LPFM Needs your input!
Comments Due by May 7th, 2012 

File your comments for the current LPFM proceeding 99-25.  This comment filing opportunity will close on May 7th with reply comments due by May 21st, so please do not procrastinate.  Your comments will help shape the new LPFM service.  Your comments and data are not retained by this system and are transferred directly into the FCC's ECFS system instantly when you press submit.

Some key points  and items the FCC is  considering that you may want to comment on:

• Upgrade service to 250 watts for new and existing LPFM Stations
• Consideration of a waiver system to allow second adjacent waiver filings 
  where a fully spaced LPFM is not available.
• Removal of LP-10 CLass - replacing with LP-250 Class
• Removal of I .F.  Channel Minimum Distance Separation Requirements
• Requirement Tha t  Applicant Be Community-Based
• Eligibility of  Native Nations
• Cross-Ownership (LPFM stations / Translator Stations)
• Multiple Ownership (For native nations)
• Various changes to the Point System  & Eligibility 
• Third-Adjacent Channel Interference Complaints and Remediation
• LPFM Interference Protection and Remediation Requirements
• Procedures for handling interference to translators by LPFM

and supporters like you. The FCC will be releasing its final rules to preserve channels for community radio in urban areas, as well as new proposed rules that will shape the future of the Low Power FM (LPFM) radio service. Those new LPFM rules should be codified later this year at which time the FCC will be announce an application filing window, when groups can apply for new LPFM radio stations.

'Austin Airwaves Predicts 10,000 Applicants'

The Audio Division of the Federal Communications Commission confirmed to Austin Airwaves on January 20^th that the Commission is “shooting for the Fall” for the opening of the highly-anticipated ‘window’ for applications for new Low Power FM (LPFM) educational radio stations. The previously-reliable government source asked not to be named. Another source outside the Commission, long familiar with the LPFM issue, stated she thought that the FCC wanted to get “the ‘process rolling’ before the presidential election."

Austin Airwaves predicts that nationwide there will be as many as ten thousand applications for the new LPFM licenses.

When asked if he felt this number was a good guestimate, the FCC source said, “We never know what a particular demand will be until we open a window. We have stopped conjecturing about how many applications there may be. It depends in part on supply and demand, availability of spectrum in major markets. There are “mysterious, serendipitous aspects to it.” The “new second adjacent rules” contained within the Local Community Radio Act (LCRA) “certainly has opened up more channels.”

Noting past incidences when the FCC’s servers have crashed under the load of hundreds of applications, Austin Airwaves asked if the “FCC servers are up for the job.”  “Absolutely! But,  “Nobody should be filing in the last 15 minutes of the very last night” of the application process. “But will some people do that? Oh yeah, absolutely!” , “I’m not sure of the capacity of the FCC servers. They have had problems in the past. We support having multiple windows for different regions of the country because of the limited number of engineers and lawyers who are qualified to help organizations apply. Breaking up the windows makes it easier for everyone to have access to them.  Regardless of whether or not the FCC will have multiple windows, groups should waste no time in preparing to apply for a construction permit”

Many engineering firms and LPFM advocacies such as Nexus Broadcast are gearing up for an application window before the presidential election this year. We are helping groups prepare to apply during a potential five day window, most likely in September or October.”

Clear the Way For LPFM, Here we Come!

 “I could see anywhere from five to ten thousand applications submitted nationally.” The FCC’s Proposed Rule Making (PRM) regarding translators is expected later this month. It will finally resolve the questions as to what to do with thousands of translator applications remaining from the 2003 application window. Translators are low power FM stations that carry an existing station’s signal into other areas. They operate on the same frequencies as LPFMs. Community radio groups have been advocating protecting these frequencies for local, community and minority applicants, especially in larger markets. Depending on the number of frequencies made available after the PRM, “a significant number of frequencies could be made available, especially in major markets.”

After a decade of effort by community radio advocates, the Local Community Radio Act (LCRA) was passed by Congress on December 20^th, 2010 and signed into law by President Obama on January 5^th, 2011. With only days to go before the end of the session, Austin Airwaves played a key role in the lifting of the so-called “secret hold” in the Senate. Once the hold was lifted, the full Senate voted on the LCRA, passing it by a wide margin. Advocates for the LCRA fought years of strident opposition from National Public Radio and the National Association of Broadcasters.

At the National Conference for Media Reform in Boston, Congressman Mike Doyle (D-PA) praised the years of work by LPFM advocates.

