379
edits
Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (view source)
Revision as of 14:37, 15 August 2022
, 2 years ago→Section 7(3) Regime - Meeting third-adjacent protection requirements
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
===== Section 7(3) Regime - Meeting third-adjacent protection requirements ===== | ===== Section 7(3) Regime - Meeting third-adjacent protection requirements ===== | ||
... | Section 7(3) of the LCRA required the FCC to modify §73.810 to require Section 7(3) Stations “to address interference complaints within the protected contour of an affected station” and encourage them to address all other interference complaints, including complaints “based on interference to a full-service FM station, an FM translator station or an FM booster station by the transmitter site of a low-power FM station on a third-adjacent channel at any distance from the full-service FM station, FM translator station or FM booster station.” The FCC tentatively concluded that Sections 7(2), (4) and (5) apply only to Section 7(3) Stations. | ||
Unlike Section 7(1), Section 7(3) did not specifically refer to §74.1203. The FCC requested comment on whether the more lenient interference protection obligations currently set forth in §73.810 should continue to apply to fully-spaced LPFM stations. They noted that, while Section 7(1) instructs the Commission to require Section 7(1) Stations “to provide” interference protections, Section 7(3) merely instructs the Commission to require Section 7(3) Stations “to address” complaints of interference. The FCC asked what must a Section 7(3) Station do to “address” a complaint of third-adjacent channel interference. The FCC observed that Section 7(3) requires the Commission to provide notice to the licensee of a Section 7(3) Station of the existence of interference within 7 calendar days of the receipt of a complaint from a listener or another station. They requested comment on whether to establish certain basic requirements for such complaints. For instance, should the FCC require copies of such complaints to be filed with the Audio Division; whether they require such complaints to specify the call sign of the LPFM and/or affected full-service FM, FM translator or FM booster station and whether the FCC should require the complainant to provide contact information. | |||
==== Periodic announcements ==== | ==== Periodic announcements ==== | ||
Section 7(2) requires that LPFM stations constructed on a third-adjacent channel make "periodic announcements" by LPFM stations to alert listeners that interference that they may be experiencing could be from the result of a an LPFM station on a third-adjacent channel and instructs listeners to contact the LPFM station of any interference complaints. The LPFM station shall notify the FCC and all affected stations on third-adjacent channels within 48 hours and to cooperate in addressing any such interference. | Section 7(2) requires that LPFM stations constructed on a third-adjacent channel make "periodic announcements" by LPFM stations to alert listeners that interference that they may be experiencing could be from the result of a an LPFM station on a third-adjacent channel and instructs listeners to contact the LPFM station of any interference complaints. The LPFM station shall notify the FCC and all affected stations on third-adjacent channels within 48 hours and to cooperate in addressing any such interference. These announcements must be broadcast for a period of one year after construction. The FCC requested comments on whether they should specify the language to be used in these announcements and, if so, what to specify and whether the FCC should mandate when and how often the announcements must be aired. The FCC noted that have done so with respect to other required announcements and that ensuring uniformity may reduce listener confusion and provide regulatory certainty by allowing LPFM stations to be confident that they have satisfied the requirements of Section 7(2). | ||
The FCC originally drew the conclusion that these announcements would apply to Section 7(3) stations (meeting the distance separation requirements), but also queried whether it should also apply to Section 7(1) stations not meeting distance separation. | The FCC originally drew the conclusion that these announcements would apply to Section 7(3) stations (meeting the distance separation requirements), but also queried whether it should also apply to Section 7(1) stations not meeting distance separation. | ||
==== Definition of a bona fide complaint ==== | |||
Section 7(5) of the LCRA expands the universe of interference complaints which Section 7(3) Stations must remediate. Section 7(5) states: | |||
''The Federal Communications Commission shall —(A) permit the submission of informal evidence of interference, including any engineering analysis that an affected station may commission; (B) accept complaints based on interference to a full-service FM station, FM translator station, or FM booster station by the transmitter site of a low-power FM station on a third-adjacent channel at any distance from the full-service FM station, FM translator station, or FM booster station; and (C) accept complaints of interference to mobile reception.'' | |||
The FCC requested comment on whether any of the four criteria set forth in §73.810(b)(1) of the rules remain relevant. They tentatively concluded that Section 7(5) requires them to delete Sections 73.810(b)(1) (bona fide complaint must allege interference caused by LPFM station that has its transmitter site located within the predicted 60 dBu contour of the affected station), (2) (bona fide complaint must be in form of affidavit and state the nature and location of the alleged interference) and (3) (bona fide complaint must involve a fixed receiver located within the 60 dBu contour of the affected station and not more than 1 kilometer from the LPFM transmitter site). They solicited comments on whether they should retain the remaining criterion, which requires a bona fide complaint to be received within one year of the date an LPFM station commenced broadcasts. | |||
==== Technical flexibility ==== | |||
Section 7(4) of the LCRA required the FCC, to the extent possible, to “grant low-power FM stations on third-adjacent channels the technical flexibility to remediate interference through the collocation of the transmission facilities of the low-power FM station and any stations on third-adjacent channels.” They noted that, per Section 3 of the LCRA, they are eliminating the third-adjacent channel spacing requirements set forth in §73.807. The FCC identified no other provision of our rules that would hinder their ability to offer the flexibility specified in Section 7(4) of the LCRA. Accordingly, they tentatively concluded that we need not modify or eliminate any other provisions of our rules to implement Section 7(4). | |||
