This morning, the full Federal Communications Commission has voted unanimously to promote a further notice of proposed rulemaking (FNPRM) that will:
• Recognize that the “10-cap” (limiting translator applicants to 10 pending applications) process is not consistent with the LCRA.
• Look at three possible handling methods giving preference to a “market specific” approach proposing “channel floors” for the top 150 markets and proposes to dismiss translators in markets where the number of LPFM channels available is below the channel floor.
• Would allow more translator applications than the “10-cap” approach and allow the immediate licensing of translator stations in rural areas.
• For LPFM, it would preserve opportunities in urban areas where spectrum is most scarce.
• Propose to take actions to prevent the further trafficking of translator construction permits.
• Recognizes the impacts of the Great Translator Invasion (Auction 83 window).
• Express concerns about a “handful of filers” who filed hundreds of translator applications for the sole purpose of selling them.
• Look at expanding the use of translator stations for AM. Should Auction 83 translators be allowed to rebroadcast AM?
REC looks forward to the opportunity to trigger discussion on this NPRM. We are concerned that a “market based” approach would be unfair to markets that have a large amount of land mass as those areas could be taken into consideration as having LPFM availability while continuing to disadvantage the metropolitan areas. We continue to feel that a location centric model, such as our 2x70 concept or another model that uses population coverage instead of county/market boundaries would better fairly distribute frequencies for LPFM while continuing to make them available for translators.
The FCC proposes “channel floors” for the top 150 markets. Earlier this year, REC has determined that in these top 150 markets, only 13 have availability for a two or more LP-100 channels for at least 50% of the market’s population. 46 in markets 151 through 250 have similar availability and in 22 of the lowest markets 251 through 290. Using a market based approach, the FCC continues to preclude smaller markets from LPFM opportunities based solely on which county the station is located in. We feel that an individual case basis, such as proposed under 2x70 would better manage these smaller markets.
REC commends the Media Bureau for addressing, once and for all, the behavior of a small group of filers in the 2003 “Auction 83” FM Translator Window in what REC coined then as the “Great Translator Invasion”. It was relieving to us to hear the FCC staff state on record their concern over the speculative practices that took place in that filing window. We look forward to reviewing the FCC’s proposed methods for addressing the trafficking of FM translator construction permits.
REC remains deeply concerned about the expansion of the use of translators for the rebroadcast of AM stations, especially in medium and larger markets and especially when the AM station is co-owned by a full power FM station. We feel that in the case of co-owned AM stations, an FM station should not be allowed to use a translator to provide nighttime service for their AM but instead to use one of their HD Radio streams to provide full time AM service to their FM IBOC service area. AM stations that are not co-located are more likely to be owned by groups representing women, GLBT, transsexual/intersex, minorities and people of color. We must keep opportunities open for these non-co-owned AM stations to maintain their nighttime service with minimal impacts to new LPFM voices.
The FCC is devising a solution to an 8-year old issue. We hope the general public reviews the entire proposal and provides constructive commentary in the record.
REC will be developing changes to our applications and reports once the NPRM is released.
REC Networks - media contact: Michi Eyre – mae@recnet.com
