Implementation of the Local Community Radio Act of 2010; Revision of Service and Eligibility Rules for Low Power FM Stations, 20555-20558 [2012-8129]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
year, as required by the Commission’s
rules. See 47 CFR 64.610(f)(2) of the
Commission’s rules. In each case, costs
submitted must be for those costs
actually incurred during each preceding
one-, three-, or six-month period.
8. The Commission further notes that
the waiver granted in document DA 12–
430 will be for the duration of the
NDBEDP pilot program. The purpose of
establishing the NDBEDP initially as a
pilot program is to provide the
flexibility needed to enable certified
programs to structure their distribution
and service delivery systems to
effectively meet the needs of their
participants. This flexibility is expected
to result in a variety of equipment
distribution and service delivery models
that could serve as the foundation for
establishment of the permanent
NDBEDP. The Commission concludes
that allowing certified entities to receive
the needed funding in a timely manner
will better enable such entities to make
their programs effective and sustainable,
which, in turn, will help inform future
Commission decisions regarding a
permanent NDBEDP that furthers the
public interest.
Ordering Clauses
9. Pursuant to sections 4(i) and 719 of
the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 620, and
§ 1.3 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.3, and § 64.610(f)(2) of the
Commission’s rules is conditionally
waived to permit NDBEDP certified
programs to submit claims for
reimbursement more frequently than
once every six months as required by
§ 64.610(f)(2) of its rules and to submit
reimbursement claims up to one time
each month.
10. This action is taken under
delegated authority pursuant to §§ 0.141
and 0.361 of the Commission’s rules, 47
CFR 0.141, 0.361.
Federal Communications Commission.
Karen Peltz Strauss,
Deputy Chief, Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2012–8133 Filed 4–4–12; 8:45 am]
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:36 Apr 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MM Docket No. 99–25; FCC 12–28]
Implementation of the Local
Community Radio Act of 2010;
Revision of Service and Eligibility
Rules for Low Power FM Stations
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; denial of petitions for
reconsideration.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission modifies its rules in order
to implement provisions of the Local
Community Radio Act of 2010
(‘‘LCRA’’) that unambiguously require
the Commission to eliminate its thirdadjacent channel spacing requirements
and to maintain the spacing
requirements currently in place to
protect radio reading services. The
Commission also dismisses and/or
denies various petitions for
reconsideration of the Third Report and
Order in MM Docket No. 99–25 and
terminates a Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in that docket.
DATES: Effective June 4, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter Doyle (202) 418–2789.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s document
in MM Docket No. 99–25, FCC No. 12–
28, adopted March 19, 2012. A synopsis
of the proposed rulemaking segment of
this decision will be published in a later
issue of the Federal Register. The full
text of the Fifth Report and Order,
Fourth Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and Fourth Order on
Reconsideration is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference
Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The
full text may also be downloaded at:
https://www.fcc.gov.
Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis.
This Report and Order does not adopt
any new or revised information
collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.
3501–3520). In addition, therefore, it
does not contain any new or modified
‘‘information collection burden for
small business concerns with fewer than
25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
Report to Congress. The Commission
will send a copy of this Fifth Report &
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20555
Order to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
Summary of Fifth Report and Order
and Fourth Order on Reconsideration
I. Introduction
1. In the Fifth Report and Order, we
modify our rules to implement certain
provisions of the Local Community
Radio Act of 2010 (‘‘LCRA’’), which
unambiguously require the Commission
to eliminate its third-adjacent channel
spacing requirements and to maintain
the spacing requirements currently in
place to protect radio reading services.
In the Fourth Order on Reconsideration,
we dismiss in part and deny in part a
petition for reconsideration of the Third
Report and Order in this docket, which
the Commission released in 2007, and
terminate the Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (Second FNPRM)
that accompanied that order.
II. Background
2. In January 2000, the Commission
adopted a Report and Order establishing
the LPFM service. In doing so, the
Commission sought ‘‘to create a class of
radio stations designed to serve very
localized communities or
underrepresented groups within
communities.’’ The Commission created
two classes of LPFM facilities. The
LP100 class consists of stations with a
maximum power of 100 watts effective
radiated power (‘‘ERP’’) at 30 meters
antenna height above average terrain
(‘‘HAAT’’), providing an FM service
radius (1 mV/m or 60 dBu) of
approximately 3.5 miles. The LP10 class
consists of stations with a maximum of
10 watts ERP at 30 meters HAAT,
providing an FM service radius of
approximately one to two miles. ‘‘[T]o
preserve the integrity and technical
excellence of existing FM radio
service,’’ the Commission adopted
separation requirements for LPFM
stations operating on co-, first- and
second-adjacent channels to full-service
FM, FM translator and FM booster
stations. The Commission, however,
declined to impose third adjacent
channel distance separation
requirements, and declined to adopt
special protections for radio reading
services. The Commission specified that
LPFM stations operate on a ‘‘secondary’’
basis. In other words, LPFM stations
generally cannot cause interference to
existing and future full-service FM and
other ‘‘primary’’ stations and are not
protected against interference from
these stations.