Reprinted from Radio-Guide Magazine of which our founder is a regular contributer.  Leo Ashcraft is CEO of Nexus Broadcast “Broadcast Outside The Box!”.  He is a broadcast consultant with over 28 years engineering experience and an avid LPFM advocate for over 15 years.  More information at NexusBroadcast.com or 888-732-3599  Free subscription at http://radio-guide.com

We previously provided an overview of the Local Community Radio Act of 2010 (LCRA), and the rule changes that the law requires the FCC to make in response. Changes to the level of protection that LPFM stations must provide to full-service FM stations and FM translators were discussed, along with ambiguous language relating to the establishment of priority of LPFM stations in relation to pending FM translator applications are awaiting resolution through a rulemaking proceeding.

The Local Community Radio Act, signed by President Obama last year, repealed restrictions on low-power FM stations, or LPFMs. The law required the FCC to study whether additional community stations hurt large stations.

Recently The Commission concluded the economic impact study, indicating whether LPFM stations will economically impact full-service FM stations. While LPFM stations are noncommercial, the FCC noted, through the underwriting and sponsorship of programs, revenue that may have previously been directed to full-service FM stations in the market may be redirected to LPFM stations. The report released found LPFM radio stations do not impact the ratings or revenue of commercial stations.  Surprisingly was the study indicated the LPFM stations may actually help the effected commercial stations overall revenue.

 "Our final conclusion is that the analysis finds no statistically reliable evidence that LPFM stations have a consistent effect on the economic performance of full-service commercial FM stations,"

That is the conclusion of a 106-page report that has been submitted to the US Congress. The study found no statistically significant ratings impact from LPFMs in most cases, and where there was impact, the amount was insignificant.  Additionally the report showed very little if any impact on revenues.  In fact parts of the study indicated the full power station actually increased revenues where an LPFM was added to its coverage area.  The only significant decline in revenues was found where LPFMs duplicated commercial formats were in religious station revenues. The FCC stated the difference was caused by "spurious correlation," with the study unable to account for factors other than the LPFM.

Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), who sponsored the Local Community Radio Act said;  "The study confirmed the widespread belief that LPFMs don’t cause economic harm or interference to other stations," "In fact, if you talk to the folks in the regions that already have LPFM stations, they say LPFMs have had a very positive impact. They provide programs that reflect and enrich local cultures.

From compiled information in its own as well as a commercial database, the Commission found that LPFM stations serve primarily small and rural markets and have geographic and population reaches that are magnitudes smaller than those of full-service commercial FM stations.

The study observed eight LPFM stations to provide a snapshot of LPFM’s overall effect.  Even though  the stations differed considerably in its individual programming and operation, the results of the case studies show that the LPFM stations generally broadcast a wide variety of programming, operate with very small budgets, rely on part-time and volunteer staff, do not have measurable ratings, have limited population reach, and do not generate significant underwriting earnings.  Most of the station operators said that their LPFM station is not competing directly for listeners of full-service stations.

The FCC said that the Act did not specifically require a study of the economic impact of interference and, since the principal purpose of the Act was to determine how the FCC should deal with interference remediation, Congress had already addressed all that needed to be considered about any potential interference.  The inclusion in previous legislation of a specific directive to study interference, which led to the report from the MITRE Corporation, further supported this.  The MITRE report concluded that there would be no substantial interference from LPFM to full-power stations, which opened the door to the passage of the Act.  Considering this, the Commission reached the conclusion that no additional study of the economic impact of LPFM was necessary

This clears the way for the Commission to put in place new LPFM rules and subsequently open a new LPFM filing window later this year.  Previously the FCC has unofficially stated a Summer 2012 filing window possibility.  This would be the second filing opportunity for new LPFM stations nationwide. Stay tuned to Radio-Guide as we watch and report further LPFM 2.0 developments this year.

Re-printed from Radio-Guide Magazine.  Leo Ashcraft is CEO of Nexus Broadcast.  He is a broadcast consultant with over 20 years engineering experience and an avid LPFM advocate.  More information at NexusBroadcast.com or 888-732-3599

Phone: 888-732-3599

Phone: 321-300-LPFM

Nexus Broadcast LLC - Colorado
3107 W. Colorado Ave #283
Colorado Springs CO 80904

Phone: 888-732-3599

Phone: 321-300-LPFM

202-459-4789 FAX for all Facilities

Leo Ashcraft
Engineering Chief

888-732-3599 Ext 307

Click to Email

NOTE: We are not a retail service company. Appointment required for access to secure facility.

Audio Division Chief Peter Doyle said, "We've done extensive market-by-market analysis" about where new low-power stations could be allocated. The protection changes will "provide meaningful opportunities for LPFMs" even in large markets, he told attendees of "The FCC And You" session at the NAB Show in Las Vegas.

Some parties argued the cap is ineffective to provide spectrum relief in the largest markets, and unnecessary in the smaller markets where's there's ample spectrum for both LPFMs and translators, Doyle said . He added that if the FCC agrees, "It means we'll have to go back to the drawing board and think about a translator processing policy that does a better job of ensuring that licenses will be available in the largest markets."

