Senate Hold Delays Vote to Expand LPFM to Larger Markets, Advocates Say
Acceptance by opponents and lawmakers of the Local Community Radio Act, awaiting a Senate vote, is sought by those in noncommercial radio. HR-1147 could make it easier to create low-power FM (LPFM) stations in larger markets. The NAB, a major opponent to the bill, has been instrumental in holding it back, some community radio supporters said. The NAB said it has concerns over the bill creating interference to full-power stations.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The House approved the bill last year after LPFM supporters agreed to about 10 changes proposed by the NAB, said Pete Tridish, Prometheus Radio executive director. “NAB stood aside on the House version based on the concessions that we gave.” Now NAB seeks another bite of the apple, he said. Prometheus and community radio supporters staged a demonstration in front of NAB headquarters Monday to persuade the broadcasters group to support the bill (CD Dec 13 p8). By making the concessions, “the LPFM advocates appeased the fears NAB had about interference,” Tridish said. “They're making their demands worse,” and “they've only become more insistent,” he said.
Legislation should ensure that full-power stations won’t suffer interference from LPFM stations, said NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton. It should have “language stating that co-channels and first and second adjacent channels will be protected through minimum distance separations,” he said by e-mail. There must be “the most adequate assurance against interference to existing stations for when (potentially) thousands of new LPFM stations populate the FM dial.” To avoid interference, the bill should recommend the spacing method, Wharton said. “It offers better interference protection for broadcasters in preserving a clear radio signal."
The spacing method would make it difficult for LPFM hopefuls to get channels, Tridish said. It’s an obsolete way to allocate, and the contouring method is better, he said. With the contours method, “you can take into account topography, directional antenna … to determine if there’s going to be interference or not,” he said. The NAB has persuaded Sens. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and John Ensign, R-Nev., to put holds on the bill, Tridish said. Their offices didn’t get back to us right away. As long as the NAB remains “fixated on getting this in the bill, there’s no way to find [available] LPFM channels in any cities,” Tridish said. Senate officials didn’t return requests for comment.
"There were concerns that the FCC hadn’t fully anticipated the interference issues,” said broadcast lawyer John Crigler of Garvey Schubert, who represents non-commercial stations. “Everybody except maybe the NAB has gotten over those concerns.” Cheryl Leanza, policy adviser for the media justice arm of LPFM supporter United Church of Christ, said “we put two years of work and hearings to get the bill within inches of the finish line and we'll have to start the legislative process anew” in the new Congress if the bill isn’t passed this year. Tridish said, “We really want to pass it in this session, because we'd have to start from scratch” otherwise.