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
20556
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
3. To ensure that any new LPFM
service included the voices of
community-based schools, churches and
civic organizations, the Commission
established ownership and eligibility
rules for the LPFM service. Specifically,
the Commission restricted LPFM service
to noncommercial educational (‘‘NCE’’)
operations, and restricted licensee
eligibility to applicants with no
attributable interests in any other
broadcast station or other media subject
to the Commission’s ownership rules.
The Commission also limited eligibility
to local entities during the first two
years LPFM licenses were available. To
choose among entities filing mutually
exclusive applications for LPFM
licenses, the Commission adopted a
point system that favors local ownership
and locally-originated programming,
with ties between competing applicants
resolved by either voluntary timesharing agreements between such
applicants or, in the event that the
applicants cannot agree, the imposition
of ‘‘involuntary time-sharing,’’ with
each tied and grantable applicant
awarded an equal, successive and nonrenewable license term of no less than
one year, for a combined total eight-year
term.
4. In September 2000, the
Commission adopted a Memorandum
Opinion and Order on Reconsideration.
In the Reconsideration Order, the
Commission revised and clarified some
of its LPFM rules, including the local
program origination criterion adopted
for the point system. The Commission
again declined to impose third-adjacent
channel separation requirements.
Instead, it adopted complaint and
license modification procedures to
address any unexpected, significant
third-adjacent channel interference
problems caused by LPFM stations. It
also modified the spacing standards to
protect radio reading services and
adopted procedures for addressing any
interference caused by an LPFM station
to the input signal of an FM translator
or FM booster station.
5. Shortly thereafter, in December
2000, Congress enacted the Making
Appropriations for the Government of
the District of Columbia for FY 2001 Act
(‘‘2001 DC Appropriations Act’’).
Therein, Congress directed the
Commission to prescribe third-adjacent
channel spacing requirements for LPFM
stations, which the Commission did in
April 2001. Congress also directed the
Commission to conduct an experimental
program to evaluate the likelihood of
interference to existing full-service FM
stations and FM translator stations if
LPFM stations were not subject to thirdadjacent channel spacing requirements,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:36 Apr 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
and to submit a report that included the
Commission’s recommendations
regarding reduction or elimination of
the spacing requirements for thirdadjacent channels. The Commission
selected an independent third party, the
Mitre Corporation (‘‘Mitre’’), to conduct
field tests. Mitre submitted a report to
the Commission, which, in turn, sought
comment on the report. In February
2004, the Commission submitted a
report to Congress on this issue. Based
on the Mitre study, the Commission
recommended that Congress ‘‘modify
the statute to eliminate the thirdadjacent channel distan[ce] separation
requirements for LPFM stations.’’
6. In March 2005, the Commission
adopted a Second Order on
Reconsideration and Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking. In the Second
Order, the Commission modified some
of the rules governing the LPFM service,
noting that the rules needed adjustment
in light of the experiences of LPFM
applicants and licensees. In the
accompanying FNPRM, the Commission
sought comment on a number of issues
with respect to LPFM ownership
restrictions and eligibility. The
Commission also proposed certain
changes to the rules governing the
formation and duration of voluntary and
involuntary time-sharing arrangements
among mutually exclusive LPFM
applicants. Finally, the Commission
sought comment on a number of
changes to the LPFM technical rules.
7. In December 2007, the Commission
released the Third Report and Order
and Second FNPRM. In the Third Report
and Order, the Commission resolved the
issues raised in the FNPRM. Among
other things, the Commission set forth
an interim processing policy that it
would use to consider requests for
waiver of the second-adjacent channel
spacing requirements from certain
LPFM stations, reinstated the local
ownership requirement, and clarified its
definition of local origination. The
Commission also modified the rules
governing the formation and duration of
voluntary and involuntary time-sharing
arrangements among mutually exclusive
LPFM applicants. In the Second
FNPRM, the Commission proposed
certain rule changes designed to avoid
the potential loss of LPFM stations. The
Commission made these proposals ‘‘[i]n
light of changed circumstances since [it]
last considered the issue of protection
rights for LPFM stations from
subsequently authorized full-service
stations.’’ The Commission sought
comment on whether to codify the
procedures for LPFM stations seeking a
waiver of the second-adjacent channel
spacing requirements, whether rule
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
changes were warranted to provide
additional flexibility to propose LPFM
station modifications, whether to
require full-service new station and
modification applicants to provide
technical and/or financial assistance to
potentially impacted LPFM stations,
whether to adopt contour protectionbased licensing standards for LPFM
stations, and whether to modify the
LPFM–FM translator protection
priorities.
8. On January 4, 2011, President
Obama signed the LCRA into law.
Through the LCRA, Congress expanded
LPFM licensing opportunities.
Specifically, Congress repealed the
requirement that LPFM stations operate
a minimum distance from nearby
stations operating on third-adjacent
channels, and required the Commission
to eliminate its third-adjacent channel
minimum distance separation
requirements. Congress also authorized
the Commission to waive the secondadjacent channel spacing requirements
if an LPFM station demonstrates that its
proposed operations will not result in
interference to any authorized radio
service. Further, it set forth criteria that
the Commission must take into account
when licensing FM translator, FM
booster and LPFM stations.