==== The "New Jersey Rule" ==== | |||
LCRA Section 7(6) required the FCC to impose additional interference protection and remediation obligations on one class of LPFM stations. Specifically, Section 7(6) of the LCRA directs the FCC to create special interference protections for “full-service FM stations that are licensed in significantly populated States with more than 3,000,000 population and a population density greater than 1,000 people per square mile land area.” The obligations apply only to LPFM stations licensed after the enactment of the LCRA. Such stations must remediate actual interference to full-service FM stations licensed to the significantly populated states specified in Section 7(6) and “located on third-adjacent, second-adjacent, first-adjacent or co-channels” to the LPFM station and must do so under the interference and complaint procedures set forth in §74.1203 of the rules. However, Congress has created an outer limit to the interference protection obligations in Section 7(6). That outer limit is the co-channel spacing distance set forth in Section 73.807 of the rules for the affected full-service station's class. | |||
This statutory requirement is different than current policy. Today, if an LPFM station meets the spacing requirements, it is “not required to eliminate interference caused to existing FM stations.” With the enactment of LCRA, at least with respect to full-service FM stations licensed to the significantly populated states that meet the criteria set forth in Section 7(6), LPFM stations licensed after its effective date must remediate any actual interference that occurs. They noted that the Section 7(6) interference requirements are, with one exception, unambiguous. They requested comment on how to interpret the term – “States.” Only New Jersey and Puerto Rico satisfy the population and population density thresholds set forth in Section 7(6). This raises the question of whether Congress intended the term “States” to include the territories and possessions of the United States. | |||
=== FM Translator input signals complaint procedure === | === FM Translator input signals complaint procedure === | ||
Section 6 of the LCRA required the FCC to “modify its rules to address the potential for predicted interference to FM translator input signals on third-adjacent channels set forth in Section 2.7 of the technical report entitled ‘Experimental Measurements of the Third-Adjacent Channel Impacts of Low Power FM Stations, Volume One—Final Report (May 2003)’”, also known as the [[MITRE Report]].. Section 2.7 of the MITRE Report finds that significant interference to translator input signals does not occur for undesired/desired ratio values below 34 dB at the translator input. Section 2.7 sets out a formula that allows calculation of the minimum LPFM-to-translator separation that will ensure a undesired/desired ratio of 34 dB. | |||
The FCC currently requires LPFM stations to remediate actual interference to the input signal of an FM translator station but has not established any minimum distance separation requirements or other preventative measures. Based on the language of Section 6, which requires the FCC to “address the potential for predicted interference,” the FCC tentatively concluded that the existing requirements regarding remediation of actual interference must be recast as licensing rules designed to prevent any predicted interference. | |||
We propose to adopt a basic threshold test. This test is designed to closely track the interference standard developed by MITRE, without necessarily requiring LPFM applicants to obtain the receive antenna technical characteristics that are incorporated into the MITRE Formula. They proposed that any application for a new or modified LPFM station construction permit may not use a transmitter site within the “potential interference area” of any FM translator station that receives directly off-air, the signal of a third-adjacent channel FM station. For these purposes, the FCC defined the “potential interference area” to be any area within 2 km of the translator site or any area within 10 km of the translator site within the azimuths from -30 degrees to +30 degrees of the azimuth from the translator site to the site of the station being rebroadcast by the translator. For example, if the primary station is located at 280 degrees true (from the translator site), the LPFM station must not be within 10 km of the translator between the azimuths 250 to 310 degrees true (from the translator site), and must be at least 2 km from the translator tower site in all other directions. If an LPFM application proposes a transmitter site within the potential interference area and fails to include an exhibit demonstrating lack of interference to the off-air reception, the FCC would dismiss the application as defective. | |||
The FCC proposed two ways for an LPFM applicant within the potential interference area to show lack of interference to the input signal of a potentially affected translator. First, they proposed, as indicated in Section 2.7 of the MITRE Report, that LPFM applicants may show that the ratio of the signal strength of the LPFM (undesired) proposal to the signal strength of the FM (desired) station is below 34 dB at all locations. Second, they proposed to allow use of the equation provided in Section 2.7 of the MITRE Report to demonstrate lack of interference to the reception of the FM station at the translator transmitter site. Because the FCC does not authorize translator receive antenna locations, they propose to assume that the translator receive antenna is co-located with its associated translator transmit antenna. In addition, this equation would require the horizontal plane pattern of the translator’s receive antenna. This information is not typically available publicly or in the Consolidated Database System (“CDBS”). Therefore, the FCC proposed to allow the use of a “typical” pattern in situations where an LPFM applicant is not able to obtain information from the translator licensee, despite reasonable efforts to do so. | |||
As with similar situations involving dismissals for violation of interference protection requirements, the FCC proposed to permit LPFM applicants to seek reconsideration of a dismissal and reinstatement ''[[nunc pro tunc]]'' by demonstrating that their proposals will not cause any actual interference to the input signal of any FM translator station using either the ratio or the MITRE Formula. Furthermore, the FCC requested comment on whether this process should be applicable to only translators receiving FM station signals, or also include those that receive third-adjacent channel translator signals directly off-air. | |||
== Other LPFM rule changes proposed == | == Other LPFM rule changes proposed == | ||