues with relocating broadcasters to new channels as 

well as the importance of clearing the 600 megahertz band as soon 

as possible. We will also examine unanswered questions surrounding low-power television and translator stations, an issue 

that is very important to many members on this committee. 

Hurricane Harvey has reminded each and every one of us—and 

now Hurricane Irma, which is pressing down on the U.S. We all 

know how important broadcasters and wireless providers are in 

times of emergency. Preserving access to over-the-air television 

while also meeting consumer needs for mobile broadband is a goal 

that we all share and a problem we need to all resolve together. 

Today’s panel will inform us on the challenges and the opportunities of the latest effort to advance this goal. Thank you, and I look 

forward to the testimony from our witnesses. 

And at this time, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, 

who is the recent father of the groom. And I know his opening 

statement is going to be as beautifully delivered as his toast to the 

happy couple. 

Mr. Doyle, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

[The prepared statement of Mrs. Blackburn follows:] 

3 

THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN

The Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will now come to order. 

The Chair now recognizes herself for five minutes for an opening statement. 

Welcome everyone to the Communications and Technology Subcommittee’s hearing titled: ‘‘The Broadcast Incentive Auction: Update on Repacking Opportunities 

and Challenges.’’ Thank you to the witnesses for appearing today to offer your perspective on this important issue. 

Mobile connectivity has become an essential component of our everyday lives. 

Today, Americans are consuming more mobile content than ever before. Since 2010, 

data traffic delivered over wireless networks has increased by a factor of 35. Last 

year alone, Americans generated over 13 trillion megabytes of wireless data traffic. 

That is the equivalent of 1.5 million years of streaming HD video. All of this consumption has led to a pressing need for more mobile broadband spectrum. 

This committee, along with the FCC, NTIA, and the private sector, has worked 

to identify opportunities to feed the spectrum pipeline. The broadcast incentive auction presented a rare opportunity to make a significant block of spectrum available 

for mobile broadband use. After years of discussion on auction design and preparation, the first two phases of the auction have been successfully completed. Earlier 

this year, the reverse and forward auctions concluded, raising $19.8 billion in revenues—the second largest auction in FCC history—and contributing over $7 billion 

to federal deficit reduction. 

We have now begun the third phase of the auction—the repack. In crafting legislation that authorized the auction, this committee worked very hard to strike a balance between the needs of broadcasters and the consumer demand for wireless service. Discussions involving stakeholders from all sides of the auction resulted in 

agreement on the post-auction transition timeline and budget. The FCC has done 

its part to carry out the first part of the auction and set parameters for the repack. 

It is now time for industry to work together to ensure that this agreement is honored and that the repack is completed on time. 

This morning we will hear about the ongoing challenges with completing this 

phase of the auction. Our witnesses will discuss outstanding issues with relocating 

broadcasters to new channels as well as the importance of clearing the 600 megahertz band as soon as possible. We will also examine unanswered questions surrounding low power television and translator stations—an issue very important to 

many members of this committee. 

Hurricane Harvey has reminded us all how important broadcasters and wireless 

providers are in times of emergency. Preserving access to over-the-air television 

while also meeting consumer demand for mobile broadband is a goal we all share. 

Today’s panel will inform us on challenges and opportunities in the latest effort to 

advance this goal. 

Thank you and I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL F. DOYLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH 

OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I thank 

you for holding this hearing. And thank you to the witnesses for 

appearing before us. 

I want to start by saying—and I think all of us up here feel the 

same way—that our thoughts and prayers go out to those affected 

by Hurricane Harvey in Houston and those folks that are in the 

path of Irma. 

But, you know, in tragedy and loss, we also hear stories of perseverance and fortitude. Broadcasters in Houston have been on the 

air nonstop since Harvey, doing everything from coordinating food 

drops and rescues to setting up fundraisers to help with the recovery. 

And, similarly, cellular networks have largely continued to function in the region. I know my good friend Frank Pallone has been 

doing a lot of work on this issue since Sandy, and his efforts, as 

4 

well as those of the wireless carriers and the FCC, has paid off. 

The vast majority of the region maintained cellular service, which 

enabled critical lifesaving operations, as well as coordinating communications between families and loved ones and first responders. 

So I am happy to see the progress that these industries have 

made, but we need to continue to improve. And with Irma on the 

way, we may be tested again all too soon. That is one reason this 

hearing is so important. Spectrum is at the heart of both broadcast 

and cellular technologies, and it is critical that we get this repack 

right because a misstep could disrupt both technologies. 

Early reports from the FCC suggest that the 1.75 billion repacking fund will fall short in getting broadcasters relocated. I and 

many of my colleagues support Ranking Member Pallone’s Viewer 

Protection Act, which sets aside an additional $1 billion for broadcaster relocation and authorizes $90 million to conduct outreach to 

consumers to inform and educate them about the transition. 

And while I am interested in holding broadcasters harmless 

through this process, I am concerned by some allegations we are 

hearing that some broadcasters may try to use this process to slow 

the repack or to use the process for their own gain. I encourage the 

FCC to take a zero-tolerance approach to this kind of activity. 

I look forward to the hearing. And at this time, Madam Chair, 

I would like to yield the remaining time I have to my friend Gene 

Green. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Green is recognized. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and to the members of the 

committee. At one time, I did serve on the telecom subcommittee. 

But I want to thank my friend Mike Doyle. 

For 7 days, the Texas Gulf Coast was hammered by Hurricane 

Harvey, bringing destruction beyond anything witnessed in living 

memory in our State. The storm dropped 4 feet of rain on greater 

Houston. Over 100,000 homes and residences were flooded in Harris County alone. 

Currently, 85,000 Texans are staying in shelters and temporary 

FEMA housing. Authorities believe at least 70 Americans were 

killed due to Harvey, and that number will continue to rise. 

During the worst of Harvey, the people of Houston and Harris 

County were able to rely on the dedication of our local TV and 

radio broadcasters to provide critical lifesaving information, including emergency flash flood warnings, live coverage of our local officials, and first responders, and up-to-the-minute updates on conditions in our neighborhood and roads. This dedication exhibited by 

our local CBS affiliate, which I was at the week before Harvey, 

KHOU, channel 11, which continued airing emergency coverage of 

Harvey while water filled their first floor. 

I also thank the hard work of the dedicated and of our local communication workers, wireless providers, who maintained our wireless communication network throughout Harvey. I am happy to say 

that 99 percent of the cell towers in Harris County are currently 

operational. 

As our committee examines the impact of the broadcaster spectrum and repack, I ask that we take into account the value that 

our local broadcasters provide during emergencies like Harvey, and 

5 

ensure that broadcasters will be made whole and so they can be at 

the next emergency. 

In Houston, we typically get a tropical storm, a hurricane about 

every 7 years, so we know we are going to be there. They are not 

moving Houston, but we will end that. 

But anyway, I want to thank my good friend for yielding to me, 

and I will yield back to Mike. Thank you. 

Mr. DOYLE. I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

And at this time, I recognize the chairman of the full committee, 

Mr. Walden, for 5 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And I appreciate our witnesses who are here today for this really important 

hearing. 

And I also join those who are keeping you in our thoughts and 

prayers, all those affected by the hurricanes and the flooding, Harvey, Irma. I would add to it a couple names you are not familiar 

with: Chetco, Eagle Creek, Indian Creek, among others, which are 

the fires that are ravaging the northwest, including just a few 

miles from where I live. 

Over the weekend, the Eagle Creek fire took off and has now 

burned 33,000 acres. I had embers on my deck 17 miles away. 

Freeway systems closed. The rail lines are closed. And even the 

mighty Columbia River is not allowing barge traffic at this time. 

And this is in the national Columbia River scenic area, and so it 

seems like every region of our country is affected. 

And the comments made by my colleagues, they are helping out 

every step of the way with the citizens, our brave first responders, 

the firefighters, the EMTs and all, but also our broadcasters, public 

and commercial. Cell towers are staying up and operating, emergency communications are at work. Our ham radio operators, of 

which I am one, are very active in all this as well. 

And it speaks to the importance of the hearing today to make 

sure that we have the most vibrant, modern communications platforms in the world and that they continue to operate and provide 

emergency and day-to-day communication to our citizens. 

In a district such as mine with this enormous nature of it and 

these threats that we face, it is also important to realize it is very 

mountainous, and that means translators matter. And I know that 

is an issue that is on my mind because we have a lot of consumers 

out in the rural areas whose only link for television and the emergency communications that comes with that is off a translator in 

a deep valley or somewhere else. So we have got to figure that 

piece of this out. It wasn’t part of the original package, but somehow in here we have got to figure a way through that one as well. 

The legislation that brings us here today started back in 2012 

with the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act under the 

FCC. Our whole goal then was to take this very important spectrum and make it available for its highest and best purpose and 

use and drive innovation and help try to find a spectrum that 

would meet the insatiable demand of all of us who are consumers 

6 

to pull up all of our devices, like many of you probably are wishing 

you were doing right now instead of listening to me, and watch 

video, among other things. And so it is important that we did that. We raised $19.8 billion, 

the government. We funded FirstNet, or at least the first tranche 

of FirstNet, for the interoperable public safety broadband network 

called for by the 9/11 Commission, and we are continuing our oversight over that. 

But today, we need to look at this repack. That is the next phase. 

I said all along we would do that at the appropriate time to see 

if the right amount of funds are there to accomplish the goal. We 

didn’t know. We still don’t know for sure. 

We are also concerned about the timelines, the number literally 

of engineers that can do repacks. We have heard about FM stations 

that may be affected that we didn’t know—really think through 

that they may have an affect here. 

And so we have got a lot of work on our hands. We know that. 

We want to hear from each of you. That is why it is such a diverse 

panel, because we know how much is at stake. And so thank you 

for being here. Thank you for working with us over the last 5 

years. And now we enter the final phase. We want to make sure 

we get this phase right as well. 

So, Madam Chair, I thank you for your leadership on this issue 

and that of the committee on both sides of the aisle, and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Is there anyone on our side seeking the balance of his time? 

No one is seeking the time. And I think it expresses the importance of this hearing coast to coast. You are looking at disasters 

and the importance of timely information and individuals being 

able to be informed. 

At this time, in Mr. Pallone’s absence, I recognize Ms. Matsui for 

5 minutes. The gentlelady is recognized. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DORIS O. MATSUI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

Thank you for yielding. It is important that our committee, following the last spectrum incentive auction, is monitoring the process to ensure a smooth transition for broadcast stations. 

The information broadcasters share is of critical importance to 

my constituents’ daily lives. As I watched the destruction of Hurricane Harvey and the threat and the destruction already posed by 

Irma, I think of the Sacramento area and its extreme risk of natural disasters like flood and wildfire. 

We rely upon our local news for accurate, local information during times of crisis. Spectrum is the invisible infrastructure of the 

21st century, and the most recent spectrum auction was a success 

because of the participation of dozens of carriers across the country. 

We need to continue to encourage innovation that keeps us moving forward, paving the way for things like 5G, which we are leading on with new public-private partnership in Sacramento. WireVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
7 

less is the way forward, but we must also ensure that our broadcasters have the resources they need to make sure that everyone 

has access to the best information, both globally and locally. 

Thank you, and I yield to the gentleman next to me. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. The gentlelady is yielding to Mr. McNerney. You are recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, I thank my friend from California. 

I want to follow up on the ranking member’s remarks. We have 

a spectrum. The 39 months is just an estimate. We really don’t 

know exactly how much time, but we have to be careful we don’t 

allow foot dragging to move that period longer and longer, because 

it is going to cost money. 

And I am also very concerned about the merger that we are— 

that is sort of hanging over our head between Sinclair and—at any 

rate, the problem is that when we go there, we are going to be having a lot of concentration of spectrum and broadcast to one or two 

organizations that will enter many, many homes and will change 

the national dialogue. We really need diversity, so it is important 

that we continue to have diversity. It is important that we make 

sure that the spectrum allocation is finished on time. 

With that, I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

And the gentlelady yields back. And we were waiting for Mr. Pallone, but he is not here, has not arrived. 

So this concludes the member opening statements. I would like 

to remind all members that pursuant to committee rules, their 

statements will be made a part of the record. 

We want to thank our witnesses for being here today and for taking the time to come before the subcommittee. And you are each 

going to have the opportunity to deliver your opening statement. 

You will be followed with a round of questions by members. We 

look forward to your answers. 

And our witness panel today includes and we are welcoming 

Scott Bergmann, who is the Vice President of Regulatory Affairs at 

CTIA. Welcome back. Rebecca Murphy Thompson, who is the General Counsel and Executive VP of the Competitive Carriers Association; Rick Kaplan, who is the General Counsel and Executive VP 

of the National Association of Broadcasters; Patrick Butler, who is 

the CEO of America’s Public Television Stations. Go Vols. Lyn 

Plantinga, who is the VP and General Manager of NewsChannel 5 

Network in Nashville, Tennessee. And she does not say ‘‘go Vols.’’ 

She says ‘‘go Vandy.’’ And Jim Tracy, who is the Chairman of the 

National Association of Tower Erectors. 

We appreciate that you are each here today. And we especially 

appreciate your preparing your testimony and submitting that in 

advance. And we will begin the panel today with you, Mr. 

Bergmann. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

8 

STATEMENTS OF SCOTT BERGMANN, VICE PRESIDENT, REGULATORY AFFAIRS, CTIA; REBECCA MURPHY THOMPSON, 

GENERAL COUNSEL AND EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, 

COMPETITIVE CARRIERS ASSOCIATION; RICK KAPLAN, GENERAL COUNSEL AND EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS; PATRICK BUTLER, CEO, AMERICA’S PUBLIC TELEVISION STATIONS; LYN 

PLANTINGA, VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, 

NEWSCHANNEL 5 NETWORK; AND JIM TRACY, CEO, LEGACY 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF 

TOWER ERECTORS CHAIRMAN 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT BERGMANN 

Mr. BERGMANN. Thank you, Chairman Blackburn, Ranking Member Doyle, and members of the subcommittee. On behalf of CTIA, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify about the incentive auction 

and the postauction transition. 

Because of this committee’s leadership, the incentive auction was 

a tremendous success, the second largest spectrum auction by revenue raised and spectrum reallocated. It was a win for broadcasters, wireless providers, and American consumers. 

CTIA and its members strongly support the FCC’s transition 

plan which provides a flexible roadmap. We support a fully funded 

repack that ensures broadcasters are made whole for their reasonable costs. We appreciate this committee’s oversight and urge it to 

maintain the 39-month timeline. 

Delay would harm deployment of cutting-edge mobile wireless 

services, especially in rural areas, and could undermine future 

spectrum auctions. This first-of-its-kind auction has revolutionized 

the way that we repurpose spectrum to meet the Nation’s exploding 

mobile needs. It freed up 84 megahertz of spectrum. It grossed 

$19.8 billion. Fifty different parties won wireless licenses, including 

nontraditional and rural providers. And 175 broadcast stations 

were winners and will receive almost $10 billion in proceeds. 

This spectrum will generate substantial economic benefits. The 

70 megahertz of license spectrum will add more than 700,000 new 

jobs and as much as $22 billion to the GDP, so it is critical that 

this transition be accomplished smoothly, efficiently, and within 

the 39-month timeline. 

This low-band spectrum will enable new wireless services across 

the country, particularly in rural areas, which has been a topic of 

great interest to this committee. And winning bidders are already 

putting this spectrum to use. 