Asked after the session by Radio World when the LPFM rulemaking could be completed, Doyle said the item "is deep into the process" and he hopes its ready "in weeks, not months."

It sounds like the commission is rethinking its proposed FM translator cap for frozen translator applications, previously announced in anticipation of opening a new LPFM application window.

If Nexus Broadcast has provided satisfactory service to your organization - please let others know - fill out the quick form located here.  Thanks!

Top qualities: Great Results, Expert, High Integrity

Frank Patterson,  
hired Leo as a Broadcasting Eng. in 2001, and hired Leo more than once

Low Power FM Broadcast Radio Stations

This page contains information about the Low Power FM (LPFM) radio service, which was created by the Commission in January 2000. These stations are authorized for noncommercial educational broadcasting only (no commercial operation) and operate with an effective radiated power (ERP) of 100 watts (0.1 kilowatts) or less, with maximum facilities of 100 watts ERP at 30 meters (100 feet) antenna height above average terrain (HAAT). The approximate service range of a 100 watt LPFM station is 5.6 kilometers (3.5 miles radius). LPFM stations are not protected from interference that may be received from other classes of FM stations. A construction permit is required before a LPFM station can be constructed or operated.

LPFM stations are available to noncommercial educational entities and public safety and transportation organizations, but are not available to individuals or for commercial operations. Current broadcast licensees with interests in other media (broadcast or newspapers) are not eligible to obtain LPFM stations.

LPFM stations must protect authorized radio broadcast stations on the same channel or frequency (cochannel), as well as broadcast stations on first, second, or third-adjacent channels above or below the LPFM station's frequency. This protection is accomplished through the use of minimum distance separation requirements, which are set forth in 47 CFR 73.807 [PDF].

Items under this heading will be added or updated as needed. Check here for new or updated information.

October 1, 2003

NOTICE: We cannot advise as to when the next application filing window might be. Future window filing dates will be posted here, and announced by Public Notice.

Conflicting LPFM Applications. Where one LPFM application does not meet the spacing requirements in 47 CFR 73.807 to another LPFM application, those applications are "mutually exclusive" in that both applications cannot be granted if interference is to be avoided. Mutually exclusive applications can occur with all the applications clustered together, or can take the form of a chain in which the end applications are linked through intermediate proposals.

These mutually exclusive situations will be resolved through the application of a point system. Points are awarded for (1) the organization's presence in the community for at least two years, (2) a commitment to broadcast at least 12 hours per day, and (3) a commitment to provide at least 8 hours of locally originated programming each day. The applicant with the most points will be awarded the construction permit.

If there is a tie after the points are tallied, the competing applicants will be encouraged to share a license. Those competing applicants resubmitting their applications together will be permitted to aggregate their points. For example, three applicants tied with three points each would be given a total of nine points upon resubmission. This aggregated group of applicants with nine points would be awarded the construction permit over a single applicant with three points.

If the tied applicants cannot agree to share a license, the FCC will divide equally an eight year non-renewable license term among the applicants. For example, if there are four tied applicants, each will receive a two year, non renewable license term. The first license term will be awarded to the first to complete construction of its facilities pursuant to its construction permit.

if there are more than eight tied applicants, the FCC will divide the eight year term among those applicants receiving a point for established community presence. If there are more than eight such applicants, the FCC will award one year, non-renewable license terms to the eight entities with the longest community presence.

For details on the point system, please see the Report and Order in MM Docket 99-25.

In general, the rule sections of interest to LPFM applicants, permittees, and licensees are contained in 47 CFR Part 73, Subpart L (the Section 73.800 series). Related rule sections in different subparts of Part 73 are listed in 47 CFR 73.801.

Rule sections pertaining to LPFM stations are listed at http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/amfmrule.html#LPFM. Up to 3 individual rule sections at a time may be retrieved. Please be aware that selecting more than three rule sections at a time may result in a "server error" message from the Government Printing Office's server.

All Comments, Pleadings, and Orders in MM Docket 99-25 may be retrieved through the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS).

To find documents containing a specific application file number, such as the Broadcast Actions and Broadcast Applications Public Notices, enter the right-hand side of the file number into the FCC's Word Search engine. For example, for file number BNPL-20000602AFI enter 20000602AFI and submit. NOTE: The results may not include PDF documents that contain this number.

August 24, 2005

August 3, 2005

July 5, 2005

May 27, 2005

March 17, 2005

February 2, 2005

January 24, 2005

February 19, 2004

January 28, 2004

November 7, 2003

October 1, 2003

August 28, 2003

July 11, 2003

April 17, 2003

March 17, 2003

February 13, 2003

October 16, 2002

September 19, 2002

September 9, 2002

Media Bureau to Open Low Power FM Major Amendment Window from October 28 through November 1, 2002 for Certain Pending New Station Applications, Public Notice, DA 02-2178, released September 9, 2002 [ PDF | Word | Text ].

