[grc] 19-193: FCC proposes some technical changes to LPFM, eliminates Channel 6 protection requirements, avoids addressing the real issues facing LPFM stations for the sake of simplicity and to avoid controversy.

[Michelle Bradley]

https://recnet.com/node/2876


  19-193: FCC proposes some technical changes to LPFM, eliminates
  Channel 6 protection requirements, avoids addressing the real issues
  facing LPFM stations for the sake of simplicity and to avoid controversy.

The Federal Communications Commission has released a draft Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to propose several technical changes to the 
Low Power FM (LPFM) radio service, many of these changes were originally 
proposed by REC Networks and were subject to public comment in the past.

As part of a regular policy that has been put into place at the FCC 
since Ajit Pai has been Chairman, draft releases of agenda items being 
considered at the upcoming open meeting of the Federal Communications 
Commission are made public.

In the NPRM, known as MB Docket 19-193, the FCC recognizes that based on 
the 2013 LPFM filing window, the service has “matured” and that some of 
the simplistic policies that were put into place when the service was 
originally created 19 years ago have hindered development of the 
service, especially in a spectrum that is more crowded with FM 
translators and additional full service stations.  This NPRM proposes to 
amend Parts 73 and 74 to make changes to the LPFM and FM translator rules.

Specific items in the NPRM include:

  * Proposes to permit LPFM stations to use of composite directional
    patterns in addition to “off the shelf” patterns recognizing that
    some LPFM stations may need to use directional antennas to meet
    international agreements or to “relocate in areas with few available
    transmitter sites”.
  * The Commission proposes to eliminate all FM to TV channel 6
    protection requirements for all services (full-service, LPFM and FM
    translator) with a sunset date on July 13, 2021 and institute a
    waiver process for LPFM in the interim.  Currently all broadcast
    facilities on Channels 201~220 (88.1 to 91.9) must provide
    protection to channel 6 stations.  For LPFM, TV stations and LPTV
    stations were considered at their maximum facilities, which
    seriously impacted the availability of channels in the “reserved
    band” due to extreme distance separation requirements, especially
    where it comes to protecting LPTV stations.
  * The interim waiver process for LPFM to TV Channel 6 utilizes the
    contour overlap method used for FM translators outlined in
    §74.1205(c).  After the proposed sunset date on July 13, 2021, there
    will be no protection requirement by LPFM stations to TV Channel 6.
  * Extend minor changes past 5.6 km to any location where there would
    be an overlap of 1 mV/m (60 dBu) contours of the old location and
    the new location.  This would harmonize the LPFM rules with FM
    translators.  The 5.6 km distance will remain codified however
    applicants can use a contour study to extend past 5.6 km.  This, in
    a way, codifies in part, the/Vicksburg Community Radio/decision and
    eliminates the need for those wishing to move a reasonable distance
    beyond 5.6 km from having to request a waiver of §73.870(a).
  * Codify the use of FM boosters for LPFM stations (currently requires
    a waiver request, and so far, there have been 5 granted LPFM
    boosters with 2 on the air.  Four of those granted boosters were
    handled by REC Networks.)
  * Makes a minor alteration to §73.810 in respect to full-service third
    adjacent channel stations.

We do note that many of the issues raised by REC were rejected for the 
sake of simplicity or because of LCRA-related controversy.  This 
includes a “hybrid” concept to reduce the minimum distance separation 
from the LP-100 chart to the former LP-10 chart that was codified at the 
time the LCRA was enacted and then using a contour overlap model to 
protect full-service stations. This can be done within the statutory 
requirements of the LCRA.  The NPRM also rejected the option of using 
contour overlap instead of distance separation for the protection of FM 
translators and other LPFM stations as these stations do not have a 
statutory mandate for distance separation under the LCRA.

Most notably, the FCC did not address the highly supported increase in 
effective radiated power to 250 watts (7.1 km service contour) for LPFM 
stations citing the infighting that took place in the 2013/Sixth Report 
and Order/, by a group that was not actively involved in the support of 
existing LPFM stations despite their claim of being an “LPFM 
organization”.  The three major LPFM organizations that supported LP-250 
in any location where it could fit, REC Networks, Prometheus Radio 
Project and Common Frequency were overruled due to a Commission 
misconception that the rogue group actually represented the interests of 
current LPFM stations.

Commenting on the NPRM, REC founder Michelle Bradley states:

    /“Overall, the NPRM is a move in the right direction, but it does
    fall short to address the actual issues that LPFM stations are
    actually facing.  Despite the NPRM’s shortcomings, it was the
    product of many years of hard work, research, analysis, constituent
    surveys, station feedback and a boots on the ground effort in DC. 
    While REC is in Riverton, LPFM will have representation in
    Washington.  I thank my constituents for their trust and ongoing
    support, and I hope to see more new local stations in the next
    filing window. I will be working with the Commissioners, their staff
    and the Media Bureau to clarify some of the misunderstandings on
    these various issues.  Existing LPFM stations facing issues around
    interference, especially from translators and have no flexibility to
    move, despite the few changes proposed as well as potential new
    entrants who feel their community may be denied new service should
    contact me and tell me about their specific situations.  The fight
    is not over, and we can’t give up.”/

Based on the comments received in the docket, the FCC is expected to 
release a Report and Order with their decision on the final rules.  
Normally, a major rule change is “writing on the wall” for a future 
filing window.  REC still projects an LPFM filing window in 2022 or 
2023, but it may be sooner.

Finally, REC wants to remind readers that what was published today, July 
11, 2019 was only a draft.  This draft can change between now and the 
time the final version of the NPRM comes up for vote before the 
Commission (and after that, the Media Bureau will have editorial 
privilege). For now, we ask that any contact with decision making staff 
at the FCC be limited to those groups familiar with the/ex parte/process 
such as REC, Prometheus, Common Frequency and the LPFM Coalition.  
Individuals and stations will have an opportunity to speak up during the 
comment and reply comment period.  If you have any specific issues you 
would like to see conveyed to staff (that are in the scope of the NPRM 
and the original petition and comments that drove this NPRM), please let 
Michelle Bradley know.  Thank you for your understanding.

The draft of the NPRM (still subject to change) is available at the 
following URL:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-358438A1.pdf

The original filings made by REC that drove the items in this NPRM can 
be found at the following URLs:
https://recnet.net/fcc/lpfm2018prm.pdf
https://recnet.net/fcc/17-105.pdf

-- 
*Michelle A. Bradley, CBT*
/Amateur Radio: KU3N/
/Founder - REC Networks/ - *https://recnet.com*
*1-844-REC-LPFM* / +1 202 621-2355
SBE Certified