T–Mobile, the largest winner, launched operations in Wyoming 

and Maine just 2 months after receiving licenses. This year alone, 

the carrier will add new sites in Oregon, Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, 

New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington. 

To realize these benefits, it is important that we hold to the 39- 

month timeline. After carefully considering an extensive record 

from various stakeholders, the FCC developed a plan that provides 

flexibility for broadcasters, minimizes disruption for viewers, and 

provides certainty to wireless providers. 

9 

The plan features a 39-month transition, which was upheld by 

the courts, and 10 separate phases, eliminating the need for all stations to obtain equipment or schedule a tower at the same time. 

The FCC’s plan is not static. It established a process for broadcasters to extend their deadlines if necessary. And the FCC already 

has the authority to address potential timing problems, making 

legislative changes unnecessary. But significant delay would risk 

world buildout and 5G deployment and would be unfair to forward 

auction winners that invested nearly $20 billion. 

Delay could also negatively impact future auctions. If the government shows a willingness to retroactively change the rules, bidders 

in future auctions will build less, causing a decrease in spectrum 

prices and availability. 

Moving forward, CTIA’s members are doing all they can to be 

part of the solution. Our members are engaging with broadcasters 

to address repacking challenges, such as funding relocation costs 

for rural public television stations and low-power TV stations. They 

are working to ensure that equipment like antennas is available 

and are doing continuous outreach to translator and wireless 

microphone communities. CTIA expects this close collaboration and 

financial investment will continue throughout the repack. 

Finally, I would like to acknowledge the hardship from Hurricane Harvey, particularly in the district of Congressman Olson, 

and the wireless industry’ s efforts to maintain service for millions 

of Americans across Texas and Louisiana. 

CTIA commends this committee for its ongoing interest in wireless resiliency. Ranking Member Pallone has been intensely focused on this topic since Superstorm Sandy. Last year, wireless 

carriers adopted a network resiliency framework to improve resiliency during emergencies and natural disasters. 

Using this framework was successful. Wireless companies readied backup generators, prepositioned fuel, educated consumers, and 

brought in emergency response teams. Even as traffic spiked, wireless services were there when people needed them most. More than 

95 percent of cell sites remained working throughout the storm. 

More than 300 wireless emergency alerts were sent to warn people 

about tornados, flooding, and other dangers. More than 96,000 calls 

were delivered to 911, and millions of people used wireless to call, 

text, gather and share information, and communicate with loved 

ones. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bergmann follows:] 

10 


27146.001
11 


27146.002
12 


27146.003
13 


27146.004
14 


27146.005
15 


27146.006
16 


27146.007
17 


27146.008
18 


27146.009
19 


27146.010
20 


27146.011
21 


27146.012
22 


27146.013
23 


27146.014
24 


27146.015
25 


27146.016
26 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Ms. Murphy Thompson, you are recognized, 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF REBECCA MURPHY THOMPSON 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Thank you. 

Chairman Blackburn, Ranking Member Doyle, Ranking Member 

Pallone, and members of the subcommittee, I am honored to testify 

about the immense opportunities compared to the minimal challenges presented by repacking the 600 megahertz band for mobile 

broadband. 

CCA represents nearly 100 wireless carriers that serve urban 

centers and most rural parts of our country, along with 150 vendors and suppliers. The vast majority of CCA members are small 

businesses serving rural areas. 

Chairman Blackburn, I appreciate the subcommittee’s keen focus 

on prioritizing access and expansion of mobile broadband service 

and agree that an efficient and safe repacking process is a sound 

way to achieve this mutual goal. 

For these reasons, let me commend this committee for crafting 

legislation that gave life to the historic incentive auction, which unleashed 84 megahertz of low-band spectrum for mobile broadband 

use and garnered $20 billion in gross revenues, which includes $10 

billion in payments to broadcasters and $7 billion for deficit reduction. I would call that a good day at the office. 

The repacking process represents the third and final stage of the 

incentive auction. CCA carrier members represent the majority of 

the winning bidders in the auction who spent over $15 billion to 

acquire nearly 2,400 licenses. 

CCA’s carriers were key to the auction’s success and are anxious 

to deploy the spectrum to provide the latest mobile broadband services to consumers throughout the United States. The ongoing repack is not about wireless operators versus broadcasters; rather, 

collaborative work will expand access to mobile broadband, increase competition, and meet our country’s need for economic 

growth and creation. We cannot afford to wait. 

A persistent digital divide continues to plague certain parts of 

the United States, leaving rural communities trailing behind their 

urban counterparts on the road to 5G. The 600 megahertz spectrum is critical to bridge this digital divide and is tailor made for 

serving rural areas with excellent propagation characteristics. 

This is why so many of CCA’s members showed up, bid, and won 

spectrum in the auction. This is also why CCA members have continuously worked with broadcasters, tower crews, and other industry stakeholders to transition the spectrum. 

With continued congressional oversight and FCC diligence, CCA 

is confident that industry can safely and efficiently complete the 

transition within the 39-month timeline established by the FCC, 

based on congressional statute and upheld by the court. 

The committee and the FCC have committed that broadcasters 

will not go dark as a result of the transition period. The FCC antenna task force also has carefully balanced the need to clear the 

600 megahertz spectrum for mobile broadband use while protecting 

consumers. This included an efficient waiver process for any station 

that is unable to transition due to circumstances out of its control. 

27 

CCA supports these goals and urges Congress and the Commission to stay the course and maintain the 39-month timeline. This 

ensures carriers’ investments are realized and consumers receive 

the most advanced services. 

With this clarity in hand, CCA members ask that this committee 

reject any effort to delay the transition. As noted, CCA members 

spend significant capital in the auction with the expectation of offering consumer innovative services. Altering timelines now post 

auction could leave significant resources stranded, which would inject uncertainty into future auctions. 

In addition, the proposed Sinclair acquisition of Tribune could 

significantly delay the repacking effort as a result of its dominant 

market share and should be denied. Withholding spectrum in rural 

areas will deepen the digital divide and leaving consumers who 

could benefit most from the next generation technology without mobile broadband. As we say at CCA, wireless carriers must keep up 

with their Gs as networks move from 3G to 4G and soon 5G. 

Congress provided $1.75 billion for the repacking process. Initial 

expenditure estimates appear to exceed that amount. If additional 

financial resources are needed, CCA stands ready with Congress to 

make sure that adequate funding is available to complete the repack process within the 39-month timeline. 

In closing, reallocating the 600 megahertz spectrum for mobile 

broadband use creates jobs and presents a multitude of consumer 

opportunities. We must stick to this well-established, consistently 

upheld 30-month timeline and allow the commission to use its existing waiver process to resolve challenges that are outside our 

broadcasters’ control if they arise. Once repacked, 600 megahertz 

spectrum can immediately provide advanced services to rural 

Americans and be the foundation for 5G. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I welcome your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Murphy Thompson follows:] 

28 


27146.017
29 


27146.018
30 


27146.019
31 


27146.020
32 


27146.021
33 


27146.022
34 


27146.023
35 


27146.024
36 


27146.025
37 


27146.026
38 


27146.027
39 


27146.028
40 


27146.029
41 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentlelady yields back. 

Mr. Kaplan, 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF RICK KAPLAN 

Mr. KAPLAN. Good morning, Chairman Blackburn, Ranking 

Members Pallone and Doyle, and members of the subcommittee. 

My name is Rick Kaplan, and I am the general counsel of the National Association of Broadcasters. 

On behalf of NAB, I appreciate this opportunity to discuss the 

unprecedented repacking of nearly 1,000 TV stations as part of the 

broadcast TV incentive auction. NAB has worked closely with this 

subcommittee on the legislation authorizing the incentive auction 

and its subsequent implementation. 

One of the fundamental elements underpinning our collaboration 

has been Congress’ commitment that broadcasters and their viewers would be held harmless following the auction. In practice, this 

means that nonparticipating broadcasters would remain on the air, 

serve the same viewers after the auction as they did before, and 

not be required to incur costs when being assigned new frequencies. 

At the outset, it might be helpful for me to clear up any possible 

misconceptions about what broadcasters are and are not asking 

from Congress. First, broadcasters are not seeking any money from 

Congress beyond what makes us whole. We are not and have never 

sought to subsidize upgrades beyond our current operations. 

Second, broadcasters are not proposing that Congress resets the 

FCC’s current 39-month repacking window. That framework has 

been established and the transition is underway. We are seeking, 

however, for Congress to make clear that no individual station 

should be forced off the air or have a significant reduction in service if circumstances beyond its control prevent the station’s transition at its assigned time. 

Third, now is the time for congressional action. For that reason, 

NAB greatly appreciates this subcommittee’s willingness to hold 

this hearing and its ongoing consideration of legislative next steps. 

Stations are well into the transition process with the first group 

required to move to their new channels just over 1 year from now. 

They are already incurring substantial costs and have no idea 

whether they are going to be fully reimbursed. 

In addition, stations must understand their options today should 

their circumstances beyond their control prevent them from meeting their assigned transition deadlines. Broadcasters have every incentive to work towards a swift transition. There is simply no benefit to our industry if there are unnecessary delays. 

For that reason, NAB is committed to doing our part to ensure 

that this first-of-its-kind auction is truly a success. We agree with 

CTIA that the incentive auction’s failure would be crippling for future auctions. And nothing could be worse for the auction’s precedential value than if the number-one takeaway is that incumbents 

were left holding the bag. 

However, the outstanding issues with the incentive auction demand Congress’ attention, not only because their resolution comports with the spirit of the Spectrum Act, but also because of the 

critical role broadcasters play in serving communities across the 

42 

country. It should not take a devastating event such as Hurricane 

Harvey to remind us just how indispensable broadcast TV and 

radio stations are to our Nation’s safety and well-being. 

For communities big and small, local broadcasters and national 

broadcast networks combine to provide critical news and information to keep the public educated and engaged. This is precisely why 

CTIA’s and CCA’s wireless emergency alerts instruct consumers to, 

quote, check local media when alerting communities to a matter of 

urgency. 

It is also important that Congress take meaningful steps to protect those broadcasters who had no stake in the auction but are 

now, it is likely, collateral damage. Hundreds of FM radio stations 

that are colocated with repack TV stations may be saddled with 

new costs and significant disruptions. Low-power TV and translators are also struggling to maintain their ability to serve urban 

and rural audiences. 

NAB continues to believe that with congressional FCC leadership 

the repack can be a success. To date, Chairman Pai has more than 

ably guided the commission through a repacking process that received little attention before he assumed the agency’s helm. 

We are grateful to bipartisan congressional leaders for their attention to this issue and to Ranking Member Pallone and his cosponsors for their proposed legislative solution. We look forward to 

continuing to work with you to help this transition proceed as 

smoothly as possible for all stakeholders, and most critically, the 

viewers and listeners who rely on our signals every day. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to discuss these issues, and 

I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kaplan follows:] 

43 


27146.030
44 


27146.031
45 


27146.032
46 


27146.033
47 


27146.034
48 


27146.035
49 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Butler, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF PATRICK BUTLER 

Mr. BUTLER. Thank you, Madam Chair. As the representative 

of—— 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Microphone, please. 

Mr. BUTLER. Got it. OK. Sorry. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

As the representative of 170 public television licensees throughout America, let me focus my testimony today on the need for more 

funds to complete the repacking of our channels in the aftermath 

of the spectrum auction. That need is real, and for public television 

stations in particular, those funds are essential to our continued 

service. 

Thanks to the advocacy of this subcommittee, Congress approved a $1.75 billion postauction transition fund in the original spectrum 

law. The FCC has now determined that broadcasters will need at 

least another $400 million to be held harmless from the financial 

effects of this transition as the law requires. 

For the 149 public television stations being repacked, the funding deficiency is more than $50 million. This is in addition to the 

roughly $270 million, which repacking public stations are scheduled to receive from the original transition fund. 

These are all staggering, overwhelming figures for public television stations operating as local nonprofit educational institutions, 

and we must rely on the good faith of the Congress to hold us 

harmless in this transition as promised. 

Kentucky Educational Television alone must reconfigure 16 

transmitters to accommodate the postauction repacking requirements. KET, a State agency, needs $21 million to comply with this 

mandate of the Federal Government, roughly the equivalent of a 4 

years’ operating budget. 

Other public television stations, whether licensed to States, universities, local school districts, or nonprofit community foundations 

are all in the same boat. Without your help, that boat will capsize, 

and with it will go the essential services in education, public safety, 

and civic leadership on which your constituents depend. 

America’s Public Television Station supported the spectrum auction process from the beginning, and we are committed to completing this repacking transition as soon as possible. 

Dozens of public stations entered the auction and 26 licensees 

emerged with commitments to surrender their spectrum, share 

their spectrum, move from UHF to VHF frequencies or from highV to low-V frequencies. With our friends at CTIA, the wireless association, we conducted a pilot project in southern California to 

demonstrate how spectrum could be dynamically shared. 

We also engineered an agreement with our friends at T–Mobile 

to cover the cost of repacking 384 public television translators that 

carry our signal to almost 38 million viewers, many of them in 

rural America. 

But none of this should suggest that we are capable of bearing 

an additional $50 million repacking burden on our own. Incurring 

such an extraordinary expense would devastate the very programs 

and services that make public television so valued by so many milVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
50 

lions of Americans across the country and across the political spectrum. 

For 54 percent of American families, public television is all the 

preschool education their kids get. PBS LearningMedia helps almost 2 million educators teach 40 million K through 12 students 

with more than 120,000 curriculum-aligned interactive digital 

learning objects created from the best of public television, the Library of Congress, the National Archives, NASA, and more. 

Our mission of civic leadership encompasses serving as the C– 

SPAN of State governments hosting hundreds of candidate debates 

at every level of the ballot and producing thousands of hours of regularly scheduled programs on local public affairs, history, and culture every year. 

And as we saw this past week, the public safety mission of local 

public television stations literally saves lives. The PBS Warning 

Alert and Response Network routed more than 400 wireless emergency alerts to the cell phones of people in the path of Hurricane 

Harvey in less than a week. And a public safety data casting network created by Houston Public Media and local emergency agencies enabled first responders to monitor flooding conditions by 

sending live video directly to the dashboards of emergency vehicles 

all across the vast Houston metropolitan area. 

Public television’s public safety data casting has been so successful in pilot projects around the country that the U.S. Department 

of Homeland Security has entered into a formal agreement with us 

to promote this capability to public safety agencies throughout the 

country. 

So in conclusion, the sooner we can get these additional funds, 

the more likely it is that public television stations can repack on 

schedule, avoid going dark, and continue the essential services we 

provide to 97 percent of the American people. 

Congress is our only hope, and this subcommittee, once again, 

has a critical role to play in assuring that the last act of the auction process is as smooth and successful as the first. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Butler follows:] 

51 


27146.036
52 


27146.037
53 


27146.038
54 


27146.039
55 


27146.040
56 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Ms. Plantinga, 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF LYN PLANTINGA 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Good morning, Chairman Blackburn, Ranking 

Members Pallone and Doyle, and members of the subcommittee. 

Thank you for inviting me here today. My name is Lyn Plantinga. 

I am the general manager of NewsChannel 5 in Nashville, Tennessee, where I oversee day-to-day operations of 149 employees. 

NewsChannel 5 is proud to be a part of the E.W. Scripps Company and its 33 television stations across 24 markets nationwide. 