9. As Congress expanded LPFM
licensing opportunities, it also took
steps to provide enhanced interference
protection to existing full-service FM,
FM translator and FM booster stations.
Specifically, while Congress eliminated
the third-adjacent channel spacing
requirements, it required the
Commission to retain the spacing
requirements that apply to LPFM
stations operating on a third-adjacent
channel to FM stations that broadcast
radio reading services. Congress also
required the Commission to modify its
rules to ‘‘address the potential for
predicted interference to FM translator
input signals on third-adjacent
channels,’’ and to modify the
interference protection and remediation
requirements applicable to LPFM
stations operating on third-adjacent
channels.
III. Fifth Report and Order
10. The LCRA unambiguously
requires the Commission to eliminate its
third-adjacent channel spacing
requirements and to maintain the
spacing requirements currently in place
to protect radio reading services. We do
so in this Fifth Report and Order. We
take these steps without providing prior
public notice and comment because
they involve no discretion. We merely
are revising our rules in the manner
specified in the legislation. Notice and
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
comment would serve no purpose and
thus are unnecessary. Our actions fall
within the ‘‘good cause’’ exception of
the Administrative Procedure Act
(‘‘APA’’).
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Third-Adjacent Channel Minimum
Distance Separation Requirements
11. Section 2 of the LCRA amends
section 632 of the 2001 DC
Appropriations Act to delete the
requirements that the Commission
establish and maintain minimum
distance separations for third-adjacent
channels. It essentially lays the
groundwork for section 3(a) of the
LCRA, which requires the Commission
to ‘‘modify its rules to eliminate thirdadjacent minimum distance separation
requirements between—(1) low-power
FM stations; and (2) full service FM
stations, FM translator stations, and FM
booster stations.’’ Section 73.807 of the
Commission’s rules currently sets forth
these spacing requirements. We hereby
delete the provisions requiring
protection of third-adjacent channel
stations set forth in that section, with
the exception of § 73.807(a)(2), (b)(2)
and (g) of our rules.
B. Protection of Radio Reading Services
12. Radio reading services provide
access to printed news and other
information sources for blind or printdisabled persons. They are transmitted
on one of several standardized
subcarrier frequencies within a 200 kHz
FM channel. These transmissions
cannot be received on a standard radio.
Listeners must use special radios that
tune subcarrier signals to receive these
services. When the Commission
established the LPFM service in 2000, it
initially did not adopt any additional
interference protections for radio
reading services. The Commission
reasoned that subcarrier programming is
transmitted within a broadcast station’s
assigned frequency and thus receives
the same protection from interference as
the main broadcast programming of the
station.
13. The Commission reconsidered this
decision shortly thereafter due to
concerns about the greater vulnerability
of radio reading service receivers to
third-adjacent channel interference. It
noted that, because of their designs, the
subcarrier receivers used for radio
reading services are more susceptible to
interference than mass marketed
receivers. The Commission therefore
modified the spacing standards set forth
in § 73.807 of the rules to require LPFM
stations to satisfy the second-adjacent
channel spacing requirements with
respect to any third-adjacent channel
FM station that broadcasts a radio
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:36 Apr 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
reading service via a subcarrier
frequency.
14. The Commission took this step
because, at the time, it had declined to
adopt generally applicable thirdadjacent channel spacing requirements.
It later adopted such requirements at the
direction of Congress. These spacing
requirements were identical to the
second-adjacent channel spacing
requirements. Accordingly, while the
Commission did not delete the
protections specific to FM stations
providing radio reading services from
the rules, the protections became
redundant. Now, however, with the
elimination of the third-adjacent
spacing requirements, these provisions
again have relevance. In this regard,
section 4 of the LCRA directs the
Commission to ‘‘comply with existing
minimum distance separation
requirements’’ for stations that
broadcast radio reading services.
Accordingly, we conclude that we must
retain without modification
§§ 73.807(a)(2) and (b)(2) of our rules to
implement section 4.
IV. Fourth Order on Reconsideration
15. As noted above, in the Third
Report and Order, the Commission
adopted an interim waiver processing
policy. The Commission also revised
§ 73.809 and other provisions of the
rules in order to protect and preserve
the LPFM service. Ace Radio
Corporation (‘‘Ace Radio’’) filed a
petition for reconsideration (‘‘Ace Radio
Petition’’) of the Third Report and
Order, which opposed both the interim
waiver processing policy and the
revisions made to § 73.809. For the
reasons discussed below, we deny in
part the Petition and defer consideration
of the remainder of the Ace Radio’s
arguments.
16. Ace Radio challenges the interim
waiver processing policy. However, in
the Fourth FNPRM, we tentatively
conclude that section 3(b)(2) of the
LCRA supersedes this policy. We
believe it is appropriate to defer
consideration of Ace Radio’s arguments
regarding the interim waiver processing
policy until we have resolved this issue.
To the extent Ace Radio’s arguments
remain relevant, we will consider them
at that time.
17. We reject Ace Radio’s arguments
regarding our revisions to § 73.809 of
the rules to remove second-adjacent
channels from the interference
complaint procedures set forth therein.
