| The FCC has approved a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that will in inquire about how to resolve the LPFM/Translator issue. Once the NPRM is released, look for updates to this and other pages. |
Low Power FM (LPFM) is radio that within reach of many community organizations, local artists, churches, ministries, schools and government organizations. The FCC has created this service to address the concentration of full power broadcasting by large corporations who have shut out the communities they serve in favor of national formats. 100 watt LPFM stations have a practical range of about 5 miles around the station and must remain commercial free. On this site, you will learn about the LPFM service, find out about existing LPFM stations, determine if LPFM is available in your area if another filing window opens as well as legislation and other activities that support or endanger the service. Existing LPFM applicants, permit holders and licensees can find information about their station including application status and encroachment information.
FCC Rules and other documents regarding LPFM
Local Community Radio Act of 2010
ENHANCED! LPFM Channel Search Tool - The LPFM Tool has been enhanced with more searching capabilities. This version of the tool is ready for LCRA implementation and does not reflect current rules. For current rules, use the old LPFM Tool.
NEW! LPFM Availability Summary - Check summary information on LPFM availability (post LCRA) with the ability to drill down to county or Arbitron markets.
KML mapping data for use with Google Earth
Up until the late 1970's, the FCC licensed very low power non-commercial broadcast stations. These "Class-D" stations were licensed to high schools and smaller colleges. These stations were used for the education of students in radio as well as offering diverse programming to the communities they serve. In the late 70's, at the hands of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) and the bigger college radio station interests, these Class-D stations were considered not efficient use of spectrum and the FCC declared them secondary. They can exist as long as the channel was not needed for a full power station.
In the 80's the FCC created some rules that created several new classes of FM stations. This resulted in a substantial increase in the number of commercial FM broadcast stations across the country.
In the mid 90's, Congress passes the Telecommunications Act. Portions of this legislation substantially lifts the media ownership rules and would allow for corporations to own a large number of radio and TV stations.
As corporations such as Clear Channel continued to absorb more and more stations, more trends were seen in radio such as the reduction of local staff, local coverage and in some cases, stations moving from smaller communities to big cities.
As the trend continued, we saw an increase of resentment against Congress and the FCC for allowing this concentration of media to continue. Some in the grassroots resorted to broadcasting without obtaining a license. The flashpoint of the grassroots radio movement was the court challenges made by Stephen Dunifer. Lower courts justified these unlicensed operations.
In the late 90's, three separate petitions were filed with the FCC. One petition was filed by Nickolaus Leggett and Donald Schellhardt. This petition, assigned RM-9208 originally called for a concept of 1 watt microstations operating in a cellular approach. Later on, a second tier of stations with a 5 mile range was proposed. Another petition was filed by Rodger Skinner, assigned RM-9242 called for a mix of commercial primary stations up to 3,000 watts, secondary stations up to 50 watts and special event stations up to 20 watts. A third petition, RM-9246 was filed by WebSports and called for low power special event and venue broadcast stations in the AM and FM bands. (We also note, in 1999, the National Hockey League also filed a petition for an in-stadium broadcast service, RM-9682).
On February 3, 1999, the FCC started the next part of the process by issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to create a new low power radio service. In the FCC's proposal, a primary 1,000 watt service, a secondary 100 watt service and a secondary 10 watt "microradio" service. Thousands of comments were received both in favor or against various portions of the proposal or the entire concept of LPFM.
On January 27, 2000, the FCC issues their Report and Order establishing a low power FM (LPFM) radio service. The FCC establishes two classes of stations, 100 and 10 watt. The 1,000 watt class was eliminated. LPFM stations were classified as non-commercial educational meaning they could only be licensed to educational and non-profit organizations. Individuals and commercial entities could not be the licensee of an LPFM station. The FCC put specific rules in place that restricted the number of stations any organization could own as well as give preferental treatment to local applicants. Additional rules were put in place that restricted LPFM licenses from those who were ever been involved in pirate radio. This part of the rules was declared unconstitutional in 2002.
On May 30, 2000, the first of 5 LPFM filing windows opens for applications. By the summer of 2001, over 3,200 applications were filed.