September 6, 2002

May 23, 2002

March 11, 2002

February 8, 2002

August 16, 2001

July 10, 2001

April 2001

April 10, 2001

April 2, 2001

April 2, 2001

December 21, 2000

December 15, 2000

September 28, 2000

September 22, 2000

September 15, 2000

September 15, 2000

• Broadcast Applications Public Notice Containing List of LPFM Applications Received, in the second filing window, released September 15, 2000.

July 28, 2000

Low Power FM Filing Window [August 28 - September 1, 2000], Public Notice, DA 00-1697, released July 28, 2000. [ PDF | Word | Text ].

June 21, 2000

June 5, 2000
Low Power FM Application Filing Window Deadline Extended [Through June 8, 2000], Public Notice, DA 00-1263, released June 5, 2000 (MS Word 97 only). Extension provided due to difficulties with electronic filing. (Note: Do not expect any similar extension for later LPFM windows.)

May 26, 2000

April 28, 2000

April 28, 2000

January 27, 2000

• Appendix A (Low Power FM Service Rules)
• Appendix B
• Appendix C (Commissioners' separate statements)
• Errata released February 20, 2000 (MS Word 97 version).
• Statements:  [ Kennard | Ness | Furchtgott-Roth | Powell | Tristani ]

March 29, 2000

STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MICHAEL J. COPPS LAUDING THE SIGNING OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY RADIO ACT

I have been waiting for this day for a long, long time!  Enactment of the Local Community Radio Act gives local radio stations, grassroots media, and consumers nationwide genuine cause to celebrate.  Thanks to this legislation, more than 160 million people underserved by local power FM will be able to reap the benefits of these stations.  This means potentially many new opportunities for local and independent broadcasters to provide truly local and independent programming—and to be heard.

In this day of way-too-much media consolidation, stifling program homogenization, and the decimation of local news, new voices are critically important to sustaining America’s civic dialogue and citizen engagement.

It has taken real leadership to get this done.  I would like especially to thank Reps. Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Lee Terry (R-NE) for sponsoring this Bill and working so effectively for its House passage.  On the Senate side, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) offered bipartisan leadership on this issue.  Of course the leadership of the House and Senate Commerce committees under Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) was also key to this successful outcome.

How fitting that, as we begin the new year, we can turn the page on years of waiting to celebrate a victory for independent media voices and consumers nationwide.

Well now, this explains a few things.  Always interested in carrying science forward, I read with interest the article on Gawker which cites a study from McGill University in Montreal, Canada.  The gist of the article states that we seek out music we enjoy because of a chemical reaction in our brains:

Ever had goosebumps or felt euphoric chills when listening to a piece of music? If so, your brain is reacting to the music in the same way as it would to some delicious food or a psychoactive drug such as cocaine, according to scientists.

The experience of pleasure is mediated in all these situations by the release of the brain's reward chemical, dopamine, according to results of experiments carried out by a team led by Valorie Salimpoor of McGill University in Montreal, Canada, which are published today in Nature Neuroscience.

Music seems to tap into the circuitry in the brain that has evolved to drive human motivation – any time we do something our brains want us to do again, dopamine is released into these circuits. "Now we're showing that this ancient reward system that's involved in biologically adaptive behaviours is being tapped into by a cognitive reward," said Salimpoor.

If music-induced emotional states can lead to dopamine release, as our findings indicate, it may begin to explain why musical experiences are so valued. These results further speak to why music can be effectively used in rituals, marketing or film to manipulate hedonistic states. Our findings provide neurochemical evidence that intense emotional responses to music involve ancient reward circuitry and serve as a starting point for more detailed investigations of the biological substrates that underlie abstract forms of pleasure.

By extension, radio has previously been the venue for most new music discovery.  Although this continues today, it is being supplanted by “new media” sources such as youtube.  As a point of reference, studies on cocaine addiction show that dopamine levels increase by about 22% during use.  When a listener is exposed to what is perceived as good music (a subjective term), average dopamine levels increased by about 21%.

A team of scientists have published the results of a research project today which ties good music and feelings of euphoria together. For instance, did you know that listening to Samuel Barber's "Adagio for Strings" will get you so high?

In the experiment, participants chose instrumental pieces of music that gave them goosebumps, but which had no specific memories attached to them. Lyrics were banned because the researchers did not want their results confounded by any associations participants might have had to the words they heard.

The pieces chosen ranged from classical to rock, punk and electronic dance music. "One piece of music kept coming up for different people – Barber's Adagio for Strings," said Salimpoor. It was the favorite classical piece and a remix of the tune was the most popular in the dance, trance and techno genres.