Ace Radio first argues that it did not
have an opportunity to comment on the
Commission’s proposal to modify
§ 73.809 of the rules to remove secondadjacent channels from the rule. It also
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20557
asserts that the revisions to § 73.809 are
not justified by the record and, when
coupled with the Commission’s interim
waiver processing policy, will allow
LPFM stations to operate within a fullservice station’s 70 dBu contour,
resulting in interference holes,
otherwise known as the ‘‘swiss cheese’’
effect.
18. The Commission provided ample
public notice that it was considering
modification of § 73.809 of the rules to
remove second-adjacent channels. In the
FNPRM, the Commission explicitly
raised the issue of ‘‘encroachment’’ and
whether a relaxation of the secondadjacent channel interference
restrictions found in § 73.809 of the
rules was necessary to prevent LPFM
stations from being displaced. While
Ace Radio argues that ‘‘the number of
city of license applications filed does
not justify [the Commission’s] action,’’ it
fails to raise any facts or questions of
law showing that the Commission’s
decision was incorrect. Contrary to Ace
Radio’s suggestion that the number of
LPFM stations at risk of displacement is
insignificant, the Bureau identified 44
LPFM stations that could be forced to
cease operations as a result of the filing
activity resulting from the January 2007
lifting of the freeze on the filing of FM
community of license modification
proposals combined with the
implementation of new streamlined
licensing procedures.
19. We also note that Ace Radio has
mischaracterized the effects this rule
modification will have on signal
reception within a full-service station’s
70 dBu contour. The diagram provided
by Ace Radio portrays the full 60 dBu
contour of 118 hypothetical LPFM
stations within the 70 dBu contour of a
full-service station. The fact that an
LPFM station has a 60 dBu contour on
a second- or third-adjacent channel
inside the 70 dBu contour of a fullservice station does not establish that
the LPFM station would cause
interference. Any potential interference
received by the full-service station
would be only in the immediate vicinity
of the low-power transmitter site, and
can be substantially reduced or
eliminated through various technical
measures. Finally, contrary to Ace
Radio’s assertion, the Commission did
not, in its modification of Section
73.809, remove the second-adjacent
restriction for the general allocation
processes for LPFMs. Rather, this rule
change is limited to situations involving
a full-service station that is authorized
subsequent to an LPFM station. As such,
Ace Radio’s concerns are without merit.
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
20558
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 66 / Thursday, April 5, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
V. Termination of Second Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
20. As noted above, the Commission
issued a Second FNPRM in 2007. We
find that all of the proposals made in
the Second FNPRM are either
inconsistent with or otherwise mooted
by the LCRA. Specifically, the
Commission proposed to codify the
interim processing policy for secondadjacent channel waiver requests that it
adopted in the Third Report and Order.
However, in the Fourth FNPRM, we
conclude that the second-adjacent
channel waiver provisions of the LCRA
supersede this interim policy.
Accordingly, we find the Commission’s
proposal to codify the interim policy to
be moot and will not pursue it further.
Similarly, we find the Commission’s
proposal to adopt a contour overlap
interference protection approach to be
statutorily barred by section 3(b)(1) of
the LCRA, which prohibits the
Commission from modifying the current
co-channel and first- and secondadjacent channel distance separation
requirements. We will not pursue this
proposal either. Finally, the
Commission proposed certain rule
changes related to LPFM station
displacement, the obligations of fullservice new station and modification
applicants to potentially impacted
LPFM stations, and LPFM–FM
translator protection priorities. We
believe that Congress’s adoption of the
LCRA renders pursuit of those earlier
proposals unnecessary at this time.
Thus, we will not move forward with
any of them. Given our findings
regarding each of the proposals set forth
by the Commission in the Second
FNPRM, we consider the Second
FNPRM to have been concluded.
VI. Adminstrative Matters
A. Congressional Review Act
21. The Commission will send a copy
of this Fifth Report and Order to
Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
VII. Ordering Clauses
22. Accordingly, It is ordered,
pursuant to the authority contained in
the Local Community Radio Act of
2010, Public Law 111–371, 124 Stat.
4072 (2011), and sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303,
307, and 309(j) of the Communications
Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i),
303, 307, and 309(j), that this Fifth
Report and Order, Fourth Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and Fourth
Order on Reconsideration is adopted.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:36 Apr 04, 2012
Jkt 226001
23. It is further ordered that pursuant
to the authority contained in the Local
Community Radio Act of 2010, Public
Law 111–371, 124 Stat. 4072 (2011), and
sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, and 307 of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C.
151, 152, 154(i), 303, and 307, the
Commission’s rules are hereby
amended. It is our intention in adopting
these rule changes that, if any provision
of the rules is held invalid by any court
of competent jurisdiction, the remaining
provisions shall remain in effect to the
fullest extent permitted by law.
24. It is further ordered that the rules
shall be effective June 4, 2012.
25. It is further ordered that the
Petition for Rulemaking filed by REC
Networks on July 16, 2004, is hereby
dismissed, and Proceeding No. PRM–
04–MB is terminated.
26. It is further ordered that the
Petition for Reconsideration filed by
Ace Radio Corp. on February 19, 2008,
is denied in part.
27. It is further ordered that the
Second Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in MM Docket No. 99–25 is
terminated.