In April 2001, LPFM was dealt a blow by Congress using a very questionable presentation by the National Association of Broadcasters alleging that LPFM stations will cause excessive interference to incumbent broadcasters and extensive lobbying by the broadcast industry, Congress places additional restrictions on how LPFM stations protect full power stations and FM translators as a rider of a budget appropriations bill for the District of Columbia. Despite research done by LPFM interests as well as the FCC to suggest the contrary, The Radio Broadcast Protection Act prohibits LPFM stations from being on a third adjacent channel (600 kHz) away from other stations. In October 2002, the FCC opens a 3 day filing window for affected applicants to try to find an alternate channel or other arrangement. March 17, 2003 in an event we coined as the "St. Patty's Day Massacre", those applications that were still deadlocked were dismissed.
As a result of the Radio Broadcast Protection Act, the FCC was ordered by Congress to do an independent study of the impacts on third adjacent channel operations by LPFM stations to incumbent broadcasters. The famous MITRE study proved that there is no considerable interference by LPFM stations to full power broadcasters on the third adjacent channel. Despite the NAB's calls for the FCC to conduct a economic impact study, which was also requested by Congress, the FCC presented to Congress the positive outcome of the MITRE report. Community broadacsting legislation is currently pending in both the House and the Senate.
In February 2005, the FCC had a public meeting where many representatives from the LPFM community met with the Commission on the future needs of LPFM stations. In March, a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was issued that resulted in some non-contraversial changes such as the length of time a station can take to build as well as more liberalized rules on how far a station can move to a different location. The FCC accepted comments on various contraversial subjects including the status of LPFM stations to translators. The translator contraversy was sparked by a translator filing window in 2003 (coined "The Great Translator Invasion") where thousands of applications were filed by a small number of speculative applicants who have already trafficked some of the granted permits. The translator filing window has foreclosed on future opportunities for LPFM stations.
Of the 3,200 applications originally filed, just under 1,000 of them were eventually granted by the FCC, over 500 of these stations have completed the process and are fully licensed.
In late December, 2009 as the very last item to be considered before they take their holiday break, the US House of Representatives voted to pass the Local Community Radio Act. The bipartisan supported LCRA would remove the third adjacent channel restrictions imposed by the Radio Broadcast Improvement Act of 2001 in exchange for a proactive interference prevention program which was mutually agreed by interests representing full power radio. In 2010, a revised version of the LCRA was introduced in the 111th Congress. This version passed the House on voice vote.
On December 18, 2010, the Senate adopted the LCRA and once signed by the President, will become law.
| Please note that information on this page is subject to change due to the recent passing of legislation and eventual rule changes. Please keep checking with REC for progress information on the rule changes. |
You may wonder why may notice that there are "open spaces" on the FM dial but you can not place an LPFM station there. This is due to the FCC's rules regarding interference protection. Let's discuss the different elements involved in determining how interference is predicted.
The FCC uses certain criteria to determine an FM radio station's service areas and interference potential by using measurements distances at certain field strengths. Field Strength can be measured in either microvolts per-meter (µV/M) or in decibels unterminated (dBu) (commonly just decibels). While µV/M is used in FM broadcasting, many of the broadcast rules are written in decibels so this is what we will use. The higher the decibel number, the stronger the signal.
Each broadcast station has two basic contour measurements:
Also sometimes referred to as a protected contour indicates the primary service area of the station. This is the primary area that the FCC protects for FM stations. Most stations including LPFM are protected to a 60 dBu (1 µV/M) contour. For 100-watt LPFM stations (LP-100), this creates a service contour of 5.6 kilometers (km). Certain full power FM stations in certain areas of the country have a larger protected area by extending the service contours to 54 or 57 dBu. Full power stations in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have much larger service contours due to the area's geography. Service contours are measured using a method called F(50,50) meaning that estimated field strength exceeded 50 percent of the potential receiver locations 50 percent of the time at a receiving antenna height of 9 meters. Non-commercial FM rules (not LPFM) require that the community of license be within the primary service contour of the radio station.
The Interference Contour is a signficantly larger contour. This is a contour that a station has the potential to radiate to but is less likely but there is still a potential for interference. There are different interference contours for co-channel (same channel), first adjacent, second adjacent and third adjacent channels with the co-channel being the largest of the interference contours. Unlike the service contour, the interference contour is measured using F(50,10) or estimated field strength exceeded 50 percent of the potential receiver locations 10 percent of the time at a receiving height of 9 meters.