As the number-one rated station in Nashville, NewsChannel 5 is 

dedicated to practicing the Scripps’ motto: Give light and the people will find their own way. We carry out this mission by telling 

the stories of people who often do not have a voice and ensuring 

accountability for the actions of the powerful. 

Our commitment to community through coverage of breaking 

news, severe weather, in-depth investigations, and civic engagement helps make Nashville a better place to live and to work. 

Behind the newsroom cameras, before the Doppler radar image 

or the live feed from our news helicopter can reach our viewers, 

NewsChannel 5 maintains and operates a sophisticated technical 

infrastructure to originate and deliver our free broadcast signal 

over the air to viewers in middle Tennessee and southern Kentucky. 

In the fall of 2019, this infrastructure will be tested when 

NewsChannel 5 is required to move channels to accommodate an 

auction of broadcast spectrum that affords our station and its viewers no benefit. At a minimum, we will expend time and resources 

to significantly reconfigure our operations and educate over-the-air 

viewers to rescan their television so they can find us on our new 

channel. In the worst case, we will face out-of-pocket costs and 

viewer disruption that undermines our ability to serve our community. 

To put what is an otherwise academic problem in real terms, 

NewsChannel 5’s move will require the purchase and installation 

of a new transmitter, new primary antenna, and an interim antenna. We estimate that these equipment and labor costs will total 

$4.1 million for our station alone. While this is a high number, it 

is not atypical. Of Scripps’ 33 local television stations, 17 of them 

will be moving channels, including those in Tampa, Buffalo, and 

Detroit at an estimated cost of $55 million. 

More people tune to NewsChannel 5 for news and information 

than to any other station in the State of Tennessee. We have 

earned this position in the market through dependable coverage, 

quality journalism, and investing in our team and tools so we can 

raise the bar every day. 

Local broadcasters like us who drew the proverbial short straw 

and face this channel change upheaval, through no fault of their 

own, should certainly not be required to drain additional resources 

from their coverage by footing the bill from a repack for which we 

yielded no benefit. 

The logistics of our channel reassignment also prevents significant challenges in completing our move in the timeframe that is 

57 

prescribed by the FCC. Though branded NewsChannel 5, we will 

actually move from channel 25 to 36 in Nashville. 

Over the course of only 6 weeks, we will need to complete our 

work and coordinate with two other local broadcasters, the station 

that occupies the channel we are moving to and the station that 

will move into the channel that we currently occupy. There is little 

margin for error, and this will all be happening while five additional broadcasters perform similar tower work in Nashville. 

We can foresee these difficulties because NewsChannel 5 has 

been down this road before. Our three previous channel moves during the digital transition proved extremely difficult because of challenges in scheduling the individual components of the channel 

change, getting equipment delivered, and work done on time. 

Weather also played a significant role. Heavy rain can prevent 

a tower crew from climbing, especially on a tower as tall as ours 

at nearly 1,400 feet. Several days of rain or more severe weather 

can close the window to complete a project. This repack’s compacted timeline and the market pressures of so many stations 

changing channels at the same time adds to the difficulty. 

In conclusion, I really want to emphasize our shared goal for a 

successful transition that accomplishes Congress’ objective of deploying additional wireless services. However, NewsChannel 5 asks 

that Congress take all the necessary steps to ensure that its relocation costs are fully covered by the FCC. 

We also ask that our viewers be protected from any risk of signal 

disruption should we be unable to complete our station move on 

time due to no fault of our own. Anything less would not only be 

inequitable, but would undermine the ability of NewsChannel 5 

and all of these impacted broadcasters to continue to serve Nashville and the other local communities. 

Thank you again for inviting me here today and I look forward 

to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Plantinga follows:] 

58 


27146.041
59 


27146.042
60 


27146.043
61 


27146.044
62 


27146.045
63 


27146.046
64 


27146.047
65 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Tracy, 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JIM TRACY 

Mr. TRACY. Chairman Walden, Chairman Blackburn, members of 

the committee, subcommittee, my name is Jim Tracy. I am the 

CEO of Legacy Telecommunications in Burley, Washington. But I 

am here today testifying on behalf of the National Association of 

Tower Erectors, or NATE. 

I am honored to serve as the chairman there, and we are a nonprofit trade association in the wireless and broadcast infrastructure 

sectors. NATE’s diverse membership encompasses every layer of 

the wireless communications ecosystems and infrastructure. It includes over 825 member firms. We build, service, and maintain 

hundreds of thousands of communications structures, towers, 

throughout the United States and other countries. 

But I would be remiss—and I am going to have to go off script 

here a minute—if I did not reach out and say thank you to the— 

a new concept is the zero responder, because the first responders 

don’t get to talk to the people who are in trouble unless we keep 

them on air. 

And the people that we serve are working right now in California 

and in Oregon, by your house, Mr. Chairman. And they are working in Washington, and they are working in Montana to make sure 

that we are leapfrogging all of the cell sites ahead of the fires. 

And several weeks ago we started preparations, and ours were 

the people that were on the ground at the zero time, not the first 

responder, the zero responder to get ahead in the Gulf Coast to 

make sure that we could communicate when Irma was upon us— 

or when Harvey was upon us. 

And for the last week, down in south Florida, we have been making preparations with generators and cell sites, towers, and things 

like that to make sure that the first responders do have a way to 

communicate. So NATE member companies are and continue to be 

on the front lines of not only the natural disasters but also this 

broadcast repack. 

And the FirstNet deployment. And let’s not forget about the 

densification of not only those networks but also the next gen, the 

5G that is coming up. This is creating the perfect storm for the 

wireless tower climber. 

Now, NATE’s mission statement is focused on the core principles, 

there are really four pillars: safety, quality, standards, and education. It was drafted 22 years ago when the association was founded. And not only are these the guiding principles today, but they 

are also the foundation on which we were built. 

In recent years, we have continued and we are working collaboratively with OSHA, FCC, and FAA. And we have developed a variety of safety and education programs and tools for our members 

and their climbers, such as the NATE STAR program, voluntary 

program where we worked directly with OSHA on and where our 

members commit to higher levels of education and training and 

that kind of thing. 

I also would like to bring to your attention our broadcast video 

repack. That is where we reached out and talked to the climbers 

to show them a video. These are the generation that text with two 

66 

thumbs. We have to get to them and talk to them in a way that 

they can reach and understand. 

So that workforce video provides an overview of the unique challenges that are on these tall big iron structures. Greater detail on 

this is included at the end of the written testimony. 

We have also partnered with ANSI to create—ANSI, what we 

call A1048, which is the tower standard, defines what a tower is 

and how it should be put together. 

We also have worked with the National Wireless Safety Alliance. 

It is a broad coalition of all parts of this industry, which I am 

proud to sit with these people at the table today who are all of our 

friends. Anyway, they provide tower technician certification and 

credentialing to lift up the people who actually have to go out and 

do the work and allow them to do it with dignity. 

Through these and other efforts we are building, maintaining, 

modifying communication towers faster and safer than ever before. 

There is one unescapable fact: At present, there are not enough 

qualified workers to perform all the work that is going to be required in this perfect storm. Today, I am the voice for an estimated 

30,000 tower industry workers. We refer to them as tower technicians. Many of these men and women are employed by NATE member firms. Yet the workforce challenges our industry faces continue 

to meet communications demands will be exacerbated not only by 

the repack but by the establishment of FirstNet, 5G, and the tower 

marking mandate that the FAA has on top of us. 

I kind of went off script a little bit, so I am going to skip ahead 

and say thank you very much for your time. It is not enough for 

people to want these tower jobs, but they have to be able to physically and mentally be capable of performing the tasks. So I appreciate your time today, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Tracy follows:] 

67 


27146.048
68 


27146.049
69 


27146.050
70 


27146.051
71 


27146.052
72 


27146.053
73 


27146.054
74 


27146.055
75 


27146.056
76 


27146.057
77 


27146.058
78 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

And this concludes our testimony. And so we are going to move 

into our question and answer part of this hearing. And I am going 

to begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes. 

And, Mr. Bergmann, I want to come to you. And let’s talk a little 

bit about what you mentioned in your testimony with how an extension on the repack schedule, making changes there would affect 

the carrier participation in this and in future auctions. So I want 

you just to drill down on that just a little bit more. 

Mr. BERGMANN. So I thank you very much. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Microphone, please. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Thank you very much for the question. Appreciate it. 

For us, this transition really sort of boils down to one simple 

thing: The faster we get access to spectrum, the faster we build 

out. The faster we are able to serve rural America, the faster we 

are able to build out 5G, and the 39-month timeline is an absolutely critical part of that for our companies. We talked a lot about $20 billion that this auction raised, which 

is remarkable, right, the second largest spectrum auction by revenue. But what that means to the companies and the bidders, 

right, who have made those bids, I think is worth note, right. 

This is the equivalent of purchasing JetBlue, right, or purchasing 

Best Buy, or, you know, Domino’s and Alaska Airlines, and then, 

you know, saying you are not going to be able to use it for, you 

know, 3 years and 3 months. 

So, you know, that is a tough sell to boards of directors, right, 

to go and make that kind of investment. But the reason our companies do that is because of competition in the wireless industry and 

a desire to serve and lead and bring new services to American consumers. 

So this timeline is really important for the investments that we 

are making. I think it is really important for us as a country as 

well too, when you think about the economic growth and job creation that will come out of this spectrum. 

So we are very appreciative of this committee’s willingness to 

hold this oversight hearing and to try to make sure that we stick 

to that 39-month timeline. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. OK. Ms. Murphy Thompson, you talked a little 

bit about jobs and jobs growth. Do you want to quickly add anything to his comments? 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Yes. Thanks. I wholly agree with Mr. 

Bergmann about the uncertainty. But, in particular, for rural carriers who—I have a chart here that I would like to show you. Competitive carriers are the ones who really showed up for this auction. 

They are the blue ones. They basically mortgaged the farm for this 

spectrum, and access to it is critically important especially in rural 

areas. Rural constituents are the ones that are going to benefit 

most from things like telehealth and distance learning and enhanced public safety. And all those things are—incredibly spur job 

creation throughout rural America, which is what we are focused 

on. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. All right. Ms. Plantinga, let me come to you. 

You have been through this before, and you referenced that in your 

79 

testimony. And channel 5 is scheduled to go through in phase 

six—— 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Yes. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. —which means late 2019 for you. 

So what I would like for you to quickly do is discuss what you 

are doing to, in preparation, kind of how you are timelining this 

out since you have done this before, and then what your expectations are, and then, for the record, what your concerns are, if you 

will just timeline that out a little bit. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Yes, Chairman Blackburn, thank you for that 

question. 

Because the E.W. Scripps Company has over half of its television 

stations changing channels as a result of the auction, we have a 

cross-company repack team that is leading the effort on this. At 

NewsChannel 5, I can tell you that already we have our strategic 

plan in place. 

Changing channels is a little bit like changing the tires on your 

car while you are still rolling down the highway, because you have 

to keep the existing signal on the air while you are building the 

infrastructure for the new station. And we have a strategic plan to 

do that using a temporary antenna and a lot of equipment. 

We have identified the individual pieces of equipment that we 

will purchase, and we have identified the vendors who will do the 

work for us. So I do believe our ducks are in a row for the transition. 

In terms of concerns, I would say based on past experience, I 

have a couple of concerns. The first, of course, is the financial 

piece. We want to be certain that we are fully reimbursed for the 

cost of this transition. Again, we were the people who drew the 

short straw, and we understand it is our responsibility to step up 

and make this happen, and we intend to do that. But we were told 

at the beginning of this process that those costs would be reimbursed, and we are looking for assurance that that is going to happen. The uncertainty around the financial piece is a concern, and 

we all know uncertainty is bad for business. 

The second concern that I have is around the timing. In our previous channel changes, we have had some difficulty. I think the 

current timeframe is achievable if all goes smoothly. But in our 

previous channel changes, we have run into some obstacles, and 

that timing is a concern. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you. 

Time has expired. Mr. Doyle, you are recognized. 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

This first question is for the whole panel, and I am just looking 

for a yes or no answer. Do you think the broadcaster relocation 

fund is sufficient to relocate the broadcasters? I will start with Mr. 

Bergmann. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Certainly, based on the FCC’s initial estimates 

it looks like—— 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Microphone. 

Mr. DOYLE. Microphone, please. And I am looking for a yes or no. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Sure. I think based on current estimates, it looks 

like no. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. No. 

80 

Mr. DOYLE. No. 

Mr. KAPLAN. No. 

Mr. DOYLE. No. 

Mr. BUTLER. No. 

Mr. DOYLE. No. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. No. 

Mr. DOYLE. No. 

Mr. TRACY. That is not my area of expertise. 

Mr. DOYLE. OK. So we have, what, five noes and an abstention. 

Let me just say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that 

we are ready to close this gap. I don’t think any of us want broadcasters in our districts to go off the air and people to be cut off because of an accounting error. 

Let me ask, first, Mr. Kaplan, I have heard allegations that some 

stations are dragging their feet to complete their channel moves in 

the hopes that if they wait long enough, they can more fully transition to the new ATSC 3.0 compatible equipment. I have also heard 

that some broadcasters are demanding that this new technology be 

included in new wireless devices. Mr. Kaplan, tell me, are stations 

trying to slow walk this process and have the deadlines pushed 

back or delayed in the hopes that they can get either taxpayers or 

auction winners eager to get access to this spectrum to pay for 

these upgrades or concede to costly additional features on their devices? Does your organization think that is right or fair? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Well, absolutely not. I don’t think that has actually 

been going on, to my knowledge. And the FCC has set up very specific deadlines by which you have to transition. So even if someone 

was to attempt to do that, there is no ability to do that because 

the FCC has said you must transition. And we have supported, 

throughout the process, an aggressive transition—— 

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Bergmann, what do your members think? 

Mr. BERGMANN. So I certainly think we think it would not be appropriate to slow down the transition for a technology upgrade. We 

certainly hope that broadcasters will do everything in their power 

to stick to the timeline. 

Mr. DOYLE. Ms. Thompson—Ms. Murphy Thompson, excuse me, 

CCA has filed a petition to deny the Sinclair-Tribune merger at the 

FCC, and your testimony expresses concerns that this deal could 

impact the repacking process. Tell us what your concerns are. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Thank you. That is a good question. I 

appreciate the opportunity to expand on that. 

There are two primary concerns: First is the sheer size of Sinclair and Tribune, and together they would have to move over 200 

stations. We also have seen already that Sinclair has had reluctance in complying with a 39-month timeframe, and so post transaction we are concerned that having to move 200 stations could derail the timeframe and divert resources away from broadcasters 

who are ready to move. 

The second is Dielectric, who is a subsidiary, a broadcast antenna equipment manufacturer of Sinclair. They post transaction 

would hold 90 percent of the market share. That is pretty staggering. And with that and the daisy chain issues that will occur, 

we are concerned that there is going to be artificial demand for 

81 

Sinclair stations and, again, diverting resources away from broadcasters that are ready to move. 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you. 

Mr. Butler, Deborah Acklin from WQED in Pittsburgh is on your 

board, and their station and others participated in the incentive 

auction to some degree. How do you see public television stations 

leveraging these funds to secure themselves and also expand and 

evolve their mission, and what is your hope for the public TV post 

auction? 

Mr. BUTLER. Thank you, sir. Well, WQED is certainly taking the 

lead, as it has over several decades, in enhancing the educational 

mission of all the public television, beginning with Mr. Rogers and 

The Fred Rogers Company and so forth. 

