LPFM Draft NPRM Considered Noncontroversial
An NPRM on technical changes to low-power FM rules is considered noncontroversial. It doesn’t go as far as some LPFM stations would like, LPFM industry officials and broadcast attorneys who represent full-power stations said in interviews. Since the NPRM doesn’t tee up previously contentious proposals to increase LPFM power levels (see 1807230039), it's unlikely full-power broadcasters will be concerned with it, broadcast attorneys said. REC Networks founder Michelle Bradley said in posts on her website she wishes for more expansive rule changes but supports all the NPRM’s proposals.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
“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,” Bradley said. The NPRM stems from a petition from REC. “Some of it is good, some of it could be clarified,” said LPFM startup specialist Caitlin Reading in an interview.
Reading and Bradley said rule changes expanding LPFM options for directional antennas and making it easier for LPFM stations to use FM boosters are pluses for LPFM operators. Low-power advocates said it's possible full-power interests could oppose those changes out of concern about the FM band being too congested. That’s unlikely because full-power outlets aren’t generally concerned with technical issues within LPFM, and boosters only allow stations to fill in coverage gaps within their own contour, said Womble Bond radio attorney John Garziglia. Improving LPFM access to boosters is a “reasonable” change and unlikely to lead to a “stampede” of requests, Reading said. The NPRM’s description of “off the shelf” directional antennas needs clarification, Reading said.
The NPRM proposes more relaxation of channel 6 protections than expected, Brady said. The draft NPRM proposes sunsetting all requirements that FM stations protect TV stations using Channel 6 in 2021. “Big win on Channel 6!” Bradley said. Relaxing the channel 6 rules would be very helpful for low-powers that grapple with those issues, but that’s a relatively small portion of LPFM stations, Reading said.
Bradley believes the proposed updates here and an earlier proceeding on LPFM and noncommercial educational application rules indicates LPFM and NCE application windows are on the horizon. Bradley believes the LPFM window should take place after the sunset of channel 6 protection requirements proposed in the NPRM. “It would be in everyone's best interest” to do the NCE window in mid-2020, and the LPFM in mid-June 2021, she said.
Though based on a REC Networks petition, the NPRM doesn’t consider several of REC’s other requests that had been considered more controversial. It doesn’t propose allowing LPFM stations to raise their power levels, and doesn’t discuss relaxing separation rules for the outlets, Bradley said, saying the agency “punted” on those issues. Proposals to increase power levels would likely again have gotten opposition from full power broadcasters, radio attorneys said. “There would definitely be some contention,“ Bradley said. “As an advocate, I need to pick my battles and if I do pick them, how to time them."
Full-power stations would be able to use their primary status to override any legal interference that could come from LPFM broadcasters using directional antennas or boosters, said Donald Martin, a broadcast attorney with LPFM and full-power clients. Full-power broadcasters could be concerned about interference from LPFMs outsider their protected contour, Martin said. Expect the NPRM to be mostly noncontroversial, he said. "In practice, it's not a hot-button item."