In addition to these contours, commercial FM stations also have a City Grade Contour. This contour is intended to show the area where a superior quality signal is available. The City Grade contour for all commercial stations is 70 dBu, which makes it smaller than the service contour. In full power commercial FM rules, the entire city of license must be in the city grade contour of the FM station.
The formula for determining interference between two stations involves determining the size of both station's service and interference contours. There is a formula based on the station's power and antenna height above average terrain (HAAT). The distance between the two stations is measured. If the sum of the sizes of the service and interference contour exceed the distance between the two stations, then you have overlap and the potential for interference. In normal full power rules, this measurement must be made both ways. There are additional considerations that are used when directional antennas are used which we will not get into here. Another interference model, referred to as Longley-Rice also uses actual terrain data to determine a station's coverage areas. This model is currently accepted in the digital television rules.
Several groups in the LPFM grassroots are asking the FCC to look at a prohibited overlap model that does take into consideration the actual powers of the stations, directional antennas for either station and other factors. The FCC has interpeted portions of the Radio Broadcast Protection Act that was passed by Congress just over a year after LPFM was approved that the statute requires the FCC to use the distance spacing criteria that it uses today and that other models such as prohibited overlap or Longley-Rice can not be used in the LPFM service. There are efforts on the way to repeal these restrictions.
Depiction of two stations fully spaced. In this drawing, you will see two stations. The black circles represent the service and interference contour of one station. The blue circles represent the contours of a higher powered station. Notice how that even though the interference contours of the two stations are overlapping that neither interference contour is actually crossing into a service contour. This means that these two stations are fully spaced and therefore legal as neither station will place interference into the other station's primary service contour.
In the commercial rules (as well as the LPFM rules), all broadcast stations as having full facilities with non-directional antennas over flat terrain. Therefore, distance separation tables are used. To determine the distance, we look at the distance from "Station A" to its 60dBu (or 57 or 54 dBu) service contour and the distance from "Station B" to its interference contour and then we add those two distances together. Then we go the other way and look at the distance to Station B's service contour and the distance to Station A's interference contour. The greater of the two distances is then the minimum distance required.
Shows a full power station's Buffer Zone is depicted in the LPFM rules. Now in the LPFM rules, the FCC did something a little different. In order to maximize the number of LPFM stations possible, the FCC will allow a full power FM station's interference contour to overlap partially into a LPFM station's service contour. In relation to FM translators, an LPFM station can cross well within a the translator's interference contour. In no case shall the service contours of the LPFM and the other station overlap.
For full power stations, a 20 km "buffer zone" is given. This was designed to permit a full power station to be allowed to change to a different location without causing the two service contours to overlap. Therefore, a service contour of an LPFM station can not cross into the buffer zone.
When you search for an available LPFM Channel on REC, you will sometimes see the channel referred to as an "interference channel". This means that the other station's interference contour crosses into the proposed LPFM station's service contour. Those on interference channels may or may not receive actual interference or you may receive interference in a portion of the LPFM service contour. This can be caused by the actual power of the other station (remember, for the rules, all LPFM stations are considered at full facilities), the other station's location and the terrain in between (are there mountains the block the signal from the other station reaching your area?).
Encroachment is a term that REC had coined in the LPFM community to indicate application activity being made by a full power station that can result in either increased interference to or complete displacement of a LPFM station. LPFM is a secondary service, meaning that if the LPFM station causes interference to a full power station, the LPFM is responsible for resolving the interference. FCC rules indicate when full legal interference takes place. Encroachment will not be covered here, instead you can read our section on Encorachment.
In addition to the interference restrictions above, the FCC also has a restriction called intermediate frequency. All radio receivers also generate radio frequency. FM receivers normally generate a signal at 10.7 Mhz. Some FM receivers may mix that 10.7 frequency with the signal of a very strong FM station and create interference approximately 10.7 MHz up or down from the strong station. As a result, the FCC has a requirement that full power FM stations, LPFM and translators over 100 watts also protect the IF channels. Since FM channels are spaced every 200 kHz, there is no true FM channel exactly 10.7 MHz above or below the station's frequency. Instead, the FCC protects both the channel 10.6 MHz (53 FM channels) and 10.8 MHz (54 FM channels) above and below the station's frequency. The IF is calculated by taking the sum of the 91 dBu contour (F 50,50) of both stations.
