|
Graham Brock, Inc. |
|
Broadcast Technical Consultants |
| Vol. XI, No. 3 |
R. Stuart Graham, Jr. |
| March 2004 |
Jefferson G. Brock |
| LPFM Third Adjacent Elimination
Possible |
| The FCC has reported to Congress on its position as
to whether it is necessary to maintain third adjacent
channel protection to full service FM stations from LPFM
proposals. Mitre Corporation had undertaken a review,
which some have questioned, on the need to continue
third adjacent channel protection to full service
stations. When originally authorized, LPFM stations only
needed to provide spacing clearance to co-channel, first
adjacent and second adjacent stations. In fact, during
the first two LPFM windows many applicants filed
ignoring third adjacent FM stations. Subsequently, the
rules were modified requiring protection to third
adjacent stations for the remainder of the filing
window. The Mitre report, based on field testing,
indicated that third adjacent stations were not impacted
by the operations of LPFM stations. Now the Commission
has indicated in its letter to Congress that the
legislative body should re-address the issue of third
adjacent channel protection and eliminate it. Further,
the Commission suggests that a second test, which
Congress had initially requested, would not be
necessary. There has been no immediate response to the
Commission letter. |
| At this time, there has been no word concerning
the final number of new and major change AM
applications that were submitted at the end of
January. Neither were there any indications when
they will be added to the Commission’s database. The
number filed has been rumored to be below 2,000.
After the applications are added to the database, we
expect a public notice to be issued identifying
those applications which are not mutually exclusive.
While it is now possible to submit applications for
minor changes, we have been advising clients to wait
until we are able to verify that their minor change
application (which include power increases, site
changes and adjacent channel frequency changes) will
not become entangled by one or more of the
outstanding new/major change applications |
| The license renewal cycle has begun again
and, as part of the license application,
licensees are required to certify compliance of
their stations with the radio frequency
radiation guidelines. Included with the renewal
form is an RF worksheet, which many stations can
use to show compliance. However, if the
station’s antenna is co-located with a TV
station, has multiple FM users or is an AM tower
on which other broadcast facilities are located,
it is not possible to use the worksheets to show
compliance. A separate narrative must be
submitted to demonstrate compliance. In some
cases, the number of stations at a particular
site make it impossible to mathematically show
compliance, and field measurements will be
necessary . Don’t wait until the last minute to
see if your stations comply. Renewal
applications for radio stations in Kentucky,
Indiana and Tennessee are due April 1, 2004. For
radio stations in Michigan and Ohio, renewal
applications must be submitted by June 1, 2004. |
| Surfing The Net Over
Power Lines |
| The FCC has proposed some changes to the
measured RF emissions from power lines as
part of its effort to allow power companies
to offer broadband services over power
lines. The Commission indicates that by
allowing the introduction of broadband
services on power lines, it will allow this
service to reach rural and under-served
areas, and allow an alternate delivery
method to enhance competition. |
| It is that time of year again to
plan for the trek to the desert. The
National Association of Broadcasters
will convene their spring get together
April 17th through April 22nd. Stu
Graham and Jeff Brock will both be on
hand. If you would like to meet to
discuss an upcoming or on-going
technical matter or just have a cup of
coffee, please give them a call. |
|
|
|