So I believe Deb’s intention is to not only retire some debt, which 

her station incurred over the last many years trying to operate on 

a shoestring, but also to enhance this educational mission still 

more. I think that is also the ambition of most of the 26 stations 

that have participated in the auction and have gotten some kinds 

of proceeds from them. 

But, you know, local public television is a very idiosyncratic 

thing. The adage in our industry is if you have seen one public television station, you have seen one public television station. And so 

each of these stations is going to have its own philosophy about 

how to best apply these funds. And some will be enhancing their 

endowments. Some will be doing a lot more in public safety, which 

we are very much encouraging them to do and in education. 

But we are all in the public service business, and these funds, 

which are unevenly distributed across an idiosyncratic system will 

not give the entire public television system a particular boost in 

one direction or another. These will be local decisions that local 

managers like Deb will make. 

Mr. DOYLE. Thank you. Thank you, Madame Chair. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Chairman Walden, you are recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And, Mr. 

Butler, I appreciate your testimony and the good work your stations do, and you are a reminder to the committee that it was our 

subcommittee that I chaired back when in 2012 that said probably 

need about $3 billion to do this. 

Mr. BUTLER. Exactly right. You were right. 

Mr. WALDEN. And then it ran into our friends in the Senate who 

wanted $1 billion, and we got it up to $1.75 billion, and my belief 

then was that wasn’t enough but it was the best we could negotiate 

with Senator Reid and his people and now we are—some of us 

could say, told you so. But we still don’t know what the exact number is going to be, and I think it is important we work together as 

we go through this transition and repack to make sure that broadcasters are not adversely harmed, because having played a large 

role in writing this the assurance was given, as we are reminded 

from my broadcast friends, that those innocent parties would not 

be injured, they would be compensated, and there would be time 

to work this through. And so, we have more work to do here clearly. 

82 

Mr. Tracy, I appreciate your testimony. I was in the broadcast 

business for a number of years, and I remember one year the FCC 

came around and decided to check the paint on all the towers in 

our area, and decided a lot of them needed to be repainted all in 

the same year, which, of course, they checked in summer and at 

55 degrees or whatever you can’t repaint, and there are only like 

X number of painters, and so I worry about the pressure on your 

industry to be able to satisfy the re-move to hang these antennas, 

to perhaps erect new towers and all of that. And you have indicated the market will dictate that. You have pressures with 

FirstNet buildout and others. Can you meet the 39-month deadline? 

Mr. TRACY. It is really important to recognize that the application of pressure creates opportunity to hurry, and our business is 

not a good business to hurry in, and while most of the towers are 

not—the hyperbole indicates that we always say they are 2,000 feet 

tall—— 

Mr. WALDEN. They are not. 

Mr. TRACY. In Mr. Kramer’s market, that KVLY tower is probably 2,000 feet. In reality, most of them are 800, but that is still 

a long fall. 

Mr. WALDEN. Yes, we don’t like to talk about it in those terms. 

I think ours was 140-something feet. It was an AM tower, but the 

TV towers are much higher. The question, though, is based on your 

experience, your knowledge of the industry, can these stations get 

relocated in 39 months? 

Mr. TRACY. Having not done it before, that is a great question. 

I think some of our friends on the broadcast side have brought up 

weather issues are certainly going to come into play, but I think 

the biggest thing we need to focus on is, number one, we need to 

do it safely regardless of time frame. Number two, we need to 

make sure that we are recruiting and training better than we have 

in the past so that we have the qualified—but frankly, there aren’t 

enough people to do all of the work that we have mentioned across. 

I called it the ‘‘perfect storm for wireless.’’ 

Mr. WALDEN. Right. 

Mr. TRACY. It is 5G. It is FirstNet. It is repack. It is pinning for 

aviation FAA standards, and all of those are subject to time constraints. 

Mr. WALDEN. In terms of your situation in Tennessee, are you 

able to get the other equipment when you are ordering new antennas, new transmitters and all that, do you feel confident that your 

station there and the others you are involved with, that that flow 

is working in a timely enough manner? 

Ms. PLANTINGA. It is a good question. I believe that the time 

frame that has been laid out from our perspective is achievable if 

everything goes smoothly. 

Mr. WALDEN. All right. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Our experience has been, specifically, in three 

channel changes, we have not had one that has gone smoothly. 

Mr. WALDEN. Yes, I understand that. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Some specific concerns that have involved 

weather, that have involved equipment, and that have involved 

personnel. 

83 

Mr. WALDEN. I guarantee I am the only chairman of the committee that has ever done an all-nighter at the base of a tower in 

a foot of snow while we are doing a transmission line. And I heard 

from broadcasters in my district especially, Patsy Small at KOBI 

about their issue with translators, and I think a lot of us thought 

that would be the last thing we would deal with, and indeed, it 

suddenly is becoming the first thing, and that the frequency tables 

aren’t out there for the final allocations for those translators, so 

they may end up doing it twice. Are you running into that? 

Ms. PLANTINGA. I will tell you we have a translator in Nashville, 

which we think may not be affected by this, but my biggest 

takeaway regarding translators is the difference between a primary 

signal and a translator is something we may all discuss, but from 

a viewer perspective you get the signal or you don’t. 

Mr. WALDEN. Right. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. And viewers that receive their signal via a 

translator value that signal as much as any other viewer, and if 

that is taken away, that is a tremendous disruption. 

Mr. WALDEN. Yes, and part of what we pledged was we would 

try not to diminish the coverage area of the stations, and in markets like I represent, a lot of that is served by those very translators, because you are off down in a hole somewhere. 

So it is something we probably should have included in the funding piece and did not, and it is something we are going to have to 

work through, but we also have to recognize we have got people 

that bought this spectrum and need to be able to move on it. So 

I understand that, as well. We have got our work to do, Madame 

Chair, and I appreciate you holding this hearing. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back, and at this time, 

Mr. Pallone, you are recognized, and I know you want me to be 

generous with the time because you missed your opening statement. 

Mr. PALLONE. Oh, well, that is all right, Madam Chair. I just 

wanted to ask unanimous consent to introduce my opening statement into the record. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. So ordered. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR. 

The images coming out of Texas over the past two weeks have been devastating. 

For those of us from New Jersey, they bring back difficult memories. Our hearts 

go out to everyone left struggling in the wake of Hurricane Harvey. 

But with all the devastation, there were also rays of hope. Some of the most 

heartening scenes from Texas also reminded us of what we saw 5 years ago—broadcasters once again stepping up when their communities need them most. It’s not 

just the journalists who put down their mics to grab the hands of people stuck in 

raging flood waters. It’s broadcasters doing what they do best—saving lives by providing the critical information that can let people know how to stay out of trouble. 

Just like hurricane Harvey, Sandy raged on for days and the recovery lasted 

months. When the flood waters rose, our power was wiped out, taking nearly all of 

our communications with it. But through it all, broadcast stations pushed through 

to serve the community with local content. Both television and radio stations kept 

on transmitting throughout. 

These efforts are what inspired me to introduce the Viewer Protection Act. This 

bill would make sure that television viewers and radio listeners will not lose their 

signal as a result of the FCC’s incentive auction. The incentive auction helps reallocate airwaves from broadcasters who have chosen to give up their licenses to use 

84 

for mobile broadband. The remaining broadcasters may need to be assigned new 

channels through a process called repacking. As I expected, the FCC does not have 

sufficient funds to pay for the repacking. And—if Congress does not act—some stations may be forced to go dark. 

The risks to viewers and listeners is too grave. As we are seeing, disaster can 

strike at any moment. Residents in the west are dealing with wildfires as we speak 

and people in Florida are preparing for a hurricane. When it does, local broadcasters 

are crucial to keeping us safe. The Viewer Protection Act will make sure that broadcasters can continue to serve us when we need them most. So, I urge my colleagues 

to act quickly to get this bill passed. 

But as important as it is, this bill alone is not enough. Because we also learned 

during Sandy that our phones become our lifelines. Unfortunately, 5 years ago we 

lost a quarter of our cell towers. In some parts of New Jersey, that number rose 

to as many as half. That was simply unacceptable. 

So I introduced the SANDy Act, which would help wireless carriers keep their 

towers operating during an emergency. I also worked with wireless carriers represented by CTIA and the Competitive Carriers Association to develop a set of voluntary commitments to improve service during disasters. 

One dropped call in an emergency is too much-it can be the difference between 

life and death. But the carriers’ efforts seem to have improved the situation in 

Texas—we don’t seem to be having the same problems so far. Instead of losing a 

quarter of cell towers, it looks like the number is closer to 5 percent. While not perfect, that is a dramatic improvement. So I want to thank CTIA and CCA for their 

hard work, and I hope that we can continue to work together to make sure every 

call goes through. 

Finally, it’s time for the Senate to pass the SANDy Act. The bill will make sure 

that wireless carriers, broadcasters, and cable operators can all better serve communities hit by disaster. We need to continue to work together to get this bill signed 

into law. 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you. So this will be the second time in the 

last decade that the TV industry has been repacked into a smaller 

portion of the spectrum. The first was in 2009 with the digital television transition, and just as back then, we need to make sure that 

viewers and radio listeners do not get left behind. And so, that is 

why I included funds in the Viewer Protection Act to help support 

consumer education. This was modelled on how Congress approached the DTV transition. 

So I wanted to start with Mr. Kaplan. You helped spearhead the 

consumer outreach for the FCC in 2009. In some ways, this transition seems even more complex than the last one. Are there lessons 

we learned from that experience that can help us this time around? 

Mr. KAPLAN. I think there is. I think the first one that many 

members mentioned right off the bat is industry is working together. And I am also pleased to report that the FCC has been 

working very closely with our industry already to get things off the 

ground, and that will be critical because we all play a part, whether it is moving off spectrum, moving to spectrum, so I think collaboration is absolutely key. 

I think you mentioned the funding piece, and that absolutely is 

another important component. In the last few months of the DTV 

transition, Congress did approve $90 million to go towards consumer education. In that case we had one date, June 12th, 2009 

that was the transition date. Here we are going to have many, 

many dates in each market just to solve with. So luckily, we at 

NAB have done a lot already. We have a Web site up and running 

for consumers, TVAnswers.org, PSAs, videos, things like that. So I 

think those kind of things are going to be imperative as we move 

forward. 

85 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you. And then I wanted to ask Mr. Butler, 

during Hurricane Sandy public broadcasters played a critical role 

in keeping people informed and saving lives, and I know the stations in Houston have also been going above and beyond over the 

past couple of weeks, and these efforts demonstrate just how important public broadcasters are for our communities. So if you 

would just say what are the potential outcomes for public TV stations if there isn’t enough money in the reimbursement fund? 

Mr. BUTLER. Well, as I have said, we operate on shoestrings to 

begin with, and we are non-profit organizations that don’t have a 

lot of capital sitting around to invest in anything. And so, the risk 

for us is almost existential, if we have an unfunded mandate like 

a $50 million fund for a transition that we can’t meet. So everything is at risk for us, all the programming that people count on, 

all the educational services that we provide to schools around the 

country, all the public safety work that we do in New Jersey and 

Texas and elsewhere, and the civic leadership that we provide, trying to equip our citizens to have all the information that they need 

to make the appropriate decisions, they need to make in the world’s 

most important democracy. All of that is at risk if we are faced 

with a $50 million bill in addition to the $270 million that we are 

likely to get from the transition fund. 

If we can’t pay for that, all of that is at risk, and it is a big problem for us, and I don’t want to disparage anything that the commercial broadcasters feel about this, too, but as nonprofits, we have 

a particular interest in making sure that this program is well-funded. 

Mr. PALLONE. Thank you. And then I wanted to go back to Ms. 

Thompson. One of the goals of the Viewer Protection Act is to make 

sure that we get the spectrum into the hands of wireless providers 

as quickly as possible, and I know that in response to Mr. Doyle, 

Ms. Thompson, you raised concerns about the potential impact of 

the proposed Sinclair/Tribune merger on the 39-month repacking 

process time frame. But could you just elaborate on your concerns 

on how that might relate to the Viewer Protection Act, if you 

would? 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Sure. So the transaction between Sinclair and Tribune will, by its own CEO’s admission, create the largest broadcast company by a country mile. Having said that, that 

creates both vertical and horizontal market power that will allow 

them to delay this transition. 

We believe that oversight, and through the Viewer Protection 

Act, additional funds will be necessary to help broadcasters and the 

likes of Mr. Butler’s company to help them transition, so we fully 

support providing additional funds when necessary. I think I would 

just close in saying that the Sinclair/Tribune transaction only benefits Sinclair and Tribune, which is why nobody supports it. 

Mr. PALLONE. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you, 

Madam Chairman. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The ranking member yields back, and at this 

time, I recognize the vice chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Lance. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you, Madam Chair, and good morning to the 

distinguished panel. Mr. Bergmann, it is important that the United 

86 

States win the race to 5G, because it means significant investment 

and jobs here in this country. 

A recent report by Accenture estimates that 5G will bring 3 million new jobs, and half a trillion dollars in increased GDP. During 

the August district work period, I led a roundtable of companies in 

the district I serve. Those companies are some of the leading 

innovators in 5G, and we discussed how we can ensure that the 

United States will continue to be the leader in wireless innovation. 

One key that was brought up several times is the necessity of 

sufficient commercial spectrum available to meet the needs of 5G 

deployment. How important are FCC spectrum auctions, such as 

the most recent incentive auction to this effort? 

Mr. BERGMANN. So thank you for the question and thank you for 

your leadership as well, too, on this topic. We really appreciated 

the 5G forum that you held back in New Jersey and drawing the 

attention of communities to the opportunities that 5G brings. You 

talked a little bit about the investment that wireless providers are 

ready to make in 5G, $275 billion over the next 7 years, and the 

opportunities that creates, 3 million new jobs, half a trillion dollars 

to our economy, and that is really an opportunity for communities. 

I think we talked a lot about what 5G might mean in terms of 

increased speeds, increased capacity, but I think one of the things 

that is really exciting about 5G is the opportunity to the reinvent 

industries, to create smart communities, the opportunity to integrate wireless so that our transportation times go down, so that we 

save lives, so that our medical capabilities are enhanced. So there 

is a tremendous upside, I think, both for us as a Nation, and then 

for our communities with 5G. 

And the 600 megahertz spectrum is really a key part of that. We 

talked a lot about the need for low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum 

for 5G, and this 600 megahertz spectrum is prime low-band spectrum that enables signals to travel long distances and enables us 

to connect 100 times the amount of devices that we could connect 

before. So as we think about trying to have automated vehicles, 

embed sensors into our water systems to get better water quality, 

and then just to connect people right across broad areas, the 600 

megahertz spectrum will play a really key role and this incentive 

auction is a key part of that, making sure that we are sticking to 

our timelines, and getting that spectrum out to use quickly is also 

a really key part of it. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you very much for your answer. Ms. 

Plantinga, I may be from New Jersey, but my wife and I met at 

Vanderbilt Law School in Nashville, and the principal reason Marsha has permitted me to serve on this committee. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Excellent. Good decision making all the way 

around. 

Mr. LANCE. It certainly was a good decision that I was able to 

meet my wife. 