Full Power and LPFM stations operating in what is known as the Reserved Band from 88.1 to 91.9 MHz must also protect TV Channel 6 stations. Channel 6 protections are measured by adding the sum of the Grade-B contour (which is TV's version of a Service Contour) and a certain interference contour of the radio station. The size of the interference contour is different for each of the 20 channels in the reserved FM band and as you go up in channel, the interference contour gets smaller. In the LPFM rules, all TV Channel 6 stations (both full power and low power) are considered having full facilities (even though only a dozen low power TV stations have anywhere near full facilities).
Now that you have an understanding of how interference protection is calculated. You may refer to §73.807 of the FCC rules for LPFM stations, §73.207 for full power commercial FM stations, §73.507 for full power non-commercial stations and §74.1204 for FM translators to determine the required distances or field strengths needed to protect other stations.
You can try the FCC's CURVES program in order to determine a station's exact service and interference contours.
REC's LPFM Channel Search Tool uses the distance separation guidelines defined in §73.807 of the rules.
| Please note that information on this page is subject to change due to the recent passing of legislation and eventual rule changes. Please keep checking with REC for progress information on the rule changes. |
When the FCC authorized LPFM, they authorized two classes of LPFM stations. LP-100 stations (the ones we currently have on the air today) are stations that can operate up to 100 watts at an antenna height of 30 meters above average terrain.
The second service is called LP-10 (also referred to in the initial rulemaking as "microradio"). The intention of the LP-10 service is to provide a lower power radio service that could possibly go into urban areas where LP-100 stations would not be possible or if the organization does not need the coverage of an LP-100 station.
Unfortunately, when the FCC designed the LP-10 service, it became a "sub-secondary" service with pretty much no protection, not even from other LPFM stations! We feel this sub-secondary status was just the FCC giving into "piratephobia". Now that we have had a few years to experience LP-100 stations, we hope that the FCC looks into the LP-10 rules before opening the first LP-10 window.
LP-10 stations are NOT protected from LP-100 stations. - §73.807(a)(1) - This means that under the current rules, if you construct an LP-10 station, you run the risk of losing your station in a later LPFM filing window. We recommend when considering a channel that you look at a channel that you can squeeze in your LP-10 and an LP-100 would not be able to fit. Doing this along with finding a channel that does not receive interference from full power stations will be a real juggling act.
No LP-10 allowed with a HAAT (Height Above Average Terrain) of over 100 meters. - §73.811(b) - Those in mountain communities overlooking valleys may have difficulty setting up LP-10 stations due to this limitation. This rule is in place because the FCC does not license any FM station with a power output of less than one watt. If the station is above 100m HAAT, it will produce a service area of over 3.2km, the legal limit for LP-10.
Minor Amendments. - §73.871(c)(1) - Amendments to change location over 3.2 km will be considered a "major amendment". LP-100 stations are allowed 5.6 km.
Minor Changes. - §73.870(a) - Similar to minor amendments, LP-10 stations are limited to station moves less than 3.2 km to be considered a minor change. LP-100 is 5.6 km. Moves that do not meet these limitations must be filed in a major change window. This is also being proposed to be extended to 3.2km.
LP-10 can be "bumped" by translators - §74.1204 - LP-100 stations are protected from secondary translators on the LP-100's co-channel and first adjacent channel. These protections are not provided to LP-10 stations. It is possible that an LP-10 can be bumped by a translator application.
As you can see, the LP-10 service based on today's rules is a very risky service. Those who are considering an LP-10 station should keep a close watch on your proposed channel during the application process and keep watching it after you are on the air. Have a plan to move to an alternate channel in the event of application activity that makes your current channel unusable. Remember, outside any filing windows, the FCC will allow you to change to any channel if real or predicted interference takes place.
The FCC only authorizes 50 watts @ 30m HAAT for LP-100 stations located within 125 km of the Mexican border.
This change is in accordance with the United States/Mexico Agreement on FM Broadcasting that was drafted prior to the creation of the LPFM service. Even though the agreement does address "LPFM" stations, this also addresses translators. Basically it states that all "LPFM" stations operating within 125 km of the common border with Mexico will be permitted to radiate no more than 50 watts in the direction of Mexico.
Since all LPFM stations are non-directional, there is no question that all LPFMs near the border would be affected.