As the participants listened to their music, Salimpoor's team measured a range of physiological factors including heart rate and increases in respiration and sweating. She found that the participants had a 6-9% relative increase in their dopamine levels when compared with a control condition in which the participants listened to each other's choices of music. "One person experienced a 21% increase. That demonstrates that, for some people, it can be really intensely pleasurable," she said.

In previous studies with psychoactive drugs such as cocaine, Salimpoor said relative dopamine increases in the brain had been above 22%, while a relative increase of up to 6% was experienced when eating pleasurable meals.

The team of scientists from McGill University in Montreal, led by Valorie Salimpoor, published the results today in Nature Neuroscience. The study claims that hearing good music, or even eating good food, can trigger feelings of euphoria that your brain wants to feel again. Dopamine is released into your "brain circuits" to make you fiend like a crackhead for those sweet, sweet tunes you like. According to Salimpoor:

Okay, that makes enough sense (sort of). However, don't know about you, but hearing "Adagio for Strings" (not a techno version) makes me think of the part in Platoon where Charlie Sheen heads off on a chopper, crying — not a night out with an eight ball of coke and nothing to lose. Just saying.

Published in Current, Jan. 10, 2011
By Karen Everhart

Low-power FM advocates are celebrating a hard-won victory with enactment of the Local Community Radio Act, approved in the last days of the 111th Congress and signed Jan. 4 by President Obama.

The law clears the way for expansion of low-power FM stations, a noncommercial licensing category established by the FCC a decade ago but confined to small markets and rural communities by interference-protection rules demanded by full-power broadcasters. Their transmitter power is limited to 100 watts, reaching from three to five miles.

Approved with bipartisan support in both houses of Congress, the law gives the FCC more flexibility in assigning channels to LPFMs and resolving interference problems with full-power FMs and their translators.

“The thing that people really feel is really a ton of joy,” says Hannah Sassaman, a longtime organizer for Prometheus Radio Project, a Philadelphia-based group that led a spirited, broad-based and tenacious grassroots campaign to get the bill moving through Congress. “Now there’s going to be thousands of opportunities to license LPFMs in cities and towns.”

Advocates predict as many as 1000 LPFMs could sign on, although the FCC has many issues to resolve before anyone knows how many channels will be available.

“There’s about 800 stations now, and this could at least double that,” said Cheryl Leanza, a longtime advocate for the microstations who now represents the National Federation of Community Broadcasters. “This will vastly expand the number of listeners LPFMs are able to reach, because it allows stations to be licensed in the top 50 markets.”

Anti-interference mileage restrictions that have limited LPFM licensing — the so-called third-adjacent-channel protections — will be eased when the bill takes effect, and the FCC is authorized to assess potential interference with topographic contour-mapping instead of simple mileage between stations on the same or adjacent frequencies.

“The contour method is very good at predicting interference,” said Brandy Doyle, regulatory policy director for Prometheus. “It’s a modern method for licensing stations in all services, and the legislation authorized it for LPFMs.”

“The reality of spectrum availability is that the contour method is the only realistic way that signals will become available,” said Leanza.

Found senators’ secret “holds”

NPR opposed earlier actions to expand LPFM on behalf of member stations, but dropped out of the fight after successfully lobbying for provisions in the House bill approved in December 2009. Commercial radio continued its opposition until it was the last lobby standing against it.

The Local Community Radio Act languished in the Senate for most of last year. With former Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith as president of the National Association of Broadcasters, the trade group persuaded a series of senators to place secret holds on the bill. Prometheus orchestrated a tireless lobbying campaign to ferret out lawmakers blocking the legislation.

“Every time there was a hold, activists would call every single Senate office,” Sassaman said.  “Seventy-five percent of the Senate would say, ‘We’re not blocking it.’”

Senators who didn’t respond would hear from constituents who supported the bill, drawn from a diverse grassroots coalition including religious organizations, media reformers and social justice groups.

A Dec. 13 rally outside NAB headquarters in Washington, D.C., was a photo-friendly high point for the campaign. Activists wearing colorful wigs and costumes swung hula hoops and shouted, “Stop making us jump through hoops! Support low-power FM radio and the Local Community Radio Act!” The spectacle was covered by national and Washington-insider media; NAB shortly dropped its opposition and negotiated a compromise.

The law places the burden of resolving interference problems on low-power stations, and explicitly states that full-power stations are higher priority than LPFMs in the pecking order of FM broadcasters. The law decrees equal ranks for LPFMs and FM translators of full-power stations, but the FCC must work out new rules to resolve interference problems between these two classes of stations.

“We’ve accepted these obligations because we think interference is unlikely, and we’re committed to working with full-power stations and the FCC to resolve them in ways that don’t result in taking stations off the air,” Doyle said.

Special provisions protecting radio reading services that air on subcarriers of full-power stations, secured by NPR in the House bill, are now written into law.