We witnessed the horrific hurricane, and we, of course, all pray 

for the people in Florida, and Ranking Member Pallone and I are 

intimately familiar with what happened at Sandy. Broadcasters 

keep local audiences informed and safe in times of emergency. How 

does your local station keep viewers informed and what does the 

87 

repack mean for this critical service to communities across the Nation? 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Absolutely. We have a commitment to quality investigative journalism. Our station is a leader nationally in weather coverage and weather equipment. Tennessee is actually a dangerous place for weather. The number of deaths related to tornados 

in Tennessee is very high. So we take that responsibility very, very 

seriously. So that certainly is an important way to keep people informed. 

I will tell you in 2010 a 500-year flood hit Nashville Tennessee, 

and NewsChannel 5 was flooded. We lost our entire newsroom. Everyone had to leave that floor of the building, and we stayed on the 

air for several days with nonstop coverage keeping the community 

informed and letting people know where they could go, what areas 

to avoid and keeping our communities safe. So our commitment to 

safety and information in middle Tennessee is our greatest responsibility. 

In terms of what this repack means for us, my biggest concern 

at this point is regarding the timeline, because I know that we will 

do our part to stick to this timeline and want it followed. The difficulty is if something happens that is beyond our control, for example, weather, delivery of equipment—an example for weather 

would be a lot of people realize if you have a tornado, you are not 

going to be climbing a tower. People may not realize that a good, 

hard rain can prevent a tower climb; or a blustery day where the 

winds are going in a few different directions, so essentially, normal 

weather can shut down a tower climb. If you get a good week of 

rain in a compacted time period like ours where three stations are 

moving in 6 weeks, a week of rain can make that goal unattainable. 

So our ask is simply if it is a situation like that that is out of 

our control, that we have some type of safe harbor that allows our 

signal not to be cut off. Because my understanding is we don’t have 

that now, and that if something like a rainy week caused us to 

miss our deadline, that NewsChannel 5 is shut off for all of middle 

Tennessee. 

Mr. LANCE. Well, thank you my time is expired. That is a very 

good point, and my thanks to the entire panel. I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Ms. Clarke, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. CLARKE. I thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank our ranking member. I thank our panelists for their expert testimony here 

this morning. 

To Mr. Butler, public television is an extremely valuable resource 

for Americans across the country. This has been for at least a generation or more now. Public television stations are critical for the 

education of children and preparing them for the new STEM jobs 

and opportunities of the future. Unfortunately, these operations 

aren’t always fully funded. And I am concerned that the potential 

shortfall in the repack could endanger these small stations. Would 

you provide us with your view as to why getting the repack right 

is particularly important for the Nation’s public television stations? 

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, ma’am. Thank you. As I have said in other responses to other members here, the issue that we face is that we 

just don’t have this kind of money sitting around to invest. And abVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
88 

sent the help of Congress itself we are going to have a very difficult 

time. It is going to be impossible to be frank for us to meet this 

burden, which Congress, in its original Spectrum Act, said we 

should not be burdened with to begin with, we should be held 

harmless, and this is a great harm that is about to be inflicted 

upon us, absent some additional funds. 

So I would say that the issue that we face is that all of the work 

that we do is endangered by the possibility that these funds will 

not be made available to us, and I think it is also important for 

the committee to understand that not only the urgency of the 

funds, but the fact that the funds will be made available sometime 

soon is just very important. Our stations, almost half of them, are 

state or university licensees, and so they are beholden to state 

budget cycles, university budget processes and so forth, and they 

have no capability on their own to raise this kind of money, and 

absent the certainty and the speed with which Congress needs to 

act on this issue, half of our stations are just going to be floundering without any certainty as to how to meet this obligation. And 

if we go dark, all of the things that we do in education and public 

safety and civic leadership are gone, and the American people have 

been quite generous in their support for us, not only for the Federal funding that we support, but in every public opinion poll that 

really has ever been taken since we went on the air. We are among 

the most trusted, the most valued institutions in America straight 

across the political spectrum, and I just don’t think we want to lose 

that at a time like this. 

Ms. CLARKE. Absolutely. I thank you for your response. 

Ms. Thompson, in your written testimony, you note that a combined Sinclair/Tribune transaction has the potential to slow the repacking process. I also understand that Sinclair already owns the 

dominant broadcast antennae manufacturing company. Do you 

think Sinclair could use its control of this company to slow down 

its competitors’ ability to meet their repacking debt timelines? 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Yes, that is a great question. And the 

answer is without a doubt. As I noted, Dielectric post-transaction 

will have 90 percent of the market share, which will give them the 

ability to focus primarily on stations, the Sinclair stations diverting 

resources from broadcasters who were ready to move, many of 

whom have been doing preparations already today to make the 39- 

month deadline a reality. So we are very concerned about that. 

Ms. CLARKE. Very well. Thank you for your response. And to Mr. 

Bergmann, can the 600 megahertz band support next generation 

5G wireless technologies? And can we expect the deployment of 5G 

services in this 600 megahertz band to serve as a catalyst for 5G 

deployments in other frequency bands. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Thank you, Congresswoman Clarke. Absolutely. 

And we are already seeing winners in the auctions start to roll out. 

Services in the spectrum is remarkable within 2 months of receiving licenses starting to build out advance LTE services, and planning for 5G as well, too. 

As a country, we are aiming to lead in 5G, and within our industry our members are vying to lead in 5G. The U.S. delegation went 

to the standards bodies and asked to have the standards accelerated by a year in 5G. And we are very much thinking about high 

89 

bands, mid bands, and low bands. The 600 megahertz spectrum is 

ideal for that low-band spectrum for 5G, so we very much have our 

plans on that. 

Ms. CLARKE. Thank you. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Yes, I know your time is expired. Can 

I indulge you for a minute to collaborate what Mr. Bergmann said? 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Quickly. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. So we have a joint member T–Mobile 

who has already deployed in Cheyenne, Wyoming, and I just was 

hoping to put into the record the press release that describes how 

they have already been using the 600 megahertz spectrum. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentlelady yields back. At this time, Mr. 

Shimkus, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you for 

being here. It is a very good panel, very important subject; 39 

months and enough money, if you want to boil it down, I think that 

is kind of the debate. 

So just on just a few specifics. Mr. Bergmann, on the 5G—first 

of all, Mr. Tracy, you are in a great position. People want to build 

towers. So we just got to find the workers, and we should be able 

to do that. Are a lot of the people who are building the towers, are 

they with bargained units or CWA, Communication Workers of 

America, or are they not bargained or—because I know some 

unions have the programs of Helmets to Hardhats programs where 

you can transition military personnel. I am a veteran, and a lot of 

us are, which would seem like, you know, if someone is ready to 

jump out of a plane or climb a cliff, they might be able to climb 

a tower. Do you have any other of those type of programs or 

work—— 

Mr. TRACY. We have worked very closely with Warriors for Wireless, although that program is in the beginning, and it does take 

a longer time to transition into the broadcast portion. That is a 

skill set that is, quite frankly, very technical and different from 

what we do in the wireless carrier category, so. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. But also, our military does have a pretty good expertise in communications themselves? 

Mr. TRACY. They do, and you know, especially when you look at 

our special forces they have very defined objectives with small 

teams and compressed time frames that are very high-pressure situations. They generally have thrived in wireless. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. And I have also worked in my district quite a bit 

about working with local community colleges who should be the 

gateway, and that has been—it is still challenging. I continue to be 

frustrated by the jobs available in the manufacturing sector and 

getting qualified people who will show up on time who are drug 

free and that challenge, and it is a societal thing, and I am kind 

of saddened for it, but you are in a good position if you are the 

builder and people need to redo these towers, so I wanted to throw 

that on the table. 

But following up, Mr. Bergmann, on 5G, we had a hearing a couple months ago, and part of that was not on towers anymore. The 

proposal is these small boxes to be placed kind of on Main Street, 

and affixed to buildings and stuff. Is that true? 

90 

Mr. BERGMANN. Thanks for the question, and it is a nice challenge to think about having more jobs, right, than we can fill, but 

you are absolutely right. As we think about the next generation of 

wireless architecture, we are thinking not just about large towers. 

That is still an important part of wireless network infrastructure, 

but we are thinking about this evolution to small cells, things that 

are more like the size of a pizza box or a baseball bat. And the 

challenge that we are facing is we have about 300,000 cell sites 

today. We are going to add about that same amount over the next 

3 years, so literally, double the number of sites we have got. So as 

we think about those new small cells, we need to think about the 

infrastructure citing policies so that we make sure that we can 

build that out quickly. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. I think a lot of us are very supportive of that. Let 

me finish with the public broadcasting folks who—it is a great heritage, a great tradition, an example, and I wanted to use this opportunity to talk about the Luther movie that is going to be aired 

on many public broadcasting stations on September 12th. This is 

the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, so Thrivent Financial 

has put together a movie to talk about the life and times of Martin 

Luther and it will be aired nationally. That is something that obviously the for-profit entities can’t do all the time. It has been an 

education historical account, and that is a—that added value that 

you all bring, and so we would hope in this transition that we first 

do no harm to other voices out there in the broadcast sector. 

Mr. Butler, do you want to comment or add to that? 

Mr. BUTLER. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. The Luther 

documentary is a wonderful example of the kind of work that we 

do that nobody else does. I am not on the programming end of the 

public television business, so I don’t want to misrepresent anything 

here, but it is true that this is our stock in trade going to programming that nobody else is going to do. 

In that vein, Ken Burns will be premiering his 18-hour history 

of the Vietnam War starting on September the 17th on public television. There is nobody else in the world that would devote 18 

hours to a history of the Vietnam War, other than American public 

television, and we are very proud of the fact that that is the business that we are in. Whatever one thinks one knows about the 

Vietnam War, your assumptions are going to be challenged and 

some will be overturned by this series that Ken has done. 

I have been fortunate to see all 18 hours of it, and it is a masterpiece. So we are very proud of the fact that we do that kind of programming, which is not going to find its way on any other broadcast signal, and we are committed to continuing that kind of work. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. LANCE. [Presiding.] Thank you, Mr. Shimkus. The chair recognizes Mr. Loebsack. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This has really been informative, as all these hearings are. It is really great to have so 

many great people on the panel here, and thank you for your testimony in answering so many questions. 

The first thing I want to say, Ms. Plantinga, back in 2008, when 

Iowa suffered a huge flood, and half the damage of Iowa was in my 

congressional district. We had a local TV station was flooded in 

91 

downtown Cedar Rapids, and they had folks literally broadcasting 

outside the station, and so, I just want to appreciate sort of the 

heroism and the great service of so many of these local folks like 

you. I really appreciate that. 

Clearly today, this selection impacts services that are critical to 

folks in my district, broadcast television, mobile broadband, and on 

both fronts, we need to make sure these transitions are done 

seamlessly, and I think we can all agree on that. In order to both 

protect consumers and make sure that Americans can reap the 

benefits of the auction, including the potential for improved rural 

broadband access, really important for my district, for Chairman 

Walden’s and others, as well, Marsha’s, others, and I am encouraged to hear there have already been voluntarily efforts by auction 

winners, T-Mobile, to help translators in low-power stations, particularly in those rural areas. 

And, Ms. Murphy Thompson, I appreciate you mentioning in 

your testimony my legislation, your written testimony. While the 

Rural Wireless Access Act does not deal specifically with repack, I 

share your concerns that we need better wireless coverage data in 

order to achieve the goal we all share of improving rural broadband 

access, and I want to thank, in particular, Mr. Costello, for joining 

me on that bill in a bipartisan effort, and I hope we can move that 

sooner rather than later. 

As sometimes happens, Mr. Shimkus sort of took some of my fire 

away already when it comes to workforce development but, I do 

have to ask you, Mr. Tracy, first of all, I appreciate your testimony. 

These are great jobs that can’t be outsourced, for one thing. That 

is really fantastic, isn’t it, that we don’t have to worry about these 

kinds of jobs moving overseas? But I do want to ask you, sort of, 

what are the qualifications for these workers in the first instance, 

people who are doing these towers, working on these towers? 

Mr. TRACY. I guess the first element is the ability and the willingness to ascend and work at elevation. And when you get beyond, 

that the training and education requirements involve everything 

from fall protection to RF safety and awareness, and when you roll 

into that then you are talking about the differences in being able 

to identify the hazards of working at that, and it is everything 

from, you know predatory birds to hornets and wasp nests that are 

130 feet off the ground that could surprise you. And when you add 

all those things up, it takes a long time to get someone so that they 

are very productive in their job, and you don’t do anything second 

nature when you are 130 feet off the ground until you have done 

it quite a few times and your muscle memory begins to kick in. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Well, I want to echo Mr. Shimkus’ remarks about, 

especially, the Helmets to Hardhats program because I actually 

have a couple of kids who are in the Marine Corps and I have traveled overseas a number of times on the Armed Services Committee 

to visit our troops as a number of folks here today have. Those 

folks, in many instances, are very qualified for these kinds of jobs. 

I just would want to make sure that folks continue to tap into that 

reservoir of experience and ability and willingness to do these kind 

of jobs as well. I just wanted to second what Mr. Shimkus said. 

And certainly workforce preparation, you know, I am a huge fan 

of community colleges. I have my own saying I made up that comVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
92 

munity colleges are the principal intersection, not the only, but the 

principal intersection between education and workforce development, so I wanted to put a plug if for them as well as Mr. Shimkus 

did. Do you have any comments you want to make on that or other 

job training programs? 

Mr. TRACY. There is a community college in Iowa that does a 

wonderful job. They are an ATE member, and they do a wonderful 

job of training, but also, there is an outfit that operates in California, Texas, and in my home State of Washington called 

Airstreams Renewables, that is actually recruiting from active duty 

military and making the transition available for our heroes that 

are coming back from the campaigns. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thank you very much. One quick question I want 

to get on the record at least. It does sound like this broad agreement that more resources are needed to ensure the smooth transition that we are talking about. And Mr. Kaplan, why is it important to address the funding and possible timing shortcomes now 

even though the station moves themselves won’t start until later 

next year? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Well, as you said, the work is being done now, and 

so the equipment is being ordered, and all those kinds of things are 

taking place today, and if that is not addressed now, broadcasters 

have no certainty as to what might be covered, and especially in 

terms of timing, if they are going to be knocked off the air because 

of circumstances beyond their control, and they don’t know that 

until that moment, that is going to be devastating for the broadcasting industry. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thanks to all of you and thanks, Madam Chair. 

I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Guthrie, you 

are recognized. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you very much. Ms. Plantinga, so I am in 

Bowling Green, Bowling Green, Kentucky, so I am Metro, and I am 

in your media market, and so we get NewsChannel 5, and some 

people say people in my area know more about what is going on 

in Nashville than Kentucky. I was never reminded more of that 

once when I was flying from D.C. back to Nashville, and I was flying with the chairman, Diane Black, and Jim Cooper, and a lady 

nudged me after we landed and said, ‘‘You can’t believe this, but 

we were flying with three Congressmen.’’ Well, I didn’t say four, I 

just said ‘‘Well, they looked familiar,’’ but anyway, so a lot of people 

do watch—in my area, watch your—know more about Nashville 

going on. But I say this because even I have your program, your 

channel programmed on Sunday morning when I am at church. 

There is a show I like to watch when I get home, and so I guess 

my question is probably more of a nuisance than a problem, and 

Mr. Kaplan, if you will talk about this too, but you individually, 

there is going to be 1,000 broadcast stations, yours in particular in 

my area, that is going to be relocating channels, and just the process of communicating that, there has got to be a plan. How are you 

going to let people know that, you know, 913 in Bowling Green is 

not going to be the channel used to watch NewsChannel 5? 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Absolutely. Having been through this three 

other times, it requires a strong message repeated. People don’t get 

93 

it the first time, and they need to hear it over and over again. Our 

plan is extensive coverage within newscasts, crawls at the bottom 

part of the screen during our highest profile programming, and 

PSAs that will be running on our channels. So we are going to have 

to tell people over and over and over again. 

