A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) has been released by the FCC in response to a petition by REC Networks to amend the Commission’s rules for the Low Power FM (LPFM) radio service.
A Comment Date and Reply Comment Date will be affirmed upon publication of the NPRM in the Federal Register.
A vote on the NPRM came prior to Thursday’s August Open Meeting (8/1), where a vote was on the Docket.
However, the Commissioners unanimously approve the NPRM, which the REC notes proposes some technical changes acknowledging that LPFM is evolving into a “mature” service.
Some of the changes, REC adds, include the ability to move more than 5.6 km as a minor change as long as a contour study can show that there is no contour overlap; the ability for LPFM stations in San Diego and Tucson (and other places along the Mexican border) to use directional antennas to go to a full 100 watts except in the direction of Mexico; and the ability for LPFM stations to use FM boosters without a waiver request.
Further, “in a big surprise to the entire industry,: the FCC is proposing to eventually eliminate all protection requirements between reserved band (88 MHz to 92 MHz) broadcast facilities (full power, LPFM and translator) and analog TV channel 6 stations effective with the sunset of analog Low Power TV operations in July 2021.
The FCC is proposing an interim policy for LPFM stations desiring to use channels in the reserved band to be permitted to use a contour study similar to that used for translators to show a lack of contour overlap.
But, the NPRM is absent of REC proposals for LPFM relief from short-spaced FM translators and a “LP-250” proposal, which would give an LPFM essentially the same power output as a FM translator. “REC is urging all commenters to request these items back on the table and be considered,” it said.
Under REC’s rejected proposal, LPFM stations not meeting the §73.807(c) minimum distances would be required to use a contour study to show no interference to a translator and agree to be subject to more advanced interference remediation policies currently not applicable to LPFM stations.
REC is also urging that the Commission consider a simpler LP-250 proposal, such as what was proposed in RM-11749. Such a method was proposed in the past by the FCC and was considered as not in contravention to the Local Community Radio Act, REC argued.
In explaining the NPRM, the FCC said, “We seek comment on technical proposals to improve LPFM reception and to increase flexibility in siting while maintaining interference protection and the core LPFM goals of diversity and localism. We also seek comment on the costs and benefits of these proposals and any alternatives commenters may propose. Our action is consistent with our ongoing efforts to modernize media regulations and remove
unnecessary requirements in the media marketplace.”