After President Obama signed the Local Community Radio Act into law, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski described it as “a big win for radio listeners.”

“Low-power FM stations are small, but they make a giant contribution to local community programming,” Genachowski said. “The FCC will take swift action to open the dial to new low-power radio stations and the valuable local service they provide.”

Primary sponsors of the legislation were Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.).

By DJ Pangburn, Death + Taxes Magazine

The  Local Community Radio Act was signed into law by President Obama this past Wednesday.

The act had its origins during the Bush administration when MAIN-FM, a local radio station in Ashville, NC, went on the air as WPVM “The Progressive Voice of the Mountains” with only 2 watts of signal power when their license granted them 100 watts.  The FCC restriction was the result of the lobbying efforts of various commercial broadcasters to restrict the signals of local broadcasters.

The victory was the result of a long battle by a coalition of media reformers.  One of the organizations involved, Media & Democracy Coalition, had this to say of the Act being signed into law:

“After years of well-executed strategy the Prometheus Radio Project, OC Inc at the United Church of Christ, the Media Access Project, the Future of Music Coalition, Free Press, the Media & Democracy Coalition, and many other public interest organizations can share in the pride that many more low-power FM radio licenses will be available for communities across the country. This is a great achievement for local, independent media and will help to create a more diverse radio dial.”

What most Americans are unaware of in history of the radio wars is that much of this can be traced directly back to Bill Clinton’s crowning corporate achievement of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.  Americans were told that the legislation would create greater competition in the radio and television industries.  What the 1996 Act did, however, was create a situation in which various corporations were able to buy up and consolidate radio and television stations, thus forming gigantic media conglomerates.

Clear Channel Communications, for instance, used the Act as a pretext for purchasing hundreds of radio stations across the United States, which resulted in bad music, more ads and non-controversial content and radio personalities.  Clear Channel now owns over 1200 radio stations, and operates—according State of the Media statistics—at least one station in each of the top 25 markets.

And while Clear Channel is clearly the biggest, it is not the only conglomerate at work in radio.  The shadows of corporations like Infinity Broadcasting, Cumulus Media, Citadel Communications, Entercom Communications and American Family Association stretch across the American radio landscape, creating something like an approximation of Mike Judge’s “Idiocracy.”

In short, the result of this sort of consolidation is that radio stations have been allowed to exercise much less editorial independence for fear of incurring the wrath of advertisers or the government.

And while it is pleasant to see President Obama take a break from his transmogrification from human being into corporate and banking automaton, it almost seems as if the Local Community Radio Act is a piece of subliminal government and business cynicism.

How, you might ask?  Well, in the wake of the Net Neutrality fiasco, it seems as though the scraps of radio have been thrown back to its rightful owners with the hidden message, “Have the radio, we’ve got the internet now, suckers.”

And so the mission is two-fold now: build another internet and start broadcasting on the low FM frequencies.  Provoke.  Antagonize.  Make Obama wish he hadn’t signed the bill into law by criticizing moves such as the appointment of his new Chief of Staff William Daley, son of the Chicago political machine and current JP Morgan Chase executive, whose crowning achievement was NAFTA.  Turn Obama’s signing of the bill against him in a bit of sweet irony.

People still value the radio, as was revealed when Clear Channel napalmed Los Angeles’ Indie 103.1 (on which you could listen to a show hosted by Jonesy from the Sex Pistols, for instance).  Many listen to local public radio stations and NPR.  And though internet occupies more of our time these days, people still listen to the radio.

Agitate on the low frequencies, my friends.

On Tuesday, January 04, 2011, the  President signed into law:  H.R. 6533, the  Local Community Radio Act of 2010, which modifies current restrictions on low-power FM radio stations.  This will make room on the radio spectrum for thousands of smaller, community-based radio stations.

The provisions were in place to prevent interference, and largely isolated low-power FM stations to rural areas where airwaves were less congested Prior to this act, low-power radio stations were only allowed to occupy frequencies within four dial positions of a full power radio station, officially called fourth-adjacent frequencies. Community radio advocates such as the Prometheus Radio Project said that placed too much of a restriction on the spectrum, and that more frequencies could be opened without interference issues.

The new act allows low-power stations on third-adjacent frequencies, or within three frequencies of a full power station. The two sides reached a compromise over language, and on Dec. 17, the NAB sent a letter of support to members of the House Energy and Commerce committee.

The NAB also issued a statement in support of the measure Dec. 17 after the House passed its version of the act.

Director of strategic planning at Prometheus Radio,Danielle Chynoweth, said that she anticipates that the act will allow low-power FM stations to open in urban areas such as Washington, D.C., where the spectrum had been deemed too crowded under the old rules.

