FCC Wants To Know What YOU Think Of Unprotected Six

The Commission has invited public comment on the NPR proposal to deep-six Section 73.525, the rule requiring that noncommercial FM stations provide special protection for Channel 6 TV stations. In a routine public notice issued just two weeks after the NPR petition for rulemaking was filed, the FCC opened a 30-day comment period. (We wrote about the NPR filing when it first surfaced.) You’ve got until December 2, 2009, to chip in your two cents’ worth.

This is a very preliminary step in the rulemaking process. The mere fact that the Commission has asked for comments does not necessarily mean that the NPR proposal will ever go anywhere. Even if the FCC is favorably disposed to NPR’s suggestion, there are a lot of time-consuming hurdles – e.g., issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking, a comment/reply comment period usually lasting at least a month or two, lots of bureaucratic head-scratching, issuance of a Report and Order, reconsiderations, appeals, etc. – that would need to be jumped before we could bid farewell to Section 73.525.   In other words, there is probably no urgent need to sound off about the NPR proposal now, but if you feel like doing so, the door is open through December 2.

Unprotected Six?

NPR to FCC: Repeal Section 73.525

In a bold move guaranteed to generate heated debate, National Public Radio (NPR) has asked the Commission to dump the Channel 6 protection obligations (set out in Section 73.525) which have been imposed on noncommercial FM stations for the last quarter century. While the proposal no doubt appeals strongly to NPR’s NCE-FM constituency, the television side of the universe – and particularly current Channel 6 licensees and viewers – can’t be happy.

The protection requirements were imposed in the first place because the portion of the FM band reserved for NCE operations butts up against Channel 6, spectrum-wise. As a result, the potential for interference to Channel 6 operations from stations in the NCE-FM band was thought to be considerable, leading the Commission back in 1985 to impose extra hurdles in the path of new and improved NCE-FM service in order to shelter Channel 6. For all you spectrum historians, NPR’s petition for rulemaking provides interesting background about the development of the protection requirements. (Interesting factoid: the receivers used to determine the appropriate level of protection were all manufactured prior to 1979, meaning that the protection standards in place today are based on 30-year-old receiver technology – at best.)

According to NPR, the increased sensitivity of today’s television receivers – particularly in the wake of the DTV transition – warrants reconsideration of the standards. NPR even has two studies, conducted by its own labs and by the highly-respected techno-gurus at Hammett & Edison, which it cites in support of the proposition that the interference rule no longer serves any real purpose. 

NPR also claims that not too many viewers are likely to notice NCE-FM-induced interference to Channel 6 operations because more than 90% of U.S. viewers get their TV by cable or satellite, sources which are not subject to such interference. 

In contrast, NPR points to the seemingly insatiable demand for NCE-FM service. The most recent window filing opportunities for new non-comm radio authorizations (full-service and translators) have attracted tens of thousands of applications, each subject to the limiting effects of the Channel 6 rules. According to NPR, NCE-FM stations would enjoy, on average, a 75% increase in 60 dBu population coverage if Section 73.525 were to be tossed; some might increase by more than 200%.

NPR makes it all sound so good.

But what NPR doesn’t mention is that, while there may not be boatloads of full-service DTV stations still operating on Channel 6, there are a significant number of analog LPTV stations still up and running. These licensees do not yet have a deadline for converting to digital operation, and they typically provide service to the 10% of the public that does not have satellite and cable service. In addition, it isn’t clear whether analog TV sets that are plugged into DTV converter boxes will continue to experience interference if the interference protection requirements are lifted. Indeed, it’s apparently not even clear whether DTV converter boxes introduce or reduce the possibility of increased interference. Taking the NPR bait could lead to considerable reception problems for over-the-air viewers still loyal to Channel 6 stations.

These questions would obviously have to be examined carefully in any consideration of NPR’s proposal.

The NPR petition was filed on October 20. The Commission has not yet taken any action on it. In view of the petition’s relatively controversial proposal – as well as the Commission’s current fixation with all things broadband (to the apparent exclusion of anything broadcast) – the FCC may not get around to the petition for some time, if it gets around to it at all. In all likelihood, the first sign of progress we might see on this would be the assignment of a rulemaking number to the petition, together with a public notice soliciting comments on it. That could happen in a matter of weeks, or months, or longer. We will let you know if and when any opportunity to comment on the proposal opens up.