28. It is further ordered that the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau, Reference Information Center,
shall send a copy of this Fifth Report
and Order, Fourth Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and Fourth Order
on Reconsideration, including the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration, and shall
cause it to be published in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 to
read as follows:
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336,
and 339.
2. Section 73.807 is amended by
revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
■
§ 73.807 Minimum distance separation
between stations.
Minimum separation requirements for
LP100 and LP10 stations, as defined in
§§ 73.811 and 73.853, are listed in the
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
following paragraphs. An LPFM station
will not be authorized unless the cochannel, first- and second-adjacent and
IF channel separations are met. An
LPFM station need not satisfy the thirdadjacent channel separations listed in
paragraphs (a) through (d) in order to be
authorized. Minimum distances for cochannel and first-adjacent channel are
separated into two columns. The lefthand column lists the required
minimum separation to protect other
stations and the right-hand column lists
(for informational purposes only) the
minimum distance necessary for the
LPFM station to receive no interference
from other stations assumed to be
operating at the maximum permitted
facilities for the station class. For
second-adjacent channel and I.F.
channels, the required minimum
distance separation is sufficient to avoid
interference received from other
stations.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–8129 Filed 4–4–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0039]
RIN 2127–AJ93
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Platform Lifts for Motor
Vehicles; Platform Lift Installations in
Motor Vehicles
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This document adopts
amendments to the Federal motor
vehicle safety standards on platform lift
systems for motor vehicles. The purpose
of these standards is to prevent injuries
and fatalities during lift operation.
NHTSA believes it is necessary to revise
the lighting requirements for lift
controls; the location requirements,
performance requirements, and test
specifications for threshold warning
signals; the wheelchair retention device
and inner roll stop tests; and the
lighting requirements for public use
lifts. This notice also discusses a
November 3, 2005 interpretation
clarifying specific procedures that are
performed as part of the threshold
warning signal test.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 66 (Thursday, April 5, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20555-20558]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8129]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MM Docket No. 99-25; FCC 12-28]
Implementation of the Local Community Radio Act of 2010; Revision
of Service and Eligibility Rules for Low Power FM Stations
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; denial of petitions for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission modifies its rules in order
to implement provisions of the Local Community Radio Act of 2010
(``LCRA'') that unambiguously require the Commission to eliminate its
third-adjacent channel spacing requirements and to maintain the spacing
requirements currently in place to protect radio reading services. The
Commission also dismisses and/or denies various petitions for
reconsideration of the Third Report and Order in MM Docket No. 99-25
and terminates a Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in that
docket.
DATES: Effective June 4, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Doyle (202) 418-2789.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
document in MM Docket No. 99-25, FCC No. 12-28, adopted March 19, 2012.
A synopsis of the proposed rulemaking segment of this decision will be
published in a later issue of the Federal Register. The full text of
the Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and Fourth Order on Reconsideration is available for
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC
20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: https://www.fcc.gov.
Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. This Report and Order does not
adopt any new or revised information collection requirements subject to
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C.
3501-3520). In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or
modified ``information collection burden for small business concerns
with fewer than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
Report to Congress. The Commission will send a copy of this Fifth
Report & Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Summary of Fifth Report and Order and Fourth Order on Reconsideration
I. Introduction
1. In the Fifth Report and Order, we modify our rules to implement
certain provisions of the Local Community Radio Act of 2010 (``LCRA''),
which unambiguously require the Commission to eliminate its third-
adjacent channel spacing requirements and to maintain the spacing
requirements currently in place to protect radio reading services. In
the Fourth Order on Reconsideration, we dismiss in part and deny in
part a petition for reconsideration of the Third Report and Order in
this docket, which the Commission released in 2007, and terminate the
Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Second FNPRM) that
accompanied that order.
II. Background
2. In January 2000, the Commission adopted a Report and Order
establishing the LPFM service. In doing so, the Commission sought ``to
create a class of radio stations designed to serve very localized
communities or underrepresented groups within communities.'' The
Commission created two classes of LPFM facilities. The LP100 class
consists of stations with a maximum power of 100 watts effective
radiated power (``ERP'') at 30 meters antenna height above average
terrain (``HAAT''), providing an FM service radius (1 mV/m or 60 dBu)
of approximately 3.5 miles. The LP10 class consists of stations with a
maximum of 10 watts ERP at 30 meters HAAT, providing an FM service
radius of approximately one to two miles. ``[T]o preserve the integrity
and technical excellence of existing FM radio service,'' the Commission
adopted separation requirements for LPFM stations operating on co-,
first- and second-adjacent channels to full-service FM, FM translator
and FM booster stations. The Commission, however, declined to impose
third adjacent channel distance separation requirements, and declined
to adopt special protections for radio reading services. The Commission
specified that LPFM stations operate on a ``secondary'' basis. In other
words, LPFM stations generally cannot cause interference to existing
and future full-service FM and other ``primary'' stations and are not
protected against interference from these stations.