During the rulemaking processes, REC was already aware that this restriction may apply and we proposed creating an "LPFM Zone" along the region within 125km to the Mexican border where we proposed secondary "D2" 10-watt microstations and a primary "A5" 50-watt service.
In the R&O, the FCC did acknowledge that LPFM stations would be subject to any international agreements but would not elaborate on what they were. The USA/Mex FM Agreement was not available on-line at that time so many who applied were not aware (and nor was REC) that the FCC would definitely enforce a 50 watt limit in the border region.
We feel that the FCC should codify this 50 watt restriction within the border area. We are not requesting distance spacing changes at this time because 50 watts is the minimum power for other LPFMs. We will continue to examine the situation and may file if appropriate. We anticpate a time in the future when the US can negotiate a 100 watt limit for LPFMs along the border. If that ever happens, we need to make sure that existing LPFMs can upgrade at that time.
The primary lesson we can learn from the first filing windows for LPFM is that this process will require a lot of patience. Some groups will be waiting up to 10 years from the time they applied for their LPFM application to the time when they can actually turn on the transmitter and go on the air.
The first set of filing windows had some roadbumps, mostly because of major changes in the LPFM rules in the middle of the series of filing windows. This resulted in additional remedial windows to fix the problems.
Assuming that there are no curveballs like there was in the first set of filing windows, this is the process to get you from your original application to getting your construction permit (CP) granted.
Initial Filing Window. This is where the FCC will accept applications for new LPFM stations. It's also very possible that in the next window that the FCC will also accept applicatios for "major changes". A major change involves a move of the station a distance of more than 5.6 km (for LP-100) and/or a channel change to a channel other than a first adjacent or Intermediate Frequency (IF, 10.6 or 10.8 MHz). In the first filing window, the FCC assigned each state and territory into one of 5 filing windows. Those states could only apply during their assigned filing window.
Acceptance for Filing for singletons. If the FCC has determined that your application was properly filled out and there are no competing LPFM applications, your application will be accepted for filing. This will result in a comment window where any party can file a Petition to Deny (PTD) against your application. For LPFM stations, this period is 30 days. LPFM applicants receiving petitions to deny have experienced delays, some for years. Applicants have the right to reply to Petitions to Deny. In addition, any party can file an "informal objection" (IO) anytime during the application process (including prior to it being accepted for filing). Some have said that IOs carry much less weight than a PTD however some of REC's best contraversial LPFM dismissals have been as a result of IOs.
Determination of Mutually Exclusive (MX) applicants. For those applicants whose proposed facilities conflict with other proposed facilities, there is a process to determine how these situations will be handled. See our section on MX applicants.
Construction Permit Grant. Once the FCC has determined that your application is acceptable for filing and any MX, Petition to Deny and Informal Objection issues are overcome , the FCC will grant you a permit to start building your station. Construction Permits (CP) are valid for 18 months. We do note that the FCC has recently stated that they are willing to extend (or toll) a CP to 36 months. There is also a proposed rule change that would automatically make all CPs 36 months.
Obtain Call Sign. Once your CP has been issued, you may obtain a call sign. Once you have a call sign, you may start program testing. (NOTE: If you have been granted a CP along with others as part of a consecutive license, you may not go on the air after receiving a call sign. See our section on MX for more information.) Program Test Authority allows you to operate the station as a normal LPFM station. You are not limited to just running tones and IDs.
File License to Cover. Once you have completed your station's construction and you are on the air, the next step is to file an application to the FCC to indicate you have completed construction and you are on the air. (For consecutive license grants, the application is filed once the station is built, see MX) We do note that the FCC tends to approve these applications in batches. Many licensees can wait months for this to be granted. As long as you have filed your "License to Cover" application (and you are not a part of a consecutive license), you may continue to broadcast.
License to Cover granted. Once the FCC finally grants your license to cover, you are fully licensed.
