NAB and LPFM Groups Battle Over Power Increase Proposal
“We have patiently waited for the opportunity to fix our channels,” replied 51 low-power FMs, posted Wednesday in support of a REC Networks proposal to allow for increased LPFM power levels (see 2106220056). “We ask the FCC to entertain the…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
creation of new regulation via RM-11909 to assist our plights,” said the group of stations, called LPFM Broadcasters for Sustainable Signals. Community support for the proposal is “overwhelming,” said REC. “Even stations that can’t upgrade acknowledge that for many rural and ... some urban LPFM stations, the upgrade to LP250 would enable their programming to reach their community with greater success.” NAB filed against the proposal. It “fails to see why LPFM operators should be allowed a short-cut that would not only allow them to broadcast with the same amount of radiated power as a Class A station, but to do so while avoiding” public interest and EAS requirements, it said. “LP250 service is unwarranted because an LPFM entity is always free to apply for a 250-watt Class A station, just like anyone else.” Common Frequency attacked NAB arguments LPFMs are prone to operate outside allowed power levels. “NAB could only amass three cases in the two-decade history of LPFM, among 2,114 stations, where LPFM licensees were cited for over-powered broadcasting,” CF said. “None of NAB’s concerns presented in their Objection are supported by fact.”