One of the issues with the rescanning is, if someone is seeing 

Channel 5 on a certain frequency and that frequency goes away, 

they can no longer see our signal to hear that rescan message 

again, so it is tricky. I will tell you during our previous channel 

changes, I have called people’s nephews and said, Could you please 

go to your Aunt Irma’s house and help her rescan? I have literally 

been in people’s homes, I have gone to homes with our chief engineer in middle Tennessee and walked into their living rooms and 

helped them rescan, because our motto is ‘‘leave no home behind.’’ 

We don’t want anybody to lose the broadcast signals that they 

value. 

But it is a challenge. The communication piece is challenging, 

and the previous communication piece with the digital transition 

had everybody going at once and a lot of money being spent for a 

national messages as well as our local message. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Maybe you should get one of your world famous 

weather persons to give a public service announcement? Oprah 

Winfrey started on your channel doing weather. 

Ms. PLANTINGA. Yes, she did. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. So, Mr. Kaplan, I assume all the other stations are 

going through the same? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Yes, they are, and I echo that. One interesting 

thing here is that I went through this working for the FCC in 2009 

during the DTV transition, and was actually on the phone with a 

number of members of Congress who were trying to get their TVs 

rescanned, as well, on the Senate side. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Of course. 

Mr. KAPLAN. No consumer is going to know tomorrow if their 

wireless carrier has 10 less megahertz of spectrum, but they will 

know if they can’t receive their television station. And that is a key 

thing here. Not that wireless isn’t incredibly important, but in the 

timeliness of all of this, that is something to keep in mind. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. OK. Thank you. Mr. Tracy, actually stuff you don’t 

think about when you are doing timelines, the FAA bill is kind of 

in limp status. Right now it is not moving forward, and I know 

there is some requirements for towers in the FAA bill for marking 

and different things that you have to do. How does the fact that 

that is not passed yet and in place and you know exactly what you 

need to do affecting your ability to repack and do what you need 

to do to towers? Is that interfering at all, resources or timing? Does 

that have anything to do with what is going on here? 

Mr. TRACY. Well, in terms of planning and logistics, it is tough 

to prepare for a job if you don’t know it is coming. And we do know 

the 5G is coming. We don’t really know when, but we know that 

the rollout is coming sooner rather than later. 

We know that FirstNet is under pretty specific time constraint, 

and we are going to be actively participating in that, but here 

again, when you add all these things together and you talk about 

the perfect storm for the wireless worker now—— 

94 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Because you are adding the—— 

Mr. TRACY [continuing]. We have a lot of people we still have to 

train, because our workforce is too small right now, and recruiting 

is an issue in virtually any business, but when you have to add the 

physical nature of what we do to the technical nature, we have to 

log on to a laptop, there is a lot of skill sets that really come into 

play. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. I have about half a minute, so I will ask another 

question, but Mr. Kaplan or Mr. Bergmann, you want to talk about 

how the other requirements that are coming from other bills are 

affecting your ability to move forward on time frame, or does it affect your timing? 

Mr. BERGMANN. So certainly, the work that this committee is 

doing to speed the infrastructure setting process I think is really 

critical and important in terms of our ability to roll out—— 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Does the FAA bill have any impact on what you 

do? 

Mr. BERGMANN. Certainly, absolutely. The ability to make sure 

that we are spending resources smartly and efficiently with respect 

to tower study and maintenance, and it is funny, one of the words 

I think you have heard from me to the panel is ‘‘collaboration.’’ 

This is one of the many areas where we work closely with our 

friends in the broadcast industry and appreciate working with this 

committee on that legislation, as well, too. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. I am out of time, so I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. McNerney you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I thank the chairlady and I thank the witnesses 

for their testimony. I find it very interesting. First of all, Mr. 

Bergmann, my district is largely rural and has spotty connections, 

some agriculture. What is in mind, how would my deployment of 

5G benefit the constituents in my district? 

Mr. BERGMANN. So thanks very much for the question, and I do 

agree with you. I think communities notice whether they are part 

of the next G, right? If they have 4G, if they have 5G, they really 

notice, and it makes a big difference to those communities. So one 

of the great things about this spectrum is that it is ideally suited 

as a low-band 5G band. So the kinds of things that that unlocks, 

right, are faster services, better downloads, much more responsive 

services. 

So from a rural perspective, we think about things like being 

able to take advantage of medical professionals in urban centers 

and have that kind of virtual diagnosis and treatment, and the reduced latency that you will have from 5G really opens up tremendous opportunities to try to bring better medical care to rural 

areas. Think about education, right, and the ability for kids in a 

rural classroom to put on virtual reality glasses, and all of a sudden, be in the Smithsonian. So a trip that might have otherwise 

been inaccessible is now there. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. So there is a lot of benefits then for rural kind 

of activity basically? 

Mr. BERGMANN. Very much so. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Considering my concern about the Sinclair/Tribune merger, what interest does Sinclair have in the ATSC 3.0? 

95 

Mr. BERGMANN. My understanding is that the broadcasters are 

all thinking about the transition and upgrading their equipment 

and we certainly support that ability, but we think it is really critical that a transition to ATSC 3.0 not slow down that transition. 

And again, we certainly hope that every broadcaster will be doing 

everything that it can to make sure we stick within that transition. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you. Ms. Murphy Thompson, has Sinclair 

taken any other steps that would cause delays in the repacking 

process? 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. As I have already noted, they have 

taken several steps, including delaying the outset of the incentive 

auction and also creating additional market power that would enhance their reluctance to comply with this, and, you know, the 

vertical market power that they would possess post transaction 

would have a significant impact on the transition. 

And if I could, just for a second, comment on what Mr. 

Bergmann said, I agree. The only thing I would note for rural areas 

in particular, you know, many of them are still going from 3G to 

4G, so this spectrum is critically important to get access to it immediately so that they can get to their next generation of technology and then build on to 5G. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. So how would the Sinclair/Tribune merger impact efforts to close the digital divide then following up your—— 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. I think it would detrimentally affect 

that. Our carriers showed up to this auction in droves because they 

need the spectrum. They wouldn’t have spent all this money in 

order to sit on it. They are going to deploy it, and, you know, even 

if you delay at the outset, there is a cascading effect which could 

push this time frame out for years, which would deprive rural carriers, rural consumers of these next generation services. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. And the last question about that. How might the 

merger impact U.S. competitiveness in the global rush to 5G? 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Yes, it is the same answer, frankly. 

This spectrum is the baseline foundation to build on 5G, and yes, 

some of it will be used for 5G, but it is the foundation layer, and 

without being able to connect, you are not going to be able to use 

the remote patient monitoring that Mr. Bergman talked about. So 

if we want to leave the race to 5G, we need to unleash this 600 

megahertz band spectrum in the timeframe that was allotted. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you. Mr. Kaplan, are you confident that 

no broadcaster will go dark as a result of the transition to 3.0? 

Mr. KAPLAN. As a result of the transition to next gen television, 

absolutely not. All it will do is enhance service. It is our version 

of 5G, and we are extremely excited about what it can do for consumers. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. So there won’t be any delays or any broadcasters going dark then? 

Mr. KAPLAN. There will be no delays as a result of a next generation television, correct. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Right. Of 3.0 ATSC? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Yes. What we call next gen television, ATSC 3.0 

should have no bearing whatsoever on the repack. 

96 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I am going to be out of time, but I was going 

to ask you about broadcasters currently taking to protect themselves from cyber attacks, but I will have to let that question go. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman can submit that for the record 

as he yields back, and we will submit that to you for later. 

Mr. Kinzinger, you are recognized. 

Mr. KINZINGER. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for 

yielding and for holding the important hearing today and for all of 

you for being here. I really appreciate it. The incentive auction has 

proven to be a unique and innovative way to bring additional spectrum to the broadband market and additional revenues to the Federal Government. We are all invested in ensuring that it remains 

successful and can serve as a model for future allocations of spectrum or anything else we want to go about that way. But I am 

equally concerned that the local broadcasters, many of whom are 

being asked to move channels to make all of this work, are treated 

fairly and that no consumer is harmed in the process. 

So Mr. Kaplan, you mentioned in your testimony that NAB is not 

proposing a new repacking deadline or an open ended extension of 

the FCC’s 39-month repacking window. But you did say that Congress should act to make it clear that no individual station should 

go off the air, or have significant reduction in service if, in fact, circumstances outside its control prevent its timely transition. 

The FCC already has the authority to grant deadline extensions 

on a case-by-case basis upon reviewing the circumstances and the 

variables that are outside of the control of the broadcaster. Variables, including inclement weather, crew shortages, zoning issues, 

and other matters that may affect the earnest efforts of the broadcasters. Can you please explain in greater detail what you believe 

Congress should actually do to provide this leeway? In other words, 

what sort of language or guarantee are you proposing that we 

enact? And please be as precise as you can. 

Mr. KAPLAN. Sure. Thank you for the question. And, yes, there 

is actually various bills out there already with the language that 

would do exactly what we would like to do, and I am glad you reiterated what I said in my testimony which is this should be a fairly 

easy problem to solve in that it is not a debate over whether 39 

months is the correct number of months. It is really just that safety 

valve as to if you are unable to transition due to circumstances outside of your control, you should not be penalized, and I think we 

can all agree on that. The FCC has said that it does not intend to 

grant waivers if it affects the overall transition. So that is kind of 

counted us in already, and if you look at NewsChannel 5’s circumstance where they are moving to another channel with someone on it, so they have to move, and then their channel, once they 

vacate, is going to have someone else move on to it, you can see 

how that obviously one move affects the other. 

So Congress is important in this process because the FCC really 

looks to this committee to give it direction, and so making that 

statement that no station should go dark, or have a significant loss 

in service due to circumstances beyond its control, that would help 

us greatly at this point. 

Mr. KINZINGER. So you think just basically making the statement 

and having the hearings is—— 

97 

Mr. KAPLAN. I think legislation is incredibly important paired 

with legislation as we have all agreed here except for the one abstention that there should be more money in the fund. 

Mr. KINZINGER. Roger. All right. Mr. Bergmann, as you know, 

there are millions of our constituents across the country that are 

going to be affected by this transition. Ideally, everything will go 

off without a hitch and at the end of the process, everybody will 

have equal or better access to television broadcasting, more people 

will have access to broadband in rural areas, and eventually, everyone will have a much faster internet speed. 

It may be a bit optimistic to think that everything will go off 

without a hitch, but we are holding out hope. But to reach the end 

goals, everyone is going to need to work together. So as you mentioned today in your testimony, there are authorities at the FCC 

to make some deadline extensions on a case-by-case basis. We don’t 

yet know if there will be any such issues, but if they arise sometime down the road, are you and your member companies prepared 

to deal with it, and if so, could you please describe how you see 

that situation unfolding in a productive and collaborative manner? 

Mr. BERGMANN. So thanks, Congressman, very much for the 

question. So, you know, we absolutely hope and expect that we are 

going to be rolling out services, and we are seeing that before 39 

months, right? Just within 2 months of the auction we see our 

member companies rolling out services. So I think a lot of what we 

are trying to do is think about how this process plays out over 

time. And the FCC has put together, I think, a very thoughtful 

transition plan that is based on 10 phases, so we try to chunk, you 

know, the challenges up as we go, but as you mentioned, they have 

also built in some backup plans, and the ability to grant waivers, 

and I think you talked a little bit about those sort of touchstone, 

right, or unforeseeable circumstances or events that are beyond the 

station’s control. 

So I think the FCC very much has the authority to address those 

kinds of issues as they come up, and I would completely agree 

with, you know, my friends in the broadcast industry, we are really 

confident that Chairman Pai and the commissioners are focused on 

this task. They have all come here and said, and you have asked 

before, so I know you care deeply about this issue, they said no station will go dark. 

So I think we are confident that the FCC has the authority, has 

the ability, has the willingness to make sure this is a smooth transition. 

Mr. KINZINGER. Well, thank you. And I want to quickly say we 

have made it clear that broadcasters will be made whole throughout this whole process. I intend to work with my colleagues to ensure that we uphold our end of the bargain. And I appreciate both 

sides for really engaging in this incredible undertaking, because 

this is massive and complicated and very much appreciated. I think 

at the end of the day, it all works out well. So with that, Madam 

Chair, I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. And Ms. Eshoo, 

you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ESHOO. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. This is an important hearing, and it is timely because of the challenges of the hurVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
98 

ricanes, and it certainly cast a spotlight on what broadcasters do, 

how the American people depend on broadcasting in our country, 

and, of course, all the issues that are attendant to the auction and 

what is moving forward. 

So thank you for the wonderful testimony that each one of you 

have given. I love hearings because I always learn so much from 

the people that come here to be instructive to us. 

First, my sensibilities are that we did a very good job in thinking 

through the auction. The auction brought in tremendous sums of 

dollars. I think that there is a lot of good news that is going to 

come out of it, so that—and the American people are going to benefit from it, as well. You have already given testimony about that, 

but I just want to say that I think that—number one, I think the 

39 months is a long period of time. And while I understand that 

we are all sensitive about what can happen, and our sensitivities 

are at an all-time high now because of Harvey and Irma and all 

that is going on; I don’t think there was anyone that objected in 

the beginning that 39 months was an insufficient timeframe to accomplish what needed to be accomplished. 

So I think the case that has been made relative to the dollars 

that are needed in order to make the transition is a case that the 

Congress has to pay very close attention to. 

So I have raised concerns about the proposed Sinclair/Tribune 

merger from a media consolidation perspective, and I called on the 

chairman of the committee to hold a hearing on the merger. I also 

know that there are a lot of issues going on behind the scenes regarding the ATSC 3.0 standards with respect to the merger and 

the spectrum repacking plan. 

I am very, very sensitive about media consolidation. I think in 

a democracy there should be many voices to the many, not fewer 

voices to the many. And so, I was very concerned about that. And 

I still think that we should be examining that with a hearing. 

We also know that spectrum is critical for the deployment of 

wireless broadband in our country, and service in rural areas and 

within buildings. So I want to ask some questions about that. 

First, going to Ms. Thompson, do you think the issue surrounding the ATSC 3.0 standard further justify the need for a 

hearing here? You can say just yes or no. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Yes. 

Ms. ESHOO. Why? Briefly. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Because I think, as I said earlier, that 

this transaction supports only Sinclair and Tribune, which is why 

nobody else supports it. And in particular, you know, oversight over 

this will provide a lot of further detail about what they intend to 

do, including information about ATSC 3.0. 

Ms. ESHOO. Thank you. And on the issue of the critical deployment of wireless broadband, especially in rural areas and within 

buildings, how important do you think this repacking plan is for 

the future deployment of NextGen 911 services and the ability of 

individuals in rural areas and in buildings to make 911 calls from 

their mobile devices? 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Sure. And if I could, just first thank 

you for being the cochair of the NG 911 Caucus. As a board member, I really appreciate all the work you have done there. 