Just to give you an idea of how long it takes to get licensed, here is a timeline of the first round of LPFM filing windows. Now remember, this round had some "curveballs" in it because of the Radio Broadcast Preservation Act that imposed third adjacent channel protections.
| 01/27/2000 | FCC approves LPFM. |
| 05/30/2000-06/05/2000 | LP-100 filing window I for Alaska, California, District of Columbia, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Mariana Islands, Maryland, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Utah. |
| 08/28/2000-09/01/2000 | LP-100 filing window II for Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Virginia, and Wyoming. |
| 01/16/2001-01/22/2001 | LP-100 filing window III for American Samoa, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Missouri, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. |
| 04/02/2001 | FCC codifies the Radio Broadcast Protection Act. Imposes third adjacent channel restrictions to all LPFMs including those already applied for. |
| 06/11/2001-06/15/2001 | LP-100 filing windows IV and V combined into a single window for Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Guam, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, U.S. Virgin Islands, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia. |
| 08/28/2002-09/01/2002 | Remedial filing window for LPFM applicants impacted by the Radio Broadacst Protection Act restrictions. |
| 03/17/2003 | The St. Patty's Day Massacre. LPFM applicants who could not comply with the new third adjacent channel restrictions had their applications dismissed. |
| 08/28/2003-10/30/2003 | Settlement window for mutually exclusive applicants in LPFM windows I, II and III. |
|
10/01/2003-12/05/2003 |
Settlement window for mutually exclusive applicants in LPFM windows VI and V. |
In the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, full power FM stations operate at field strengths well above normal operating class parameters in the mainland. As a result, LPFM rules have always had different spacing requirements. While the protections between full power stations within PR and VI follow some really strange service and interference contours (based on the classes of BOTH stations), LPFM is a little more straightforward. However, the engineering rules are different than on the mainland. These rules may help if you are assisting with a potential applicant in Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands. While REC has not performed any substantial research on the availability in PR/VI, there were not many opportunities during the last window. We are aware of 1 LPFM station in the VI. We will look at doing additional research on availability in the region, but for now, here’s what appears to be the solution of how they do PR/VI based on our own trial and error.
LPFM stations in this area are the normal field strength (5.6 at 60dBu) for service contour and like LPFM stations on the mainland, interference contour protections vary for class B1 and B opposing stations. Like the mainland, the class B1 and B stations will have protected service contours out to 57dBu and 54dBu respectively, however all three classes (A, B1 and B) will use the same interference contours.
In addition, LPFM stations are required to protect FM operations in the British Virgin Islands. All LPFM applications in PR & VI will be coordinated through the International Telecommunications Union. A foreign administration may object to the assignment. The FCC provides information on BVI FM stations which do appear in REC’s databases (look for the country code BV). It’s only as good as the information the FCC receives from the ITU and/or the BVI administration. REC does our best to protect these stations on Channel Searches but we always recommend additional investigation on applications in this area. In this document there is a list of stations that we are aware of in the BVI (but not confirmed), some are not in the FCC database and therefore not in REC broadcast services.
Because PR and VI are in Zone I-A, class C, C0, C1, C2 and C3 stations are not available. Translators are limited to 250 watts at 32m HAAT (13.8km service contour).
The following charts show the proper contours to use when determining protection rules for LPFM services. Remember, the 20 km buffer zone around the full power station’s service contour for co-channel and first adjacent channel is in effect in Puerto Rico or Virgin Islands.
LPFM Engineering Charts for Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands
Distance seperation charts for LP-100 in Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands
Distance seperation charts for LP-10 in Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands
When the FCC has a filing window, there's a possibility that two or more applicatons were filed that would not be able to be granted because each application would specify facilities that would conflict with each other. These applications are referred to as "mutually exclusive" or "MX" for short. To address these situations, the FCC has put procedures in place to process these applications.
There are two circumstances where a mutually exclusive application can be dismissed by rule:
Student-run LPFM Station - An LPFM station that will be licensed to an educational institution that also has full power broadcast holdings may hold an LPFM license if the full power station is not student ran and the low power station will be. In addition, the LPFM application must not meet any competing applications. (See 73.860(b))
Traveler's Information Service - Public safety users can waive the ownership limit rules for LPFM stations as long as each station is located within their juristiction and the applications do not meet any competing applications. Public safety users can designate a single "priority" application that would not be automatically dismissed but will more forward in the MX resolution process. (See 73.855(b)(4))
When the FCC declares that a group of applications are MX, they will use a point system to determine the most qualified applicants. Points are earned as follows:
Established Community Presence - For a period of at least two years prior to the filing window, organizations that have at least 75% of it's board members living within 10 miles of the proposed transmitting antenna.