[Note: The NPR proposal is unrelated to the MMTC proposal, included in the MMTC Radio Rescue Petition, to have TV Channels 5 and 6 re-purposed for audio use only. It will be interesting to see if the Commission is inclined to fold the two together.]

Creativity Crushed

Media Bureau puts kibosh on NCE applications with Channel 6 contingencies

Sometimes it doesn’t pay to get creative, especially where the FCC’s rules are concerned.  This was apparent in an April 1 Public Notice which supposedly “provided guidance” to noncommercial educational (NCE) FM stations with regard to television Channel 6 protection requirements.  Significantly, the Notice was issued by the Media Bureau, not the Audio Division.

Because NCE FM channels are close neighbors to Channel 6 on the spectrum, NCE FM stations (and related applications) must protect nearby Channel 6 stations.  A couple of very narrow exceptions are available, one of which involves submission of an unconditional agreement between the NCE and the Channel 6 station in which the latter “concur[s] with the proposed NCE facilities.” 

The Channel 6 protection requirement cropped up big time in the run-up to the October, 2007, NCE FM filing window.  Channel 6 problems would ordinarily have prevented the filing of many applications.  But several NCE applicants came up with a work-around.  They noted first that, after the DTV transition (then scheduled for February 17, 2009), a lot of Channel 6 operations would simply disappear, as the stations in question abandon their analog Channel 6 facilities for digital facilities elsewhere on the TV band.  The would-be applicants then calculated, correctly, that the NCE FM permits they were filing for wouldn’t be granted for at least a year or two – which means that their three-year construction periods would run well past the DTV transition. 

So, they reasoned, if there would be no Channel 6 operation to worry about when construction time actually rolls around, shouldn’t they be able to ignore Channel 6 at the application stage?

Thinking along these lines, a number of applicants either sought waivers of the protection rules or entered into, and submitted, contingent agreements with the nearby Channel 6 station.  (The contingent agreements reflected the Channel 6 licensee’s consent to the filing of the NCE FM application, generally with the proviso that the FM wouldn’t crank up – and thereby cause interference – until the TV station had vacated the Channel 6 premises, thereby eliminating the possibility of interference entirely.)

As far as we can tell, neither the full Commission nor the Bureau nor the Audio Division had opined as to the acceptability of that approach prior to the October, 2007, window.  Since then the Division has indicated in one or two decisions that it was not inclined to accept such applications.  But the Bureau’s April 1, 2009 Notice – issued a mere 18 months after the applications were filed – conclusively slams the door by barring such creative solutions.  The Notice states unequivocally that the Bureau will dismiss any NCE application that conflicts with the interference rules and fails to include either: (a) a showing that no more than 3,000 people would be subject to the predicted interference; or (b) an “unconditional consent letter” from the Channel 6 licensee. To make itself perfectly clear, the Notice warns that that consent “cannot contain any contingencies, conditions, qualifications or restrictions.”  (We get it; we really do.) 

Applications filed in the October, 2007, window are subject to the terms of the Notice, which means that any such application that doesn’t satisfy the Notice is toast, since the Bureau emphasized that any attempt to revive the application through an amendment or a petition for reconsideration (even after the Channel 6 station goes away)  will be unceremoniously rejected.  Further, with regard to currently mutually-exclusive NCE applications for new stations, the Bureau notes it will dismiss the applications of NCE FM “tentative selectees” who have attempted the end run described above. 

The Notice does magnanimously indicate that, after the June 12 DTV transition, the Bureau will open a filing window for NCE stations to permit them to take advantage of the Channel 6 migration.  (The Notice refers only to "stations", which suggests that the window may be limited to licensees seeking to modify their facilities -- that is, the window would appear not to be available for new applications.  Time will tell.)  But applicants for minor changes who attempt to do so before the window opens will  in any event be shown the door.  And, oh by the way, the Commission will start a rulemaking to evaluate the “continued viability” of the Channel 6 protection requirements after completion of the digital TV changeover.

While we appreciate the efficient processing considerations that underlie the Bureau’s approach, that approach may elevate form over substance in view of the imminent departure of most full-power Channel 6 stations.