[[Page 20556]]
3. To ensure that any new LPFM service included the voices of
community-based schools, churches and civic organizations, the
Commission established ownership and eligibility rules for the LPFM
service. Specifically, the Commission restricted LPFM service to
noncommercial educational (``NCE'') operations, and restricted licensee
eligibility to applicants with no attributable interests in any other
broadcast station or other media subject to the Commission's ownership
rules. The Commission also limited eligibility to local entities during
the first two years LPFM licenses were available. To choose among
entities filing mutually exclusive applications for LPFM licenses, the
Commission adopted a point system that favors local ownership and
locally-originated programming, with ties between competing applicants
resolved by either voluntary time-sharing agreements between such
applicants or, in the event that the applicants cannot agree, the
imposition of ``involuntary time-sharing,'' with each tied and
grantable applicant awarded an equal, successive and non-renewable
license term of no less than one year, for a combined total eight-year
term.
4. In September 2000, the Commission adopted a Memorandum Opinion
and Order on Reconsideration. In the Reconsideration Order, the
Commission revised and clarified some of its LPFM rules, including the
local program origination criterion adopted for the point system. The
Commission again declined to impose third-adjacent channel separation
requirements. Instead, it adopted complaint and license modification
procedures to address any unexpected, significant third-adjacent
channel interference problems caused by LPFM stations. It also modified
the spacing standards to protect radio reading services and adopted
procedures for addressing any interference caused by an LPFM station to
the input signal of an FM translator or FM booster station.
5. Shortly thereafter, in December 2000, Congress enacted the
Making Appropriations for the Government of the District of Columbia
for FY 2001 Act (``2001 DC Appropriations Act''). Therein, Congress
directed the Commission to prescribe third-adjacent channel spacing
requirements for LPFM stations, which the Commission did in April 2001.
Congress also directed the Commission to conduct an experimental
program to evaluate the likelihood of interference to existing full-
service FM stations and FM translator stations if LPFM stations were
not subject to third-adjacent channel spacing requirements, and to
submit a report that included the Commission's recommendations
regarding reduction or elimination of the spacing requirements for
third-adjacent channels. The Commission selected an independent third
party, the Mitre Corporation (``Mitre''), to conduct field tests. Mitre
submitted a report to the Commission, which, in turn, sought comment on
the report. In February 2004, the Commission submitted a report to
Congress on this issue. Based on the Mitre study, the Commission
recommended that Congress ``modify the statute to eliminate the third-
adjacent channel distan[ce] separation requirements for LPFM
stations.''
6. In March 2005, the Commission adopted a Second Order on
Reconsideration and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. In the
Second Order, the Commission modified some of the rules governing the
LPFM service, noting that the rules needed adjustment in light of the
experiences of LPFM applicants and licensees. In the accompanying
FNPRM, the Commission sought comment on a number of issues with respect
to LPFM ownership restrictions and eligibility. The Commission also
proposed certain changes to the rules governing the formation and
duration of voluntary and involuntary time-sharing arrangements among
mutually exclusive LPFM applicants. Finally, the Commission sought
comment on a number of changes to the LPFM technical rules.
7. In December 2007, the Commission released the Third Report and
Order and Second FNPRM. In the Third Report and Order, the Commission
resolved the issues raised in the FNPRM. Among other things, the
Commission set forth an interim processing policy that it would use to
consider requests for waiver of the second-adjacent channel spacing
requirements from certain LPFM stations, reinstated the local ownership
requirement, and clarified its definition of local origination. The
Commission also modified the rules governing the formation and duration
of voluntary and involuntary time-sharing arrangements among mutually
exclusive LPFM applicants. In the Second FNPRM, the Commission proposed
certain rule changes designed to avoid the potential loss of LPFM
stations. The Commission made these proposals ``[i]n light of changed
circumstances since [it] last considered the issue of protection rights
for LPFM stations from subsequently authorized full-service stations.''
The Commission sought comment on whether to codify the procedures for
LPFM stations seeking a waiver of the second-adjacent channel spacing
requirements, whether rule changes were warranted to provide additional
flexibility to propose LPFM station modifications, whether to require
full-service new station and modification applicants to provide
technical and/or financial assistance to potentially impacted LPFM
stations, whether to adopt contour protection-based licensing standards
for LPFM stations, and whether to modify the LPFM-FM translator
protection priorities.
8. On January 4, 2011, President Obama signed the LCRA into law.
Through the LCRA, Congress expanded LPFM licensing opportunities.
Specifically, Congress repealed the requirement that LPFM stations
operate a minimum distance from nearby stations operating on third-
adjacent channels, and required the Commission to eliminate its third-
adjacent channel minimum distance separation requirements. Congress
also authorized the Commission to waive the second-adjacent channel
spacing requirements if an LPFM station demonstrates that its proposed
operations will not result in interference to any authorized radio
service. Further, it set forth criteria that the Commission must take
into account when licensing FM translator, FM booster and LPFM
stations.
9. As Congress expanded LPFM licensing opportunities, it also took
steps to provide enhanced interference protection to existing full-
service FM, FM translator and FM booster stations. Specifically, while
Congress eliminated the third-adjacent channel spacing requirements, it
required the Commission to retain the spacing requirements that apply
to LPFM stations operating on a third-adjacent channel to FM stations
that broadcast radio reading services. Congress also required the
Commission to modify its rules to ``address the potential for predicted
interference to FM translator input signals on third-adjacent
channels,'' and to modify the interference protection and remediation
requirements applicable to LPFM stations operating on third-adjacent
channels.