Proposed Operating Hours - If granted for a full time station, the applicant pledges to be on the air at least 12 hours a day.
Local Origination - Applicant pledges to originate at least 8 hours a day of local programming. Local programming is considered produced within 10 miles of the transmitting antenna.
When more than one organization wants to use a channel, the best sharing arrangement is a time share agreement. In this agreement, each party to the agreement will have specific times of the day that they will broadcast. Each time share proponent must propose at least 10 hours a week.
When the FCC declares which applications are mutually exclusive, a universal settlement can be reached between all of the proponents in the MX group. These universal settlements can be filed at any time.
If a universal settlement can not be reached, the FCC will open up a settlement window among all equally qualified members of the MX group (see "The Point System" above). During this settlement window, the FCC will allow partial time share agreements by allowing each party in an agreement to aggregate their points. For example, let's say we have a MX group of 3 applicants, each claiming 3 points. Two of the three stations reach a settlement agreement within this window. The FCC give that group 6 points and the other applicant will have their 3 points. The 6 point group will beat the 3 point application therefore the applicant who did not reach a settlement agreement would be dismissed.
When after a settlement opportunity has been given and there is still a tie for the most qualified applicant, the FCC will declare a tie and grant construction permits to all parties.
Once the station is built, the license will be granted for a portion of the 8 year license based on the number of applicants in the tie. For example, if there were two different groups, each group would get a 4 year license. When each station can go on the air is based on when their full license is granted.
Successive licenses are NOT RENEWABLE.
LPFM applicants reaching this point run the risk that once they build their station, they may have to wait up to 7 years before they can broadcast.
If after a settlement window, there are more than 8 equally qualified applicants, the FCC will find the 8 most qualified applicants based on how long the organization has been established. If there are still over 8 equally qualified applicants, the FCC will dismiss the entire group.
FCC rules regarding time sharing can be found in 73.872.
Updated 2/2011 - With the passing of the Local Community Radio Act, there has been some significant movement in the controversy over the Auction 83 (Great Translator Invasion). An organization representing commercial broadcasters has filed a proposal that would allow translator applications to be released if they can make a showing that an LPFM station can be placed in the service area of the translator. In the past, Prometheus Radio Project and Educational Media Foundation (K-Love/Air 1) have reached an agreement that would allow LPFM applicants to file "on top of" translator applications and any remaining space would go to the translators.
REC introduced a complete plan that would
The plan would then call for all translator applications to be dismissed unless they have 70% of their service contour based on population where at least two properly spaced LP-100 channels would be available.
REC Comments on Auction 83 Applications
In March 2003, the FCC opened a filing window for new FM translator stations operating in the non-reserved band (92-108 MHz). This window was open to both commercial and non-commercial applicants therefore it was an auction window.
Possibly motiviated by a petition filed by Calvary Chapel of Twin Falls, Inc. to allow satellite fed translators in the non-reserved band (RM-10609), thousands of allegedly speculative applications were filed by two commonly-owned organizations. These applications were originally filed requesting to repeat commercial stations on their short form applications and then were changed to non-commercial stations on their long form applications thus excluding them from filing fees.
what has angered those in the community radio movement is not just the fact that they filed so many applications, but that they are now starting to sell these unbuilt construction permits. So far, this organization has booked over $800,000 in revnue and the FCC has approved over $300,000 worth.
In response to requests from the community radio movement, the FCC has imposed a freeze on the grant of new translator construction permits. That freeze has lapsed and the various community radio movement groups are requesting that this freeze be extended to any organization that has filed more than 10 applications and extend the freeze to include the assignment and transfer of construction permits.
The FCC is looking at changing the rules on how an LPFM is required to protect a translator including the overall dismissal of all ungranted translator applications. REC does not support the dismissal of all translator applications as some of these will provide needed services to local broadcasters.
REC has proposed that all translators that were in service before the Great Translator Invasion that are "local translators" should be eligible for protection from LPFM stations. In addition, translators filed during the Great Translator Invasion window that are commonly owned by the primary station and fully within the service contour of the primary station would be subject to protection as these are "fill-in" translators.
Translators subject to displacement are those with a ultimate primary station that is in a different state at at least 450 km away from the translator. These translators are not able to provide a local service to its listeners and therefore an LPFM should be allowed to displace these stations if there is no way to accommodate both the LPFM station and the translator.