FCC Petitioned by LPFM Over FM Interference Complaints

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

https://news.radio-online.com/articles/n37152/FCC-Petitioned-by-LPFM-Over-FM-Interference-Complaints

Today, the LPFM Coalition filed a Petition for Reconsideration to address FCC rulemaking that amends Part 74 of the rules regarding FM translator interference. Translators are unattended FM facilities licensed to broadcasters to 'repeat' an existing station on different frequencies. This FCC rulemaking threatens to change protections the public has long enjoyed, putting an individual's right to address interference caused by repeater stations at risk.

Currently, these designated repeater stations must respond to FCC complaints from any listener reporting that they harm reception to FM stations originating programming locally. If repeater station cannot fix the interference, they must shut down.

The new FCC rules would block millions of Americans from the right they now have to stop interference on the FM stations they prefer. The FCC rule change allows a single complaint from any one building. While those in single family homes can complain at will, those in multi-family and high rise buildings will lose individual rights. And, their individual voices will be ignored by the FCC.

Part 74 is specifically the one that is being addressed here

 

[Kelly A]

I don't see what the issue is here: Both LPFM and FM Translators are considered to be 'secondary services', which mean they have no protection from interference from either a full power station or another Translator/LPFM. I know there have been some LPFM operators who have whined about interference from translators or other LPFM's, but because those stations are on-par with the interfering station; the Commission has turned a deaf ear to their complaints.

 

[b-turner]

While you are correct both LPFM and translators are both secondary services, there are still rules in place to allow both services to co-exist without interference. Certainly reality is sometimes different from Langley Rice predicted coverage. I know of a couple of translator interference issues where the operator is overpowering many multiples their allowed 250 watt ERP (calibrated spectrum analyzers tend not to lie)and in another instance the bays were mounted incorrectly. In both cases the LPFM was reduced to a coverage area of less than half a mile. In one instance the translator was shut down. The other is still pending after more than a year.

In my mind LPFM and translators should not be equal as secondary services. I feel a class of station that can originate programming should have greater priority over a class of station that is relegated to only 30 seconds an hour for fundraising purposes.Yep there are some bad LPFMs out there but there are some bad full power stations too. Still a service that can be local is a different animal from repeating a distant station.

 

[Kelly A]

In my mind LPFM and translators should not be equal as secondary services. I feel a class of station that can originate programming should have greater priority over a class of station that is relegated to only 30 seconds an hour for fundraising purposes.Yep there are some bad LPFMs out there but there are some bad full power stations too. Still a service that can be local is a different animal from repeating a distant station.

LPFM's are considered the same 'Class' as a translator.

Other than obscenity rules, the Commission doesn't regulate programming. To your point: Are you saying an FM translator with local AM programming would have less priority than an LPFM? Yeah, that wouldn't go over well with a lot of AM stations with FM translators.

 

[b-turner]

Yes I'm aware LPFMs are equal in class to translators. The FCC does regulate programming to the extent a translator must repeat the broadcast of it's host station (the exception being the daytime only AM can be 24/7 on the FM translator). LPFM is not available on AM. An FM translator's programming is (at least during the day if the translator repeats an AM daytimer). My point is a service that originates programming, in my opinion,is not equal to a service that does not. AMs are not the only translators. In fact, most are distant stations or satellitors that do no local programming whatsoever for the area served. Needless to say, both LPFM and translators should not be causing interference to one another. By design they do not but there are some that over-power or are not built out to FCC approved specs.

My last job was managing an AM daytimer in a top 10 market for over a quarter of a century (jeez I'm getting old). I understand the value of that translator. I'm just saying LPFM is an apple and the translator is an orange. They are not the same but by FCC Rules are treated as the same. I don't think that is right. I'll never change the FCC's mind but that's my opinion.