III. Fifth Report and Order
10. The LCRA unambiguously requires the Commission to eliminate its
third-adjacent channel spacing requirements and to maintain the spacing
requirements currently in place to protect radio reading services. We
do so in this Fifth Report and Order. We take these steps without
providing prior public notice and comment because they involve no
discretion. We merely are revising our rules in the manner specified in
the legislation. Notice and
[[Page 20557]]
comment would serve no purpose and thus are unnecessary. Our actions
fall within the ``good cause'' exception of the Administrative
Procedure Act (``APA'').
A. Third-Adjacent Channel Minimum Distance Separation Requirements
11. Section 2 of the LCRA amends section 632 of the 2001 DC
Appropriations Act to delete the requirements that the Commission
establish and maintain minimum distance separations for third-adjacent
channels. It essentially lays the groundwork for section 3(a) of the
LCRA, which requires the Commission to ``modify its rules to eliminate
third-adjacent minimum distance separation requirements between--(1)
low-power FM stations; and (2) full service FM stations, FM translator
stations, and FM booster stations.'' Section 73.807 of the Commission's
rules currently sets forth these spacing requirements. We hereby delete
the provisions requiring protection of third-adjacent channel stations
set forth in that section, with the exception of Sec. 73.807(a)(2),
(b)(2) and (g) of our rules.
B. Protection of Radio Reading Services
12. Radio reading services provide access to printed news and other
information sources for blind or print-disabled persons. They are
transmitted on one of several standardized subcarrier frequencies
within a 200 kHz FM channel. These transmissions cannot be received on
a standard radio. Listeners must use special radios that tune
subcarrier signals to receive these services. When the Commission
established the LPFM service in 2000, it initially did not adopt any
additional interference protections for radio reading services. The
Commission reasoned that subcarrier programming is transmitted within a
broadcast station's assigned frequency and thus receives the same
protection from interference as the main broadcast programming of the
station.
13. The Commission reconsidered this decision shortly thereafter
due to concerns about the greater vulnerability of radio reading
service receivers to third-adjacent channel interference. It noted
that, because of their designs, the subcarrier receivers used for radio
reading services are more susceptible to interference than mass
marketed receivers. The Commission therefore modified the spacing
standards set forth in Sec. 73.807 of the rules to require LPFM
stations to satisfy the second-adjacent channel spacing requirements
with respect to any third-adjacent channel FM station that broadcasts a
radio reading service via a subcarrier frequency.
14. The Commission took this step because, at the time, it had
declined to adopt generally applicable third-adjacent channel spacing
requirements. It later adopted such requirements at the direction of
Congress. These spacing requirements were identical to the second-
adjacent channel spacing requirements. Accordingly, while the
Commission did not delete the protections specific to FM stations
providing radio reading services from the rules, the protections became
redundant. Now, however, with the elimination of the third-adjacent
spacing requirements, these provisions again have relevance. In this
regard, section 4 of the LCRA directs the Commission to ``comply with
existing minimum distance separation requirements'' for stations that
broadcast radio reading services. Accordingly, we conclude that we must
retain without modification Sec. Sec. 73.807(a)(2) and (b)(2) of our
rules to implement section 4.
IV. Fourth Order on Reconsideration
15. As noted above, in the Third Report and Order, the Commission
adopted an interim waiver processing policy. The Commission also
revised Sec. 73.809 and other provisions of the rules in order to
protect and preserve the LPFM service. Ace Radio Corporation (``Ace
Radio'') filed a petition for reconsideration (``Ace Radio Petition'')
of the Third Report and Order, which opposed both the interim waiver
processing policy and the revisions made to Sec. 73.809. For the
reasons discussed below, we deny in part the Petition and defer
consideration of the remainder of the Ace Radio's arguments.
16. Ace Radio challenges the interim waiver processing policy.
However, in the Fourth FNPRM, we tentatively conclude that section
3(b)(2) of the LCRA supersedes this policy. We believe it is
appropriate to defer consideration of Ace Radio's arguments regarding
the interim waiver processing policy until we have resolved this issue.
To the extent Ace Radio's arguments remain relevant, we will consider
them at that time.
17. We reject Ace Radio's arguments regarding our revisions to
Sec. 73.809 of the rules to remove second-adjacent channels from the
interference complaint procedures set forth therein. Ace Radio first
argues that it did not have an opportunity to comment on the
Commission's proposal to modify Sec. 73.809 of the rules to remove
second-adjacent channels from the rule. It also asserts that the
revisions to Sec. 73.809 are not justified by the record and, when
coupled with the Commission's interim waiver processing policy, will
allow LPFM stations to operate within a full-service station's 70 dBu
contour, resulting in interference holes, otherwise known as the
``swiss cheese'' effect.
18. The Commission provided ample public notice that it was
considering modification of Sec. 73.809 of the rules to remove second-
adjacent channels. In the FNPRM, the Commission explicitly raised the
issue of ``encroachment'' and whether a relaxation of the second-
adjacent channel interference restrictions found in Sec. 73.809 of the
rules was necessary to prevent LPFM stations from being displaced.
