379
edits
Third Report and Order: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|adopted = November 27, 2007 | |adopted = November 27, 2007 | ||
|released = December 11, 2007 | |released = December 11, 2007 | ||
|approve = Martin, Copps & Adelstein | |||
|approvepart = Tate & McDowell | |||
}} | }} | ||
This ''Report and Order'' was released 7 years into the LPFM service and to date, the FCC received 3,236 applications for new LPFM stations for which 1,286 have been granted and 809 stations are fully licensed and operating. At the same time, the Media Bureau was compelled to cancel 17 station licenses and 95 construction permits for failure by the holder to satisfy certain procedural and/or technical requirements. | This ''Report and Order'' was released 7 years into the LPFM service and to date, the FCC received 3,236 applications for new LPFM stations for which 1,286 have been granted and 809 stations are fully licensed and operating. At the same time, the Media Bureau was compelled to cancel 17 station licenses and 95 construction permits for failure by the holder to satisfy certain procedural and/or technical requirements. | ||
| Line 104: | Line 106: | ||
Commissioner [[Wikipedia:Jonathan Adelstein|Jonathan Adelstein]] reminisced when LPFM was first created that the critics were saying that there is no viable business model for such a localized medium while others argued that LPFM stations would undermine the economic stability of full-service FM stations and that time had revealed that neither statement was accurate; and referring to the LPFM service as "a great success story of communications policy". "Today, the Commission takes steps to reaffirm the non-commercial, local nature and orientation of LPFM stations, and to enhance opportunities for new voices to be heard on the radio dial. Additionally, the Commission finally recognizes the value of LPFM stations as a service that is worthy of some, albeit very limited, channel protection from full-power stations." The Commissioner was pleased that the FCC preserved the noncommercial local nature of LPFM stations by prohibiting most sales of licenses and outright ban any transfer or assignment of construction permits preventing a market for the sale of LPFM stations, which will help protect the local quality and service orientation that made LPFM thrive. The Commissioner was also pleased by the changes in the ownership rules, which could never happen in commercial radio. | Commissioner [[Wikipedia:Jonathan Adelstein|Jonathan Adelstein]] reminisced when LPFM was first created that the critics were saying that there is no viable business model for such a localized medium while others argued that LPFM stations would undermine the economic stability of full-service FM stations and that time had revealed that neither statement was accurate; and referring to the LPFM service as "a great success story of communications policy". "Today, the Commission takes steps to reaffirm the non-commercial, local nature and orientation of LPFM stations, and to enhance opportunities for new voices to be heard on the radio dial. Additionally, the Commission finally recognizes the value of LPFM stations as a service that is worthy of some, albeit very limited, channel protection from full-power stations." The Commissioner was pleased that the FCC preserved the noncommercial local nature of LPFM stations by prohibiting most sales of licenses and outright ban any transfer or assignment of construction permits preventing a market for the sale of LPFM stations, which will help protect the local quality and service orientation that made LPFM thrive. The Commissioner was also pleased by the changes in the ownership rules, which could never happen in commercial radio. | ||
Commissioner [[Wikipedia:Deborah Tate|Deborah Taylor Tate]], dissenting in part, stated that there should have been more input and further comment on the actions taken before taking some broad and expansive actions regarding the status and protections of both LPFM and primary services. She believed that the FCC should have taken a more rational basis for setting the standards for LPFM, perhaps using the minimum operating guidelines for the required hours of operation. For FM translators, she would have preferred a more measured approach rather than an 80% cut from 50 to 10. "[E]nhancing the status of Low Power FM licensees as compared to full power FM stations, or creating new status and protections, is beyond the scope of the NPRM and is more appropriately addressed in the Further Notice we are issuing today. Such a sweeping change by an agency should require further notice, consideration, and comment." "Therefore, I dissent from this Order’s finding of a ten application limit on translators, from the finding regarding second-adjacent channel waivers, and from the portion of this Order that places Low Power FM in a superior position to full power. I find no justification in the record for such a complete shift in well-established policy. Low Power FM licensees provide a great service to their communities, but they accept their license knowing that they are a secondary service, and accept both the risks and rewards that status entails." | |||
Commissioner [[Wikipedia:Robert M. McDowell|Robert McDowell]], dissenting in part, supported the rule changes involving ownership, eligibility, time-sharing and construction deadlines. "We hope that these actions will strengthen and promote the long-term viability of the LPFM service, and the localism and diversity goals that this service is intended to advance." He dissents on the decisions regarding the immediate enactment of second-adjacent channel waivers, calling the actions as premature. "Rather, we should abide by our duties under the Administrative Procedure Act to seek and consider public comment before crafting and implementing rules." Second, he objects to the amending the rules to establish a licensing presumption to protect certain operating LPFM stations from subsequently proposed city of license modifications where no alternate channels are available for the LPFM station. "Adopting this rule at this juncture is a radical departure from prior Commission precedent made without sufficient public notice." Lastly, he considers the application cap of 10 translator applications stating that the number is even lower than the numbers suggested by LPFM advocacy groups on the record. | |||
== Rule sections amended by this decision == | == Rule sections amended by this decision == | ||
* §[[73.809]] - Interference protection to full-service FM stations. | |||
* §[[73.853]] - Licensing requirements and service. | |||
* §[[73.855]] - Ownership limits. | |||
* §[[73.865]] - Assignment and transfer of LPFM licenses. | |||
* §[[73.870]] - Processing of LPFM broadcast station applications. | |||
* §[[73.871]] - Amendment of LPFM broadcast station applications. | |||
* §[[73.872]] - Selection procedure for mutually exclusive LPFM applications. | |||
* §73.3598 - Period of construction. | |||
== Petitions for Reconsideration filed and suspension of processing the "10-cap" dismissals == | |||
On March 4, 2008, the FCC released a ''Public Notice'' stating that several ''Petitions for Reconsideration'' were filed by: | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5514993163 Ace Radio Corporation, et al] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5514991170 CSN International] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5514993446 Educational Media Foundation] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5514993961 National Religious Broadcasters] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5514993445 Positive Alternative Radio, Inc.] | |||
Oppositions to the ''Petitions for Reconsideration'' were filed by: | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5515019335 Prometheus Radio Project] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/filing/5515019079 REC Networks] | |||
As a result of those ''Petitions for Reconsideration,'' the Media Bureau released a ''Public Notice'' on April 7, 2008 suspending the processing of the dismissals of translator applications exceeding the cap of 10 applications determined in this ''Report and Order.'' | |||
== Related links == | == Related links == | ||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/document/creation-low-power-radio-service-1 Third Report and Order and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at FCC.] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/document/petitions-reconsideration-action-rulemaking-proceeding-33 Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding at FCC.] | |||
* [https://www.fcc.gov/document/media-bureau-suspends-dismissal-fm-translator-applications-related Media Bureau Suspends Dismissal of FM Translator Applications Related to Processing Cap at FCC.] | |||
{{LpfmProceedings}} | {{LpfmProceedings}} | ||