Today is just the start of the process to bring more community radio stations to the air. There is a lot of work yet to be done, not the least of which is on the part of the FCC, which will now determine the rules of the next application window. The  Commission must  resolve pending translator applications which could use up a lot of frequencies that otherwise are appropriate for LPFM stations under the provisions of this new law. Speculation is that the translator processing will be put on hold until after an LPFM window can be processed.

Read more...

By Halimah Marcus and Jonathan Lawson
Special to The Seattle Times

PEOPLE are sometimes surprised when Jeff Hoyt tells them his Vashon Island community organization has waited 10 years to start a radio station. Radio? What about podcasts, what about the Internet?

"We viewed starting an Internet station as strapping on a life preserver and treading water until we could get a low-power FM radio station," said Hoyt.

Hoyt's group, Voice of Vashon, runs a locally focused Web radio stream, as well as a tiny microtransmitter offering travel information to car passengers waiting at the island's ferry dock. The past decade has been something of a waiting game for Voice of Vashon. When the Federal Communications Commission first distributed low-power FM (LPFM) licenses in 2000, Hoyt was one of thousands who applied. However, like many others, the Vashon application was thrown out on a technicality.

From: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/avantgo/2012174595.html

There has been no movement at the FCC in the on-going battle between, on one hand, LPFM interests, and, on the other, broadcasters seeking to protect their rights to FM translator facilities. At stake is whether the FCC will adopt a "cap of 10" applicable to still-pending applications for FM translators, thereby freeing spectrum for LPFM, and at the same time give LPFM applicants priority rights over long-pending FM translator applications.

FM translator application flood. This deadlock began to develop shortly after the FM translator window in 2003: In that window approximately 13,000 applications were filed, reportedly far beyond the FCC's expectations or processing capabilities. Nevertheless, the Commission managed to process approximately 6,000 of the 13,000 applications, mostly "singletons," by the end of 2007. This left 7,000 applications, most of which are mutually exclusive with others and thus will have to be processed through comparative "points" hearings. Of these, approximately 2,000 are attributable to two applicants.

LPFM interests have a stake in this matter since they use the same channels as FM translators. Thus the Commission is reluctant to open an LPFM application window with 7,000 translator applications still pending. Under current rules the pending translator proposals have cut-off rights that would preclude later-filed mutually exclusive LPFM applications.

Cap of 10 debated. A cap of 10 applications was proposed by the FCC in December 2007, in an effort to break the log jam. Under this proposal, applicants with more than 10 translator applications still pending would have to select their favorite 10 and the remainder would be dismissed. With two applicants accountable for 2,000 of the still-pending applications, this approach would presumably have trimmed the backlog by more than half.

A number of broadcasters with more than 10 pending applications sought reconsideration of the Commission's 10-application cap. By April 2008, the Commission suspended the cap to afford it time to review the petitions for reconsideration. Nothing of significance has happened since then except the FCC's decision to allow AM stations to broadcast over FM translators. This rule change has heightened interest in FM translators, but has not produced the needed prioritization between LPFM and translators -- or an application cap.

Compromises proposed. This year, Educational Media Foundation on the translator side and Prometheus Radio Project on behalf of LPFM interests, submitted a joint proposal to resolve the conflict. They suggested that the FCC scrap the cap of 10 and simply hold all pending FM translator applications in abeyance while opening an LPFM filing window. Those LPFM applications that conflicted with pending FM translator applications would be given priority, and the conflicting FM translator applications would be dismissed. This presumably would have left EMF and others with far more than 10 opportunities.

After objections to this plan were received from NPR and the NAB, among others, EMF and Prometheus supplemented their plan. The supplement provided that parties with fewer than 10 translator applications could pick one of their applications for grant, thereby getting at least one new translator, and then the Commission would open an LPFM window that included an LPFM priority vis-&agrave-vis pending translator applications.

A coalition of commercial broadcasters opposed this modified proposal, and urged the FCC to proceed with processing of all the pending applications after first opening a settlement window among translator applicants. Such a settlement window, it was urged, would considerably reduce the number of pending applications.

Still no movement. There is no indication from the FCC as to when it will proceed or whether any of the compromise proposals will be favored. While FM translator applicants have been awaiting action since March 2003, 1,100 full-power NCE FM applications, filed four years later in October 2007, have been granted. And LPFM applicants have been waiting for their first window in nearly 10 years, a window that will not be opened until the FCC reaches a decision regarding how many FM translator applications will be processed, under what priority scheme.

LPFM is any station, which is licensed with the FCC, to transmit at a lower power than commercial radio stations.  LPFM stations usually have a reach of just seven miles, but serve to highlight local communities, artists, and independent musicians.

In January of 2000, the FCC created the LPFM designation.  The creation of these stations was immediately throttled by the passage of the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000.  At the bequest of large commercial broadcasters, Congress passed the Act, which prevented any LPFM station from being within “three clicks” of a commercial station.