99 

Ms. ESHOO. Thank you, along with Mr. Shimkus. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Yes, Mr. Shimkus as well and other 

members of the committee. And I think a lot of this comes back to 

public safety, a lot of what we talked about here today. And, you 

know, I think that you hope you never have to call 911, but when 

you do, you want it to connect, and this spectrum, in particular, 

provides excellent propagation characteristics to travel far distance 

in rural areas, which means that rural consumers will be able to 

connect to public safety emergency personnel as we have seen in 

collaboration with the broadcasters during Hurricane Harvey. 

Ms. ESHOO. I just want to do a shout out to Mr. Butler. I think 

that public broadcasting is a national treasure, an absolute national treasure. 

Mr. BUTLER. Thank you, ma’am. 

Ms. ESHOO. And I am a big fan. I can’t imagine my life without 

public broadcasting. It is where I receive my news. I trust that, and 

its examination, and again, a gift to the American people that 

keeps on giving. Thank you. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentlelady yields back. Mr. Bilirakis, you 

are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Madam Chairman, I appreciate it. I 

thank the panel for their testimony this morning. I guess it is almost afternoon. 

Mr. Bergmann, the Spectrum Act does not allow low power television and translator stations to receive relocation funds. I understand that some of the members of the CTIA have committed resources to help these stations during the repacking process to advance a timely transition. Can you expand on some of the work 

your members are doing with these low power TV and translator 

stations? 

Mr. BERGMANN. Sure. Thank you so much for the question. I appreciate it. We talked a little bit about collaboration. I think this 

is a great example of it where, you know, T–Mobile, our largest 

winner in the auction has worked with LPTV stations, rural public 

broadcaster stations to make sure that we are doing what we can 

to try to ameliorate some of those challenges. We saw for some of 

the LPTV stations was a need to, in some cases, move twice before 

they got to their new home, their new channel. And so T–Mobile 

announced a partnership to fund a number of those moves. So I 

think, you know, my colleague, Mr. Butler, did a great job talking 

about from the public broadcaster standpoint, the opportunity to 

make sure that 380-plus translators are facilitated, and I think you 

will see more of that. There is a lot of collaboration happening in 

the industry today from a wireless perspective. We think it is important that we are able to roll out quickly in these services. I 

know that this committee takes this issue seriously, and is thinking about those questions about funding. But we want to be good 

partners in that, as well too. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Very good. I have a second question for you, sir. 

As you noted in your testimony, the FCC found 95 percent of the 

cell sites in counties affected by Harvey were still working, which 

is significant, in my opinion. Now the people in my district are preparing for Hurricane Irma. In years ahead with carriers developing 

100 

new uses for spectrum previously used by broadcasters, what potential advantages will users have to do that do not currently exist. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Sure. So it is a really important and timely 

question. And I have to say this committee has spent a lot of time 

thinking about network resiliency, in part, in response to some of 

what we heard from this committee. Wireless carriers rolled out a 

network resiliency framework last year that emphasized a lot of 

things that I think paid dividends in Harvey. Preplanning, information sharing, collaboration, again, making sure that we educate 

consumers, and we did all of those things before Harvey, you know, 

an unprecedented event, and I think really saw remarkable performance. You mentioned 95 plus percent of cell sites operational, 

and you know, what that enabled were calls to 911. It enabled 

wireless emergency alerts, and, you know, now we are preparing 

for another. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. You are saving lives. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Saving lives, absolutely. 

So each storm is unique, right? And so Irma will present different challenges. In Harvey, it was flooding. In Irma, we are talking about record-setting winds. 

But our companies are doing the same things now to preposition 

for that, as well, too, making sure that we are doing everything we 

can to be ready to try to keep service up, get service back quickly 

where it goes down, and educate consumers about how to be smart 

and use their wireless devices in the time of need. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Very good. Thank you. 

Does anyone else want to comment on that with regard to the 

hurricane? 

Mr. KAPLAN. I would love to. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Sure. 

Mr. KAPLAN. I think, obviously, broadcasters, like wireless companies, have a lot at stake in these times. And we report on the 

front lines, broadcasters do, as you saw throughout Hurricane Harvey. 

I think the hurricane situation actually really sheds light on the 

challenges we face during a repack, so I am glad you raised this. 

If you think about it, in phase one of the repack, three stations in 

Beaumont, Texas, are scheduled to move. In phase two, 6 months 

later, another eight stations are set to move. If we were just upon 

that deadline, what would we do? 

At the moment, the FCC rule says, ‘‘You are off the air. Sorry.’’ 

And so that is why we are before this committee to say, hey, there 

is a sane way to do this. We can all work together. We don’t have 

to adjust the entire timeframe, but, in these circumstances beyond 

their control, there should be a safety valve that we understand. 

Because, literally, those stations could have to go off the air during 

hurricane coverage, according to FCC rules. 

So it is very important. And hurricanes, you know, it shouldn’t 

take that for us to realize it, but I do think that sheds light on this 

very important problem. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Well, thank you very much. 

I yield back, Madam Chair. I appreciate it. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Ms. Matsui, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

101 

Ms. MATSUI. Thank you very much. 

And I really want to thank the witnesses for being here today. 

This has been very enlightening. Thank you so much. 

Many of my questions have already been asked already, so let me 

ask something that probably hasn’t been asked yet. 

You know, we have seen the critical role that local radio stations 

play in times of severe weather. And, sadly, they will probably be 

called upon later on in Chicago this week. 

My understanding is that many radio stations have transmitters 

on the same towers as TV stations and will have no choice but to 

turn off their signals and possibly erect new auxiliary transmitters 

in order to continue serving local listeners during the time when 

crews are working on impacted TV stations. 

Mr. Kaplan, does the FCC have authority under existing law to 

reimburse radio stations for the costs they may necessarily incur 

as a consequence of the repacking of the TV broadcast spectrum? 

And should Congress fix this problem by making funds available to 

impacted radio station just as we are making funds available to TV 

stations? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Thank you for the question. 

First, the law of the Spectrum Act is very clear that only TV licensees are eligible for the funds under the current law. 

And to your second question, yes, Congress should make those 

funds available. Radio stations are innocent bystanders in this 

process, and what happens is they have to power down so that 

work can be done to towers when they are co-located. And there 

are almost 700 radio stations, FM stations that are affected. 

Ms. MATSUI. Right, right. Thank you. 

We have heard some discussion today regarding the potential 

consumer education that would be necessary during the repack. 

And, Mr. Butler, I am also a fan of public television, having been 

a chairman of the board of one of them in Sacramento. 

Mr. BUTLER. Yes. 

Ms. MATSUI. And so it has been with interest I have been following what has been happening. 

But can you speak about the particular challenges to public 

broadcasters in making sure viewers can find their stations during 

and after the repack? 

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, ma’am. And, in particular, our audience, while 

it goes across generations, is particularly centered on serving very 

young people and much older people. And those are two populations that they and their families are going to need all the consumer education they can get. 

This is not just a matter of turning a switch between analog and 

digital, as we did 8 years ago. It is a matter of changing signals 

within a market several times. And there is so much room for confusion in a process like that that we think consumer education is 

just an extremely important thing. 

It was funded, I believe I am right, at $90 million during the digital transition. And we think that at least that kind of money 

should be invested in consumer education for this transition as 

well. 

Ms. MATSUI. OK. Thank you. 

102 

As I have indicated, I am very sympathetic to concerns that 

broadcasters have about circumstances like whether that may affect their ability to transition in time. However, I am not sympathetic to any intentional delays or gaming of the system. I am also 

concerned that, if the Sinclair merger goes through, Sinclair will 

have significant incentive to slow-walk the transition. 

Mr. Kaplan, what safeguards are we putting in place to ensure 

that the transition is not unnecessarily delayed? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Thank you for the question. 

I think that the safeguards are already in place. With deadlines 

and timelines enforced by the FCC that we understand and agree 

to, there is really no room for a broadcaster to drag their feet. And 

what we are looking for today is just the safeguards that, if something is beyond your control—so the circumstance you described I 

would not imagine would be included—that is what we are looking 

to have covered. 

And I think you know, in particular, that broadcasters like to 

work collaboratively with the wireless industry. With your leadership, we worked with the Department of Defense to help clear the 

AWS–3 spectrum that led to the most successful auction of all 

time. 

Ms. MATSUI. All right. Well, thank you very much. 

And I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentlelady yields back. 

Mr. Long, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LONG. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And, Mr. Bergmann, do you believe that the 39-month date 

played a role in how much wireless carriers paid for the spectrum 

during the incentive auction? 

Mr. BERGMANN. Very much, Congressman. You know, when they 

get access spectrum is a critical part of how they decide what they 

should bid. When we are talking about bids of $20 billion, again, 

imagine purchasing JetBlue and realizing that you are going to 

have to then wait for more than 3 years. 

Mr. LONG. Are you talking about the JetBlue that is not going to charge anybody more than $99 to fly out of Florida this week? 

Mr. BERGMANN. Yes. 

Mr. LONG. I had to get a little plug in there. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Right. So you want to be able to use it when you 

need it, right? 

Mr. LONG. Right. 

Mr. BERGMANN. So, very much. 

Mr. LONG. Yes. 

Are you concerned that if Congress changed the date that it 

could have an impact on the success of future auctions? 

Mr. BERGMANN. So, we are. When companies make investments 

of this size, it is predicated on the ability to use that spectrum. So, 

we do think that if government is changing the rules afterwards 

and you don’t get access to it at the same time, they will discount 

that in their bids the next time. And I think what that means is 

lower prices for bidding and, potentially, in two-sided auctions, less 

spectrum cleared. 

So, from a perspective of the economy, right, that is not a good 

thing, right? We know every time we make available spectrum, 

103 

wireless providers invest, wireless providers create jobs, wireless 

providers bring new services to communities. And so the less spectrum that we bring to market, I think overall as a country we are 

harmed. 

And then I know, certainly, from this committee’s perspective, 

the ability to raise money, it can be very helpful. The 2012 Spectrum Act raised over $60 billion, right? It enabled the rollout of 

FirstNet. Just from this last auction, $7 billion alone went to deficit reduction. 

So the ability to make sure that we are, you know, able to take 

advantage of that tool for our economy, for our rural communities, 

and also, as a potential funding source are all really important as 

part of this process. 

Mr. KAPLAN. Congressman Long, may I quickly address one comment that was made? 

You know, earlier in the hearing, we heard—I just want to make 

sure we are all on the same page here. The Spectrum Act itself 

never set a deadline for repacking. Congress did not address that 

issue. It left it to the FCC to address. The FCC then went ahead 

and adopted the 39-month deadline. 

And, by the way, which is still—there were 31 petitions for reconsideration filed during the early stages of the auction about various things in the auction. Thirty of them are closed. Only one remained open throughout the auction period, and that was the deadline. 

And, to this day, 39 months is still an open question at the FCC. 

So I just want to be clear that auction bidders will—— 

Mr. LONG. Right. Thank you. 

My next question is for Colonel Tracy. 

Colonel—that is correct, isn’t it? You are a colonel? 

Mr. TRACY. No, sir. 

Mr. LONG. You are not an auctioneer? 

Mr. TRACY. Not yet, sir. I attend the Western School of 

Auctioneering later this month. 

Mr. LONG. Oh, OK. Well, you will soon be a colonel. Because all 

auctioneers are colonels, anywhere you go. If you ever go to an auction, don’t know the guy’s name, you say, ‘‘Hey, Colonel,’’ he will 

answer you. So I thought you had already graduated from auction 

school. 

Mr. TRACY. In advance, I thank you, sir. 

Mr. LONG. As one colonel to another. 

As carriers move to deploy the new 5G technologies, how will the 

tower industry respond to needs from both broadcasters and carrier 

communities? 

Mr. TRACY. Wow, that is a huge question. As a member of CTIA 

and with great friends at the broadcasting, we are kind of caught 

in the middle of any argument that happens between dollars and 

time. That is why I said it was way over my pay grade to comment 

on how much it was going to cost. 

I am a simple tower guy, and I can tell you that we have a math 

problem. And the math problem involves training enough workers 

to get up on a tower, where a lot of people, frankly, don’t want to 

be, and getting the work done with quality and safety as our top 

priorities. 

104 

So, if I look at the math problem, I would say that if there is 

anyplace that this math problem can be solved, it is in the United 

States of America. I trust our workforce more than I trust any 

other one place in the world. And especially with—we talked about 

our former military coming in. These folks, if anybody can get it 

done and solve this math problem, it is the people in the wireless 

community. 

Mr. LONG. Thank you. 

And, Madam Chair, I hold in my hot little hands ‘‘Something for 

Cellphone Users to Celebrate: The FCC’s Air Waives Auction Provides a Much-Needed Boost to Main Street.’’ This is something I 

would like to submit. It is an op-ed by former Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman—Communications and Technology 

Subcommittee Chairman Billy Tauzin, congratulating Congress 

and celebrating the advanced mobile services that will soon be deployed to places that either lack competition in the high-speed 

wireless marketplace or don’t have it at all. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. So ordered. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. LONG. And, with that, I yield back. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

Mr. Welch, 5 minutes. 

Mr. WELCH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

First of all, I want to thank the panel. It has been a really good 

panel. Bottom line here, we want to make sure the broadcasters 

have a good signal, and we want to get the benefit of deployment 

of broadband in rural areas. That is a really, really important issue 

for rural America, which is most of America. 

Mr. Kaplan, I support Ranking Member Pallone’s bill to provide 

additional funds so that the broadcasters have—they are held 

harmless during the repack process. But I would ask you, you have 

done this a bit already, but can you elaborate on what the broadcasters need to ensure the smoothest repack possible and to ensure 

that viewers are not left in the dark for any period of time after 

the repack? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Sure. We need two things, which is money and 

time. 

And in terms of money, it is to be fully reimbursed, because 

broadcasters, as I said, today are spending that money. They are 

putting in the orders; they need to do it. We have heard testimony 

about exactly the steps that are necessary to do these tower climbs, 

to have the antennas, transmitters, those types of things that are 

critical. 

Mr. WELCH. So Mr. Doyle asked everybody whether there is 

enough money, and everybody, with one abstention, said there 

isn’t. What are we talking about, in terms of money? And can you 

explain how you have come to a conclusion about what is needed? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Sure. Well, we could look to the FCC. So we have 

all submitted—broadcasters submitted initial estimates that the 

FCC has looked through, and that came to over $2.1 billion. Also, 

we have heard today from members issues about radio, low-power 

television, and those things are enormously important for the ecosystem as well. 

105 

So, you know, we are in the neighborhood. We know it is going to be at least $2.1 billion, and it is probably going to go up a little 

bit, plus money for some other entities that are casualties in the 

process. 

Mr. WELCH. Thanks, Mr. Kaplan. 

Mr. Bergmann, can you share with the committee what the spectrum will mean for our rural constituents. I mean, that is a huge 

part of America. It is supposed to be, as you know, under the original Telecommunications Act, getting the same service as urban 

areas. We are not doing that, and it is really hollowing out the opportunity for rural America, where if people are going to start jobs, 

entrepreneurs are going to come—and a lot of people want to—I 

know this in Vermont—because of what they see as a quality of life 

that is different, they can’t do it, as you well know, unless they 

have urban-style speeds. 

So can you talk about what the spectrum can do? 

Mr. BERGMANN. Sure. Thanks, Congressman Welch. And I certainly appreciate your and this committee’s attention to making 

sure that rural America is a full participant in wireless. And I 

think there are a couple components of it. 