While Ace Radio argues that ``the number of city of license
applications filed does not justify [the Commission's] action,'' it
fails to raise any facts or questions of law showing that the
Commission's decision was incorrect. Contrary to Ace Radio's suggestion
that the number of LPFM stations at risk of displacement is
insignificant, the Bureau identified 44 LPFM stations that could be
forced to cease operations as a result of the filing activity resulting
from the January 2007 lifting of the freeze on the filing of FM
community of license modification proposals combined with the
implementation of new streamlined licensing procedures.
19. We also note that Ace Radio has mischaracterized the effects
this rule modification will have on signal reception within a full-
service station's 70 dBu contour. The diagram provided by Ace Radio
portrays the full 60 dBu contour of 118 hypothetical LPFM stations
within the 70 dBu contour of a full-service station. The fact that an
LPFM station has a 60 dBu contour on a second- or third-adjacent
channel inside the 70 dBu contour of a full-service station does not
establish that the LPFM station would cause interference. Any potential
interference received by the full-service station would be only in the
immediate vicinity of the low-power transmitter site, and can be
substantially reduced or eliminated through various technical measures.
Finally, contrary to Ace Radio's assertion, the Commission did not, in
its modification of Section 73.809, remove the second-adjacent
restriction for the general allocation processes for LPFMs. Rather,
this rule change is limited to situations involving a full-service
station that is authorized subsequent to an LPFM station. As such, Ace
Radio's concerns are without merit.
[[Page 20558]]
V. Termination of Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
20. As noted above, the Commission issued a Second FNPRM in 2007.
We find that all of the proposals made in the Second FNPRM are either
inconsistent with or otherwise mooted by the LCRA. Specifically, the
Commission proposed to codify the interim processing policy for second-
adjacent channel waiver requests that it adopted in the Third Report
and Order. However, in the Fourth FNPRM, we conclude that the second-
adjacent channel waiver provisions of the LCRA supersede this interim
policy. Accordingly, we find the Commission's proposal to codify the
interim policy to be moot and will not pursue it further. Similarly, we
find the Commission's proposal to adopt a contour overlap interference
protection approach to be statutorily barred by section 3(b)(1) of the
LCRA, which prohibits the Commission from modifying the current co-
channel and first- and second-adjacent channel distance separation
requirements. We will not pursue this proposal either. Finally, the
Commission proposed certain rule changes related to LPFM station
displacement, the obligations of full-service new station and
modification applicants to potentially impacted LPFM stations, and
LPFM-FM translator protection priorities. We believe that Congress's
adoption of the LCRA renders pursuit of those earlier proposals
unnecessary at this time. Thus, we will not move forward with any of
them. Given our findings regarding each of the proposals set forth by
the Commission in the Second FNPRM, we consider the Second FNPRM to
have been concluded.
VI. Adminstrative Matters
A. Congressional Review Act
21. The Commission will send a copy of this Fifth Report and Order
to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
VII. Ordering Clauses
22. Accordingly, It is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained
in the Local Community Radio Act of 2010, Public Law 111-371, 124 Stat.
4072 (2011), and sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, 307, and 309(j) of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307, and
309(j), that this Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and Fourth Order on Reconsideration is adopted.
23. It is further ordered that pursuant to the authority contained
in the Local Community Radio Act of 2010, Public Law 111-371, 124 Stat.
4072 (2011), and sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, and 307 of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, and 307,
the Commission's rules are hereby amended. It is our intention in
adopting these rule changes that, if any provision of the rules is held
invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining
provisions shall remain in effect to the fullest extent permitted by
law.
24. It is further ordered that the rules shall be effective June 4,
2012.
25. It is further ordered that the Petition for Rulemaking filed by
REC Networks on July 16, 2004, is hereby dismissed, and Proceeding No.
PRM-04-MB is terminated.
26. It is further ordered that the Petition for Reconsideration
filed by Ace Radio Corp. on February 19, 2008, is denied in part.
27. It is further ordered that the Second Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in MM Docket No. 99-25 is terminated.
28. It is further ordered that the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this
Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
and Fourth Order on Reconsideration, including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration, and shall cause it to be published in the
Federal Register.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 to read as follows:
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.
0
2. Section 73.807 is amended by revising the introductory text to read
as follows:
Sec. 73.807 Minimum distance separation between stations.
Minimum separation requirements for LP100 and LP10 stations, as
defined in Sec. Sec. 73.811 and 73.853, are listed in the following
paragraphs. An LPFM station will not be authorized unless the co-
channel, first- and second-adjacent and IF channel separations are met.
An LPFM station need not satisfy the third-adjacent channel separations
listed in paragraphs (a) through (d) in order to be authorized. Minimum
distances for co-channel and first-adjacent channel are separated into
two columns. The left-hand column lists the required minimum separation
to protect other stations and the right-hand column lists (for
informational purposes only) the minimum distance necessary for the
LPFM station to receive no interference from other stations assumed to
be operating at the maximum permitted facilities for the station class.
For second-adjacent channel and I.F. channels, the required minimum
distance separation is sufficient to avoid interference received from
other stations.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-8129 Filed 4-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P