So, if one station in Chicago is broadcasting at 90.1, and another at 91.3, no LPFM station could use any of the airwaves between the stations, because even if it was at 90.7 it would be within three clicks of each full powered station.

According to the Free Press, a non-profit media reform organization, the removal by the Low Power Community Radio Act of this “three click” restriction would allow hundreds, if not thousands of LPFM stations to benefit local communities by having access the public’s airwaves.  Over the last ten years—and in spite of the restrictions—over 850 LPFM stations have already been licensed with the FCC.  (See an excellent synopsis of the history of LPFM at Reason.com.)

“These noncommercial stations will help to diversify the airwaves, support local music and culture, and assist communities during emergencies,” Candace Clement of Free Press said.  “This is an amazing and exciting victory for the many organizations across the country who have been waiting for an opportunity to get on the air.”

Many organizations have been fighting for this victory over the last ten years, including the Prometheus Radio Project, which has been lauded for working tirelessly against the bill’s opponents.  The Prometheus Radio Project even took to protesting the National Association of Broadcasters earlier this month.

“A town without a community radio station is like a town without a library,” said Pete Tridish of the Prometheus Radio Project.  “Many a small town dreamer – starting with a few friends and bake sale cash – has successfully launched a low power station, and built these tiny channels into vibrant town institutions.”

One of the Low Power Community Radio Act’s opponents was the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), which argued that allowing LPFM stations access to the airwaves would cause interference with the full powered commercial broadcasting stations.  The NAB has been the principle opponent of LPFM since 2000.

“Interference is a real concern for local broadcasters and buffer protections are necessary and make sense,” Caroline Beasley of NAB told Congress in 2007.  “Even with third adjacent protections in place, there are examples of harmful interference caused by LPFM stations that are not adhering to existing technical regulations.”

Despite the claims of interference, the FCC concluded, after review of a 2003 report, that “even in the worst case, no third-adjacent channel interference between a LPFM station and an existing full-service FM station will exist” if the third-adjacent channel rules were discarded.

The LPFM bill now awaits President Obama’s signature, at which time it the third-adjacent channel rule will be repealed.  Activists caution, however, that the work is far from over.  Brandy Doyle, Policy Director at the Prometheus Radio Project, recently warned, that while citizens are on their “way to seeing new community radio stations across the U.S. This marks a beginning, not an end, to our work.”

by Matthew L. Schafer

For the past 40 years, PTFP has played a major role in the development of public broadcasting throughout the United States. With the program's assistance, a public television signal now reaches about 95% of our nation's population and public radio reaches approximately 90% of the population. The program also funds radio reading services, closed captioning and descriptive video services for the disabled, and numerous distance learning facilities that provide instructional programming for students and professionals.

Eligible applicants must be:

a) a public (noncommercial) broadcast station or group of such stations; or
b) a nonprofit organization organized primarily for educational or cultural purposes; or
c) a State or local government, Indian Tribe or a political or special purpose subdivision of a State.

Click here for specific information in the PTFP Rules about eligibility.

PTFP is a competitive, matching grant program that supports the planning for and construction of

a) public (noncommercial) radio and television stations;
b) distance learning telecommunications facilities using nonbroadcast technologies, such as microwave, fiber optic cable, satellite distribution, and Instructional Television Fixed Internet Service (ITFS);
c) public telecommunications services and facilities available to, operated by and controlled by minorities and women; and,
d) projects which strengthen the capability of existing public TV and radio stations to serve the public.

PTFP classifies applications into several categories and funding priorities. Click here for specific information in the PTFP Rules (§2301.4) about funding priorities.

Construction Projects. PTFP awards funds to eligible entities to purchase equipment required to provide public telecommunications services.

PTFP is limited by law to providing no more than 75% of eligible project costs for a construction project.

PTFP's general policy is to provide no more than 50% Federal funding for projects to replace, augment, or improve equipment at operating public broadcasting stations.

Exceptions to this general policy are contained in 2301.6(b)(1)(ii) of the PTFP regulations.

Planning Projects. PTFP can fund up to 100% of eligible project costs. PTFP regulations indicate, however, that there is a general presumption of no more than 75% Federal funding for planning projects.

See 2301.6(a)(2) of the PTFP regulations for exceptions.

Nonbroadcast Projects. PTFP's dollar limits are the same for broadcast and nonbroadcast projects. By law, however, PTFP can only fund nonbroadcast projects which activate a new public telecommunications facility or extend the service of an existing public telecommunications facility.

See the November 22, 1991, Policy Statement for further information on nonbroadcast applications.

All applications are reviewed by outside peer panels and evaluated according to the following six criteria: Applicant Qualifications, Project Objectives, Urgency, Technical (or Planning) Qualifications, Financial Qualifications, and Involvement of Women and Minorities.

Click here for specific information in the PTFP Rules about the evaluation criteria.