One we were talking about just a couple minutes ago is a lifeline, 

right? And you mentioned this. The ability to reach 911 in times 

of need is really critical in rural areas, right? When you are at 

sparsely populated communities, winding roads, that ability to 

reach 911 is absolutely critical. 

The other piece is an economic opportunity, right, a growth opportunity, the ability to work where you want, to be creative where 

you want to be. It is something that wireless is really unleashing. 

When I think about the spectrum inventory, I think about this 

spectrum, the 600 megahertz spectrum—and this is like the longdistance runner, right? This is the spectrum that can cover miles 

and miles. It has great propagation characteristics. And I think 

what you see for rural America, it is happening today, right? T– 

Mobile announced in Cheyenne, Wyoming, and in Maine first. It is 

a little bit unusual compared to where we normally see services 

first rolled out. 

So this repack, this process is really key to getting the services 

out. 

Mr. WELCH. All right. Thank you. I don’t have much more time, 

and I just want to let Ms. Murphy Thompson comment on that 

same question as well. But thank you. 

Ms. MURPHY THOMPSON. Sure. And let me just thank you for all 

the work you have done to help promote rural broadband, both for 

your constituents and all of CCA members. It is in our DNA. And 

I know right now ‘‘rural’’ is a big buzzword, but it is something we 

have been working on for a long time. 

And this spectrum, as Mr. Bergmann said, is critical to all sorts 

of new technologies in order to connect rural America, not leave 

them behind in these next-generation technologies. And, you know, 

we would ask continued assistance from Congress to help bridge 

this digital divide. 

Mr. WELCH. OK. Thank you very much. 

Madam Chair, I yield back. Thank you. 

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman yields back. 

106 

Mr. Flores, 5 minutes. 

Mr. FLORES. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And I thank the panel. This has been a great hearing so far. 

Unfortunately, there were some unintended consequences in the 

repacking. Mr. Bilirakis addressed one of those, with the low-power 

TV and translators. 

Another one is that the industry, the broadcast industry, shares 

towers with AM stations, FM stations, and also with FM translators. And so those operators are also going to be impacted as the 

broadcaster, the TV broadcasters, go through the repacking process 

and changing transmitters and antennas and so forth. 

So to address this issue, yesterday Mr. Green and I introduced 

H.R. 3685, the Radio Consumer Protection Act. This bill establishes 

a similar fund for the narrow purpose of reimbursing radio stations 

during the repacking transition. It closes the unintended oversight 

that prevents radio stations from being left out of the process. 

And we have all seen the vital role that local radio stations play 

for millions of Americans that are faced with severe weather, such 

as Harvey and Irma, and natural disasters and other local emergencies. And it is at times like these that local radio can be a lifeline for the people we serve, especially when power and all the 

other communication services are down. 

So my questions are these: Mr. Kaplan, do you have an idea as 

to how many towers that the TV broadcast industry used or shared 

with AM/FM and FM translators? 

Mr. KAPLAN. I do. And, first of all, thank you and Congressman 

Green for introducing that bill. It is a very important legislation. 

There are actually 678 TV towers that would share with FM stations. 

Mr. FLORES. OK. And so my next question is, what is the impact 

on those radio stations as the TV stations start to do their modifications? 

Mr. KAPLAN. It could have a significant impact on those stations. 

Because what happens is, when tower climbers go up to do the adjustments they need for the TV repack, the FM stations have to 

power down, you know, for safety reasons. And it all depends upon 

when those happen. 

During the DTV transition, it was less of a problem because we 

had far more time, so radio stations could organize that, you know, 

2:00 a.m. To 5:00 a.m., and that was not a big deal. But with the 

tight timeline they are under now, unless they build auxiliary stations, they are going to be forced to, you know, power down during 

drive time or for weeks at a time. 

Mr. FLORES. Well, your last comment there leads me to ask the 

question, are there any other unforeseen costs of the spectrum repacking on the radio industry that were not envisioned originally? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Not at this time, but as days go by and things happen, we keep learning new things, which is why processes like 

these can be very difficult. 

Mr. FLORES. OK. I would ask you to supplementally advise the 

committee as those come up, if you would. 

Mr. KAPLAN. Will do. 

107 

Mr. FLORES. Mr. Bergmann, as I understand it, the wireless carriers who purchase the spectrum have to wait 39 months before 

they can begin to generate a return on the acquisition. 

And I appreciate that things in the wireless space move at a very 

fast pace. What does 39 months mean to the wireless industry? Do 

you have a way to quantify that in terms of revenues or lower rate 

of return, things of that nature? 

If you could do that quickly. I have a second question for you. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Sure. 

So 39 months is an eternity in the wireless world. We reinvent 

ourselves every 5 to 10 years, building out entire new networks. T– 

Mobile recently acquired 700 megahertz spectrum, built out the 

country in 2 years. So that is a long, long time for us. 

Mr. FLORES. So I guess we could have seventh generation out by 

the time that you get a chance to get a return on your investment. 

I am being facetious. 

Continuing with you, Mr. Bergmann, you made a reference to the 

evidence provided to the FCC that there are sufficient tower crews 

available to meet the repack deadline. The FCC says that. 

Can you expand on the nature of this evidence, and why is there 

so much conflicting information about whether or not there is 

enough time to complete the transition? Because Mr. Tracy has indicated otherwise, and some of our broadcast folks have said that, 

you know, they are worried about the tower resources. 

Mr. BERGMANN. Sure. 

So, you know, the FCC holds open processes and sought comment 

at a variety of different times about the 39-month timeline, about 

the particular, you know, the 10-phase project that I described for 

you, and had an opportunity to hear from all sides, from all interests, and considered a variety of different approaches. I think they 

were originally proposing 18 months for the timeline; ultimately 

decided 39 months. That was challenged in court. The court upheld 

that 39-month timeline. 

And then the staff developed a transition plan that, again, 

breaks this challenging task into 10 different phases. And I think 

that is really important. So even as we think about the size of the 

challenge, remember, we are chunking it into 10 different pieces so 

that we don’t have to have a separate tower crew, antennas for all 

of those stations at the same time. We are building that timeline 

out over the 39 months. 

Mr. FLORES. Thank you all for your responses. 

And I have exhausted my time. I yield back. 

Mr. LANCE. [Presiding.] Thank you very much. 

The chair recognizes Mr. Costello. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Thank you. 

I read all of the testimony and looked over a bunch of various 

questions I was going to ask, and I think for the most part we have 

touched on everything. That is the blessing and the curse of being 

last, sitting at the end. I wanted to get a couple things on the 

record, though, that I think are relevant for a couple different reasons. 

Let me just start, as cochair of the Public Broadcasting Caucus, 

Mr. Butler, just to give you an opportunity to explain how this reVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
108 

packing may be a bit different for the public broadcasting vis—vis 

others. 

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, sir. Thank you. 

And thanks, first of all, for being the cochair of our Public Broadcasting Caucus. We are honored to have you in that leadership position. 

As has been said and as Mr. Bergmann was just touching on, 

this is not really a 39-month transition. For lots of our stations, 

this is a much shorter transition than that. Fourteen of our public 

television stations have to make this transition within the next 

year almost, November 30 of 2018. 

And then there is a cascading effect. The next phase begins the 

next day. And so the last phase, which will take us up to July of 

2020, we only have 14 stations left at that point to get repacked. 

And so 135 of our stations alone are going to have to repack well 

before that 39-month deadline. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Why is that? 

Mr. BUTLER. Because of the phasing in that the FCC has created 

for this process. 

And so I am sorry Congresswoman Eshoo is not here for me to 

be able to clarify that. Thirty-nine months is a long time, but, you 

know, a year is not a long time. And this is a cascading effect that 

is going to have a very serious effect on public broadcasters, in particular, because of the difficulty we have in attracting capital for 

such purposes. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Thank you. 

Mr. Kaplan, in your written testimony, I want to read a paragraph, a couple sentences, give you an opportunity to respond, and 

any others, to just unwind this a little bit, both for my understanding technically, which I think I know the answer to, as well 

as what some of the unforeseen implications may be and how they 

may have to be addressed, be it through the waiver process or otherwise. 

‘‘The repack must take into account the costs and need for coordination associated with TV and radio stations which themselves 

were not repacked, but, which due to their proximity to repacked 

TV stations, must reduce power or transmit from an alternate facility for some period of time. These stations’ viewers and listeners 

should not be dismissed as collateral damage solely because the 

FCC’s original repacking plan did not take them into consideration.’’ 

Why due to their proximity to repacked TV stations must they 

reduce power or transmit? I think we know the answer to that, but 

if you could put that on the record. 

And then secondly, can you discuss some of this collateral damage and how we may need to go about addressing it or be sensitive 

to it? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Great. Thank you for the question. 

I think this gets back to Congressman Flores’ question earlier—— 

Mr. COSTELLO. Yes. 

Mr. KAPLAN [continuing], Which is that radio stations that 

share—and we have almost 700—that share towers with repacked 

TV stations aren’t just going to continue to operate business-asVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
109 

usual. When those changes are made to the towers, the FM radio 

stations will have to power down, go off the air. If they don’t have 

an auxiliary facility to accommodate that, they are literally going 

to be, you know, off the air. You will get static. You won’t hear 

your radio station. And that is for safety reasons. So that is critical 

that that is addressed. 

And it can be done in two ways. Money is critical, because if you 

have the ability to build an auxiliary station, then that can solve 

some of the problem. And time and flexibility, you said at the end 

of your remarks, I think that was exactly right, which is to be sensitive to. 

I think the issue to be sensitive to is the rush to transition, 

which we are all going to try and meet each and every deadline, 

does put pressure on those kind of situations. Because whereas you 

could power down at night during the DTV transition because that 

is when the work could be done, we don’t have to luxury if we are 

going to meet each of the 10 phases. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Right. 

Mr. Butler, the APTS partnership with the wireless industry to 

conduct a pilot project on spectrum sharing, just share your 

thoughts on how it was successful, how it may help your members, 

as well as any learning lessons. 

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, sir. Thank you. 

Among the most important lessons that we learned was the fact 

that we do have a substantial channel capacity, even in a channelsharing arrangement, so that both a public station, for example, 

and a commercial station could run a full complement of channels 

that they wish to run simultaneously. 

We also learned that the dynamic nature of this sharing is very 

important and conducive to a successful channel-sharing arrangement. You know, as a non-technologist, I had gone in thinking, 

well, we get 50 percent of the spectrum and you get 50 percent. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Right. 

Mr. BUTLER. The fact is that it is dynamically shared, and whoever needs more at one given time can have it. And so our pilot 

program in southern California proved that, proved what kind of 

equipment we need—— 

Mr. COSTELLO. Maybe more agility in there than when—— 

Mr. BUTLER. Exactly right. Yes, sir. So that was very important, 

and we are very much indebted to our friends at CTIA for helping 

us to do that. 

Mr. COSTELLO. Very good. Thank you. 

My time has expired. I appreciate all of your testimony. I yield 

back. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you very much. 

The chair recognizes Mr. Johnson. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thanks to our panelists. 

This is a really, really important hearing. I represent a part of 

the country, Appalachia, that makes this such a critical issue. I 

have 34 stations that broadcast in my district that are moving to 

new stations in 5 separate phases. 

But I have also got that rural Appalachian district where I got 

a lot of carriers that have purchased new spectrum under the aucVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:09 Feb 05, 2018 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\MY DOCS\HEARINGS 115\HEARINGS\115-53 CHRIS
110 

tion to help roll out broadband access and connectivity to a part of 

the country that is oftentimes long forgotten. 

So, from my perspective, we got to figure out a win-win solution 

to this situation where both sides come away winning. 

The broadcasters need to be able to successfully transmit without 

incurring undue cost or losing time. And in so many cases, they are 

the only communication that might be going out to a rural area, 

especially if you have bad weather or some kind of natural disaster 

come up. God forbid that we have something in Appalachia on the 

magnitude of Harvey or what might be coming up the coast with 

Irma now. 

And, also, the carriers need to be able to get a return on their 

investment and plan on how they are going to roll out these capabilities to Appalachia. 

So the hearing is very, very important, because I wanted to hear 

the update from you folks on the repacking and any anticipated 

challenges and issues dealing with any delay in the 39 months. 

So, Mr. Kaplan, to you: In your opinion, what needs to be done 

now to ensure that broadcasters are able to successfully meet the 

FCC’s repacking deadlines while still enabling the carriers who are 

propelling new broadband services into Appalachia to stay on 

schedule? What do we need to do now? 

Mr. KAPLAN. Well, thank you, Congressman. 

And I cannot frame the issue any better than you did, which is, 

what is the win-win here? And there is a win-win here, which is 

why we are here, broadcasters, today to say we are not debating 

in Congress the 39-month deadline. That is there. We are working 

with it. We are doing the best we can. What we are trying to find 

is that win-win. 

And so what we need to do is two things. One is—and it seems 

like everyone is in agreement—the money to ensure that broadcasters are made whole, which was the original intention of the 

Spectrum Act. And the second thing is that safety net for stations 

who cannot move due to circumstances beyond their control. And 

right now the FCC’s rules don’t allow for that. 

So that is what we are looking for. The aggressive deadlines are 

in place, so that is good, to your point about rolling out wireless 

services, getting them out to the people of Appalachia. That is critical. We have those deadlines, and I cannot tell you how seriously 

broadcasters are taking them. The planning has actually exceeded 

my expectations, having worked on this issue for quite some time. 

And so I think, with the money and then the safety valve, not 

a change in the 39 months, the safety valve, this is something we 

all should be able to come together on, and then we can move forward and meet those deadlines. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, the folks that I have talked to on both sides 

of the fence, both the broadcasters that I have met with in my district in Ohio—and, by the way, not all of those broadcasters are in 

Ohio. If you look at my district, half of them are in West Virginia 

and Kentucky. So, we are all over the place. And then the carriers. 

What I am impressed with is both sides being willing to be a part 

of the solution and everybody acknowledging that we need a winwin here. 

111 

So, I hate to punt the ball over to the FCC, but I think they need 

to figure out how we are going to solve this problem. And I am 

sure, knowing Chairman Pai and the new regime at the FCC, I 

know they are taking this very seriously, because his wife is not 

too far from my district. I think, in fact, she may be on the northern end of my district. That is where she is from. So he gets the 

Appalachian issue. So I am hopeful. 

I probably did more talking than asking questions, but, Mr. 

Chairman, I yield back. Thank you for your attention. 

Mr. LANCE. Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson. 

Seeing there are no further members wishing to ask questions 

for the panel, I thank all of our witnesses for being here today. 

Before we conclude, I ask unanimous consent to enter the following letters into the record: a letter from Electronics Research, 

Incorporated; a letter from the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition; a 

T-Mobile press release from Ms. Murphy Thompson; and an op-ed 

offered by Mr. Long. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. LANCE. Pursuant to committee rules, I remind members that 

they have 10 business days to submit additional questions for the 

record. And I ask that witnesses submit their responses within 10 

business days upon receipt of the questions. 

Seeing no further business before the subcommittee today, without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 

112 


27146.059
113 


27146.060
114 


27146.061
115 


27146.062
116 


27146.063
117 


27146.064
118 


27146.065
119 


27146.066
120 


27146.067
121 


27146.068
122 


27146.069
123 


27146.070
124 


27146.071
125 


27146.072
126 


27146.073
127 


27146.074
128 


27146.075
129 


27146.076
130 


27146.077
131 


27146.078
132 


27146.079
133 


27146.080
134 


27146.081
135 

Æ 


27146.082